One for the providers: Myth busted - Are you a cop?

[Thorn]

I am amazed that still to this day there are providers out there who think that if they ask their clients if they work for law enforcement it will help keep them from getting busted because cops have to tell them the truth.

Well, let's put a hole in that myth once and for all.

It is perfectly legal for an agent of law enforcement, that would be an officer of the law or a confidential informant working for the police, to lie to you to get you to expose criminal activity taking place.

What officers and their agents can't do is entrap, but entrapment has little to do with lying.

Entrapment is simply directly inducing someone to commit a crime they wouldn't have committed otherwise but for the actions of the law enforcement officer or agent.

Example: An officer or C.I. walks up to a woman and says, "You are very pretty. Can I pay you to have sex with me?" The woman says no. The officer than says, "Aw come on. I'll give you $1000.00 to give me a blow job." This is clearly entrapment.

If the officer mentions an act AND the money prior to anything done by the suspected provider it could be construed in court to be entrapment. Anything short of that it is nothing of the sort.

Example: An officer says to a suspected provider, "Will you give me a blow job?" She says, "Are you a police officer?" He says, "No." She says, "Well, I wouldn't do this except that you asked but if you really want me to blow you I'll only do it if you give me $200.00."

Not entrapment and the second the money and act are mentioned the elements of the crime are complete. Exchanging money at that point helps make the case, but isn't absolutely necessary.

A decent link on entrapment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment

An even better one is: http://www.snopes.com/risque/hookers/cop.asp

 

[magicfingersny]

Great post & great clip. Thanks Thorn!
Now can you clarify how the flip works where there is a female undercover sting? I've heard it said that if they expose themselves they can't make the arrest. does that apply to only a specific part of their anatomy?I get the concept of not mentioning sex and moneywith a SW. What about a phone conversation with an incall or outcall where sex and money has been mentioned before you are face to face? If you don't hand the money directly to the provider does it make a difference,or if it is in an envelope marked "gift", or can you say you are just paying or reimbursing for the room if it's an incall? An outcall we have already paid for the room ourselves. I know a provider often asks her client to whip it out to prove he is not a cop. So does the client similarly wait or request for the provider to undress as well?

 

[Bandaid]

I believe that it' a matter of policy for cops not to expose themselves. I don't believe the prosecution must fail if they do. The phone conversation thing - they've got to prove it's you if they're going to rely on the phone conversation, and it wouldn't surprise me to find the cops feel they have to get you repeat it face-to-face to make the bust. I bet the "gift" envelope thing is a real fig leaf. 99% of judges would say, "spare me," to that one.

These crimes are generally misdemeanors and I bet the cops don't want to do anything but airtight cases that the provider or client have to plead out on. It's too much effort otherwise.

 

[magicfingersny]

I have heard (and of course heard is hearsay) that only in NYC can a male undercover vice get undressed and still make the bust.
I think it may have come up in one of the threads here!
Maybe I watch too much TV & movies, but I have seen on many shows where they ID people with a voice print ID which is like a graph of there voice pattern, which they record & compare & it's like fingerprints. No 2 people, have the same print and it doesn't change even if the persons voice is disguised or modified. Or is that equipment too high tech for most PD's?
They would just compare the voice print from your phone call to your voice print in person.
Of course I would think they are on much more solid ground if they can get you to state the offer in person,and is why some of the smarter providers will not discuss money on the phone or in person and if the client brings it up, the phone call or meet is immediately terminated!.
Can you get around this if the provider (undercover) by saying "we already talked about it" or asking them to remind you what you agreed upon. This way it is them mentioning money and not you. Could any of our legal minds check in on this please!.
I am thinking of that law profesor thread where the ongoing advice is to say nothing!

 

[Bandaid]

Magicfingers said, "Maybe I watch too much TV & movies, but I have seen on many shows where they ID people with a voice print ID which is like a graph of there voice pattern, which they record & compare & it's like fingerprints. No 2 people, have the same print and it doesn't change even if the persons voice is disguised or modified. Or is that equipment too high tech for most PD's?"

They can, and if the case was about murder, espionage, drug dealing, etc., they would, but this is about mongering, and that's my point: I don't think the cops are going to put that kind of effort into a relatively low priority case like a prostitution bust.

I wonder how many prostitution cases are tried to a verdict by a jury? My guess, not many, actually very few, and the cops probably don't want to. When they get clients they want to put the fear of God into them, have them plead, and go bust somebody else. It's not about what's possible if every effort is made, it's what's probable.

It's like when they broke into my car in a hospital parking lot and took my laptop. The cop came, took a minimum of information, and told me they don't do any crime scene stuff for something like that. They could do a lot if they tried, but they don't. This is similar.

 

[10538]

So we've established that the cop can lie and deny that he/she is a cop, and also that in NYC, he can get naked. But the scenarios discussed are where the cop is posing as a client/john. Since cops always lie, a cop posing as a provider could also lie about being a cop. But could she get naked? Could she fuck you before busting you?

 

[magicfingersny]

Magicfingers said, "Maybe I watch too much TV & movies, but I have seen on many shows where they ID people with a voice print ID which is like a graph of there voice pattern, which they record & compare & it's like fingerprints. No 2 people, have the same print and it doesn't change even if the persons voice is disguised or modified. Or is that equipment too high tech for most PD's?"

They can, and if the case was about murder, espionage, drug dealing, etc., they would, but this is about mongering, and that's my point: I don't think the cops are going to put that kind of effort into a relatively low priority case like a prostitution bust.

I wonder how many prostitution cases are tried to a verdict by a jury? My guess, not many, actually very few, and the cops probably don't want to. When they get clients they want to put the fear of God into them, have them plead, and go bust somebody else. It's not about what's possible if every effort is made, it's what's probable.

It's like when they broke into my car in a hospital parking lot and took my laptop. The cop came, took a minimum of information, and told me they don't do any crime scene stuff for something like that. They could do a lot if they tried, but they don't. This is similar.

I agree with you totally Bandaid. Like with so many other alleged crimes, most take a plea bargain.
I also agree with you about the lack of investigation of a low level crime. I had a shed with a bunch of power and landscaping tools which was burglarized (maybe $600 worth of stuff). One cop came & reluctantly took a report. When I asked about checking for prints. I thought he was going to bust a gut trying not to LOL. He said detectives & crime lab only came out for major crime cases!
As you said they could do a lot, but they don't.
I was down on South Wellwood in Lindenhurst today. where the road forks by the Little Flower Shop. A cop car was parked facing Eastbound on a yellow cross hatch zone just ahead of the fork, pointing a radar or laser gun at the southbound traffic. I had passed going Northbound & did a flip and a U & then parked to observe for about 15 minutes. Radar gun in one hand, cell phone in the other. He never left his car. I have a radar detector in my car & it never made a peep. It is one of those computer voice ones and did sound when an ambulance was approaching.
I double checked when I headed North again. There were ABSOLUTELY NO SPEED LIMIT SIGNS, between Sunrise Highway & where the SCPD car was parked!

 

[EddyBearNY]

How about drug busts?

Does this apply to drug busts. Can a cop do drugs with a dealer?

 

[Waterclone]

So we've established that the cop can lie and deny that he/she is a cop, and also that in NYC, he can get naked. But the scenarios discussed are where the cop is posing as a client/john. Since cops always lie, a cop posing as a provider could also lie about being a cop. But could she get naked? Could she fuck you before busting you?

LMAO

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that no cop pretending to be a provider would have any interest AT ALL in fucking the client. If she fucks you, I guarantee that she's not a cop. (Unless you are some big fucking mafioso and it's a much deeper undercover thing than just vice.)

Trust me. None of us are that hot.

 

[magicfingersny]

Does this apply to drug busts. Can a cop do drugs with a dealer?

I think it started with Serpico. New Jack City also comes to mind !!
LE can and does to drugs with dealers to supposedly prove that they are NOT COPS and gain the trust of the connections and dealers. Otherwise the dealers will not do any kind of business with them. The cops try to do as little as possible and are monitored by their departments. In spite of that a fair number of cops doing undercover end up being addicted to the drug(s) they were using and require some time in a rehab or detox.
Once you are addicted to something, alcohol , drugs , gambling. sex, debting, shopping, clutter, pain, food (there are about 232 different fellowships for different addictions), it is very difficult to quit solo and more successful (and the success rates, aren't great) in a rehab controlled environment, with follow up to a support group, where other with the same addiction can offer support and encouragement & hearing their stories helps convince those who want to quit, that they are not alone!

 

[Thorn]

Great post & great clip. Thanks Thorn!
Now can you clarify how the flip works where there is a female undercover sting? I've heard it said that if they expose themselves they can't make the arrest. does that apply to only a specific part of their anatomy?I get the concept of not mentioning sex and moneywith a SW. What about a phone conversation with an incall or outcall where sex and money has been mentioned before you are face to face? If you don't hand the money directly to the provider does it make a difference,or if it is in an envelope marked "gift", or can you say you are just paying or reimbursing for the room if it's an incall? An outcall we have already paid for the room ourselves. I know a provider often asks her client to whip it out to prove he is not a cop. So does the client similarly wait or request for the provider to undress as well?

Disclaimer: All legal opinions given in this post are by a lay person and not to be construed as equivalent to that given by a lawyer for the purposes of informing one's self as to the specifics regarding any particular legal matter.

When a female officer is used in a john sting it works the same way. If the officer or CI mentions the act and the price first, not the john, it could be considered entrapment.

Example: Female undercover stops a man in the street and says, "I'll blow you if you give me $60. That could be construed as entrapment by a court.

Example: Female undercover says, "Are you interested in sex? " Man says in reply, "I'll give you $60 for a blowjob." NOT entrapment.

As to officers or CI's exposing themselves. It is NOT against the law, but violates policy on some [most] departments. It is also seen unfavorably by juries. In the CIs not as much when their involvement in the prosecution comes AFTER the fact. In other words, someone found red handed to flips and testifies. IF, however, the CI was sent in by the police than s/he getting naked is looked upon unfavorably as well.

Add to this that fact that most officers, especially female officers, aren't crazy about the idea of exposing very intimate parts of their bodies to strangers in the performance of their jobs. It could also put the officer in a bad position from a safety standpoint. Something, again, the vast majority of officers aren't crazy about.

Asking a $300/hr webscort to bear her breasts or vagina to you to prove she isn't a police officer might very well queer the session. Those into the street thing though might find it advisable.

The main way to avoid a john sting though, besides avoiding the street scene altogether, is to never mention a sex act or money until the woman is in the car beside you and you've driven five blocks or more away from the scene.

Female under covers are not going to be getting into cars with folks and certainly aren't going to be driving away with them. If, for some strange reason, it did happen you'd be pulled over immediately by the back up units before you said anything that might incriminate you. It is far too unsafe when going for a street level prostitution bust for an officer to risk getting into a car with an unknown risk and being driven any distance away from her backup team.

Hope that answers any questions.

 

[wolf5958]

Thank you Thorn and if I may add from a personal experince. UC in the drug trade are not allowed to partake in drugs and are screened just as tightly as any other officer on the force. They have learned how to FAKE their use. As with prostiution drug use by the UC is not looked at well by jury's or the DA office. My father inlaw was a NARC for over 10 years and he was so good that he needed to be transfered out because he became to well known, except for liquor and beer the man never did a single drug in his life. He finished his career as a Manhatten south Homicide det. So I know it is very rare that any UC's do drugs. You have been watching way to much TV shows cause that ain't the real world...

 

[canthelpit]

Thorn stated "The main way to avoid a john sting though, besides avoiding the street scene altogether, is to never mention a sex act or money until the woman is in the car beside you and you've driven five blocks or more away from the scene.

Female under covers are not going to be getting into cars with folks and certainly aren't going to be driving away with them. If, for some strange reason, it did happen you'd be pulled over immediately by the back up units before you said anything that might incriminate you. It is far too unsafe when going for a street level prostitution bust for an officer to risk getting into a car with an unknown risk and being driven any distance away from her backup team."

Great advice, what about not getting caught up in an incall sting? From a "lay" person's point of view, of course.

 

[EddyBearNY]

.
The main way to avoid a john sting though, besides avoiding the street scene altogether, is to never mention a sex act or money until the woman is in the car beside you and you've driven five blocks or more away from the scene.
.

Cops lie!!!

 

[Thorn]

Cops lie!!!

That isn't germane to the point about avoiding stings by taking SW providers into the car and leaving the scene prior to negotiating.

But, if you want to address it separately...

Do cops lie?

Some of them do but I think you might be surprised by how few the number is.

Since I am someone who might be perceived as biased in my comments on this topic let's look at this from a logical perspective so you might see my statement has merit.

In general most mentally healthy people don't lie for no reason at all. They lie because there is something to be gained in it. What is to be gained from lying about the commission of a crime? What is the motive?

Barring some personal reason, like a vendetta, there are only two I can see. The first is to remove what the officer perceives as a criminal from the streets.

I can tell you that most cops know that true criminals are going to remain criminals and if you don't get a chance to catch them today there certainly will be another chance relatively soon and therefore there is little reason to risk a whole lot on locking someone up with a weak case, or on trumped up evidence which requires a lie to back it up.

Why? Because there is too much to lose?

Number one is the officer's credibility. Anyone who knows anything about police work knows credibility is a very important thing. Credibility with your co-workers, with your bosses, with the prosecutors, with the courts. It's a really big deal. You get quite a bit of it on spec and you certainly build on it during the course of a career, but it can all go out the window pretty fast getting caught in that first lie either in your reports or on the witness stand. Secondly, this isn't the good-ol'/bad ol' days. Hasn't been for quite some time. Getting caught in giving false testimony puts the officer's department ass on the liability line. Departments don't like that and as a result it can wind up costing work time for the officer [suspensions = $$$] and, if it is bad enough, even the pension. Veteran officers aren't risking pensions to put someone in prison with a lie experience tells them they can catch legit a bit further down the road.

So what is the only other reason? To cover ones ass. Someone, perhaps him/her self, fucked up and now that officer has to tell a lie that keeps everyone from getting jammed up. In modern PD's with all the liability awareness training they get this happens very seldom. Why? Because now-a-days everyone knows the ONLY way to get MORE jammed up than making a mistake is to get caught in a cover-up trying to hide a mistake.

I'm not saying it doesn't happen. I am saying smart cops just don't let it happen all that often. Not at all if they can help it. Its not worth the stress wondering if its going to get past the radar and the constant weight over the head, because it doesn't go away [there is no statute of limitations for departmental official misconduct if the department can claim ongoing investigation, not to mention potential criminal malfeasance charges], if you allow any number of these to build up. Wondering which is going to be the lie that trips you up somewhere down the road just isn't worth it. Better, if it is minor, to just take the lump and move on.

So who winds up being the liars on any PD? Not surprisingly it is the fuck ups, and they find some way to screw the pooch and aren't around when all is said and done.

Bottom line. Most cops aren't going to lie to make a collar stick. There is no upside to it. They'll wait until another day when the "I's" and "T's" are all able to be dotted and crossed without sticking their neck on the line to do it.

And that day will come, as it almost always does.

 

[SkellyChamp]

ASide from the risk, it is against PD policy for an undercover lady to get into the car. Does it happen, sure but the number of times it does is really really small.

 

[SkellyChamp]

A little off track - but another one of my favorites is the disclaimer on provider websites that by hitting enter or saying OK the person going in is representing that they are not, and are not affiliated with law enforcement blah blah blah.

It has no meaning.

 

[Bandaid]

Thorn,

I'm sure you're right. One of the things I'd love to know is the average cop's attitude towards mongering. Some cops are mongers, of course, but I'd bet that to many other cops mongering is not a high priority to them, meaning that busting one more john isn't worth a lie. I've always believed mongers who rant about the cops have the wrong target; it's the DAs, politicians, and society in general hobbyists have to worry about.

Skelly, it's funny how providers seem to have as many myths as mongers do. That "time and companionship only" thing and the "agreement" before pressing enter is laughable, but OTOH, it doesn't make her situation worse. Neither does the money in the envelope, although providers have told me they do it because counting money into her hand is a mood killer.

I really wish I knew how many mongers get busted, and how it happens. My money says the overwhelming majority are on the street. Next would be incalls at a hotel (especially on the Island, it seems). I also believe without proof that outcalls or incalls to an apartment have very little risk to the client.

 

[Thorn]

Thorn,

I'm sure you're right. One of the things I'd love to know is the average cop's attitude towards mongering. Some cops are mongers, of course, but I'd bet that to many other cops mongering is not a high priority to them, meaning that busting one more john isn't worth a lie. I've always believed mongers who rant about the cops have the wrong target; it's the DAs, politicians, and society in general hobbyists have to worry about.

I don't want to get into it too deep, as it is a thread best for P&R than here. The short version is that johns have more to worry about from politicians than from officers. This is the reason:

1) Some time ago patrol work was about the application of criminal law to deter offenders who had a negative impact on a community. More and more though there is an increasing effort to turn policing into a form of positive revenue flow. Thus patrol work is becoming, by various means [and trust me cops don't like it], all about the issuing of summons for various disorderly persons offenses [misdemeanors]. Now mind you a lot of this is "quality of life" offenses and it does have a positive effect, but I hear less and less about that aspect from politicians and quite a bit more of late about how much positive cash flow the municipal and county courts are generating.

Lets look at the three biggest quality of life vice crimes street level patrol see regularly. 1) Drinking in public. 2) Street prostitution. 3) Small grade narcotics purchases.

These things can certain pollute a neighborhood, but the City of New York of late has been targeting these things less to clean up areas and more for the monetary gain presented by fines and forfeiture.

Lets break down one arrest quickly. A man running the stroll at 27th and Lex is pulled over by a plain clothed street crimes unit using one of their taxi cabs vehicles when he stops and solicits a street prostitute and drives off with her parking on a side street to do the dirty deed. Caught in the act he and she are charged with lewdness. He, not having read Utopia Guide and learned better, opens his mouth and admits she is a prostitute he paid money to get sex. She is charged with prostitution, him with soliciting.

They both get brought in and processed and the man's $30,000.00 Toyota is towed as a tool of the crime, thus subject to forfeiture.

They are both run NCIC/SCIC and have no outstanding warrants. She has a minimal criminal history of petty disorderly offenses, mostly other prostitution charges. He is given a desk appearance ticket and release after processing. She is processed through central booking and release after a bail hearing the next morning.

Each cost the city minimal money for their arrest and processing and the city will recoup a fine from the guy, one from the woman [if she pays] AND either that car will go up for auction with the proceeds going to the city; it will be assigned to a city department of government to be used as it sees fit [you'd be amazed how many city officials are driving around in city assigned cars - many of which have taken via forfeiture], or "sold" back to the owner at a very hefty fee.

Now since the offense of soliciting is a minor misdemeanor [disorderly persons offense], subject to a relatively small fine, you'd think such a thing would be a violation of the Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment. This is not the case. It has gone all the way up to the S.C. and they found that forfeiture, even when it involves large sums of money coming about from minor offenses, is not punishment at all. Thus it is not covered under the Eighth Amendment, and is legal.

So the guy pays more than 10% of the value of the car to get it back. A tidy sum.

The city fathers, not just in NYC but all over the US, have found that enforcing such laws are PROFITABLE...

THAT is what mongers need to worry about.

 

[wolf5958]

Disclaimer I am not nor have I ever been a law enforcement officer. My entire in law family are all generations of NYPD and I mean going back to getting off the boat Irish family business, so what I say here is from over 20 years of eating dinner at their house and listening to what they have said. My father in law with 35 years on the job when he passed and he had this monster wake that lasted 4 days well my wife being who she was began to ask me questions about certian female mourners. Now she knew I knew more than I would say but these ladies were in the business I knew they knew I knew it and my wife knew I knewit than of course his youngest son also knew it. So did his active duty daughters. Yes my father in-law was a monger and had no clue about his daughter my wife but he knew about me one of those don't ask don't tell things, Well I know for a fact that most of my brother in laws have found aid and comfort in the arms of a working girl and or a stripper. My sister in-laws have a opinion that prosetution should be legal. They all agree that drug dealer and KP should all be shot on sight but are much more tolerant of the sex industry. Like I said only my observence of one family and their many police officer friends..