SA - People PLEASE UNDERSTAND THE POINT

[Guest ncm2169]

My "experiences" with Scott:

 

I first contacted Scott via email in July, 2002, when doing an initial search for escorts pending an upcoming business trip to LA. He responded promptly and he hit me up on AOL Instant Messenger shortly thereafter and we began an intermittent IM conversation. I quickly concluded that Scott is very bright, but I also learned that he was pretty free with some facts, to wit: that he was underage (by only a month or so at that point of first contact - he even IM'ed me the day he turned 18 to let me know he was "legal now"), and that he'd been hired regularly when he was underage by (at least one) VERY famous Hollywood personality - he gave me the name of the client as if to impress me. (Frankly, at the time, I thought it was total braggadoccio, but I now believe otherwise). We carried on an email and IM conversation but ultimately I chose not to hire him due the rates issue, but I never told him that - I just never followed up. A few months later, in a thread here which, as I recall, was trashing him, I spoke up in his behalf, opining that he was a smart guy who was young and should be given some slack and that, while I chose not to pay his rates, I thought he should be free to charge what he wanted. That started a miniwar here when Scott posted several intemperate comments challenging my "right" to disclose "personal" info about him (his rates, his age, etc.). As I recall, the thread might have been locked by Deej.

 

Another LA-based client who used to post here regularly (with whom I have corresponded extensively over the past three years), and who has multiple Reviews here, decided to hire Scott based on my initial convo with him - that client was OK with the rates issue. The client had an awesome time with Scott, in particular when he hired Scott for a 3-some with one of his regular escorts, who I ultimately hired in place of Scott on my trip. }(

 

The LA-based client ultimately persuaded Scott to reconcile with me (knowing I was returning to LA soon), and one evening Scott IM'ed me, advising me that he'd decided to "give me a second chance." He wasn't arrogant, per se - he simply had the - what can I call it? - exuberance of youth, perhaps? In any event, my LA-based client buddy's account of his 3-way was so steamy that I decided to replicate it when I returned to LA in a few months (sans the other client, obviously x( ), and I asked Scott if he was interested. He was definitely up for it, so we scheduled a 3-hour session a few months ahead. We kept in touch off and on via email and phone leading up to my weekend trip, and two days before I was due to leave for LA, I called him to ask him a specific question about what might occur during our 3-some (nothing out of the "ordinary"). Suffice it to say, Scott proceeded (for whatever reason) to mock me and was just so obnoxious that the next morning I shot him an email in which I cancelled the 3-some scheduled for only a few days later. He shot back with a scathing criticism of me, to which I simply responded, "You have just eliminated any doubt about my decision to cancel." I let it drop after Scott told me NEVER to contact him again.

 

Epilogue: Scott and I are both Type A personalities and, while I would have loved to have had that 3-way (or other time with him), it wouldn't have worked then. Maybe now or later, but my travel to LA is behind me.

 

I have watched Scott's posts here and elsewhere, and I've even sent him an email praising his maturation when he behaves accordingly in his posts (which he did acknowledge, albeit briefly). I still think he has much to offer (first hand accolades from another client can be VERY helpful - lol), but you clearly have to be prepared for the total package, attitude very much included.

 

Bottom line from me, FWIW only: as I said a couple years ago, cut the kid some slack. YES, he probably put a few?/some?/many? clients at risk when he was underage. Do I condone that? NO WAY. But, IMHO, get over it. He's well past legal age now, and if you're hiring him now, why have any concern about his past illegal age issues?

 

To Scott: I hope this doesn't re-ignite the old crap. Just please learn when to open your fucking mouth (as in, when you suck yourself ), and when to keep it shut.

[uwsman2]

It doesn't matter what age he was. Every escort in the US regardless of age is putting customers at risk, because sex for money is illegal everywhere in the US (except for licensed brothels in certain counties in Nevada). And before the spring of 2003 when the Supreme Court decided Lawrence v. Texas, gay sex was illegal in a significant number of states regardless of age, consent, etc. Those states included Texas and Florida, which to judge by the listings on this involved a significant number of very well-regarded folks on this site.

And the age of consent for sex varies from state to state around this country - in some states it's 16, in some 17, in some 18, and believe it or not sex is legal below age 16 in some places depending upon the age difference between the parties.

So focusing in on SA conceding that he did some escorting before he was 18 is a bid absurd.

[woodlawn]

>It doesn't matter what age he was. Every escort in the US

>regardless of age is putting customers at risk, because sex

>for money is illegal everywhere in the US

 

As Doug pointed out in another thread, you seem to have trouble understanding that prostitution is a misdemeanor in the state where Scott does business, while having sex with a minor is a felony. The statutory (and likely) penalties for these two offenses are quite different. As Doug also pointed out, whatever your feelings about grown men having sex with teenagers, it's one thing for a client to decide he is willing to take the risk of a felony conviction to gratify his appetites and another thing for him to be tricked into taking that risk by a prostitute who lies about his age. I doubt many clients would disagree that they prefer to make that decision themselves rather than have someone else make it for them.

 

For future reference, the age of consent for sexual activity in the state where Scott does business is 18, not 14 or 16. It is also the law in that state that a conviction for various sex acts with someone under the age of 18 requires that the person convicted be registered as a sex offender, and subject to all the public disclosure and notification provisions of Megan's Law. Is that serious enough for you?