Prostitution, Prostitutes, Escorts, World Sex Guide

Riverside, California

     This is a request for help.  I am a criminal defense attorney in So.
California with a troublesome case.  Calif. law defines "prostitution" as
"lewd acts between persons for money or other consideration"  In the case
I am defending, an undercover police officer called an advertised service
and ordered a two girl show.  The two ladies arrived at the hotel room,
collected the fee, and proceeded to make love to each other while the male
watched.  They did not solicit him to join in.  They were nonetheless
arrested since they performed sexual acts "between persons" for money.  By
this reasoning, any actor or actress in an X rated film would be also
guilty.
     There is no precedent for this in the appellate decisions of the
Calif. Courts. A previous attempt at using this theory in the X rated film
context was defeated, but on a contrived reason; ie. the Director of the
film wasn't paying the actors in order to arouse himself, so he wasn't
guilty of pimping.  The Court specifically refused to rule whether
prostitution necessarily requires a "customer" who participates.
      I need your thoughts, your logic, your knowledge of other state's
laws, or whatever else you think might help.  This case, if successfully
prosecuted, will substantially expand police power in this area.

Mystkmole (mystkmole@aol.com)


Prostitution, Prostitutes, Escorts, World Sex Guide


HOME | Top | Archive Index |


Copyright 1997-2013 WSG Properties User Agreement | Legal Notices