Printable View
If it is true that LE is now charging the girls with sexual harassment or molestation it may mean that the girls would have to register as sex offenders if convicted. If that happens it could mean an end to life as we know it. The girls may think of paying a fine as a cost of doing business but many will probably get out of the business rather than risk having their pictures and real names posted on the sex offender database.
[QUOTE=FutSniffA;2456815]Not sure how many regulars are out here but I would imagine with all the competition they would need a high rate of turnover of customers.[/QUOTE]I had an appointment at Rejuve and doors were closed and locked. Mama answered and said no one available. This was early afternoon.
[QUOTE=KalihiKid;2456961]If it is true that LE is now charging the girls with sexual harassment or molestation it may mean that the girls will have to register as sex offenders. If that happens it could mean an end to life as we know it. The girls may think of paying a fine as a cost of doing business but many will probably get out of the business rather than risk having their pictures and real names posted on the sex offender database.[/QUOTE]That would really suck. We will have to go the escort route if our AMPs close down. Escorts are a crap shoot at best and average $300. I guess the AMPs have been pushing the threshold of being to overt and too public with their BP ads. HPD must be pushing back.
[QUOTE=KalihiKid;2456946]Since no one else has mentioned it yet I got some info that HPD is changing its tactics. For one thing they raided the same place two nights in a row. So if you think you can avoid a raid by going to a place that just got raided better think again. Another tactic that they are using is they are not charging the girls with prostitution but rather sexual molestation or harassment. The theory being that it will be easier to prove sexual harassment than prostitution. We will probably hear more about this as time goes on.[/QUOTE]Interesting, but will that tactic work? In order to convict someone for molestation or harassment, I would imagine it'd be next to impossible without a witness testifying how they got victimized by the woman. Unlike prostitution, harrassment and molestation are crimes against a specific victim, and unless that victim has suffered at the hands of their assailant and is willing to testify about the crime in front of a jury, I don't see how they can get a successful prosecution.
[QUOTE=Macko69;2457012]Interesting, but will that tactic work? In order to convict someone for molestation or harassment, I would imagine it'd be next to impossible without a witness testifying how they got victimized by the woman. Unlike prostitution, harrassment and molestation are crimes against a specific victim, and unless that victim has suffered at the hands of their assailant and is willing to testify about the crime in front of a jury, I don't see how they can get a successful prosecution.[/QUOTE]True. If Hpd really is doing this, it is truly a dirty, unfair, and lowball tactic no matter the MP worker profession and would be very difficult to prove like you mentioned if there was no other witness to see what really happened and which probably wasn't even the fault of the worker anywaY and just Hpd trying to bait somebody unfairly who never really did anything anything. Why not go after drug dealers instead amd other more serious stuff.
[QUOTE=Hiho07;2456977]I had an appointment at Rejuve and doors were closed and locked. Mama answered and said no one available. This was early afternoon.[/QUOTE]Have you been there before? Just wondering if doors are closed to everyone or just the new guys.
[QUOTE=Macko69;2457012]Interesting, but will that tactic work? In order to convict someone for molestation or harassment, I would imagine it'd be next to impossible without a witness testifying how they got victimized by the woman. Unlike prostitution, harassment and molestation are crimes against a specific victim, and unless that victim has suffered at the hands of their assailant and is willing to testify about the crime in front of a jury, I don't see how they can get a successful prosecution.[/QUOTE]Hmm, maybe you are right but imagine the following scenario: an undercover cop getting a table shower, flips over and gets his stuff washed. He says on the witness stand that he never asked the provider to wash his stuff and was shocked when she began to soap him down. After the laughter from the gallery dies down the prosecution rests its case. What verdict does a jury composed of old ladies and impotent old men come back with? Even if the chances of conviction is slight, what do you think other providers would do if they believe that there is a chance that their picture and real names might be posted on a sex offender website?
[QUOTE=Macko69;2457012]Interesting, but will that tactic work? In order to convict someone for molestation or harassment, I would imagine it'd be next to impossible without a witness testifying how they got victimized by the woman. Unlike prostitution, harrassment and molestation are crimes against a specific victim, and unless that victim has suffered at the hands of their assailant and is willing to testify about the crime in front of a jury, I don't see how they can get a successful prosecution.[/QUOTE]True. If Hpd really is doing this, it is truly a dirty, unfair, and lowball tactic no matter the MP worker profession and would be very difficult to prove like you mentioned if there was no other witness to see what really happened and which probably wasn't even the fault of the worker anywaY and just Hpd trying to bait somebody unfairly who never really did anything. Why not go after drug dealers instead and other more serious stuff. The tactic will probably wear out and backfire as believe it or not, it may sound weird but MP establishments are a necessary evil, oldest pro in the world. As long as they keep it safe and regulated, they got rights too and the right to make a living no matter how long or short or whatever side jobs they have.
[QUOTE=KalihiKid;2457017]Hmm, maybe you are right but imagine the following scenario: an undercover cop getting a table shower, flips over and gets his stuff washed. He says on the witness stand that he never asked the provider to wash his stuff and was shocked when she began to soap him down. After the laughter from the gallery dies down the prosecution rests its case. What verdict does a jury composed of old ladies and impotent old men come back with? Even if the chances of conviction is slight, what do you think other providers would do if they believe that there is a chance that their picture and real names might be posted on a sex offender website?[/QUOTE]If word of this tactic ever reaches the public, I believe there will be more problems for LEO.
My first thought is the actual victims of molestation, sexual assault, and rape would want to speak out. Claiming that the horrific experience they went through is not just a loophole to file against some working girls, that basically do no harm to anyone. Heck, there's probably some streetwalkers out there that are mentally scarred and do what they do for that reason.
I don't think this tactic will work for long, and it is just laughable in court.
[QUOTE=KalihiKid;2456946]Since no one else has mentioned it yet I got some info that HPD is changing its tactics. For one thing they raided the same place two nights in a row. So if you think you can avoid a raid by going to a place that just got raided better think again. Another tactic that they are using is they are not charging the girls with prostitution but rather sexual molestation or harassment. The theory being that it will be easier to prove sexual harassment than prostitution. We will probably hear more about this as time goes on.[/QUOTE]I feel like with any sane legal council, there is nothing wrong with sexual contact between consenting adults, and unless the LE immediately objects to the first touch and the girl doesn't immediately stop, how can this really be construed as harassment? It seems very tenuous at best.
It's one persons word versus another in court. How does that constitute a case? Or even can't a girl simply indicate it was an accident? I mean, if a guy allows a girl to lightly touch, then gently fondle his balls, and then start a CBJ or other sex act before finally calling foul, how is that the girl's fault?
"Undercover LE willingly gets buck naked with tiny Asian girl and gets molested, more at 11!"
I don't say any of the above to insult you or the intel you are providing. I think we are all in the same boat here hoping the charges against these girls do not hold any water and get overturned or thrown out.
[QUOTE=Macko69;2457016]Have you been there before? Just wondering if doors are closed to everyone or just the new guys.[/QUOTE]I think every establishment has started really screening their customers before they even get there and step inside. If mama doesn't recognize you good luck. Probably best to book directly with the girl (s) if you have their number. But as others have reported, some places have been closing early and girls have already taken off for the time being.
[QUOTE=Oppa808;2457036]I think every establishment has started really screening their customers before they even get there and step inside. If mama doesn't recognize you good luck. Probably best to book directly with the girl (s) if you have their number. But as others have reported, some places have been closing early and girls have already taken off for the time being.[/QUOTE]Yeah, and I would say if its your first time at an establishment, you really need to go with the flow and let the girl LE check you without doing anything awkward. If I was a mamasan, I'd be teaching all of my girls how to LE check and at the first sign of a new customer asking about prices, sex acts, etc, or making the LE check difficult, I would instruct them to get dressed and have the mamasan ask the guy to leave.
Word to the wise, go with the flow on LE checks.
[QUOTE=LonelySmiles;2457031]I feel like with any sane legal council, there is nothing wrong with sexual contact between consenting adults, and unless the LE immediately objects to the first touch and the girl doesn't immediately stop, how can this really be construed as harassment? It seems very tenuous at best.
It's one persons word versus another in court. How does that constitute a case? Or even can't a girl simply indicate it was an accident? I mean, if a guy allows a girl to lightly touch, then gently fondle his balls, and then start a CBJ or other sex act before finally calling foul, how is that the girl's fault?
"Undercover LE willingly gets buck naked with tiny Asian girl and gets molested, more at 11!"
I don't say any of the above to insult you or the intel you are providing. I think we are all in the same boat here hoping the charges against these girls do not hold any water and get overturned or thrown out.[/QUOTE]Very good points.
[QUOTE=Hiho07;2456977]I had an appointment at Rejuve and doors were closed and locked. Mama answered and said no one available. This was early afternoon.[/QUOTE]I had an appointment there yesterday evening (Saturday). The outside door was open, but the inner screen door was locked (as usual). Mama May knows me, so no problem for me getting in there. Only one other monger was there at the time.
Just curious, was that your first visit there?
[QUOTE=Blake123;2457040]I had an appointment there yesterday evening (Saturday). The outside door was open, but the inner screen door was locked (as usual). Mama May knows me, so no problem for me getting in there. Only one other monger was there at the time.
Just curious, was that your first visit there?[/QUOTE]Is there only one entrance? The doors on the main road?
[QUOTE=AssMan808;2457051]Is there only one entrance? The doors on the main road?[/QUOTE]IDK. I've only been there twice and have always used the entrance near the parking lot.
Don't get caught in the cross fire. There recently has been, and there will be more crack downs and LE clean ups of providers w / o Green Cards or a Working Visa. That's right, places you think nah. Nothing going happen. Well. Fair warning. Don't be there when they come. Especially places where we all know every provider is here illegally. Here for the quick provider circuit turn around. It sucks, but what you going to do.
Buka.
I have heard a wide range of charges that some of our girls have had against them, and have read about how they may or may not stick in court. With our jails at or above capacity with other non violent offenders, I'm wondering if the tactics recently used by LE are more to scare the girls away, scare clients away, and even get places to shut down for a few days and then observe who comes back and who stays closed. They've hit places multiple nights in a row, charged girls with any sexual crime that they could, and are probably monitoring these boards laughing at all of us trying to guess their next move. They've probably already planned for mama's to be more wary of who they let in, and if the busts are going to keep up for any length of time, have their "step 2" ready to go. Guys and girls, be careful. See who you know, be aware of suspicious people and cars in parking lots, and play attention for cameras sticking out where they normally wouldn't be. Hell, they may even have a traffic cam or two turned around, who knows. I hate to sound paranoid, but now's a really good time to listen to those little voices.
[QUOTE=Nutmaker;2457489]I have heard a wide range of charges that some of our girls have had against them, and have read about how they may or may not stick in court. With our jails at or above capacity with other non violent offenders, I'm wondering if the tactics recently used by LE are more to scare the girls away, scare clients away, and even get places to shut down for a few days and then observe who comes back and who stays closed. They've hit places multiple nights in a row, charged girls with any sexual crime that they could, and are probably monitoring these boards laughing at all of us trying to guess their next move. They've probably already planned for mama's to be more wary of who they let in, and if the busts are going to keep up for any length of time, have their "step 2" ready to go. Guys and girls, be careful. See who you know, be aware of suspicious people and cars in parking lots, and play attention for cameras sticking out where they normally wouldn't be. Hell, they may even have a traffic cam or two turned around, who knows. I hate to sound paranoid, but now's a really good time to listen to those little voices.[/QUOTE]Sometimes I wonder what their goal is. Because realistically they can't expect to shut down these establishments forever. There will always be a new one that springs up somewhere.
I wonder why the media aren't jumping on this. Can it be they were given a gag order?
[QUOTE=Bikini;2457682]I wonder why the media aren't jumping on this. Can it be they were given a gag order?[/QUOTE]There's a short blurb in the Star Advertiser. They mentioned charges against the women, but did not mention any location specifically. Instead of charging them with prostitution a petty misdemeanor, they were charged with sexual assault which is a misdemeanor punishable up to one year in jail.
Who would you monger rather see Dallas or Lexi from Moonlite? Why?
[QUOTE=Chik0848;2457700]There's a short blurb in the Star Advertiser. They mentioned charges against the women, but did not mention any location specifically. Instead of charging them with prostitution a petty misdemeanor, they were charged with sexual assault which is a misdemeanor punishable up to one year in jail.[/QUOTE]Wow they said they arrested 16 girls. Wonder who got nabbed.
[URL]http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/20150504_Police_arrest_16_women_in_massage_parlors.html[/URL]
[QUOTE=Yahtzee;2457673]Sometimes I wonder what their goal is. Because realistically they can't expect to shut down these establishments forever. There will always be a new one that springs up somewhere.[/QUOTE]There goal is intimidation and fear. They intend to discourage new providers from setting up here, scare mongers from going to AMPs, and harass owners with constant raids. It will work somewhat in the short term, but ultimately it will drive this business underground, where it's far more difficult to monitor. If you haven't noticed there are a lot less BP ads out from AMPs this week. Girls unfamiliar with Hawaii may have 2nd thoughts about working here. No prosecutor is going to bring a provider to court on rape charges, but the fear effect is still there.
Maybe I'm being too paranoid, but newbies or mongers visiting a place for the first time, good luck. You better have references or join a date check service. The mamas and providers are going to be jittery for a while. I'd be interested to know if newbies are let in on a first visit.
[QUOTE=Spartacus77;2457772]There goal is intimidation and fear. They intend to discourage new providers from setting up here, scare mongers from going to AMPs, and harass owners with constant raids. It will work somewhat in the short term, but ultimately it will drive this business underground, where it's far more difficult to monitor. If you haven't noticed there are a lot less BP ads out from AMPs this week. Girls unfamiliar with Hawaii may have 2nd thoughts about working here. No prosecutor is going to bring a provider to court on rape charges, but the fear effect is still there.
Maybe I'm being too paranoid, but newbies or mongers visiting a place for the first time, good luck. You better have references or join a date check service. The mamas and providers are going to be jittery for a while. I'd be interested to know if newbies are let in on a first visit.[/QUOTE]I know 3 girls that have said that the won't see anybody new now. I see that becoming the trend for a while.
[QUOTE=Spartacus77;2457772]There goal is intimidation and fear. They intend to discourage new providers from setting up here, scare mongers from going to AMPs, and harass owners with constant raids. It will work somewhat in the short term, but ultimately it will drive this business underground, where it's far more difficult to monitor. If you haven't noticed there are a lot less BP ads out from AMPs this week. Girls unfamiliar with Hawaii may have 2nd thoughts about working here. No prosecutor is going to bring a provider to court on rape charges, but the fear effect is still there.
Maybe I'm being too paranoid, but newbies or mongers visiting a place for the first time, good luck. You better have references or join a date check service. The mamas and providers are going to be jittery for a while. I'd be interested to know if newbies are let in on a first visit.[/QUOTE]The AMPs should start a "customer touch first" policy. It only makes sense. If anybody grabs the ass, the tits or the fondles the kitty before derobing, they cannot be LE, am I right? Because the customer initiated sexual contact. More better for us mongers to able to test the equipment before taking for a test ride.
I hope all the Mamasans are reading this.
[QUOTE=BP808;2457849]The AMPs should start a "customer touch first" policy. It only makes sense. If anybody grabs the ass, the tits or the fondles the kitty before derobing, they cannot be LE, am I right? Because the customer initiated sexual contact. More better for us mongers to able to test the equipment before taking for a test ride.
I hope all the Mamasans are reading this.[/QUOTE]Isn't there a customary "cop check" that both the provider and john do to make sure neither is LE?
Not sure if it holds up in court, but I believe it is something like that with the provider exposing herself and the John copping a feel.
[QUOTE=Nutmaker;2457842]I know 3 girls that have said that the won't see anybody new now. I see that becoming the trend for a while.[/QUOTE]Which three?
[QUOTE=Seeker963;2457854]Isn't there a customary "cop check" that both the provider and john do to make sure neither is LE?
Not sure if it holds up in court, but I believe it is something like that with the provider exposing herself and the John copping a feel.[/QUOTE]If you post #1144 in the "Seven" thread you will read that an LE check was done in the past. Unsure of their routine now.
[QUOTE=Seeker963;2457854]Isn't there a customary "cop check" that both the provider and john do to make sure neither is LE?
Not sure if it holds up in court, but I believe it is something like that with the provider exposing herself and the John copping a feel.[/QUOTE]Reading all the post and news at star advertiser regarding the raid and arrest of the girls makes me wonder. How do we know that the girl is not an undercover LE. Does HE / undraped massage also falls under prostitution / sexual harrasment.
[QUOTE=Seeker963;2457854]Isn't there a customary "cop check" that both the provider and john do to make sure neither is LE?
Not sure if it holds up in court, but I believe it is something like that with the provider exposing herself and the John copping a feel.[/QUOTE]I'm no lawyer, but I can see where that customary LE check could lead to sexual assault charges, if the woman goes first.
[QUOTE=Punanilicr;2457955]I'm no lawyer, but I can see where that customary LE check could lead to sexual assault charges, if the woman goes first.[/QUOTE]True. How about a combo? The man initiates sexual contact by touching first to neutralize the harassment threat, then the girl proceeds with the normal rapid insertion LE check to neutralize the prostitution charge threat.
Etiquette for newbies would be something like:
1. Zero discussion of services or money at the beginning.
2. The man must disrobe completely first--birthday suit. Any hesitation and the mamasan will ask him to leave.
3. The man must initiate contact in an overtly sexual way to neutralize the harassment threat. Kissing, gropping, etc.
4. The provider then completes a rapid insertion LE check to neutralize the prostitution threat.
And for the love of god, always locked main entry and then locked rooms to give two layers of protection against a raid barging in unannounced.
If Admin thinks posting something like this is potentially harmful, please delete.
I wish all mamas and remaining girls well as they weather the storm.
[QUOTE=LonelySmiles;2457969]True. How about a combo? The man initiates sexual contact by touching first to neutralize the harassment threat, then the girl proceeds with the normal rapid insertion LE check to neutralize the prostitution charge threat.
Etiquette for newbies would be something like:
1. Zero discussion of services or money at the beginning.
2. The man must disrobe completely first--birthday suit. Any hesitation and the mamasan will ask him to leave.
3. The man must initiate contact in an overtly sexual way to neutralize the harassment threat. Kissing, gropping, etc.
4. The provider then completes a rapid insertion LE check to neutralize the prostitution threat.
And for the love of god, always locked main entry and then locked rooms to give two layers of protection against a raid barging in unannounced.
If Admin thinks posting something like this is potentially harmful, please delete.[/QUOTE]My girl just says hello and sits next to the customer. No touching of any kind. She waits for him to make the first moves that has to included touching sex areas otherwise it's strictly massage. That way no sexual harassment charges and I think technically she could file charges against the customer for groping.
[QUOTE=LonelySmiles;2457969]True. How about a combo? The man initiates sexual contact by touching first to neutralize the harassment threat, then the girl proceeds with the normal rapid insertion LE check to neutralize the prostitution charge threat.
Etiquette for newbies would be something like:
1. Zero discussion of services or money at the beginning.
2. The man must disrobe completely first--birthday suit. Any hesitation and the mamasan will ask him to leave.
3. The man must initiate contact in an overtly sexual way to neutralize the harassment threat. Kissing, gropping, etc.
4. The provider then completes a rapid insertion LE check to neutralize the prostitution threat.
And for the love of god, always locked main entry and then locked rooms to give two layers of protection against a raid barging in unannounced.[/QUOTE]Sounds like a good plan. To be extra cautious, perhaps one more step should be added: the woman specifically requesting and requiring the man's spoken verbal consent for the woman to take off her clothing and to have sexual activity with him. That would seem to produce an even more effective defense to any police allegation of sexual assault. Plus, because police officers are often shameless liars, it might be beneficial for the woman to openly audio record that part of the verbal interaction. Better than being arrested.
[QUOTE=Chik0848;2457700]There's a short blurb in the Star Advertiser. They mentioned charges against the women, but did not mention any location specifically. Instead of charging them with prostitution a petty misdemeanor, they were charged with sexual assault which is a misdemeanor punishable up to one year in jail.[/QUOTE]This was the lead story tonight on KHON at 6 pm. Yes, sexual assault (4th degree / exposing) are the charges. They asked Peter Carlisle, who said it will be tough to prove.
They named Young, Keeaumoku, Atkinson, S. King streets as being the parlors raided.
Not a coincidence that another story was about Prosecutor Kaneshiro being sued in a civil lawsuit by the gambling machine owners. Connect the dots. Trying to save face.
They'll probably rebroadcast at 10 pm.
[QUOTE=BulgogiBoy;2458103]This was the lead story tonight on KHON at 6 pm. Yes, sexual assault (4th degree / exposing) are the charges. They asked Peter Carlisle, who said it will be tough to prove.
They named Young, Keeaumoku, Atkinson, S. King streets as being the parlors raided.
Not a coincidence that another story was about Prosecutor Kaneshiro being sued in a civil lawsuit by the gambling machine owners. Connect the dots. Trying to save face.
They'll probably rebroadcast at 10 pm.[/QUOTE]Channel 4 news featured hana on Kalakaua and Kison by Beretania times said 4 were arrested at Kison. Don't remember how many were arrested at Hana.
[QUOTE=BulgogiBoy;2458103]This was the lead story tonight on KHON at 6 pm. Yes, sexual assault (4th degree / exposing) are the charges. They asked Peter Carlisle, who said it will be tough to prove.
They named Young, Keeaumoku, Atkinson, S. King streets as being the parlors raided.
Not a coincidence that another story was about Prosecutor Kaneshiro being sued in a civil lawsuit by the gambling machine owners. Connect the dots. Trying to save face.
They'll probably rebroadcast at 10 pm.[/QUOTE]Thanks for the info.
Could all the raids come from, think I heard Crack down on sex trafficking?
[QUOTE=BulgogiBoy;2458103]This was the lead story tonight on KHON at 6 pm. Yes, sexual assault (4th degree / exposing) are the charges. They asked Peter Carlisle, who said it will be tough to prove.
They named Young, Keeaumoku, Atkinson, S. King streets as being the parlors raided.
Not a coincidence that another story was about Prosecutor Kaneshiro being sued in a civil lawsuit by the gambling machine owners. Connect the dots. Trying to save face.
They'll probably rebroadcast at 10 pm.[/QUOTE]Sh*t, it might make sense to lay low and be cool for a while. Be safe and be careful bros. Peace.