DukeSox said:
This is in response to people getting caught up in prostitution stings generally. It's NOT a response to the Sapp situation.
"Solicitation" is asking for sex for money (or, technically, other compensation, but it's rare to see that). So it's a crime of intent - basically you ask someone to make an illegal contract with you. So there's an immediate gray area when (most commonly) we have guys talking to a woman who is in some way advertising herself as sexually available.
Stings (especially street stings) are quota type things. So if you just walk over to chat or joke around or see what's up, and have no real intent to cough up the money for the sex act, there's a chance they'll be trying to make quota and nab you anyway based on anything suggestive. In reality, there are a lot of guys who just talk to women. Or talk shit around women. Or are just arrested for approaching an undercover officer. Or have a sexual interest but aren't serious. Or are just curious about going rates. Or who don't know if that's a hot girl waiting for a ride. (For example, I once defended a group of 3 14 years olds who asked a UC sting officer if she'd have sex with them for $100. When arrested they had >$20 on them. I defended another guy who asked a UC sting officer "How much do you charge for stuff?" because he had a bet with his friend about going rates.) A claim of "but I wasn't serious" does not get you un-arrested.
I'm not saying that everyone's innocent, but how do you determine when someone crosses the mental line with a "serious" money for sex offer that they really mean and are going to follow through with?
Escort/massage type stings are usually more believable in my book. They usually involve a lot of texting or emailing. But there's some gray.
Situations like the Maine Zumba thing or the Sapp situation are far more credible; since you have completed acts and/or admissions.
I understand why the state wants to regulate sex for money, in most cases by making it illegal. I don't think straight up illegality is the best approach, that's a personal political opinion. Regardless, the enforcement is often questionable and kind of puritanical/thought police-ish.