[QUOTE=BlazinRav72;4355479]Damn I reached out to her yesterday and today trying to set something up. Fuck![/QUOTE]It appears that she is still a guest of Outagamie County.
Printable View
[QUOTE=BlazinRav72;4355479]Damn I reached out to her yesterday and today trying to set something up. Fuck![/QUOTE]It appears that she is still a guest of Outagamie County.
LOL just take a breather guys the amount of time and effort it would take for them to get into her phone go through get your number then have to find out who you really are just to give you a bullshit charge it honestly all not even worth it they'd have to nail everybody in that phone just to possibly make some money and even then they'd still be losing a shit ton of it using resources to do so.
[QUOTE=AngryBob;4355832]They will need two things to do that:
A. a warrant (please see my previous post on phone digging and the supreme court ruling).
B. passcode / her fingerprint-assuming the phone is pass or fingerprint protected.[/QUOTE]For gods sake use a cheap burner phone, buy the time card with cash and there's no paper trail.
New iPhones can also use face recognition, simply pop it in front of her face.
Damn I saw her last week and she was going to be my go to when I visited mke. I will say she did ask if I was a cop and did the feel me up in the elevator which I don't think means anything but it's always a fun time LOL.
Hope she gets off with a slap on the wrist and shes fine, nice gal sorry it happened to her.
[QUOTE=Soft7;4355506]They can't do anything with just a phone number, and even then, you could have just been play texting. If they find a photo of you and some kind of agreement for money in her phone, they still have to prove that you met up and actually did what you said, which is virtually impossible. And all that effort and cost will not be put into a simple two-adults-having-sex-for-money situation. In all likelihood, absolutely nothing will happen. Now, if there was other criminal activity involved and there is documentation / proof of that (drugs, theft, etc.), then that might turn into something. But otherwise, nothing to worry about.[/QUOTE]Tell that to this guy.
[URL]https://www.wisn.com/article/milwaukee-deputy-arrested-in-prostitution-sting-complaint-says/27118742[/URL]
[QUOTE=MadJockey;4356190]For gods sake use a cheap burner phone, buy the time card with cash and there's no paper trail.
New iPhones can also use face recognition, simply pop it in front of her face.
Damn I saw her last week and she was going to be my go to when I visited mke. I will say she did ask if I was a cop and did the feel me up in the elevator which I don't think means anything but it's always a fun time LOL.
Hope she gets off with a slap on the wrist and shes fine, nice gal sorry it happened to her.[/QUOTE]She was on probation already. She's not getting off with a slap.
[QUOTE=Dmb4100;4355542]I am going to warn you again. Brittany aka Angela. Saves info, pics, screen names, texts, can history. She got me locked up for 60 days. Not going to repeat the story just be careful. Or better, let her be. She is strung out on meth, three black nubs for teeth. The reason why she looked uncomfortable during sex is because meth tenses up all of your muscles after long term use and the come down destroys sex drive. Which means the pussy is going to suck.[/QUOTE]How the hell did she get you locked up for 60 days?
[QUOTE=JimmyChitWood;4356208]Tell that to this guy.
[URL]https://www.wisn.com/article/milwaukee-deputy-arrested-in-prostitution-sting-complaint-says/27118742[/URL][/QUOTE]How does this pertain to the situation at hand he literally got caught in the act that's definitely not the case with what we're talking about here.
A young mom I know has an Uncle that got killed Sunday July 7th at about 7:15 at 21st and Pierce. It was recorded on video. Guy pulled over with a woman in the car and for some reason got out of the car and walked towards some dumpsters. Got shot several times in the stomach and died on scene.
Gunman flipped the guy over and took everything in his pockets. Woman in the car took off running with the gunman. Police say it happened before in the same general location and pretty similar circumstance. No drugs and no arrest record for victim. In her words, Police suspect sex was involved.
Be careful.
[QUOTE=Dakman;4356726]A young mom I know has an Uncle that got killed Sunday July 7th at about 7:15 at 21st and Pierce. It was recorded on video. Guy pulled over with a woman in the car and for some reason got out of the car and walked towards some dumpsters. Got shot several times in the stomach and died on scene.
Gunman flipped the guy over and took everything in his pockets. Woman in the car took off running with the gunman. Police say it happened before in the same general location and pretty similar circumstance. No drugs and no arrest record for victim. In her words, Police suspect sex was involved.
Be careful.[/QUOTE]This is scary, but this is why you never let a SW pick the spot and you never get out of your car in an unknown area.
[QUOTE=JimmyChitWood;4356208]Tell that to this guy.
[URL]https://www.wisn.com/article/milwaukee-deputy-arrested-in-prostitution-sting-complaint-says/27118742[/URL][/QUOTE]This was a hoax, not real.
[QUOTE=HugeLoad34;4356522]How does this pertain to the situation at hand he literally got caught in the act that's definitely not the case with what we're talking about here.[/QUOTE]I think it was a response to your comment that you cannot get in trouble if there is no evidence that you actually met with her. He did not show up but still got a solicitation charge due to his "play texting".
They get warrants there and crack phones open. Likely don't care about non-920 numbers but ya never know. Lots of mongers this way get phone calls and visits from Uncle.
[QUOTE=AngryBob;4355832]They will need two things to do that:
A. a warrant (please see my previous post on phone digging and the supreme court ruling).
B. passcode / her fingerprint-assuming the phone is pass or fingerprint protected.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=BuffaloDog;4357068]They get warrants there and crack phones open. Likely don't care about non-920 numbers but ya never know. Lots of mongers this way get phone calls and visits from Uncle.[/QUOTE]With a burner and reload cards purchased with cash it gets way more difficult to find you.
[QUOTE=HugeLoad34;4356522]How does this pertain to the situation at hand he literally got caught in the act that's definitely not the case with what we're talking about here.[/QUOTE]He never met the girl. Only talked about rates and what was available. They recognized his voice. Not sure, maybe I posted wrong story? I'd have to check if I did.
[QUOTE=Soft7;4357016]This was a hoax, not real.[/QUOTE]100% true. I know Milwaukee cops that knew the guy. Talk about embarrassing.
[QUOTE=BuffaloDog;4357068]They get warrants there and crack phones open. Likely don't care about non-920 numbers but ya never know. Lots of mongers this way get phone calls and visits from Uncle.[/QUOTE]Cop buddy said they can't go into a phone without a warrant if it's password protected or has a code but they can go into a phone with the new facial recognition unlocks. I know the supreme court ruled but was it on this? Wasn't the supreme court ruling about the Wisconsin case where the guy was arrested and passed out but wasn't able to give consent to give blood at hospital but they still did it without asking for a warrant?
After searching around, it seems that most state supreme courts agree that LE require warrants to access phones that are password protected OR locked with biometrics (which I would think includes facial recognition). It seems the supreme Court in the fed level follows along the same lines, but the cases are not as straightforward. For example, there was a case that involved cracking into a defendant's phone and investigating GPS activity which the SC found to be unconstitutional. All this means to me is that if SL's phone is locked by touch or password (which it probably is), they will need a warrant. Seeing how she was on probation when this shit went down, she is likely fucked. Honestly, the law is fucked up when it comes to pros. How in the fuck is serving time a fair sentence or preventing pros? It ends up being a revolving door and these girls will go right back to it. It's literally just a cash cow for jails. Fuck the justice system. Also, is anyone able to get in contact SL?
I posted this before, guess I'll post it again because it is useful and there is clarification on this matter:
NO, if you are simply arrested, they do NOT have the right to search your cell phone right away. They need a warrant to do this. In 2014, there were two cases that went to the Supreme Court that dealt with this very specific issue. In both Riley vs California and United States vs Wurie, the police arrested the defendants, and during a search incident to that arrest, the police seized each defendant's cell phone that was located on their person. Evidence of gang and weapons activity was discovered on Riley's phone, after police looked through text, photographs, and videos. In Wurie, police searched the defendant's phone finding he had received multiple calls from "my house. " They accessed the call log, traced it to the defendant's apartment, and then searched the apartment, finding drugs and firearms. Both defendants were convicted. The California Court of Appeals upheld Riley's conviction, but the First Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Wurie's conviction.
The USA Supreme Court heard both cases together, and in a 9-0 opinion, held that the police generally may not, without a warrant, search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual who has been arrested. Just because they have the tools to do it, doesn't make it legal without a warrant.
Furthermore, last summer, the Supreme Court ruled that police must obtain a search warrant to access an individual's cellphone location information. They can't simply go to a cell phone provider and ask for tower data-they need a warrant. While that decision may limit the government's access to cellphone data, it has no impact on the ability of private companies to amass, use and sell their customers' information. That is because the Fourth Amendment only limits government conduct, not private conduct. Only Congress, in enacting legislation, can limit how private companies amass and use information.
Everyone is assuming she won't give consent. I'm not so sure she won't. She's looking at jail time and may cut a deal. She was UTR before she blew up; she may go back that way.
[QUOTE=AngryBob;4359246]I posted this before, guess I'll post it again because it is useful and there is clarification on this matter:
NO, if you are simply arrested, they do NOT have the right to search your cell phone right away. They need a warrant to do this. In 2014, there were two cases that went to the Supreme Court that dealt with this very specific issue. In both Riley vs California and United States vs Wurie, the police arrested the defendants, and during a search incident to that arrest, the police seized each defendant's cell phone that was located on their person. Evidence of gang and weapons activity was discovered on Riley's phone, after police looked through text, photographs, and videos. In Wurie, police searched the defendant's phone finding he had received multiple calls from "my house. " They accessed the call log, traced it to the defendant's apartment, and then searched the apartment, finding drugs and firearms. Both defendants were convicted. The California Court of Appeals upheld Riley's conviction, but the First Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Wurie's conviction.
The USA Supreme Court heard both cases together, and in a 9-0 opinion, held that the police generally may not, without a warrant, search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual who has been arrested. Just because they have the tools to do it, doesn't make it legal without a warrant.
Furthermore, last summer, the Supreme Court ruled that police must obtain a search warrant to access an individual's cellphone location information. They can't simply go to a cell phone provider and ask for tower data-they need a warrant. While that decision may limit the government's access to cellphone data, it has no impact on the ability of private companies to amass, use and sell their customers' information. That is because the Fourth Amendment only limits government conduct, not private conduct. Only Congress, in enacting legislation, can limit how private companies amass and use information.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the clarification angrybob. You live up to your name LOL. In regards to cutting a deal, idk. I'd like to think she won't since the max is 9 mo for misA and she's done time before and she doesn't seem the type to snitch. I think we will all be fine and sadly she will take the brunt of it all because the justice system .
[QUOTE=Miltown;4359309]Everyone is assuming she won't give consent. I'm not so sure she won't. She's looking at jail time and may cut a deal. She was UTR before she blew up; she may go back that way.[/QUOTE]Why would outiegamie county care about Milwaukee county problems? People north of here don't care about Milwaukee and stay away because of this kind of crap. And Milwaukee isn't going to meddle in some crap up north, they have their own problems here already. A blow job you may or may not have gotten months ago isn't a priority here. Calm down you worrywarts.
Yes. How the hell would the cops know what she has or doesn't have in her phone? You don't know what is in there either. That's That is exactly my point. Plus Outagamie would certainly care who has contacted her from their area and they have no idea the extent or lack of info.
[QUOTE=AltereEgo;4359540]Why would outiegamie county care about Milwaukee county problems? People north of here don't care about Milwaukee and stay away because of this kind of crap. And Milwaukee isn't going to meddle in some crap up north, they have their own problems here already. A blow job you may or may not have gotten months ago isn't a priority here. Calm down you worrywarts.[/QUOTE]
Until somebody gets a call from outgamie there's no need to stress over it they obviously need a warrant to go through her phone and even then it's going to be a ***** trying to get into but honestly if they were getting a warrant they would've gotten it by now.
[QUOTE=Dmb4100;4355542]I am going to warn you again. Brittany aka Angela. Saves info, pics, screen names, texts, can history. She got me locked up for 60 days. Not going to repeat the story just be careful. Or better, let her be. She is strung out on meth, three black nubs for teeth. The reason why she looked uncomfortable during sex is because meth tenses up all of your muscles after long term use and the come down destroys sex drive. Which means the pussy is going to suck.[/QUOTE]Remember back when she was pretty? Super gh volume.
[QUOTE=Tiramisu69;4358389]After searching around, it seems that most state supreme courts agree that LE require warrants to access phones that are password protected OR locked with biometrics (which I would think includes facial recognition). It seems the supreme Court in the fed level follows along the same lines, but the cases are not as straightforward. For example, there was a case that involved cracking into a defendant's phone and investigating GPS activity which the SC found to be unconstitutional. All this means to me is that if SL's phone is locked by touch or password (which it probably is), they will need a warrant. Seeing how she was on probation when this shit went down, she is likely fucked. Honestly, the law is fucked up when it comes to pros. How in the fuck is serving time a fair sentence or preventing pros? It ends up being a revolving door and these girls will go right back to it. It's literally just a cash cow for jails. Fuck the justice system. Also, is anyone able to get in contact SL?[/QUOTE]An inmate can be contacted by mail. One has to look up find the inmate's location in the system and send a letter "care of" the facility. BTDT. Be aware that all mail is subject to inspection. One can also post money to an inmate's account. Best to do that by money order to avoid extra fees. There is whole industry built around milking money from inmates and their friends / family. I found that a girl I had seen was in a minimum security facility in Milwaukee which, fortunately, allowed FTF visits. I mailed her back and forth, got on her approved visitor list (they do a background check) and went to see her. Got a couple of cokes from a vending machine and had a nice chat sitting across a table from her.
[QUOTE=AngryBob;4359246]I posted this before, guess I'll post it again because it is useful and there is clarification on this matter:
NO, if you are simply arrested, they do NOT have the right to search your cell phone right away. They need a warrant to do this. In 2014, there were two cases that went to the Supreme Court that dealt with this very specific issue. In both Riley vs California and United States vs Wurie, the police arrested the defendants, and during a search incident to that arrest, the police seized each defendant's cell phone that was located on their person. Evidence of gang and weapons activity was discovered on Riley's phone, after police looked through text, photographs, and videos. In Wurie, police searched the defendant's phone finding he had received multiple calls from "my house. " They accessed the call log, traced it to the defendant's apartment, and then searched the apartment, finding drugs and firearms. Both defendants were convicted. The California Court of Appeals upheld Riley's conviction, but the First Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Wurie's conviction.
The USA Supreme Court heard both cases together, and in a 9-0 opinion, held that the police generally may not, without a warrant, search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual who has been arrested. Just because they have the tools to do it, doesn't make it legal without a warrant.
Furthermore, last summer, the Supreme Court ruled that police must obtain a search warrant to access an individual's cellphone location information. They can't simply go to a cell phone provider and ask for tower data-they need a warrant. While that decision may limit the government's access to cellphone data, it has no impact on the ability of private companies to amass, use and sell their customers' information. That is because the Fourth Amendment only limits government conduct, not private conduct. Only Congress, in enacting legislation, can limit how private companies amass and use information.[/QUOTE]Does it really matter if they do it and decide to charge you anyways? Sure maybe a lawyer can get it thrown out. But you know what still happens? CCAP good luck with that.
[QUOTE=DieselMike;4360126]An inmate can be contacted by mail. One has to look up find the inmate's location in the system and send a letter "care of" the facility. BTDT. Be aware that all mail is subject to inspection. One can also post money to an inmate's account. Best to do that by money order to avoid extra fees. There is whole industry built around milking money from inmates and their friends / family. I found that a girl I had seen was in a minimum security facility in Milwaukee which, fortunately, allowed FTF visits. I mailed her back and forth, got on her approved visitor list (they do a background check) and went to see her. Got a couple of cokes from a vending machine and had a nice chat sitting across a table from her.[/QUOTE]Thanks for sharing. It's probably something I'll look into if she ends up there. For now, I think she's out on bail, but no way of contacting her sadly. In the meantime, I hope she maintains. I know if I were in her shoes with her history, I'd be depressed and contemplating. But I hope she knows she's got friends and family that care about her. And misA is not forever.
[QUOTE=Tiramisu69;4361019]For now, I think she's out on bail, but no way of contacting her sadly.[/QUOTE]Not out on bail. Still in jail as of 8:30 am 7/14. Know where to look.
[QUOTE=MkePlayer;4361551]Not out on bail. Still in jail as of 8:30 am 7/14. Know where to look.[/QUOTE]Yeah, I just found her. Damn.
I don't normally like to crap on someone's cereal[blue][Deleted by Admin][/blue]
[b][u]EDITOR'S NOTE[/u]:[/b] [blue]This report was redacted or deleted to remove sections of the report that were [u]largely argumentative[/u]. Please read the Forum FAQ and the Forum's Posting Guidelines for more information. [i]Thank You![/i]
Then don't. Or learn to take stupid shit to the fight thread.
A2[/blue]
[blue][Deleted by Admin]
Please don't feed the trolls
A2[/blue]
[QUOTE=JimmyChitWood;4360991]Does it really matter if they do it and decide to charge you anyways? Sure maybe a lawyer can get it thrown out. But you know what still happens? CCAP good luck with that.[/QUOTE]I didn't know they have CCAP in other states.
Looks like there's a bad batch out there right now.
[URL]https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.jsonline.com/amp/1851549001[/URL]
[QUOTE=Platypus19;4382914]Looks like there's a bad batch out there right now.
[URL]https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.jsonline.com/amp/1851549001[/URL][/QUOTE]I saw a report as of Sunday night the count is up to 12, crazy how it says none are related, when it appears they got it from the same batch.
R. Kelly facing charges of solicitation and prostitution with a minor in Minnesota. [URL]https://variety.com/2019/music/news/r-kelly-charged-with-sexual-crimes-in-minnesota-1203292316/[/URL].
If 1/10 of the allegations about Jeffery Epstein were true; good riddance. But I was really hoping that he would give up some of his fellow pervs, possibly including Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew, in and effort to get a plea deal. The conspiracy nuts (and maybe they're right) are having a field day, saying that it is an incredible coincidence that Epstein is now silenced.
There is a huge investigation underway as to how this could have happened. Current reports say that the guards did not check on him as required.
[QUOTE=DieselMike;4402173]If 1/10 of the allegations about Jeffery Epstein were true; good riddance. But I was really hoping that he would give up some of his fellow pervs, possibly including Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew, in and effort to get a plea deal. The conspiracy nuts (and maybe they're right) are having a field day, saying that it is an incredible coincidence that Epstein is now silenced.
There is a huge investigation underway as to how this could have happened. Current reports say that the guards did not check on him as required.[/QUOTE]A few noteworthy mentions. Epstein was awaiting a ruling for an appeal of the judges no bail decision. As long as there was a possibility of getting out of jail, why commit suicide? This incident comes just 24 hrs after a judge unsealed documents detailing his sexual abuse of underage girls. A number of powerful men whose names include Prince Andrew was revealed. Alleged claims by his sex slave say that she was forced to have sex with him, Alan Dershowitz and also former Gov. Of New Mexico. Bill Richardson.
Think we'll ever see the surveillance tapes from inside the jail?
If you remember back to the whitewater scandal with the Clinton's in AR. There were many fall people. Many of those around them became the fall guys and many of them mysteriously died also. Conspiracy, coincidence or?
I normally have zero patience with conspiracy theories, but in this case there are an awful lot of very wealthy and very powerful people breathing easier now. You could make a case for Clinton, Trump, the Royal Family and apparently dozens of others that were being blackmailed by him. We'll never know.
HS.
Here it is 113.
[URL]https://www.tmj4.com/news/local-news/3-women-arrested-in-prostitution-ring-at-west-allis-massage-parlor[/URL]