Escort Reports

[RoadStar01]

Yeah-ah but there are ways to discuss things using certain abbreviations that we all love, like GFE, BBBJ, DFK, etc. To which you know if they don't say yes Or say: we can discuss it in person, or you can discuss it with the girl when you see her, or just plainly hang up on you. In all of those case you can safely assume that it just simply ain't happening. If you've been on the prowl one tenth, no, one hundredth, of the time that I've been on it, you know it as "the holy truth". LOL.

Nrlmus, I couldn't disagree with you more on the point of explicit phone talk. The only time I would mention ANYTHING explicit, be it euphemisms, abbreviations, or what have you, is trying to flush out a sting.

In my opinion, any provider that discusses such things over the phone with an unknown client is either:

A) LEO setting you up for a welcoming party, or.

B) Careless, and putting you at risk of being in the area when LEO decides to crash her party.

Now you can extoll the virtues of this kind of behavior all you like, but you won't convince me otherwise. That's why we have boards like this, and oThERs to guide us and share info with each other.

Granted, some one has to take one for the team once in a while, but to use your approach just seems like asking for trouble. Any legit provider is going to hang up on you like Nyx said, and then where are you? You've just alienated a potentially good provider.

Recognizing the warning signs for an up-sell scam or thief, and protecting yourself accordingly is a lot less risky IMHO.

Case in point: How explicit phone talk can backfire and leave you in a pinch. (or more accurately, getting pinched)

Check the posts from the past couple days. I would have linked directly to the post, but that feature doesn't appear to have worked for some time now.

http://www.usasexguide.info/forum/sh...ws#post1570022

[Nrlmus]

What provider in her right mind would discuss anything explicit over the phone with someone they've never met? That's just begging to get busted. If anyone tried that with me, I'd just hang up on them.

As for you being safe if she does, that's equally ridiculous. LE can say whatever they want once you've broached the subject. They'll agree to anything you request, at whatever price you offer, because all they want is to get you in front of them so they can bust you.

Xoxo.

Nyx

Yeah-ah but there are ways to discuss things using certain abbreviations that we all love, like GFE, BBBJ, DFK, etc. To which you know if they don't say yes Or say: we can discuss it in person, or you can discuss it with the girl when you see her, or just plainly hang up on you. In all of those case you can safely assume that it just simply ain't happening. If you've been on the prowl one tenth, no, one hundredth, of the time that I've been on it, you know it as "the holy truth". LOL.

And look, come on, no matter how you go about things, we can agree that there is no such thing as being completely safe when we're doing what we're doing. If you spend too much time registering yourself on their radar screen they'll get you no matter how careful you are.

In my opinion, the safest provider can be in such an environment is by quickly acquiring clients that work in the right places. You'd be surprised how many of them would arrest you in the morning but would be your clients at night or the other way around. So many of them are former military that spent much time on liberty hitting every dubious establishment possible and during their get-togethers with their former military bodies they still nostalgically reminisce about their One Nights in Bangcocks. LOL. How would she best attract such clients? I've no idea I'm not a provider but I can assure you that none of them would allow you to verify themselves. If they do then I refuse to pay taxes. LOL

[Nyx GG]

Look, it's like this, if providers don't ask you questions you have to make sure that they are safe bet yourself. Be more explicit on the phone about what you want them to do. If she seems like she doesn't want to answer directly, chances are she is either not going to provide you with what you're asking for, or there maybe something else wrong. I'd move on to another provider. If she answers ok, chances are you're fine at least on the cops front. It's not a foolproof recipe but nothing is. The rule of thumb is simple: the more variety of providers you want, the more chances you'd be taking.

What provider in her right mind would discuss anything explicit over the phone with someone they've never met? That's just begging to get busted. If anyone tried that with me, I'd just hang up on them.

As for you being safe if she does, that's equally ridiculous. LE can say whatever they want once you've broached the subject. They'll agree to anything you request, at whatever price you offer, because all they want is to get you in front of them so they can bust you.

Xoxo.

Nyx

[Nrlmus]

I appreciate screening because it means the provider is serious about protectiing herself and her girls, this running a secure operation. I don't want to see someone who is careless about who they see. They're more likely to also be careless with their operation and be vulnerable to arrest. Also means they don't care much about how they run the service. If they're safe, we're safe.

And the Kennebunkport lesson meant nothing to you? Or DC Madame's? Or Eliot Spitzer's? No info means no trace. The more I know about you, the more I can use against you if the situation presents itself when I should. Isn't it just common sense? I mean, there is a reason why lawyers don't want their clients talking, like at all! They don't want them to provide the other party with more information then the other party already has or they are required to provide the other party with!

Look, it's like this, if providers don't ask you questions you have to make sure that they are safe bet yourself. Be more explicit on the phone about what you want them to do. If she seems like she doesn't want to answer directly, chances are she is either not going to provide you with what you're asking for, or there maybe something else wrong. I'd move on to another provider. If she answers ok, chances are you're fine at least on the cops front. It's not a foolproof recipe but nothing is. The rule of thumb is simple: the more variety of providers you want, the more chances you'd be taking.

However if you provide your personal info to the service, it really is out of your hands now. In many ways they are the once who are in control of you now. If they want to blackmail you and you have something to be blackmailed about, they can. Doesn't mean that they will. But can they? Of course. If you would like me to spell it out for you how would I go about blackmailing you if I'd known your real name, let alone your address and phone# if I'd wish to blackmail you (which believe me I don't) ask me, I'd spell it out. And it would not Involve anything advanced like trying to find you out via your computer's IP address or anything like that.

On the other hand, if the service gets busted, chances of them not Taking you along for the ride would be very slim. Don't forget, you said it yourself,"they are serious about protecting themselves and their girls" Trust me you come distant third, if not thirteenth. If I'd be you and I found out that some service that you provided your personal info to got busted I'd take an extended vacation to Brazil, or hasten mightily my long thought of retirement to Costa Rica.

Because if you persist to stay here chances are pretty soon you'd find yourself quite famous among your friends and coworkers and not for the things you'd want to be famous about. You may even find that some changes have just been filed against yourself too.

[Leggeddog]

Secrets are no longer secrets when two individuals know about it. With technology today anyone and I mean anyone can gain access to your info whether it is through the internet, town, city halls, public records just to name a few. We all know that agencies and girls have notes on us and they leave a paper trail that I do not want to be a part of. Usng drop phones and I stay away from agencies, and only deal with individuals. A learning process for us all will be when the names from the Kennebunk ME bust comes out. Becareful out there.

[Usedj]

I'm not sure why would one "appreciate" screening but the rest are fare enough.

Is that one would think the agency is very cautious and thus is safer for everyone involved.

[JimmyMcC]

I'm not sure why would one "appreciate" screening but the rest are fare enough.

I appreciate screening because it means the provider is serious about protectiing herself and her girls, this running a secure operation. I don't want to see someone who is careless about who they see. They're more likely to also be careless with their operation and be vulnerable to arrest. Also means they don't care much about how they run the service. If they're safe, we're safe.

[Nrlmus]

I screen, many other providers and agencies do as well. It's certainly your choice not to submit to screening, there are providers out there who will see you without it, just as their are plenty of clients who have no problem with screening (and even appreciate it). But not submitting to screening will limit your options, just as I limit mine by requiring it. I turn down probably 70% of the calls I get every day because they can not, or will not, pass my screening. But the safety of my girls and myself are my utmost priority, and it's not a subject that's open to negotiation.

Xoxo.

Nyx

I'm not sure why would one "appreciate" screening but the rest are fare enough.

[Alintas]

Hey, I want to make a point without referring to Nyx or anyone directly and without being too explicit so this may sound like I'm not quite saying what I want to say. How can I put this?

I just wanted to say that in the face of what you've mentioned below, it scares the expletive out of me to think that a person who runs an agency would be posting on this site; and what if LE is indeed watching the site, and what if they decide to try to track or pursue someone in that position. Wouldn't it be safer for a person who runs an agency to just be an indie and thereby risk less if caught? I guess there are pros (money) and cons (risk). Someone so young to take that kind of risk is just mind boggling. (And you know, as an aside, it makes me realize that I really wish they would change the laws regarding this because it's a waste to prosecute for that kind of thing in my opinion. A waste of the lives of those implicated, and a waste of taxpayer money and a waste of the court's time and. Such a waste. Except for places that have people against their will. Such places should definitely be closed down and people rescued in my opinion).

I think if I were running an agency I might just get out now, take my cards (risk) off the table so to speak, while I was still safe, and then maybe start up again as an indie or something. Or never post on sites like this. I suppose there are ways to make sure one never services a LEO but. Still would make me very nervous. So. What's my point? I guess it's mind boggling the risk that's being undertaken, it's stupid that such activity is illegal instead of regulated, and wow I'm just shocked at the vulnerability of an agency person who is so easy to find on the internet. I'm a little new to all this so it's just shocking. I do recall someone saying that LE doesn't care about indies so much as people who have others in the trade against their will. I would hope so but probably that's too much to hope for.

Under the new law, whether you own an agency, are a pimp, driver, or just answer the phones, you're equally guilty of the same charge (and the minimum mandatory 5 years). Now maybe if they were offering immunity to one person with access in order to prosecute another person, that could be an issue. I'm honestly not sure who, if anyone, other than Nyx has access. I don't ask her about that part of her business, and she doesn't offer to tell me. She is a close friend of mine, and we do hang out socially, but we both know the possible risks involved with some types of information and avoid those subjects.

Stay safe, and happy hunting.

[Ho Hunter 328]

But if there are multiple people with access to it, you can question the other person about ti and you have no 5th amendment worry.

Under the new law, whether you own an agency, are a pimp, driver, or just answer the phones, you're equally guilty of the same charge (and the minimum mandatory 5 years). Now maybe if they were offering immunity to one person with access in order to prosecute another person, that could be an issue. I'm honestly not sure who, if anyone, other than Nyx has access. I don't ask her about that part of her business, and she doesn't offer to tell me. She is a close friend of mine, and we do hang out socially, but we both know the possible risks involved with some types of information and avoid those subjects.

Stay safe, and happy hunting.

[Hags Joe]

I'd assume the information is kept so that clients don't need to be screened every time they call, I doubt she could keep track of them all without records. Remember, we're not talking about an independent who sees every client themselves, but an agency that combined probably sees several hundred clients per year. Then there's also other agencies or independents contacting her for references to consider as well.

As for the obstruction of justice, see my previous post on the fifth amendment.

Stay safe, and happy hunting.

But if there are multiple people with access to it, you can question the other person about ti and you have no 5th amendment worry.

[Nyx GG]

Many high-end services in New York don't ask questions of anyone who's been referred to them by an already existing and trusted client. That's how those who really don't care if you know their name and address become their clients initially but then drug along those of their friends that prefer not to give out their personal info. I think considering our environment that's very professional, kind of balances out the service's security needs with sensitivity of those who prefer not to reveal anything about themselves.

Which is exactly the kind of tactic that Uncle Leo frequently uses. While I will certainly consider references from already screened clients, I'll still need more than that alone.

I screen, many other providers and agencies do as well. It's certainly your choice not to submit to screening, there are providers out there who will see you without it, just as their are plenty of clients who have no problem with screening (and even appreciate it). But not submitting to screening will limit your options, just as I limit mine by requiring it. I turn down probably 70% of the calls I get every day because they can not, or will not, pass my screening. But the safety of my girls and myself are my utmost priority, and it's not a subject that's open to negotiation.

Xoxo.

Nyx

[Gansett]

Just a bit of fuel to the fire. Does this agency pay taxes? Do the owners? Do the "employees" get a 1099? You can PO local LE and states attorneys but if they get a wild hair across their ass and call in the IRS you are fuked and not in the good way.

[Ho Hunter 328]

The chances of the application of 5th amendment being successful here are very remote.

I disagree. It seems pretty obvious to me that giving up a password that would provide access to data which would incriminate oneself would be covered by the fifth amendment. The recent (Feb 2012) federal court case I cited concurs with my opinion. Do we have any lawyers out there with experience in constitutional law that would like to comment on the viability of a fifth amendment defense in these circumstances?

Stay safe, and happy hunting.

[Nrlmus]

You make valid points. I still see a chance that 5th amendment wouldn't be applied, but you make valid points.

The chances of the application of 5th amendment being successful here are very remote. It would probably also involve hiring the lawyer that is very expensive. There are so many ways around 5th amendment that I can't even begin to itemize. Impending investigation, obstruction of justice, that's what instantly comes to mind and I'm sure there are plenty of others that don't.

I believe that to give out your personal info to the provider is very dangerous. If in doubt, think of all the political people who had problems with it: Eliot Spitzer, David Vitter, Dick Morris. I'm sure there are plenty more that I didn't think of. If such a big fish is taken down, we, the smaller fish, most certainly have much narrower ponds to swim in. For God's sake what are we talking about, there is an Alexis Write case going on right now! The case which as I said in my previous posts, is being discussed here to exhaustion. I looked at some of her videos on-line and in none of them I saw faces of her clients present. How many lives do you think are going to be ruined as a result of that case? How many lives were changed as a result of the DC Madame case or Heidi Fleiss. These are more famous cases I'm talking about too. Ms. Fleiss posted 1, 000, 000 bond and was able to hire a very powerful attorney too. How many escort services do you think would be able to come even close to that?

To me, giving out your personal info for verification and walking the razor's edge amount to one in the same. I mean, I love Nyx-and-all but I have no idea what she is talking about when she calls requiring personal info "professional." Throughout the centuries it's actually have been the exact opposite. A true courtesan is the one that makes a stranger feel comfortable without knowing anything about him. She often wouldn't even know if her client is married, let alone his name, address or phone. She remembers each of her client's likes and dislikes too. Her safety is always handled separately from her clients.

Today, in this country, in this city, I see from time to time at least two providers who's been in it for quite a while, who's never been arrested and who know about me only what I told them myself. They screen their clients over phone, they use references, they hardly do backpage if ever, couple of them have friends (clients?) on the force and are very much up to date on what's going on in various areas of the vicinity. I'm sure some provide freebies to those that they feel they need for their safety too, kind of cost of doing business, you know.

If one calls verifying the client by means other then asking him for a reference 'being extra careful', I'd go with that. Calling it 'an industry's norm', well, initially I thought so too, but the more providers I see, the less I believe this being "an industry's norm." Mind you quite respectable providers too: educated, drug free, the once you'd never find on the street, and the once who really make an effort to make sure that their fame is somewhat limited.

But to call asking for verification 'professional'? I'm sorry but that goes against everything that I ever read or heard on the topic. It's a provider's or service's choice, and I, personally respect that but it has nothing to do with professionalism. Some services screen more, some less. Many high-end services in New York don't ask questions of anyone who's been referred to them by an already existing and trusted client. That's how those who really don't care if you know their name and address become their clients initially but then drug along those of their friends that prefer not to give out their personal info. I think considering our environment that's very professional, kind of balances out the service's security needs with sensitivity of those who prefer not to reveal anything about themselves. Is it risk-free? No. But one can never be completely risk free in this whether as a pro or a client anyway, especially here in the US.