One Jomo Zambia, a convicted pimp, took his case to the California Supreme Court arguing that the wording of the law defining illegal pandering is unclear when it comes to recruiting hos who are already hos. You see, Zambia's attorney points to the language that defines a pimp as anyone who "induces, persuades or encourages another person to become a prostitute." This makes it sounds like it's only illegal, he argued, if one is recruiting girls new to the trade, as opposed to established, experienced hos.

Zambia was caught in 2007 on a notorious prostitution corner in the San Fernando Valley, trying to recruit an undercover police officer. A lower court had already set a precedent in 2009, which Zambia's lawyer Vanessa Place cited, writing, "[i]f the Legislature had wanted a more broadly applicable provision, it could have easily replaced the phrase 'become a prostitute' with the phrase 'engage in prostitution.'"

The court ruled 5-2 that no, pimping is pimping, and they weren't going to suffer these semantics to acquit an admitted pimp. We're guessing now this dude will appeal and take this to the Supreme Court if he has to.