In most jurisdictions, they only need to get an agreement to exchange sex for money in order to prosecute. There are some cases that have upheld prostitution convictions after a civilian, acting in cooperation with the police, has had sex with the defendant before she was arrested. See, e.g.,State v. Tookes, 67 Haw. 608, 699 P.2d 983, 1985 Haw. LEXIS 90 (1985) (collecting cases). One of the cases cited in *Tookes * notes, “that the due process “defense” involved a balancing of policy considerations in favor of crime detection and punishment against the policy of fair treatment. Stating that practicality required in some cases that the police participate in unlawful practices[.]” State v. Putnam, 31 Wash. App. 156, 639 P.2d 858 (1982) (citing State v. Emerson, 10 Wash. App. 235, 517 P.2d 245 (1973)).
In short, the cops can sometimes break laws to gather evidence. Using that evidence can prove embarrassing. The cases in the Maryland suburbs, discussed in the second quoted paragraph were dismissed for that reason–not for lack of evidence or entrapment or due process violations.
Don’t have time for a lot of analysis right now, but I’d say no. First, it’s not clear that such stings “target” female prostitutes. Female prosititutes tend to be the ones working in massage establishments, I think. Can the police target massage parlors, even though they tend to be mostly staffed by females? Probably. Even if one could show some kind of disparate impact, the prevailing tests seem to require intent to discriminate. *See, e.g., * http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/blj/vol19/sapir.pdf
Even if disparate impact were a valid theory in this context, the state could probably come up with a satisfactory explanation to satisfy the intermediate level of scrutiny applied to sex discrimination claims. In any event, the usual remedy for disciminatory enforcement is not a walk for the person complaining. *E.g., * United States v. Armstrong et al., 517 U.S. 456 687 (1996).
Not always. Apparently prostitution is also happening there. I have a personal anecdote (involves my wife’s employer, an attorney, medical place and a private investigator), but also this:
Well, for what it’s worth I did see an episode of Cops where they arrested a male prostitute for soliciting a (male) officer. Turned out he was HIV+ too.
True, but there are two business-types operating under the “massage” category in the phone book. One provides sexual favors, the other does not. Neither one really wants the other one’s clientele.
As a result, the legitimate ones claim to be certified, the illegitmate ones do not.
At least that’s how it works in my area (or so I’m told )- YMMV and all that.
The answer to this question is heavily dependent on region. In some areas the cops bust the place as soon as they find them, in some areas the cops don’t give a crap unless there is other sorts of crime going on at the place like drug dealing or extortion, in some places the cops are paid off (money or free use of the place) to leave them alone and so on. We have both kinds here in my city. A couple of non-legit places have been around for many years and they do have valid licenese to operate.
Second hand anecdote: A friend of mine had been going to one place for a few years. One day (the idiot) got the urge but didn’t have any cash available so he used a credit card. A few months later he go a visit from a man in a suit. They were trying to scare him into testifying about what happened there. He denied, denied, denied and they let him go. He was single so they couldn’t really force his hand.
He was visited by the INS branch of the new (at the time) Dept of Homeland Security. Apparently some of these gals had overstayed their visa and if it could be proven that they were here for crime it would make it easier to boot them or something.
