Thread related to Ohio Law.
Printable View
Thread related to Ohio Law.
I am very curious to know or learn information regarding the classification of "Loitering to Engage". I have seen this several times on county sites for individuals involved in hobbies; with this classification associated. I have attempted to search for information on this and regarding to this.
Something that I have found related to this classification of "Loitering to engage in solicitation" is terminology about "after positive HIV test".
What I am curious of, is, if an arrest is made and individual has above associated with their arrest, does this mean they are Positive for HIV, or is this pending a test, etc? Does anyone have any information related to this or can expound on this in any way, shape, or form.
I have noticed this classification on a few of the individuals in the local area recently; and I'm quite surprised at how many are associated with this classification, vs. Solicitation.
Any info would be greatly appreciated and would increase my knowledge base.
Thanks!
A
[QUOTE=Avunus; 1141530]I am very curious to know or learn information regarding the classification of "Loitering to Engage". I have seen this several times on county sites for individuals involved in hobbies; with this classification associated. I have attempted to search for information on this and regarding to this.
Something that I have found related to this classification of "Loitering to engage in solicitation" is terminology about "after positive HIV test".
What I am curious of, is, if an arrest is made and individual has above associated with their arrest, does this mean they are Positive for HIV, or is this pending a test, etc? Does anyone have any information related to this or can expound on this in any way, shape, or form.
I have noticed this classification on a few of the individuals in the local area recently; and I'm quite surprised at how many are associated with this classification, vs. Solicitation.
Any info would be greatly appreciated and would increase my knowledge base.
Thanks!
A[/QUOTE]On Policewoman of Cincinnati, they actually used this term to pick up two ladies because they couldn't get them on anything else. It was refered to by the one policewoman as a way to harass the ladies without having the prostitution charge available to them.
[QUOTE=Avunus; 1141530]I am very curious to know or learn information regarding the classification of "Loitering to Engage". I have seen this several times on county sites for individuals involved in hobbies; with this classification associated. I have attempted to search for information on this and regarding to this.
Something that I have found related to this classification of "Loitering to engage in solicitation" is terminology about "after positive HIV test".
What I am curious of, is, if an arrest is made and individual has above associated with their arrest, does this mean they are Positive for HIV, or is this pending a test, etc? Does anyone have any information related to this or can expound on this in any way, shape, or form.
I have noticed this classification on a few of the individuals in the local area recently; and I'm quite surprised at how many are associated with this classification, vs. Solicitation.
Any info would be greatly appreciated and would increase my knowledge base.
Thanks!
A[/QUOTE]Loitering to engage in prostitution is prohibited by Ohio Revised Code Section 2907. 241 (A) and its a misdemeanor of the 3rd Degree. If you do it after a positive HIV test it violates 2907. 241 (B) and becomes a felony of the 5th degree.
Different punishments involved.
The acts themselves are basically waiving, calling over and signalling with the intent to be involved in prostitution.
Does Ohio crack down more thank Kentucky?
[QUOTE=Lauren09;1187997]Does Ohio crack down more thank Kentucky?[/QUOTE]KY leaves it to the individual cities which is why a few like Louisville have an escort license ordinance in place which allows them to pop a girl just by her simply showing up on a paid gig even without providing any services.
Cincy also has Si Leis who's goal in life is to protect them from having fun of any kind whatsoever.
[QUOTE=Lauren09;1187997]Does Ohio crack down more thank Kentucky?[/QUOTE]I can't remember an escort sting in Northern Kentucky. I think they have cracked down on strip clubs in Newport and such over there, but not escorts.
Different story in Ohio, but it doesn't sound like a ton of activity outside SW action in the hot zones and occasionally some sting activity in Sharonville. They've been pretty active in the Eastgate / Union Twp / Clermont area too it sounds like. And it sounds like Cincinnati has had a couple of stings on outcall escorts over the past year, and those seem to have targeted specific companies / services or individuals from what I heard. But nothing I can remember in Kentucky.
I just saw a notice on the news today about Ohio's proposed sex trafficking law. This should be of interest of people here. My experience with laws of this type is many of these laws designed to stop "human trafficking" are used to target those engaged in adult consensual activity in exchange for mediums of exchange. In some states I have seen the laws expand into making all so-called "johns" into registered citizens.
At the least, there is a concern that in the event you procure the services of someone who turns out to be younger than 18, regardless of whether you know it or not, then you could get the full harassment package, the registry, the Adam Walsh Act, community notification, residency restrictions, and so on. It is a proposal of interest to all of you.
To amend sections 109. 54, 2151. 281, 2151. 414, 2151. 419, 2901. 13, 2905. 32, 2907. 02, 2907. 05, 2907. 07, 2907. 22, 2907. 24, 2929. 01, 2937. 11, 2950. 01, and 4731. 41 and to enact sections 149. 435, 2907. 19, and 2907. 242 of the Revised Code to authorize a judge or magistrate to order the testimony of a victim of trafficking in persons to be taken by closed circuit television equipment under certain circumstances, to prohibit the release of routine police reports that contain identifying information about minor crime victims or uncharged arrestees unless the identifying information is redacted, to specify that a public children services agency or private child placement agency is not required to make reasonable efforts to prevent the removal of a child from the child's home, eliminate the continued removal of a child from the child's home, or return a child to the child's home and that a court find that a child cannot be placed with either parent under specified circumstances, to provide that a guardian ad litem can be appointed for a child in certain situations, to extend the period within which a prosecution for trafficking in persons must be commenced from six to twenty years after the offense is committed, to specify that the Rape Shield Law applies to evidence of a rape victim's involuntary sexual activity as well as evidence of a rape victim's voluntary sexual activity, to prohibit the admission of evidence pertaining to a victim's sexual activity in a case of trafficking in persons in the same manner as the Rape Shield Law does in a case of rape, to eliminate as an element of the offense of importuning the offender's knowledge or reckless disregard of the age of the person importuned when the person importuned is a victim of trafficking in persons who is 16 or 17 years of age, to provide that if a minor is a victim of trafficking in persons or human trafficking the state does not need to prove that the minor was compelled to engage in certain specified activities, to include in the offense of promoting prostitution certain specified activities that through electronic means promotes or facilitates sexual activity for hire, to increase the penalty for soliciting when the person solicited is a minor, to require offenders convicted of solicitation when the person solicited is under 18 years of age to register as sex offenders, to prohibit including the term "massage" or any other term that implies a massage technique or method in advertisements unless certain circumstances apply, and to declare an emergency.
Florence police did a sting last Tuesday. It was on backpage providers.
[QUOTE=Lugnutz; 1189889]I can't remember an escort sting in Northern Kentucky. I think they have cracked down on strip clubs in Newport and such over there, but not escorts.
Different story in Ohio, but it doesn't sound like a ton of activity outside SW action in the hot zones and occasionally some sting activity in Sharonville. They've been pretty active in the Eastgate / Union Twp / Clermont area too it sounds like. And it sounds like Cincinnati has had a couple of stings on outcall escorts over the past year, and those seem to have targeted specific companies / services or individuals from what I heard. But nothing I can remember in Kentucky.[/QUOTE]
One thing to remember is that even if a minor shows you a fake DL. You can can still be convicted of statutory rape or this law. My guess however if you went to trial you could probably get off these laws. Either way it pays to use extra caution.
[QUOTE=FallenAngel; 1749589]I just saw a notice on the news today about Ohio's proposed sex trafficking law. This should be of interest of people here. My experience with laws of this type is many of these laws designed to stop "human trafficking" are used to target those engaged in adult consensual activity in exchange for mediums of exchange. In some states I have seen the laws expand into making all so-called "johns" into registered citizens.
At the least, there is a concern that in the event you procure the services of someone who turns out to be younger than 18, regardless of whether you know it or not, then you could get the full harassment package, the registry, the Adam Walsh Act, community notification, residency restrictions, and so on. It is a proposal of interest to all of you.
To amend sections 109. 54, 2151. 281, 2151. 414, 2151. 419, 2901. 13, 2905. 32, 2907. 02, 2907. 05, 2907. 07, 2907. 22, 2907. 24, 2929. 01, 2937. 11, 2950. 01, and 4731. 41 and to enact sections 149. 435, 2907. 19, and 2907. 242 of the Revised Code to authorize a judge or magistrate to order the testimony of a victim of trafficking in persons to be taken by closed circuit television equipment under certain circumstances, to prohibit the release of routine police reports that contain identifying information about minor crime victims or uncharged arrestees unless the identifying information is redacted, to specify that a public children services agency or private child placement agency is not required to make reasonable efforts to prevent the removal of a child from the child's home, eliminate the continued removal of a child from the child's home, or return a child to the child's home and that a court find that a child cannot be placed with either parent under specified circumstances, to provide that a guardian ad litem can be appointed for a child in certain situations, to extend the period within which a prosecution for trafficking in persons must be commenced from six to twenty years after the offense is committed, to specify that the Rape Shield Law applies to evidence of a rape victim's involuntary sexual activity as well as evidence of a rape victim's voluntary sexual activity, to prohibit the admission of evidence pertaining to a victim's sexual activity in a case of trafficking in persons in the same manner as the Rape Shield Law does in a case of rape, to eliminate as an element of the offense of importuning the offender's knowledge or reckless disregard of the age of the person importuned when the person importuned is a victim of trafficking in persons who is 16 or 17 years of age, to provide that if a minor is a victim of trafficking in persons or human trafficking the state does not need to prove that the minor was compelled to engage in certain specified activities, to include in the offense of promoting prostitution certain specified activities that through electronic means promotes or facilitates sexual activity for hire, to increase the penalty for soliciting when the person solicited is a minor, to require offenders convicted of solicitation when the person solicited is under 18 years of age to register as sex offenders, to prohibit including the term "massage" or any other term that implies a massage technique or method in advertisements unless certain circumstances apply, and to declare an emergency.[/QUOTE]
But I wonder if anyone can comment on this.
I have heard through the grapevine that when one pulls over to talk with a SW LE will, on occasion, pull up and bring you in. This will entail impounding your car and though it may turn out they do not have enough to prosecute you or the SW because nothing occurred, they can still make your life miserable. Pretty tough to make a case to the Mrs. Why you were trolling McM, RR or COV, which is why LE does this.
[QUOTE=Gitanacv; 1771908]But I wonder if anyone can comment on this.
I have heard through the grapevine that when one pulls over to talk with a SW LE will, on occasion, pull up and bring you in. This will entail impounding your car and though it may turn out they do not have enough to prosecute you or the SW because nothing occurred, they can still make your life miserable. Pretty tough to make a case to the Mrs. Why you were trolling McM, RR or COV, which is why LE does this.[/QUOTE]Gitanacv, we should not be pulling up to a SW and speak with her while she remains outside our car in the first place. When we pull up to her and she does not immediately get in we should drive off.
Being inside our car with us would compromise her security. If she is a LE plant she will not get in. That's the first indication she is a possible LE plant. The premises of your question is a fact situation we should not let happen.
Second, it is hard to answer questions like "What can the police do when such and such happens?" when we never know what LE knows when they approach us. A car of the same make and model and with the same left tail light out could be on their radar based upon something occurring earlier in the area. Even though that guy and car is not us this could allow LE to make a stop, an inventory search of our car and even a custodial arrest leading to the impoundment of our car. Police need Probably Cause, not Perfect Cause. Too bad for us it may not be straightened out until in the morning. Too bad for us if this happens in a known streetwalker area. We are always at risk of LE having "probable cause" based on another police report and we are simply confused with the other guy.
When you think about it police work cannot be done in any other way.
Acting like a monger, fitting the profile of a monger in a streetwalker area could give LE authority to make a brief "investigative stop." The scope of this could be expanded based upon what happens during the "investigative stop." Everything inside our car that can be seen from the outside is in "plain view" and is subject to seizure if it something we should not have. A response by us that is "disorderly conduct" could get our ass arrested and our car impounded just for that. That can happen when LE lets him go and he decides to give LE a piece of his mind. We don't fuck with LE on the street.
Police do not want to hassle law abiding citizens. This happens when law abiding citizens put themselves in positions of looking like something far different. This is the reality of things.
The police can do what they want regardless of one's actions. If they believe you are mongering they will arrest you first and ask questions later because even if they do not, in the end, have enough evidence to charge you they will make your life so miserable you will not monger again anytime soon. Also, it appears there are many instances in which the police, these days, are fabricating disorderly conduct. Frightening the number of videos that are popping up catching police brutalizing law-abiding citizens.
[QUOTE=Gitanacv;1772005]The police can do what they want regardless of one's actions. If they believe you are mongering they will arrest you first and ask questions later because even if they do not, in the end, have enough evidence to charge you they will make your life so miserable you will not monger again anytime soon. Also, it appears there are many instances in which the police, these days, are fabricating disorderly conduct. Frightening the number of videos that are popping up catching police brutalizing law-abiding citizens.[/QUOTE]No. You want to do your job right. So do the police.
[QUOTE=Golfcart;1772150]No. You want to do your job right. So do the police.[/QUOTE]You and I are going to disagree on the police doing what is right. Too many young woman are being hauled in on baseless charges, only to be released after being confined for a week or more. Also, when one reviews where abuse takes place, statistically, police are high on the list. I am sure I am not alone in being told by providers that police have hit on them and get aggressive and / or violent if their advances are rejected.
But my original question was whether anyone is aware of arrests of mongers that have taken place based on groundless charges. I discussed with another poster via PM the concern that should we EVEN pull over to talk with a SW whether we could be arrested. I think the answer is yes. I would like to know whether this has happened to anyone and, if so, how things unfolded. What was the arrest based on? How long were you held? What were the ramifications? Etc.
Thanks.