Quote:

After the fact said check did not clear.....Acct Closed or NSF then you have a "criminal" case since you have an actual negotiable financial instrument. This matter would generally fall under the "Fraud" statutes.



Not in and of itself. First off, most states allow the person/company that issued the check time to make good on it, especially in the case of an NSF check (here it's 10 days from the date the check was dishonored.)

There's also the fact that where a complainant has the option of pursuing either civil or criminal remedies, most prosecutors will encourage said complainant to chose the former. For one thing, the burden of proof is much easier to meet in a civil case (the preponderance of the evidence) than in a criminal case (the proverbial "beyond a reasonable doubt.") All a civil plaintiff has to do is demonstrate that Joe Blow was to pay her XXX.XX for services rendered and failed to do so. It doesn't matter why. In a criminal prosecution (at least under the NY statutes) the prosecutor is required to prove that not only wasn't she paid, but that Joe Blow intended to not pay her. That's where it gets hairy. Most check-kiting prosecutions here (that I'm aware of) occur where the target has done this on multiple occasions to multiple victims, thereby establishing what's known as a "Scheme to Defraud."

Also, prosecutors (especially those in busy jurisdictions) generally don't have the time to play debt collector, so if you have another route available to you, they will suggest that you take it.

But, considering that these transactions occurred in Florida, this may all be academic: One of the upshots of the Ray Guhn case seems to be that, in the eyes of the law in that state, pornography = prostitution. A contract for an illegal activity is unenforceable.