NYC CRACKDOWN ON ESCORTS!!!

[Cooper]

>Are you saying it is safer if I meet the escort and walk up

>to my room together?

 

Flyguy, I was at the Milford Plaza (M) for a meeting today. I thought about your concern as I entered the building... First off, the main lobby is on the 2nd floor. Ground level has restaurants and shops. IF you choose to meet him on this level, there is a bar called "Garvey's Pub", looks like a good meeting spot. There are also elevators on this level with only bell-hops around who didn't ask any questions. The second floor, or the main lobby, does have hotel security around the elevators. There were 2 security guards, but neither asked me if I were a "guest", but then again, I was in a business suit.

 

IF you want to meet this escort outside of the hotel, there is a bar on 8th Ave. between 45th and 46th Streets called the "Playwright Tavern" (nice place). Just a 1/2 block from the hotel.

 

Hope this helps ease your concerns. Have a good visit and enjoy. Coop

[woodlawn]

>>In many states, including Texas, anyone practicing massage

>>without a massage license is ipso facto a prostitute by law.

 

 

>I

>>wouldn't mind being corrected by one of our lawyers, but I

>>[don't] think that that is the truth.

 

You're right, it's not. There is an unfortunate tendency among some posters here to talk about subjects of which they know little. Very often they have heard someone say something about the subject and they repeat a slightly garbled version of it, like the old party game 'Telephone.'

 

States that criminalize prostitution generally have statutes that describe in specific terms the types of physical contact that are part of the crime. In addition to the physical acts, as Flower points out, there is a particular mental state of the defendant that must be proved by the prosecution if the defendant is to be convicted. Anyone who is a legitimate masseur in a given state would do well to read the statute on prostitution in his state and avoid the kind of contact that the statute describes. If this is done, he should not be convicted (or charged) no matter what he has in his bag.

 

I don't know whether ad rian is a lawyer but I know from previous threads that he is unfamiliar with some of the basic rules of evidence that apply in U.S. criminal trials and that he has trouble understanding the difference between issues of law and issues of fact. He has made a number of errors in his posts on legal issues so it behooves him to stop claiming that others are practicing law without a license and do some brushing up on the basics.

[Luv2play]

Flyguy, One thing I liked about the Milford was that although the rooms are on the small side, many have wall to wall, floor to ceiling mirrors at the foot of the bed. This apparently is designed to make the room seem twice as large but is also a great way to see your escort from different angles! The staff were also very nice about providing extra towels anytime during the day. About the security staff, they would not stop anyone in street clothes but if you're hiring a leather escort, you may want to do an outcall LOL.:7

[Bilbo]

I was a licensed masseur in Texas. I was also entrapped for prostitution in a case that really had nothing to do with my massage work other than that I told the arresting officer, before I knew he was such a person, that it looked like he needed a massage. I did not read the massage laws in toto before the incident. Nor had my lawyer or judge. The judge was quite taken aback to discover that a finding of deferred adjudication from his court would cause me more punitive damages from the state than those which he declared. My license was yanked. I cannot apply for another one. Being involved with a traumatic experience, I feel that I remember a good deal about Texas massage law. And, as has been pointed out, massage laws are very different from state to state. I remember my first massage teacher telling the class that to do massage on an undraped body - the masseur must not see your genitals, they must be covered with a sheet or towel - was automatically prostitution. I believe that my reading of the law bore that out. I distinctly remember that if the state found out that I was working in a Sexually Oriented Business they wouldn't even need a court hearing to have to automatically yank my license. Something like working as a clerk in a porn shop or bath house in one's moonlighting hours. In Texas, enforcement of this law is in general thankfully lax, but the law itself is not. Or at least wasn't three years ago.

[woodlawn]

>I was a licensed masseur in Texas. I was also entrapped for

>prostitution in a case that really had nothing to do with my

>massage work other than that I told the arresting officer,

>before I knew he was such a person, that it looked like he

>needed a massage.

 

 

For future reference, 'entrapment' refers to a situation in which the defendant was subjected to such a degree of pressure or persuasion by a law officer to commit a criminal act that a court finds the defendant did not possess the 'evil intent' necessary for a conviction. It does not refer to a garden variety sting operation in which law enforcement catches someone performing a criminal act by pretending to be a potential customer, although some people erroneously use the word in that way.

 

>I feel that I remember a

>good deal about Texas massage law.

 

Okay, so tell us the specific statute you are talking about and I will see if I can find it. I doubt it will say what you said earlier, which is that if you give a massage without being licensed that is sufficient grounds for a conviction for prostitution. I realize some strange things happen in Texas, but I would be surprised to find that that was true.

[Guest LOVEHANDLE27]

Well, bitches, here's the update!

 

The masseur is a Brazilian kid here with an expired student visa with no massage nor CMT license to do so. Anyhoo, he's out on a $3500 bail and is to see the judge at the end of the month.

 

Here's the story:

 

He got a call from a supposed client who wanted a massage. The masseur is listed in both HX and Rentboy and he does not remember which listing the supposed client saw his number. He was asked what kind of service he offers, and mentioned that he can do release. They made an appt for the afternoon of Friday, at the masseur's midtown apt and the "client" showed up. As soon as the "client" was inside the bedroom, partially undressed, the masseur thought that everything is ok and set so he started undressing himself and asked the "client" what kind of service he wanted. That's when the cop identified himself and then called for his back-up. He obviously had his radio on all the time and then collared the masseur. He was taken to the police station was asked of his license, his immigration status, hence the deportation issue. He was there for a night until his friend called a NY lawyer to help them, after paying him to take the case, of course. Doesn't this sound so familiar? How come this want not in the news? I guess this is a regular sting operation and don't usually hit the tabloids as often as it happens. It ended up in the Village Voice though as an article before but not as day to day news! This is just to warn our masseurs out there, that this is something they should be careful about. I know the guy, met him a couple of times and I just feel bad for him! My friend and favorite escort is so afraid even to take calls now because he's afraid this can happen to him as well. Him and most of his friends have similar concerns, we hope this does not drive them away! He is actually giving up his apt to move to NJ!

[+ Lucky]

RE: NYC CRACKDOWN ON BITCHES!!!

 

"Well, bitches, here's the update!"

 

Is this form of address supposed to be amusing or endearing? It doesn't work for me!

[Guest LOVEHANDLE27]

RE: NYC CRACKDOWN ON BITCHES!!!

 

Then it doesn't!

[Luv2play]

I can see where the masseur went wrong here. I have been to many masseurs of the erotic variety and the "professional" ones always ask me to undress and get comfortable, while they excuse themselves from the room. Even if the agreement is that they will get naked for the massage they ensure that I am naked first. I have never been in an entrapment situation but I understand the undercover cop will never get completely naked. If this is the case, then the masseur should act accordingly and not strip and only proceed to give a regular massage. In this situation the cop will usually not take the first step as in groping the masseur as this would constitute entrapment. In my case, of course, not being a cop, I would start the groping and before long have all the clothes off the masseur!:+

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

RE: NYC CRACKDOWN ON BITCHES!!!

 

>"Well, bitches, here's the update!"

>

>Is this form of address supposed to be amusing or endearing?

>It doesn't work for me!

>

 

So Lucky, you are so sensitive and sensual and fun.... Next time I'm in the Big Apple if I invite you to dinner is it on the clock or not?:+

[+ Lucky]

RE: NYC CRACKDOWN ON BITCHES!!!

 

I would love to have dinner with you. If we find a big enough clock, we can both eat on it!!

[Bilbo]

For future reference, please keep in mind that though common parlance may at times sound exactly like jargon used in any particular industry, including law, it does not necessarily follow that the two word usages necessarily mean the same thing. That is why most dictionaries which I have perused include more than one meaning for many of their words. Any time that any person whose job it is to enforce public morals feels that it is perfectly all right to lie to enforce those morals, there is a common feeling that "entrapment" is going on, and, as you yourself pointed out that feeling is fairly widely held in this community. Please don't really expect us to change the usage of the word simply because you don't feel it correct. Do you have a word for "moral lieing" in your vocabulary?

 

As a producer, I have a show opening on the 13th and another show which is not cast yet which must be cast yet but must start rehearsals next on or about that day as well. Good luck on my having time to find the exact reference for you. You will either have to actually find it and read it yourself or wait til I have time for you to rely on something other than my best memories. Don't hold your breath. There are something like ten typewritten pages of Texas law on massage licenses and that large a grouping shouldn't be hard for an experieced law professional to find for themselves, even without a page, paragraph, etc. number from me.

[woodlawn]

>as you yourself pointed out that feeling is fairly

>widely held in this community.

 

Excuse me, but that is not what I said. I said that some people use the word 'entrapment' erroneously.

 

>Please don't really expect us

>to change the usage of the word simply because you don't feel

>it correct. Do you have a word for "moral lieing" in your

>vocabulary?

 

We are not discussing my feelings. 'Entrapment' is a legal term that has been given a specific meaning by the courts and legislatures of this country, not by me. This thread is about a legal risk that escorts in New York may be facing. I really don't see how you are helping the situation by posting misinformation about the law in Texas or elsewhere. In the context of this thread, how does it help anyone to make statements about the law that are not true and to use legal terms to mean something other than their legal definition? You are just confusing people who really need accurate information.

 

 

>As a producer, I have a show opening on the 13th and another

>show which is not cast yet which must be cast yet but must

>start rehearsals next on or about that day as well. Good luck

>on my having time to find the exact reference for you.

 

I'm not an escort in Texas so it really isn't my problem. You are the one who brought it up, not me, and if you are not interested enough in the subject that you brought up to spend any time on it then don't. I have no reason to care.

[Guest endoman31]

One of my regulars is runing scared, another doesn't believe it.

So much for facts.

[Guest nhl-nbaguy]

While entrapment is a legal term of art, it is worth noting that even among legal professionals there is considerable debate about whether the subjective intent of the accused can or should be infered from prior conduct. That is precisely what the prosecution attempted to do in the famous Marion Barry cocaine video case as a matter of law, but which the jury rejected as a matter of fact. (The bottom line here is that it is poor advice to escorts or clients to tell them to carry on as usual, don't mind if they are charged, because they will prevail at trial as a matter of law or fact.) I suspect that would be cold comfort to most escorts and clients.

[woodlawn]

>While entrapment is a legal term of art, it is worth noting

>that even among legal professionals there is considerable

>debate about whether the subjective intent of the accused can

>or should be infered from prior conduct.

 

 

On the contrary, in every state with which I'm familiar evidence of prior conduct on the part of the defendant is always relevant on the issue of what is normally called 'predisposition.' If you know any state in which a court has ruled otherwise, I'd be interested to read the case. Or a federal case, if you know of one.

 

(The bottom line here is

>that it is poor advice to escorts or clients to tell them to

>carry on as usual, don't mind if they are charged, because

>they will prevail at trial as a matter of law or fact.) I

>suspect that would be cold comfort to most escorts and

>clients.

 

I am not sure who you think is giving such advice or how the issue of predisposition is relevant to what I was discussing, which is the situation of a legit masseur who does not engage in the actus reus of the crime of prostitution as defined by local statute.

 

My advice was directed to just such a person who posted here after reading the misinformation in Bilbo's post that anyone who performs a massage without a license is automatically guilty of prostitution. That simply is not true, and I fail to see any constructive purpose in telling people that it is. There may be penalties in a given state for accepting money for a massage without being a licensed masseur, but being charged with the crime of prostitution is surely not one of those penalties.

[Guest nhl-nbaguy]

Professor Woodlawn, yes predisposition is a requirement to prove entrapment in the United States, but not in any other common law jurisdictions. And further, my point was not that it is a current element of proof, but rather there is much academic and professionalism of it, precisely because it tends to confuse as a matter of law and fact. In simple terms, with predisposition, law enforcement can charge someone on dubious facts and leave it to the jury to figure out, notwithstanding your earlier lecture about directed verdicts. Don't confuse the "ought" from the "is". I suspec the experience of our masseur here has something to do with this.

[Guest nhl-nbaguy]

Professor Woodlawn, yes predisposition is a requirement to prove entrapment in the United States, but not in any other common law jurisdictions. And further, my point was not that it is a current element of proof, but rather there is much academic and professionalism of it, precisely because it tends to confuse as a matter of law and fact. In simple terms, with predisposition, law enforcement can charge someone on dubious facts and leave it to the jury to figure out, notwithstanding your earlier lecture about directed verdicts. Don't confuse the "ought" from the "is". I suspec the experience of our masseur here has something to do with this.

[woodlawn]

>Professor Woodlawn, yes predisposition is a requirement to

>prove entrapment in the United States, but not in any other

>common law jurisdictions. And further, my point was not that

>it is a current element of proof, but rather there is much

>academic and professionalism of it, precisely because it tends

>to confuse as a matter of law and fact.

 

I find your statements very confusing. Predisposition is not "a requirement to prove entrapment" in any jurisdiction. Entrapment is an affirmative defense to a criminal charge. The defendant may choose to raise this defense, and if he does the prosecution has the right to present evidence on the issue of predisposition in order to show that the defendant would have committed the crime even without the pressure or persuasion of the officer.

 

 

In simple terms, with

>predisposition, law enforcement can charge someone on dubious

>facts and leave it to the jury to figure out, notwithstanding

>your earlier lecture about directed verdicts. Don't confuse

>the "ought" from the "is". I suspec the experience of our

>masseur here has something to do with this.

 

I don't recall saying anything about directed verdicts. If you can find those words in any post of mine, kindly point them out.

 

I don't understand the rest of your post at all. The point I made, and I'll repeat it again for your benefit, is a very simple one. A legit masseur who is worried about being charged with prostitution can protect himself by reading his state's statute that describes the acts that make up the crime and then avoiding those acts. Entrapment is only relevant in a situation in which the defendant actually committed the criminal acts with which he is charged. In the situation we're discussing, he doesn't.

 

If you're talking about police officers who fake evidence, that is a completely different issue. A cop can always lie about what a masseur said or did. Or he can plant a gram of heroin in the masseur's bag, or plant an autographed picture of Bin Laden with the inscription "Thanks for helping me blow up New York." None of that has anything to do with entrapment, it's simply perjury and evidence tampering by the cop.

 

If you want to dicuss basic concepts of criminal jurisprudence in America you should take the time to learn something about them first.

[woodlawn]

>Professor Woodlawn, yes predisposition is a requirement to

>prove entrapment in the United States, but not in any other

>common law jurisdictions. And further, my point was not that

>it is a current element of proof, but rather there is much

>academic and professionalism of it, precisely because it tends

>to confuse as a matter of law and fact.

 

I find your statements very confusing. Predisposition is not "a requirement to prove entrapment" in any jurisdiction. Entrapment is an affirmative defense to a criminal charge. The defendant may choose to raise this defense, and if he does the prosecution has the right to present evidence on the issue of predisposition in order to show that the defendant would have committed the crime even without the pressure or persuasion of the officer.

 

 

In simple terms, with

>predisposition, law enforcement can charge someone on dubious

>facts and leave it to the jury to figure out, notwithstanding

>your earlier lecture about directed verdicts. Don't confuse

>the "ought" from the "is". I suspec the experience of our

>masseur here has something to do with this.

 

I don't recall saying anything about directed verdicts. If you can find those words in any post of mine, kindly point them out.

 

I don't understand the rest of your post at all. The point I made, and I'll repeat it again for your benefit, is a very simple one. A legit masseur who is worried about being charged with prostitution can protect himself by reading his state's statute that describes the acts that make up the crime and then avoiding those acts. Entrapment is only relevant in a situation in which the defendant actually committed the criminal acts with which he is charged. In the situation we're discussing, he doesn't.

 

If you're talking about police officers who fake evidence, that is a completely different issue. A cop can always lie about what a masseur said or did. Or he can plant a gram of heroin in the masseur's bag, or plant an autographed picture of Bin Laden with the inscription "Thanks for helping me blow up New York." None of that has anything to do with entrapment, it's simply perjury and evidence tampering by the cop.

 

If you want to dicuss basic concepts of criminal jurisprudence in America you should take the time to learn something about them first.

[+ Lucky]

but rather there is much academic and professionalism of it, precisely because it tends to confuse as a matter of law and fact."

 

Huh? I'll stick with woodlawn on this one!

[+ Lucky]

but rather there is much academic and professionalism of it, precisely because it tends to confuse as a matter of law and fact."

 

Huh? I'll stick with woodlawn on this one!

[Cooper]

Thanks for the alert...The word about these "crackdowns" has reached the Gaiety dancers. I was talking with one dancer yesterday and he was quite concerned. He asked me what he should do to take (more) precautions. I suggested the obvious about asking certain types of questions about his ID, being alert to strange behavior, and letting him get naked first, but can you think of anything else to ease his concerns? .... A friend told me that one new dancer (last week) was so afraid of getting busted, that he stopped giving "private shows".

[Cooper]

Thanks for the alert...The word about these "crackdowns" has reached the Gaiety dancers. I was talking with one dancer yesterday and he was quite concerned. He asked me what he should do to take (more) precautions. I suggested the obvious about asking certain types of questions about his ID, being alert to strange behavior, and letting him get naked first, but can you think of anything else to ease his concerns? .... A friend told me that one new dancer (last week) was so afraid of getting busted, that he stopped giving "private shows".

[+ Lucky]

It is so amazing that in the midst of high terror alerts the police would at all care about someone paying to get their rocks off.