Would you KNOWINGLY choose to see someone that is the subject of an investigation?

[Whispers]

Valid question for ladies as well as men.

If you knew that you were seeing

- someone that is going through an ugly divorce and probably had a PI following and taking pictures;

- someone that was being investigated by Family Protective Services where they were trying to ascertain what their activities consisted of;

- someone on the radar of the media looking for a story surrounding their activities.

- someone involved in a criminal investigation and the subject of an ongoing investigation

- someone recently caught with a Spouse actively seeking to catch them at what they are doing.


In each of these examples there are other parties involved that could end up confronting you with the person you are seeing or immediately afterwards as well as documenting your presence. In a couple of them it could lead to undesirable media attention.


There is always a cry out that people's personal lives should be of no concern to any of us. But the reality of people's personal lives often invades others unknowingly with extremely negative results.

IF you knew of any of the above would you choose NOT to see them? Would you see them but take additional precautions?

If you did not know and chose to see them and afterwards found yourself caught up in something that you could have known about what would your reaction be?

[Exithere]

Knowingly? No. I have no interest in being a part of someone else's drama.

[tpepsi]

Did somebody order a pizza?

[babykins78]

I would probably take extra precautions if they were a regular who ended up in a situation like that...but I would not see a new client knowing it's going to or can cause drama...if I didn't know and got caught up I would play dumb and give as little info as possible because I believe in confidentiality and what goes on behind closed doors is no one's business

[Sheep Herder]

What about when a hobbyist or provider shares the info during a session do you have a duty to get the information out?

[Guest010619]

If that information is to later be used in a court of law where the evidence can later become public record? Hmmmm!!!!

[Bbbj Receiver]

Negative Ghost Rider. Or alternatively HELL NO!!

[babykins78]

Originally Posted by Sheep Herder

What about when a hobbyist or provider shares the info during a session do you have a duty to get the information out?

The provider/hobbiest should not be giving info unless the person is a major danger...and if that's the case the provider/ hobbiest should write an alert!!!

[flinde]

where is fluffer still looking?

[HUMP!]

No.
Pissed.

[Guest070618]

Originally Posted by flinde

where is fluffer still looking?

Why , why why do you have to stir up the pot ,don't you guys have anything to do in Austin

[JohnnyYanks]

Originally Posted by Whispers

Valid question for ladies as well as men.

If you knew that you were seeing ...

I would consider the source of all this new found information. I would sniff and sniff and sniff some more.

Then, in this case, I would decide it stinks. Fucking stinks something awful. Like a dead whale rotting under a week's summer sun, if you know what that smells like. Maybe worse than that.

So, yeah, I'll see her. Who's the lucky lady you're out to smear this time?

[KlassyKelliAnn]

Originally Posted by schertzguy

Knowingly? No. I have no interest in being a part of someone else's drama.

+1

[gfejunkie]

Originally Posted by milo

Why , why why do you have to stir up the pot ,don't you guys have anything to do in Austin

For enlightenment see the Austin cross thread...

http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=1536705

[Camille Fox]

Originally Posted by gfejunkie

For enlightenment see the Austin cross thread...

http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=1536705

I'm sure the Austin crowd appreciates you bringing further attention to their drama. You know what they say about good intentions...