Massage Parlor Reports

**Teejay** · 01-14-11 23:49

Haven't been around much lately but as some may remember I'm a firm believer that if you find a bad provider, you need to report it. If you don't your an accomplice in their subsequent victims. With this in mind, I offer the following:

Stay away from http://boston.craigslist.org/sob/thp/2160441571.html. Surprise! The pics are fake. The $30 special went up to $40 / hh. I got a quick 5 minute half hearted back rub for 5 mins, then the flip. The hard negotiating started with $1. 2 for a "special" BJ. She wanted $50 for he, I said no. She wanted $40, I said if I can roam, she said no. We settled on nothing until she offered he with no touching for $30.

Did the deed while talking on the phone with other mongers. Gents, don't bother.

Remember, report the bad ones! She got three calls while I was there. Some one knew she was a ripoff before I got there. If you have any winners in the Quincy area, PM me.

**Promethius** · 01-14-11 21:03

Originally Posted by Dan Wesson [View Original Post]

I am thinking I would have gone with the "just got massage" comment and then asked if I was being charged with anything. If not, I would take my leave. I have to believe they stopped more customers, but the others probably had no priors on which the cops could squeeze the customers.

This case kinda stinks with respect to rights on several levels and I would hope the only charge they can stick is the unlicensed massage parlor.

Please, fellow mongers, invest the time, reap the dividends:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7N...eature=related

I promise it will be worth your while. Once you're done with that video, go down the right hand column and check out a few more, then ask yourself what your answer would be.

**Aimstraight** · 01-14-11 02:55

Originally Posted by SMS 54 [View Original Post]

I found it amusing that the Narcotics officer for Stoneham PD and the Southern Middlesex Regional Drug Task Force took down these 2 Chinese masseuses, who were then released on $40 bail.

More public employees doing what they do best. Putting the taxpayers' dollars to work!

**Binzer** · 01-14-11 02:13

Originally Posted by Dan Wesson [View Original Post]

I am thinking I would have gone with the "just got massage" comment and then asked if I was being charged with anything. If not, I would take my leave. I have to believe they stopped more customers, but the others probably had no priors on which the cops could squeeze the customers.

This case kinda stinks with respect to rights on several levels and I would hope the only charge they can stick is the unlicensed massage parlor.

I agree. Why would anyone say anything but "I got a massage". There is absolutely nothing illegal about getting a massage. And unless the police actually sprung a trap with an undercover operation. They have nothing. Know your rights. And say nothing but the obvious truth."I got a massage. If you're not charging me for something, adios!"

**SMS 54** · 01-14-11 01:20

I found it amusing that the Narcotics officer for Stoneham PD and the Southern Middlesex Regional Drug Task Force took down these 2 Chinese masseuses, who were then released on $40 bail.

**Ming04** · 01-13-11 22:04

Originally Posted by Pires24 [View Original Post]

Looks like they changed there name to forever young. Anymore info people? Same ownership? Same girls? They do have the same number thou.

Thanks

I was there today, I got Coco I think, not sure. The " body work " (they don't like it when we say massage) done by this provider was poor, not very polite but not rude, that came later when I asked what was the other girls name after she finished, no extras. Not even an accidental rub, not sensual in any way, she just squeezed a lot.

Some say that you can get just about anything here with the right girl, I guess I got the one that does not do any extras of any kind.

I would love some info about the girls that work there (Tina, Coco & Amy) I asked who was working and the woman on the phone gave me those names. If anyone is familiar with this girls please let me know.

I am still curious to know about the other girl that was there but I was so disappointed that when I walked by her on the hallway I only said Hi. I should have ask her name and and next time set up an appointment with her, she was very sweet, cute and attractive.

**Dan Wesson** · 01-13-11 20:13

I am thinking I would have gone with the "just got massage" comment and then asked if I was being charged with anything. If not, I would take my leave. I have to believe they stopped more customers, but the others probably had no priors on which the cops could squeeze the customers.

This case kinda stinks with respect to rights on several levels and I would hope the only charge they can stick is the unlicensed massage parlor.

**Bigboy22** · 01-13-11 18:26

If you feel the conversation may lead you to testify against yourself, the best way is to shut your mouth up. If they don't let you go, find a lawyer. Your strength is not to give them any information, not the other way.

**Energizerbunne** · 01-13-11 18:24

It could be that there were men going to the legit masseuse seeking extras. That would make me unhappy, if I were operating a legit place.

Anybody that opens up a rub & tug place in a residential neighborhood is asking for trouble.

I recall a similar place I visited off Porter Sq. Some years ago. Not Asian, but all-American. I remember thinking as I walked up to the house that I'm certain the neighbors saw male customers coming & going and the place wouldn't last long. Sure enough, it did not. Too bad, because I got one hell of a massage, along with a very happy ending.

Originally Posted by Boston Ampfan [View Original Post]

Gentlemen,

Three things struck me about this incident:

1. OK, so they were running an unlicensed massage establishment in a building where a licensed masseuse also had her studio. WTF were the folks at Gemstone thinking? Did they really have that much blind faith in the lady upstairs to believe that she wouldn't look for a way to kill off the competition?

2. Interesting that the PD alleged that two of the fellows they questioned are registered sex offenders. Was this true, do you think? Methinks it ain't necessarily so. Perhaps they are making this up on the theory that it's useful to suggest that anyone who would go to a "happy" MP is by definition, a perv.

3. As for the quote about the "legitimate" therapist in the building: "One of the complaints against the establishment, according to police, came from a legitimate masseuse who runs a business from the top floor of the building. She said that Gemstone Massage, which is located in the basement, gets a lot more business than she does and only seems to take male customers." Now that she has eliminated the {allegedly} Happy place downstairs, does she truly believe that all of Gemstone's former customers will seek her out? That her own business will pick up? Note and a biz development hint to complainer: Answer is,"Not likely, dearie." And if you want to attract more male customers. Well, you know what you need to do!

Kindest Regards,

BA

**Amp Slave** · 01-13-11 17:56

Originally Posted by Santa66 [View Original Post]

Of course, they should have kept quiet. What could they be charged with if the cops didn't catch anyone in the act of breaking the law? Even if they had already been able to get a client to admit to receiving extra services, that doesn't imply that everyone who gets a massage there gets extras. Just say you got a straight massage and nothing else. Who's to say different? Just my. 02 worth.

I tried looking the law up and there is no law about getting a massage, so the cops don't have anything on you. Just admit you got a massage period. Unless they have video proof they have nothing. It is your word against the girl, only if they speak english.

**Boston Ampfan** · 01-13-11 14:56

Gentlemen,

Three things struck me about this incident:

1. OK, so they were running an unlicensed massage establishment in a building where a licensed masseuse also had her studio. WTF were the folks at Gemstone thinking? Did they really have that much blind faith in the lady upstairs to believe that she wouldn't look for a way to kill off the competition?

2. Interesting that the PD alleged that two of the fellows they questioned are registered sex offenders. Was this true, do you think? Methinks it ain't necessarily so. Perhaps they are making this up on the theory that it's useful to suggest that anyone who would go to a "happy" MP is by definition, a perv.

3. As for the quote about the "legitimate" therapist in the building: "One of the complaints against the establishment, according to police, came from a legitimate masseuse who runs a business from the top floor of the building. She said that Gemstone Massage, which is located in the basement, gets a lot more business than she does and only seems to take male customers." Now that she has eliminated the {allegedly} Happy place downstairs, does she truly believe that all of Gemstone's former customers will seek her out? That her own business will pick up? Note and a biz development hint to complainer: Answer is,"Not likely, dearie." And if you want to attract more male customers.... well, you know what you need to do!

Kindest Regards,

BA

**Santa66** · 01-13-11 12:10

Of course, they should have kept quiet. What could they be charged with if the cops didn't catch anyone in the act of breaking the law? Even if they had already been able to get a client to admit to receiving extra services, that doesn't imply that everyone who gets a massage there gets extras. Just say you got a straight massage and nothing else. Who's to say different? Just my. 02 worth.

Originally Posted by Dan Wesson [View Original Post]

Acccording to the article:

"The customers, according to Norton, were open and honest with the questioning officers, realizing that there was no denying what services the establishment really offered. All three described similar experiences at the parlor, which consisted of an hour-long massage that concluded with the massage therapist performing a sexual act.

In return for their police cooperation, the customers are able to walk away, but their names are included in the report filed against the establishment."

Think these guys should have kept quiet? What charges could they have faced?

**YogiKenny** · 01-13-11 01:58

Originally Posted by Dan Wesson [View Original Post]

Acccording to the article:

"The customers, according to Norton, were open and honest with the questioning officers, realizing that there was no denying what services the establishment really offered. All three described similar experiences at the parlor, which consisted of an hour-long massage that concluded with the massage therapist performing a sexual act.

In return for their police cooperation, the customers are able to walk away, but their names are included in the report filed against the establishment."

Think these guys should have kept quiet? What charges could they have faced?

The police F they up, can't charge anything like these.

**SMS 54** · 01-13-11 01:37

Originally Posted by Sebastian6 [View Original Post]

The Stoneham Police have shut down another AMP in Stoneham. Don't think you will see too many AMPs opening in Stoneham anytime soon as the police are being aggressive in shutting them down.

http://www.wickedlocal.com/stoneham/...eham-masseuses

Interesting, irritating article. All this time I've been tipping 2x the usual rate for HE.

**Wayback** · 01-12-11 22:57

Originally Posted by Jimmy Pratt [View Original Post]

There used to be a LuLu at FuShen in Somerville. I wonder if its the same one? Possibly needed a new venue since Fu's trouble with LE? If I recall, LuLu from Fu was petite, possibly 40-ish. Very energetic. Does that sound right? Can you give a brief description of the LuLu at WW? If it is the same gal, I think it will get me to pay a visit to Waltham sooner than I thought because she was pretty good at FuShen.

Thanks,

JP

Petite and 40-ish sounds right, big time nipples on B / Cs.