Judge Requires Strip Club Patrons To Tuck In Shirts, Dancers To Cover Rear-Ends

A Houston-area strip club is set to face trial in December on allegations that all sorts of illicit activities — prostitution, drugs, illegal weapons — were being trafficked within its walls. Yesterday, the judge in the case ruled that the club can remain open, but on some rather strict conditions.

According to the Houston Chronicle, the club has one week to cross off all the items on her checklist, which includes requiring patrons to tuck in their shirts and making sure that all employees completely cover their derrieres.

“I saw far too much tokus for my liking,” the Chronicle quotes the judge, who reviewed tapes from inside the club, as saying.

Here are some additional conditions put on the club:

* On-camera bag checks for all entering employees and contractors;

* Anyone on the payroll with a felony conviction in the past decade must be dismissed;

* Random drug testing for employees;

* Install 14 additional video cameras in the club. Tapes from these cameras and the existing dozen cameras are to be turned over to government lawyers.

“What the judge has done is make sure that within a very short period of time they’re complying with the law and we have evidence if they’re not complying with the law,” said one prosecutor after Monday’s ruling. “If they follow the court’s orders, work with us, we work with them, it can be a legal operation. We don’t want to close them if they will obey the law.”

The club maintains that it did nothing illegal and is being unfairly targeted because it has challenged local ordinances targeting adult businesses.

Strip club can continue to operate with new limits [Chron.com]


Edit Your Comment

  1. msbaskx2 says:

    “I saw far too much tokus for my liking”

    Uh… what did she expect to see in a strip club???

    • Emperor Norton I says:

      Mishagoyim need to stop using Yiddish if they can’t properly pronounce it!

    • YouDidWhatNow? says:

      That…exactly. WTF?

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      I’m more concerned that the judge is dictating the employee’s dress code based on her own morality and not the law.

      • Jawaka says:

        And his insistence that they fire anyone guilty of a felony within the past decade. So the judge would rather that these people collect unemployment than work? Why shouldn’t felons who have served their sentences be allowed to work in a strip club? Its not like its a public school or some high security job.

        • Captain Spock says:

          Maybe because they are under investigation for felonies, that having felons working there would not stop the felonies? I dunno, just playing Devil’s advocate here.

          • Rachacha says:

            Somehow I don’t think that someone who calls airport security on their ex boyfriend and is convicted is going t present a risk 20 years later stripping in a strip club.

      • WraithSama says:

        Not only that, but ordering a private business to more than double their security cameras and hand over the tapes to the prosecutors? When they haven’t been found guilty of anything yet? It sounds like the judge is trying to build the prosecution’s case for them. It’s also likely a violation of the club owner’s 5th Amendment right not to self-incriminate, especially if the judge is making them pay for all the extra cameras.

        I also don’t see the legal grounds the judge is standing on for ordering on-camera bag checks of patrons and mandatory drug screening for employees. It sounds like this judge is grossly overstepping her authority.

        • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

          Actually the last two items are the only ones I’d agree with. Preventing illegals materials entering the business, and testing to be sure the employees aren’t using illegal drugs.

          That, at least, is sensible, allbeit still rather restricting.

          But adding security cameras, making them produce the footage (free titty dances? WTF?) and then telling the strippers how to strip. Come on!

    • StarKillerX says:

      Maybe the stripper was fat?

  2. umbriago says:

    Oy, gevalt! It’s spelled tuchus where I come from.

  3. STXJK says:

    Why is this consumer news? Is Consumer Reports going to start rating strip clubs now? Gives those rating circles new meaning when they have to use two at a time.

    • Banished to the Corner says:

      Posted by Chris Moran…..Chris is very concerned about the segment of the consumer market that visit strip clubs and well, expect a striptease.

      • Sarek says:

        What would the columns be on the ratings? Number of dancers, dancers’ appearance, dancers’ dancing ability, availability of lap dances, prices of drinks and/or “extras”, availability of seating in public & private areas, etc.?

  4. Banished to the Corner says:

    OK, the strippers need to cover their behinds (they can still show everything up front???) and the club needs to add more CCTV camera.

    New club name: No Show and Tell !

  5. deathbecomesme says:

    AND! He needs instant remote access to any cameras facing the stage ….”please welcome Diamond to the stage!”

  6. Velvet Jones says:

    WTF, who does this judge think she is. What authority does she have to order bag checks and drug tests for employees. These people have not been convicted of any crime. Hopefully voters will make her unemployed come election time.

    • StarKillerX says:

      Yeah, I was wondering the same thing and of course that was even before I read:

      “Install 14 additional video cameras in the club. Tapes from these cameras and the existing dozen cameras are to be turned over to government lawyers.”


    • Bob A Dobalina says:

      it probably is election time. she knows that this will be challenged and overturned. but she can say that she “fought for Houston’s chillllldrennnnn”

    • fleef says:

      yeah, who does she think she is, making sure thugs and drug dealers aren’t carrying weapons into a dark, loud establishment where copious amounts of alcohol is served???

      • Velvet Jones says:

        OK, Mr. Police State, should we now have TSA style security at ever bar and nightclub in country? There has been no trial so far, yet the judge is imposing penalties. That is the problem. If you are having trouble understanding that I suggest you go back to 9th grade civics class.

  7. SirWired says:

    I hope they appeal… this ruling makes no sense. Is it even with the judge’s power to order them to fire any employees with felony convictions? What does that have to do with anything? Can the judge order the business to implement drug testing? I don’t think so. There are certainly businesses not allowed to hire felons, and that must test for drugs, but strip clubs aren’t one of them.

    And requiring strip club employees to cover their rear end? And have patrons tuck in their shirts? Yeah, that’s so far out of bounds, 1st-amendment-wise, it’s not even funny.

    I suspect the order will be quickly stayed, appealed, and overturned.

    • bluline says:

      Agree. I don’t see how the judge has the power to order and enforce such rules. If anything, that would be up to the state legislature, and even then I think some of the rules would be unconstitutional.

    • fleef says:

      the article doesn’t go into details as to the laws and regulations in that part of the city (and/or state) I lived one block from this club- doesn’t matter, but I DO know that bag checks AND pat downs are de riguer, I believe it is some sort of regulation. Something about guns and alcohol.. gee, I could be WRONG here /s

  8. Pants O Doom says:

    I particularly pissed about the firing of anyone convicted of a felony in the past decade.
    So felons (who admittedly, may or may not be part of the current problem) shouldn’t be allowed to make livings?

    • Craige says:

      More interestingly, this is happening when the strip club hasn’t even been found at fault of anything yet. This is happening in the time period BEFORE their trial.

  9. Red Cat Linux says:

    I’m not generally sympathetic to strip clubs getting trolled by the law, but… WTF. If they cover everything up, how exactly is a strip club supposed to operate?

    If they think the club is a wretched hive of scum and villainy, and not just some earnest college girls working their way through school, then have the cops start running drug and prostitution stings there instead of this schoolmarm nonsense.

    A few of those and one of two things will happen: Either the lawabiding patrons who just want a show and a lapdance will be the only ones left behind, or the business will fold because nobody was there except for everyone looking for illegal action.

  10. Kuri says:

    This seems like an attempt to use the chilling effect on this strip club. Impose restrictions to make the clientele get bored and stop going, bam, you just forced the market you close the club for you.

    • tlvx says:

      Exactly. It’s a constructive shutdown, by making it nearly impossible to live up to those over the top restrictions and simultaneously stay in business.

  11. Andy S. says:

    “Install 14 additional video cameras in the club. Tapes from these cameras and the existing dozen cameras are to be turned over to government lawyers.”

    Well, well. Sounds like Houston-area government lawyers are going to have something to keep them entertained on late, solitary nights at the office.

  12. Jim M says:

    “tapes” What it’s 1985 again? Dig out the VCR.

  13. Press1forDialTone says:

    Well, I’ll just have my own strip-club parties in my home
    and anyone who is semi-hot and wants to show their tookus (misspelled
    in article) can do so. No illegal activities, just good clean American sex-obsessed

  14. njack says:

    Cover the rear end? What do they think a strip club is?

  15. Bob A Dobalina says:

    * Anyone on the payroll with a felony conviction in the past decade must be dismissed;

    * Random drug testing for employees;

    Who wants to go to a strip club that only has a cook and a janitor?

  16. Shadowman615 says:


    There’s a few alternative spellings but none of them are “tokus.” Although that does actually sounds like how a Texan would spell it.

  17. DZ says:

    Does this mean ‘meatless Fridays” are back in vogue? And why should the lawyers get to watch all the tapes anyway? Can I get a copy?

  18. allthatsevil says:

    First of all, how has no one noticed who the writer of the Houston Chronicle article is? Why, it’s Consumerist’s very own Chris Morran who can’t spell tuchus!

    Second, you do all realize that Houston is in Texas, right? Not the most liberal-minded state when it comes to sex (among other things). However, a little further digging reveals that the judge’s booty quote refers to surveillance footage of the entrance to the club – not the interior – where multiple dancers were “partially exposed.”

    Is the judge within her rights to require employees to keep their derrieres completely covered? Probably. I don’t know about the rest of her extreme requirements, but I think that’s one she can get away with. In Houston, for a strip-club to have a liquor license their clientele must be 21 and up, and the dancers may be topless only (and I think a more recent law even requires the use of pasties). If they choose to forego liquor sales they can be byob, their patrons must be 18 and up, and the dancers can be completely nude. I don’t think the “topless only” rule is meant to keep asses covered, but I have a feeling it can be interpreted that way.

    I’m not defending the judge, because many of those requirements do appear to be out-of-bounds, but after reading more about the situation it sounds like the club has been seriously overstepping their bounds and the judge is just fighting fire with fire. According to other news sources, they’ve had over 40 prostitution and drug-related arrests in the last 4 years. I don’t know how many of those resulted in convictions, but it does seem like an unusually high number, regardless.

    Like I said, I don’t know about the rest of her requirements, but I do know that Houston keeps a pretty tight leash on the sex industry. I wouldn’t be surprised if she’s able to get away with most, if not all, of those rulings.

    • Shadowman615 says:

      “…it’s Consumerist’s very own Chris Morran who can’t spell tuchus!”


      I think that’s just a coincidence; not the same person. The Consumerist guy is Chris Morran, the Houston Chronicle guy is Chris Moran.

      Get a brain, Morans!