The stories here are all for entertainment right? wink wink..

oh shit

Don't worry MrBater2010!

The police aren't going to wade through the stories about "chakin fangers," colonizing Uranus, doing a three way with Prince and Kim Bassetter, and other gems to find the occasional post where somebody is telling the truth.

It's a brilliant system!

1 Hour Ago • Don't worry MrBater2010!

The police aren't going to wade through the stories about "chakin fangers"...

But be careful of stories about cucumbers. Those are real.

In all seriousness - are these guys being prosecuted solely because of reviews they wrote on a message board/website?

The article suggests that one of the web sites was actually used to book prostitutes so it would go beyond merely containing reviews. Nevertheless, theoretically, there could be a prosecution based solely upon reviews if the reviews showed that these guys paid to have sex with these women. The "crime" would be paying for sex, with the reviews being evidence that the "crime" actually took place.

I hate to think it, but It looks as if the new 'Nordic' model of decriminalizing prostitution but criminalizing being a client is effectively becoming the enforced but unwritten law in some areas of the country, including 'public shaming' of high profile j0hnz. Mandatory disclaimer: Of course everything anybody says on this website is completely a work of fiction and utter bullshit! Honestly, officer....honestly Your Honor!

I'd think, and I've been told by my lawyer, that posts on a board like this one would be considered hearsay, and not normally relevant unless corroborated by actual eyewitnesses. Now, they *can* be used as a reason to investigate, if they refer to public places or actual people.

Perhaps the standards are different elsewhere.

I always wondered if comments on here would be considered under the statement against interest except to the hearsay rule? After all we are actually admitting to a crime during a lot of our dtories.

I consider them all to be works of fiction... and many probably actually are.

Per the article:

"... These defendants, we allege, were absolutely devoted to the commercial sexual exploitation of vulnerable, powerless immigrant women," King County Prosecutors said in January, adding that the women, who were forced into prostitution to pay off debts to organized crime bosses in Asia ..."

When it appears to be human trafficking, or minors, involved, that will make the authorities act swiftly - assuming there *was* human trafficking involved and that they are not just trying to sensationalize or pant it for something that it's not as can often be the case.

"... I hate to think it, but It looks as if the new 'Nordic' model of decriminalizing prostitution but criminalizing being a client is effectively becoming the enforced but unwritten law in some areas of the country, including 'public shaming' of high profile j0hnz ..."

Yeah - the story hails out of Seattle which is pretty left/"progressive" and I think I've heard of the authorities in that city going after the johns making them be the reason why women turn to prostitution (i.e. b/c of the sex demand by johns).

"... the authorities in that city going after the johns making them be the reason why women turn to prostitution ..."

which would be like blaming custies for dancers becoming strippers.

"I always wondered if comments on here would be considered under the statement against interest exception to the hearsay rule? After all we are actually admitting to a crime during a lot of our stories."

First time a question of evidence law has come up so I'm glad to answer it. You wouldn't need to get to the statement against interest exception because out of court statements of a party to a legal proceeding are always admissible. This is sometimes referred to as the admissions by a party opponent exception.