Sugar Baby may have been vice cop

[arunforthemoney]

Does anyone here have any Sugar Daddy/Sugar Baby experience in which the SB turned out to be an undercover cop? I am a member of a SB site, and would ideally like to go that direction. I have done so in the past and it worked out quite well for a long period of time. A few weeks back, I was having lunch with someone I met from the site, and she began to say some very specific things that made my LE hairs tingle. She said, "She loved sex, and she loved money - so she really liked that I would be paying her for sex." (very odd comment). And when I said, "No, I would not pay for sex because that would be illegal." She went on to say, "You have been very specific about what you want." (I had not). I said, "I think you are a cop, and this coversation is over." Still get some emails from her.
Has anyone else had a similar experience locally?

[Mojojo]

This is not an alert.

[ShysterJon]

I live in Dallas, not Houston, although I lived in Houston 10 years and had a SB while there. Since then, I've had about 12 SBs, and I've met maybe 75-100 girls with profiles on SB web sites. Not one girl I've met was a cop.

I assume your concern about a female cop posing undercover as a SB candidate is that she may attempt to bust you for prostitition. But I think Houston Vice would be hard-pressed to make a case for prostitution against a SD or a SB.

In Texas, a person can commit the offense of prostitution by:
(1) making an offer,
(2) accepting an offer, or
(3) soliciting a person in a public place
to engage in sexual conduct for a fee, or
(4) engaging in sexual conduct for a fee.

See "Fundamentals of Texas Prostitution Law"

I think it would be hard for the State to prove the offense of prostitution against a SD or SB because of the requirement of a "fee" to prove the crime. The leading case which interpreted the meaning of "fee" under the Texas prostitution statute held that the word means something of value given to a person who sells sex for a living. Tisdale v. State, 640 S.W.2d 409 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1982, pet. ref'd) (emphasis added). The court discussed various hypotheticals to illustrate what is not prostitution. The one most applicable here is as follows:

A secretary becomes friendly with her boss -- so friendly in fact that they wind up in the same bed together. As a direct result of their affection, she receives a raise in pay. Are these people guilty of prostitution?

The Court in Tisdale impliedly held that the facts presented in this hypothetical did not prove up prostitution. The inference can be made that this isn't prostitution because the secretary makes a living as a secretary, not as a sporting girl. The same is true for the SBs I've had. They made their livings in various shitty, low-paying jobs, and they sought allowance to pay for things they could not otherwise afford. While I had sex with all my SBs, most of my time was spent with them pursuing pleasure while we were dressed.

For more information, see:

"What constitutes a 'fee' under the Texas prostitution statute"

If Houston Vice is expending time, effort, and tax dollars on trying to make cases off a SD-SB web site in these hard budgetary times, I have to question the priorities of the police chief in Houston.

[308Shooter]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

If Houston Vice is expending time, effort, and tax dollars on trying to make cases off a SD-SB web site in these hard budgetary times, I have to question the priorities of the police chief in Houston.

I think those priorities have been in question for some time now.

[simpleton]

It seems like a lot of work with the chance of no pay off. Maybe she just didn't know the rules of engagement. I would have told her," your acting like a cop now give me a blowie so I know your legit.