Originally Posted by
LittleFuzzy
What were my words? "You're opening yourself to prosecution." You may have forgotten this but I am not Lewk. I don't believe in robo-justice and I frequently point out our system was designed with the idea that we are human beings capable of judgement and reasonable discretion.
It means their alleged girlfriend may actually be engaged in an act of prostitution. What's the context and what additional details are there, pointing in on direction or another? If I was going to engage in robojustice, one of the analytical standards would be the use of the concept necessity and sufficiency. Paying for travel is one of the many things which fall under "has an exchange taken place" which is a necessary condition for sustaining a prostitution charge. But it is not sufficient by itself to prove that it was prostitution, providing sex for renumeration. If you have a prior existing relationship, the additional details would not provide sufficiency for the charge. If you were arranging to have sex with on Ashley Madison with someone you had never previously met before, the details are going to be a much closer match to those of prostitution.
And if you by travel tickets for your girlfriend solely for booty call, maybe you should stop treating her like she's a prostitute. :p
