Sex with an escort may be legal by court rulings!!

[frontman667]

I did some in depth legal research into escorting and the prostitution case law. After reading People v. Johnson 60 Ill.App.3d 183, Com. v. Potts 314 Pa.Super. 256, and Bergen v. Wood 14 Cal.App.4th 854, I realized that sex with an escort may be legal.
There is a male escort agency in Las Vegas, NV that caters to women. Their male escort sometimes appears on talk shows. On the shows I watched, the talk show hosts ask them if they have sex with their female clients. They said that they do engage in sexual activities with their female client sometimes. They make it clear that they are not contracted to have sex with them. When the reporter interviews the owner of the agency, he said that he doesn’t sell sex but companionship. The policy of the agency is money up front and no guarantee of sex.
On their website it said that if there is a romantic activity that happens, it is legal. They must consult with lawyers before making such statements. Also they use the disclaimer that state any activities between consenting adult is personal preference and not contracted for.
Why their male escort doesn’t get into trouble with prostitution? The answer is how the escort session is conducted. Women hobbyist goes onto dates with these male escorts. Male escort, on the other hand, tend to book appointments for specific sex session at hotel rooms.
The specific sex session gets male hobbyist into trouble with the law. The Com. v. Potts make it clear that specific sex session for a fee is engaging in prostitution business. If an escort shows up at the hotel or motel room and charge a fee for specific sex session, the act is considered engaging in prostitution business.
If an escort goes out with a client to dinner, movies, shopping, and the date ended up at a hotel room, these activities are considered social companionship. If sex occurs after these activities, it is personal preference between consenting adults.
From the case Bergen v Wood, the court state that a sexual relationship with companionship as a collateral is not prostitution even with the evidence of monetary exchange.
If you show up at hotel rooms, motel rooms, or apartment for specific sex session for pay, this legal defense of social companionship for sexual activities is not a valid defense. In the court decisions Comm. V Pott and People v Johnson did NOT state that you cannot pay for social companionship (escort services). It is a good idea to originate the date in public and move private latter on the date.
Comm. V Potts defines the definition on prostitution business in the Model Penal Code.

Disclaimer
Just legal theory. Not legal advice.

[frontman667]

If you study what social companionship means, it can mean escort services. Sacramento City Code
““Escort” means a person who, for pecuniary compensation, consideration, hire or reward, 1. escorts or accompanies others to or about social affairs, entertainment or places of amusement, or 2. keeps company with others about any place of public resort or within any private quarters.” – Sacramento City Code 5.04.010 Definitions.
The case Com. v Pott 460 A.2d 1127, 314 Pa.Super. 256 (1983) was in the context of escort services. Miss Pott was using escort services as a front for prostitution. Instead rendering escort services to her clients, she sold them specific sex acts instead. She was busted for selling specific sex acts to her clients.
A Sovereign Citizen told me that there are sometimes remedies or loopholes are hidden in case laws. Especially, case laws that involve prostitution.
There is a possible legal loophole of trading escort services for sexual activities in this case law. There is no mentioning that the social companionship must be given for free.
How does it apply to the entire United States? I ask the Sovereign Citizens on how this case can be used in the entire United States. He told me there is a secret trick written in this case law that he will not tell me. He said that if you look carefully, you will find the secret trick. He refused to tell me the secret trick.
He said that it is not necessary to find the secret trick. Just find those buried case laws and you MAY find there is a case law in every state that allows for this loophole.
This may be the reason the famous male escort agency in Nevada never get busted for prostitution. They instruct the male escort to take money upfront from the female clients and go on dates with the clients. If sex occurs, it is personal preferences between consenting adults. They are using this loophole.
The best approach for an escort is to render escort services according to the legal definition of escort services, don’t show up to hotel or motel rooms, and don’t list sexually suggestive services on their ads. If something happens between the client and escort, it is personal preferences between consenting adults.
This doesn’t guarantee an escort will not get charged with prostitution. This will guarantee a strong legal challenge. Legally challenging the right to sell specific sex session never work. The judges will state that selling specific sex session is prostitution business. There are court opinions where the judges state prostitution businesses encourages human trafficking, creates traffic, and contributes to social evils. Escort services are like mistress-lovers relationship because it doesn’t create the high volume of traffic and encourage human trafficking. In arguing a defense, it is possible to argue that pimps love specific sex session because the clients never know the escort well enough to report the crime. Pimps don’t like the escort to go on dates with escorts because they cannot control the situation. There is a strong legal defense that true escort services with sexual activities don’t create the traffic and social evils that specific sex session creates.

[oktome]

for most people the charges themselves are enough to ruin their lives, conviction is secondary.

[mtw1977xxx]

in people v. johnson, the prostitute lost on every one of her arguments, so I fail to see how that case, in any way whatsoever, backs your theory.

The court held (1) statute prohibiting prostitution which applies only to those who offer, perform or agree to perform a sexual act for money was not unconstitutionally overbroad or vague; (2) statute did not deny defendant her constitutional rights to freedom of speech and freedom of association under First Amendment; (3) prosecution did not deny defendant, who approached police officer on public street and offered to perform sexual act for $50 her constitutionally protected right of privacy; (4) statute forbidding prostitution was rational attempt to protect valid state interest and was a valid exercise of Legislature's authority and must be upheld; (5) evidence, although contradicted by accused, was sufficient to sustain conviction, and (6) trial court did not err in denying new trial based on alleged newly discovered evidence.

Sovereign Citizens are idiots, and they dont know how to interpret case law. the laws in the United States are not so arbitrary as to allow an individual to get away with something that would normally be construed as a crime to be immune from prosecution because he called the crime something clever.

[frontman667]

This case is cited in a law journal article; “Trading Sex for College Tuition: How Sugar Daddy "Dating" Sites May Be Sugar Coating Prostitution.”
The opinion was that the prostitution laws don't apply social companionship with sexual activities. They don't have to write a whole brief on it.

False. If there is a bunch of men with power that hobby, there are some remedies. That is the reason why you hire a lawyer. If there is no remedy to your situation, then you won't need to hire a lawyer. There are many ways of getting out of a legal situation. That what lawyers are for.

If you study police prostitution stings, you will find the same pattern. Men showing up at hotel rooms to pay for sex acts. I don't see sting operation on men who go on dates with sugar babies or escorts. It doesn't have to be completely legal. It means that there is a way to do things. If you do what most men who buy sex do, you don't have a defense and you open yourself up to getting sting.

[frontman667]

Most Americans don’t realize that many State Supreme Courts in US have legalized live in escort services. The only states that I know of currently doesn’t have legalize live in escort services are Illinois, Georgia, and Louisiana.

You can hire an escort to act as a wife and live with you. The wife experience includes cooking, house clean, take care your pets, do your laundry, have sex with you, etc. The wife experience is an alternative to the Girlfriend Experience that is commonly offered by escorts. In most states, this arrangement is legal by the State Supreme Court decisions.


You must purchase the wife experience companionship package to be legal. Selling individual sex acts is still criminal.



Just remember to have a written agreement about palimony. You don’t want the escort to sue you for palimony. Also remember that sleep overs don’t count as cohabitation.
If you are interested in hiring an escort for the wife experience, I recommend you to read the book “Living Together: A Legal Guide for Unmarried Couples” by Nolo Press.


There may be differences from state to state in legal requirements for cohabitation agreement. It is important to read the State’s Supreme Court decision in your state that grants the right to cohabitation agreement. Even if there is no clear legal right, then you can still enter into a cohabitation agreement. It may not be legally binding. If there is an issue that makes it into court, it has the possibilities of being appeal to the State Supreme Court. The legal challenge can establish a new legal right.

California
Marvin v. Marvin , 18 Cal.3d 660
Whorton v. Dillingham, 202 Cal.App.3d 447 (1988)

Arizona
Carroll v. Lee, 712 P.2d 923 (Ariz. 1986)