***Wow...Hidden Healing (haven)...busted!****

[wetvelvetsat]

Hi,

On the news, Hidden Haven got busted...the chic says she just rented the rooms out to the girls! The also picked up all the evidence in the house that was in Boerne!
2 for prostitution and the owner! Be careful ladies!

Massage Parlor Bust
Sincerely,
Velvet

[Persistent Bear (no longer active here)]

which news channel??

[wetvelvetsat]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Persistent Bear @ Feb 16 2009, 06:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

which news channel??[/b]

Hi,
It was just on Channel 12!
Sincerely,
Velvet

[Persistent Bear (no longer active here)]

Here&#39;s a link to the news report.

http://www.ksat.com/news/18726864/detail.html

[wetvelvetsat]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Persistent Bear @ Feb 16 2009, 06:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Here&#39;s a link to the news report.

http://www.ksat.com/news/18726864/detail.html[/b]

Hi,

After watching that report again, I hope no other providers "work" or give that lady money to rent a room. Looks like she is going to throw the ladies "under the truck" to protect herself...really, like she didn&#39;t know what was going on!..... :angry:

Sincerely,
Velvet
:unsure:

[Persistent Bear (no longer active here)]

Yes, I agree. if she isn&#39;t willing to take the risk, she shouldn&#39;t be running that type of business. Hopefully, the ladies she as been associated with will stay a long way away from her and hopefully, she won&#39;t be able to lure anyone else in.

[Mokoa]

This incident was also reported by the Fox station KABB.

[wetvelvetsat]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mokoa @ Feb 17 2009, 12:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

This incident was also reported by the Fox station KABB.[/b]

Hi,

mokoa....kabb said....anonymous tip....that&#39;s terrible! The little green monster raises his head, again!
I had read something like that happened in Austin...a certain group of people got most of the parlors closed there.....and now, we sure do have a lot of "massage" parlors here...reminds me of the 80&#39;s.....
Persistent bear....your stated it perfectly and the best part of your statement ...."she won&#39;t be able to lure anyone else in"...sounds like she has been living off providers for awhile...let her make her own way!

Sincerely,
Velvet
:D

[SofaKingFun]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (wetvelvetsat @ Feb 17 2009, 06:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Hi,

mokoa....kabb said....anonymous tip....that&#39;s terrible! The little green monster raises his head, again!
I had read something like that happened in Austin...a certain group of people got most of the parlors closed there.....and now, we sure do have a lot of "massage" parlors here...reminds me of the 80&#39;s.....
Persistent bear....your stated it perfectly and the best part of your statement ...."she won&#39;t be able to lure anyone else in"...sounds like she has been living off providers for awhile...let her make her own way!

Sincerely,
Velvet
:D[/b]

I saw the follow-up with the reporter interviewing &#39;The Landlord", and why she&#39;s even commenting at all is beyond me...??, but I don&#39;t thinck she&#39;s "throwing the gals under the bus". What would you expect her answer to be? Of course she&#39;s going to pass it off to the gals who got popped. They&#39;re the one&#39;s who got pinched.

She&#39;s not the one who slipped so why should she admit to anything??

And I beg to differ about the quantity of massage parlors compared to the 80&#39;s. The numbers are nowhere near what they were back then. Not even close.

Peace,
SKF

[PennyLane]

I would also like to point out - that while the girls will get a slap on the hand and at most a fine (unless they are repeat offenders) - the lady that owns the place usually gets to go to jail.

[pepperspringfield]

Yes, everyone be very careful. I hear other girls have gotten in trouble with the law lately, also. :(

[wetvelvetsat]

Hi sofaking,

What about "no comment" and keep on stepping. Unfortuantely, her words hit a nerve, that&#39;s all! And yes there aren&#39;t as many because the massage parlor "license" back in the day was a health certificate and a license issued by the local police department (fingerprints and all) and now the schools charge $6,500 (I checked into it and i&#39;m not sure about the health certificate though) and back in the day it was $2,500 after the laws changed to mandate going to school. And yes, the other ladies bought the attention to her establishment. If she didn&#39;t want no part of the down fall why not rent to "real" massage therapist....SA current is full of them. :wub:

Hi pennylane,
I understand she went to jail because she didn&#39;t have a massage license and if she would of had that..she would have walked! I&#39;m curious if she charged by the client or the week...ahheheh....Reminds me of the old women that use to be on Cherry Street...she charged certain providers (the ones that didn&#39;t rip the guys off) to use her rooms to supplement her SSI and they arrested the poor old lady because the ladies were using her rooms for prostitution. So to me, that lady got off "scott free!"

IMO, which I seem to always have one..aheheheheheh :D

Sincerely,
Velvet

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SofaKingFun @ Feb 17 2009, 07:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

I saw the follow-up with the reporter interviewing &#39;The Landlord", and why she&#39;s even commenting at all is beyond me...??, but I don&#39;t thinck she&#39;s "throwing the gals under the bus". What would you expect her answer to be? Of course she&#39;s going to pass it off to the gals who got popped. They&#39;re the one&#39;s who got pinched.

She&#39;s not the one who slipped so why should she admit to anything??

And I beg to differ about the quantity of massage parlors compared to the 80&#39;s. The numbers are nowhere near what they were back then. Not even close.

Peace,
SKF
[/b]

[SofaKingFun]

Hi wetvelvet...

Uhhh..." "no comment" and keep on stepping"?? Excuse me? I don&#39;t believe I stated anything out-of-line.

I was simply disagreeing with your stating that, "it looks like she&#39;s going to throw the other ladies under the truck" in order to protect herself. The reason I didn&#39;t agree with you is because she was only charged with operating without a massage license. She had not been charged with any prostitution-related crimes.

The other gals on the other hand...different story. They were charged and arrested for prostitution-related crimes.

I just don&#39;t see where the owner threw anybody "under the truck" by stating that she "just rented them rooms". Certainly she&#39;s protecting herself. It&#39;d be kinda&#39; foolish of her not to do so, don&#39;t you think? Should she have been an open-book and poured her heart out by offering a confession?

My question to you is...since she did not implicate anyone in anything how is she "throwing the ladies under the bus"?

Finally, this. "...she won&#39;t be able to lure anyone else in..sounds like she has been living off providers for awhile...let her make her own way!"


I have no personal knowledge of this operation other than what I&#39;ve read and heard but I&#39;m just curious to know
what makes you (and Persistent Bear) feel that she "lured" these ladies in? Seems to me that both parties benefited from the other (a symbiotic relationship I believe it&#39;s called).

The owner benefited from the monies paid by the ladies for the room rental. The ladies benefited in having a place in which to have their appointments and earn their fee. I don&#39;t think that they were being forced to operate out of there or do anything other than pay for the room rental...I could be wrong, though.

(I&#39;m also going off of the assumption that ladies who typically enter this hobby via the FBSM route..are likely newbies -not yet &#39;seasoned veterans&#39; w/regard to the &#39;ins-n-outs&#39; of being a provider...and aren&#39;t usually in a position, financially, to &#39;set-up shop&#39; on their own.. )

So given that, wouldn&#39;t an arrangement such as the one above generally be better for the ladies?
-They wouldn&#39;t have to hunt for an incall each and every day.
-Scheduling would have to be easier.
-Having a couple of ladies around while they&#39;re taking their appointments would have to be safer.
-It&#39;s probably cheaper than paying for a notell on a daily basis.
-etc. etc..

Or...

Do you feel that the ladies would be better off if the owner were to terminate such an arrangement, stopping any and all activities...everyone "earning their own way"?

Just wondering...

I apologize if my comments came across as confrontational or argumentative. That wasn&#39;t my intent. I was simply disagreeing.

If it&#39;s any consolation, , we both agreed that there aren&#39;t as many massage parlors as before...so that&#39;s gotta&#39; count for something...doesn&#39;t it?

Enjoy the weekend!
SKF