Advertising to be a Sugar Baby vs. Solicitation

My question involves criminal law for the state of: Texas

I recently created a profile on a common sugar daddy site to be a sugar baby. I got a response. We have been texting for awhile now, and we plan to meet in public in a few weeks. So far, I have sent him a few suggestive photos to keep his interest, and we also had a brief sexual conversation via text that went something like this:

Me: “I’m so eager to meet you. I already know exactly how things will be.”

Him: “And how is that?”

Me: “We will spend time together and snuggle and *insert sexual act here*.”

Him: “I would enjoy that.”

Me: “Sounds like a plan.”

*subject changes*

Now, I know in MY mind that I was not serious. I have no intent of actually sleeping with this guy. I’ve never done this before, and I’m now aware that I really should not have said that. Like I said, I’m just trying to keep him intrigued. In the very very beginning, we spoke about money, a transaction. I mentioned that I was interested in a monthly allowance arrangement but obviously we need to meet first. Then I mentioned the sexual things.

So, my questions are:

Have I committed the crime of solicitation of prostitution? I’m fully aware that there are undercover cops that are on these sites trying to catch people. We plan on having lunch in a public place and that is all our plan is. Let’s say he’s an undercover cop, can I be arrested for what I’ve done so far? The conversation about money, the sexual comment, the pictures? Also, is sending pictures and so called “sexting” in exchange for money a crime?

If I send him a text apologizing for I said about the sexual act, and explain clearly that I don’t want to have sex with him while we have a transaction arrangement, will that sort of void what I have already messed up? If I’m clear and try to fix it, is that enough NOT to get arrested if he is an undercover cop?

Slightly off-topic, but how are you going to manage being a Sugar Baby without having sex with your Sugar Daddy? The whole sugar baby-sugar daddy relationship structure revolves around sugar daddies having sex with their sugar babies in exchange for cash and/or expensive gifts. That's the whole point of it! If there's no sex, then there's no cash or gifts.

More on-topic: yes, you can probably avoid criminal charges if you clarify with your potential Sugar Daddy that there will be no sex in your relationship. However, when you do this, you can expect potential Sugar Daddy to head for the hills (or at least to other potential Sugar Babies) because for him, there's no upside to having a relationship with you.

Was fee for your Sugar Baby services ever discussed because a sexual act certainly was?


Texas Penal Code - PENAL § 43.02. Prostitution


(a) A person commits an offense if, in return for receipt of a fee, the person knowingly:

(1) offers to engage, agrees to engage, or engages in sexual conduct;  or

(2) solicits another in a public place to engage with the actor in sexual conduct for hire.

(b) A person commits an offense if, based on the payment of a fee by the actor or another person on behalf of the actor, the person knowingly:

(1) offers to engage, agrees to engage, or engages in sexual conduct;  or

(2) solicits another in a public place to engage with the actor in sexual conduct for hire.

(b-1) An offense is established under Subsection (a) regardless of whether the actor is offered or actually receives the fee.  An offense is established under Subsection (b) regardless of whether the actor or another person on behalf of the actor offers or actually pays the fee.

<Text of (c), as amended by Acts 2015, 84th Leg., ch. 332 (H.B. 10), § 14>
(c) An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor, except that the offense is:

(1) a Class A misdemeanor if the actor has previously been convicted one or two times of an offense under this section;

(2) a state jail felony if the actor has previously been convicted three or more times of an offense under this section;  or

(3) a felony of the second degree if the person solicited is:

(A) younger than 18 years of age, regardless of whether the actor knows the age of the person solicited at the time the actor commits the offense;

(B) represented to the actor as being younger than 18 years of age;  or

(C) believed by the actor to be younger than 18 years of age.

<Text of (c), as amended by Acts 2015, 84th Leg., ch. 1273 (S.B. 825), § 1>
(c) An offense under Subsection (a) is a Class B misdemeanor, except that the offense is:

(1) a Class A misdemeanor if the actor has previously been convicted one or two times of an offense under Subsection (a);  or

(2) a state jail felony if the actor has previously been convicted three or more times of an offense under Subsection (a).

(c-1) An offense under Subsection (b) is a Class B misdemeanor, except that the offense is:

(1) a Class A misdemeanor if the actor has previously been convicted one or two times of an offense under Subsection (b);

(2) a state jail felony if the actor has previously been convicted three or more times of an offense under Subsection (b);  or

(3) a felony of the second degree if the person solicited is younger than 18 years of age, regardless of whether the actor knows the age of the person solicited at the time the actor commits the offense.

(d) It is a defense to prosecution for an offense under Subsection (a) that the actor engaged in the conduct that constitutes the offense because the actor was the victim of conduct that constitutes an offense under Section 20A.02 or 43.05 .

(e) A conviction may be used for purposes of enhancement under this section or enhancement under Subchapter D, Chapter 12, but not under both this section and Subchapter D, Chapter 12.  For purposes of enhancement of penalties under this section or Subchapter D, Chapter 12, a defendant is previously convicted of an offense under this section if the defendant was adjudged guilty of the offense or entered a plea of guilty or nolo contendere in return for a grant of deferred adjudication, regardless of whether the sentence for the offense was ever imposed or whether the sentence was probated and the defendant was subsequently discharged from community supervision.

I understand what you are saying. The breif sexual conversation that I mentioned is the only sexual conversation that we have had. If we have a connection and build a relationship and trust then sure, I would have sex with him because I desire him. Not because I’m getting an allowance. I’m more concerned with the legality of things at this moment. I just want a sense of security that I am not and can not be arrested for solicitation of prostitution once arrive for our lunch date. I’m asking if what I have done so far is considered that.

I don’t want to have to text him and be clear about not having sex, because I don’t want to scare him off. He seems wonderful.

PayrolGuy-

That’s exactly what I read which is why I’m saying I think that what I’ve done is a crime. So, if I text him and make it clear that I don’t want sex in exchange for an allowance and I apologize for what I said previously, will that be enough for me NOT to get arrested (if he’s an undercover cop)? Or have I said what I said and it can’t be taken back? Does that make sense?

PayrolGuy- I just saw the question in your response. I’m sorry. The conversation of an allowance was mentioned first thing, then later on the sex was mentioned. But the conversation wasn’t EXACTLY “I will give you an allowance to have sex.” We haven’t clearly discussed the allowance thing at all really. We are waiting until we meet in public. Allowance was mentioned, then it was dumb old me that mentioned sex.

Quote:

---

Quoting spdr_

---

Now, I know in MY mind that I was not serious. I have no intent of actually sleeping with this guy. I’ve never done this before, and I’m now aware that I really should not have said that. Like I said, I’m just trying to keep him intrigued.

---

In other words, you're looking to string him along; mislead him.

Quote:

---

Quoting spdr_

---

Have I committed the crime of solicitation of prostitution?

---

Since we don't know exactly what was said, we have no way of assessing this intelligently.

Quote:

---

Quoting spdr_

---

Also, is sending pictures and so called “sexting” in exchange for money a crime?

---

You wrote that the photos were "suggestive." Were they more than "suggestive"? Regardless, you apparently sent them without receiving any money and without any expectation of receiving money, so I doubt that, by itself, was criminal.

Quote:

---

Quoting spdr_

---

If I send him a text apologizing for I said about the sexual act, and explain clearly that I don’t want to have sex with him while we have a transaction arrangement, will that sort of void what I have already messed up? If I’m clear and try to fix it, is that enough NOT to get arrested if he is an undercover cop?

---

Here's my suggestion:

Tell this guy you've changed your mind. Thanks, but no thanks. Change your cell number and any other contact info. To the extent possible, cancel your membership and delete your profile on the "sugar daddy site." Get a real job and take care of yourself.

Okay, I also just realized that after I said “Sounds like a plan.” he made a sexual comment back and that was the end of the convo. It involved a sexual act. So, let’s say he is a cop. Would he be allowed to even say that?

This is so stressful. I feel stupid for ever mentioning it. He seems great. I think I ruined it with my big mouth. No pun intended.

Quote:

---

Quoting spdr_

---

So, let’s say he is a cop. Would he be allowed to even say that?

---

The only thing a cop may not legally do is induce a person to commit a crime when that person is not otherwise predisposed to commit the crime. That's what entrapment is. The fact that you registered at the "sugar daddy site" is all the evidence anyone would need to conclude that you were predisposed to commit a crime.

You wrote, "Me: “We will spend time together and snuggle and *insert sexual act here*.” "


If a fee or gifts were also discussed in exchange doing the above you would seem to have violated the law I posted.

By the way, the dialog in the original post is hilarious as written -- especially if you imagine it being spoken by Steve Carrell and Tina Fey (or maybe Jennifer Aniston). Rather than sponging off some dude, you might consider a career in standup comedy or scriptwriting.