Public enemy? Where is Scooby-doo?
Ad Taker Busted for Promoting Prostitution
— If something like this stands up in court it will kill most regional newspapers. These cops should be looking into yellow pages, TV chat lines, and espcially operations like Manhattan cable. It’s always amusing when cops such as this joker go after small fry trying to eke out a living (on commissions, I’m sure) while organized crime runs prostituion rings and nothing is done about that.
Nels Noseworthy of Bellevue Road is accused of selling ads to undercover Metro officers who made it known they were promoting prostitutes, police said. The escort-service ads included suggestive phrases like ”XXX,” ”Sex In The City Escorts,” and ”$200/hr.”
Noseworthy, 29, was indicted by a Davidson County grand jury on six felony counts of promoting prostitution. He faces up to 12 years in prison if convicted.
And since when is it this guys job to stop prostitution?? I have a serious problem with police who set up this sort of sting. They create a fake situation then arrest someone who didn’t do a crime.
via R. Brill
Now if it’s true that “state law allows for prosecution of anyone who assists in the commission of a crime,” exactly where was the crime?! Unless the cops really intended to go through with the prostitution I don’t see any underlying crime that Nels Noseworthy assisted.
good point
I’m gonna have to agree… unless they actually purchased services or something, they shouldn’t be wasting their time. An ad alone is pretty useless. That’s like an ad that says buy drugs by calling X number. You call the number and it’s disconnected, or turns out to be a prank on someone. There’s no crime there unless they were actually able to purchase the services of the ads in question.
Hmmm. Let me think about what you are saying…
If a pawn shop owner offers to knowing recieves “stolen” goods in a sting operation.. is it not a crime unless the goods are REALLY stolen?
Or, if a (undercover cop) “drug dealer” offers to sell fake heroin, is it not a crime to buy it from him since it is powdered sugar?
Or, unless a (cop) “hooker” actually DOES have sex for money…
If you guys are right, no sting operation is valid unless a REAL crime is followed through on.
It would be a serious hindrance in law enforcement.
– Alan
Exactly how is this law enforcement? It conning. The police con a guy into commiting a crime then bust him. It’s THEY who are breaking the law. By YOUR logic in a perfect society where there is zero crime and it requires the police to trick someone into breaking the law, then this to you is law enforcement? Let’s just cut to the chase and hook people up to lie detectors and work on the idea of pre-crime. These stings are essentially pre-crime enforcement. Fabulous.
Hindrance my ass. This is crime creation. How about spending energy solving REAL crimes instead creating a crime?
“Instead of coming after me or another manager, (Serpas) went after an innocent employee trying to do his job,” Del Favero said in the statement.
Interesting that they didn’t charge the Publisher or Editors with promoting prostitution. The ad sales guy is ultimately responsible for the content of that paper? 🙁
The pornography cases against Hustler brought charges against Larry Flint as Publisher, not the photographer taking the pictures. Why don’t the promoting prostitution cases name the publisher as defendant?
To Alan: You seem confused. Some lawyer was quoted as saying that state law allows for prosecution of anyone who assists in the commission of a crime.
Assuming what the lawyer said was true, there seems to be three elements required to be found guilty of that crime. The accused has to assist, a third party, in a “commission of a crime.”
In this present situation, the accused assisted the police to place a fake advertisement. Thus, the accused assisted, there was a third party, but that third party never committed a crime.
If your interpretation is correct, then if I assist someone to change his tires, I’m guilty, because in the exact same way I assisted, a third person, who did NOT commit a crime. How is that situation different from Noseworthys situation?!
Sure, its illegal to solicit prostitution. But its also illegal to steal tires. In Noseworthys situation, there were no prostitutes. In my situation, the tires werent stolen. Ill ask again, how are they different?
Some more comments. In reference to receiving stolen goods, youre wrong. To be convicted to receiving stolen goods the goods MUST be stolen. Thats the law.
Furthermore, if a cop sold a drug dealer sugar that “drug dealer” could not be charged with a crime. Youre thinking backwards. Cops buy drugs from dealers, NOT the other way around.
Regarding prostitution, the cop has to obtain some sort of statement or information from the hooker that she intends to go through with a sexual act for money. That crime has different elements than the one mentioned in the article.
And lastly, sting operations are rarely valid when done your way. Your way is backward. Here’s another example, police dont set up pawn shops by pretending to sell stolen goods. They get tips that the pawn shop is buying stolen goods, they get a search warrant, then they search the shop. If stolen goods are found, the owner is charged.
imafish – Exactly!
If somebody walks into a pawn shop and try’s to sell something that they say is stolen, unless it actually is stolen, there is no crime.
This situation is the same. Unless services were purchased by law enforcement as a direct result of that ad, there is no crime. I can say I have a lady that provides certain sexual services that you pay for, but unless I and her actually deliver, and you actually pay for said services, then there isn’t a crime. The only other way to bust someone is to actually catch them in the act of doing said activities and prove that money was exchanged for those services.
If you guys are right, no sting operation is valid unless a REAL crime is followed through on.
It would be a serious hindrance in law enforcement.
From the article:
Yesterday’s arrest was part of a wider investigation of the publication, begun in May 2003 … That investigation has linked 30 Nashville Scene ads to prostitution businesses and led to 25 prostitution arrests so far, Aaron said.
People were arrested for prostitution, but the ads for those “services” were as vague as the cop’s ads.
They are trying to prove that accepting “suggestive” ads is a crime, if the person selling them is “reasonably sure” a crime will be committed.
The police had no intention of engaging in prostitution.
Unless they can prove the ad-seller had similarly frank discussions with the arrested protitutes and pimps/madams, they shouldn’t have a case.
If I was the ad-seller, my defense would be: “I just thought the guys were “talking sh*t”, and humored them to make the sale”. 🙂
Like John mentioned, are they going to do “sting” operations against Yellow Pages sales people, next??
The problem is not ads for prostitution, it is that prostitution is such a wide-spread and established “industry” that they do place ads!!! 🙂
What other “illicict” group openly buys ads? (besides Attorneys).
Why are so many Nashville Metro checking the personals of the paper anyway?
and I can’t believe it, I know him.
4,
Its not the SIGN at the pawn shop, its the ACTION that is against the law.