Can the police identify and detain people on the grounds of whoring only by the oral testimony of the massage girl?

Your question itself is full of contradictions. First of all, you are positive about the fact of whoring, but you have not grasped the current situation. In other words, you must have the fact of whoring, but you didn't get caught. You were not caught red-handed. If this sentence is true, it is of course prostitution.

Secondly, you said that through the prostitute's WeChat collection and statement, can you be sure? This also brings a problem. The collection and statement of prostitutes can be used as evidence, but the validity of the evidence is questionable. We must analyze what whoring means. The so-called whoring, first of all, must have the fact of whoring, followed by economic exchanges. In other words, you have had sexual relations, or you have reached an agreement on sexual transactions, and it is based on economic transactions, and both are indispensable.

If there is a sexual relationship between the two sexes, even once or more, it is the same. But if there is no transaction with money as the medium, it does not constitute whoring or prostitution. It must also be pointed out that the establishment of prostitution or whoring does not necessarily mean that there is a de facto sex trade. As long as the two sides reach a sexual transaction agreement, the apricot transaction with money as the medium constitutes prostitution.

We must carefully determine the consistency, correspondence and internal relationship between sexual intention and money transaction. If sexual relations and money exchanges are unified and it is found that there are sexual relations and money exchanges between them, it will be classified as illegal and criminal, which is a big mistake. Generally speaking, there are money exchanges and sexual relations between husband and wife and lovers, which does not constitute prostitution.

For prostitution, there must be a causal relationship between money trading and sex trading. According to the law, the subject of prostitution is not necessarily between men and women. Between women, between men and women, yes; Women and women can also; Men and women are the same. There are male prostitutes, female prostitutes, male prostitutes and female prostitutes. In a word, as long as both money and apricot trading are met, it is prostitution.

In other words, we often talk about prostitutes, leaving out one aspect: prostitutes exist. Similarly, we often talk about prostitutes, but in fact there is one aspect missing: prostitutes. Back to your question. Judging from your second sentence, if it is only the information and oral expression of prostitutes, there is a problem of evidence validity, that is, it is not enough to prove the facts of prostitution.

The first is the receipt certificate of prostitutes. What I can believe is that the woman may be paid a lot, but not all of them are prostitutes'. She may have normal economic contacts, and economic contacts do not mean that they are all prostitutes.

Followed by the prostitute's statement. We should carefully analyze what is said about prostitutes. First, is the prostitute's statement correct? Just a unilateral statement by a woman without other facts, especially the existence of sexual relations between two people or the agreement to reach sexual relations, cannot constitute prostitution.

Second, the correctness of the prostitute's statement. We must rule out several doubts: first, the truth of the prostitute's statement; Second, whether the object of prostitution is a specific man; Third, there must be a one-to-one correspondence between WeChat transfer and prostitutes.

In addition, the witness's testimony must be consistent with other evidence, and it is not possible to determine the existence of prostitution only by one person's testimony or unilateral testimony. A prostitute, as a prostitute, strictly speaking, her words can't completely prove the existence of others' whoring, because she is the client herself. We can't completely deny the truth of the prostitute's statement and the correctness of our understanding. More in-depth investigation and study must be carried out.

Tell a simple joke or a bold assumption. If we say that there is a WeChat transfer between you and others, what do you think when Ta declares that there is prostitution between them? What do we do? This involves the validity of the evidence. Who should provide the evidence? Our opinion is who advocates who gives evidence. Therefore, prostitutes have not been caught and cannot be used as evidence through prostitutes' WeChat highlights and oral testimony. This is only unilateral, and should only be used as a reference, and further investigation and evidence collection are needed.