Court Ruling on Prostitution Website

[Marcus78]

The court found that the owner/proprietor did not run a house of prostitution, nor a place which encouraged it. What do you all think will be the backlash/effects of this ruling? Is it just that the laws are too inadequate to deal with the digital age, especially on matters such as this?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/20...e-ruled-legal/

[ShysterJon]

I don't know Arizona state law, but the article states the basis of prosecuting the web site owners was because they were allegedly running a "house of prostitution." I guess the DA's argument was the web site was a virtual or electronic house of prostitution. I think that's an awful argument. For one thing, since time immemorial, for a place to be considered a whorehouse, there had to actually be some whoring taking place under a roof.

I expect the DA in Arizona will appeal the trial judge's ruling. A written opinion by an appellate court might help clarify things.

Texas doesn't have a whorehouse statute comparable to Arizona's. The provisions in the Texas Penal Code dealing with prostitution and computer crimes don't seem to apply to Eccie and similar web sites. If I were a DA and wanted to charge a hooker board with something, I'd use the part of the penal code dealing with... ahh, never mind.

[carguy1989]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

I don't know Arizona state law, but the article states the basis of prosecuting the web site owners was because they were allegedly running a "house of prostitution." I guess the DA's argument was the web site was a virtual or electronic house of prostitution. I think that's an awful argument. For one thing, since time immemorial, for a place to be considered a whorehouse, there had to actually be some whoring taking place under a roof.

I expect the DA in Arizona will appeal the trial judge's ruling. A written opinion by an appellate court might help clarify things.

Texas doesn't have a whorehouse statute comparable to Arizona's. The provisions in the Texas Penal Code dealing with prostitution and computer crimes don't seem to apply to Eccie and similar web sites. If I were a DA and wanted to charge a hooker board with something, I'd use the part of the penal code dealing with... ahh, never mind.

I truley suspect that no court officer in Arizona will do anything about this ruling since it all took place in Albuquerque New Mexico.

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by carguy1989

I truley suspect that no court officer in Arizona will do anything about this ruling since it all took place in Albuquerque New Mexico.

Whoops! Haha. I don't know why I thought the case was out of Arizona. Maybe I got confused because I'd scanned the Supreme Court's ruling on the Arizona immigration law that day.

[slowlick]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

Whoops! Haha. I don't know why I thought the case was out of Arizona. Maybe I got confused because I'd scanned the Supreme Court's ruling on the Arizona immigration law that day.

I bet Shyster would still bill you for the correct advice (on the wrong state)

I do appreciate you counselor

[ck1942]

Actually, due to current federal laws I don't see where any state laws can successfully assert, or even presume jurisdiction, over websites...no matter where the servers are physically located. Best of course to be located outside of a locality in which potential issues may arise.

That is not to assume that anywhere or anything on the web is immediately immune from criminal or civil prosecution... Charges or suits can always be filed...with the subsequent defense expenses then necessary.

[Little Stevie]

Just ask the offshore gambling website owners how they are liking their chances right about now.. They were arrested when thy came back to the U.S. to visit relatives but are now fugitives again. Trying to clean up their operation which had formerly been located in the U.S., these guys apparently "played by the rules" with everything except the ability of players playing in their offshore poker rooms and casinos to collect winnings within the U.S. The "Devil is in the Details" and the transfer of the money was still somehow thought to be illegal on the part of the gamblers who used the offshore site.

I think when the Feds want you, they find a way to make it happen.

http://www.caribbean360.com/news/ant...#axzz1ziWCHnp2

[Grouchy]

http://cyb3rcrim3.blogspot.com/2009/...r-pimping.html

http://cyb3rcrim3.blogspot.com/2012/...d-keeping.html