Enough evidence to convict
[QUOTE=Hizark21]You should have gotten a lawyer. My guess is that you could have challenged the car impound. SD only had a criminal intent to solicit law. This means they have to arrest and convict you to make a car impound stick. Based upon your statement it was not enough for a arrest.[/QUOTE]Hizark,
I hate to disagree with you, but I have to let you all know that the facts outlined here did give rise to sufficient evidence to convict someone of solicitation. I'm not saying that he shouldn't have got a lawyer. He should've fought the case (what the hell, he was only in college, what did he have to lose, it's not liike he was married with a wife and kids and would look bad in the community).
The law, though, is bad on this front. You can be convicted of prostitution under 3 different theories:
1) engaging in an act of prostitution (you will almost never see anyone charged with this statute because it is very hard to prove that any act witnessed by the police was actually prostitution. They usually go under lewd conduct in this situation. See Hugh Grant).
2) Soliciting an act of prostitution. This is the most common, where the john is accused of trying to get someone to commit an act, which means that he provides the terms to someone (ie. "fuck me and I"ll give you $50).
3) Agreeing to commit an act and doing an act in furtherance of that agreement. This is also very common, and is the situation in this case. Most mongers and prostitutes have learned not to supply all of the elemants of the crime to the police (ie. They don't say "fuck me for $50"). Rather, they try to get the cop the say some of the things. Cops have become smart to that, and finally they say (and this is how they'll write it in the police report) "I formed the opinion that the person was a streetwise prostitute engaging in a word game designed to avoid arrest, " or something to a similar effect if it's a john. They'll conclude "I therefore asked him if he wanted a blowjob, to which he said yes. I asked how much he had, he said how much do you want, I said $40, he said OK, I told him to drive to the next corner and meet me there, which he did. "
So, in this case, there isn't an explicit solicitation, in that the cop supplies some of the terms of the bargain, it's a back and forth negotiation, not a solicitation to engage in the act. But, it is an agreement, and the driving to the corner at her instruction is an "act in furtherance" of that agreement. The Courts have held that almost anything counts as an act in furtherance (I remember the city attorney arguing that money in someone's pocket was an act in furtherance since the defendant must have wanted to spend it on a prostitute. I think the judge actually kicked that case). So, as soon as you get into a word play with a girl on the street, you're screwed.
As far as I have been able to tell handling these cases over the last couple of decades, the solution appears to be get them into your car and feel them up. Because cop would ever agree to that, unless the cop's off duty and a really kinky chick.
Keep it clean out there boys, I don't need any more clients (altlhough I don't work in OC anyways). Good luck and happy mongering.
