Question about the laws on prostitution?

[ostirch 1668]

If my mother is an escort and pays for my university tuition. Am I, under Canadian law, living of the avails of prostitution?

 

If my mother is an escort, would the government not be breaking the law by taxing her income? They would technically be "living off the avails".

 

In a public place, am I aloud to solicit sex for money communicating only with text messages through my blackberry, the escort is in front of me?

[SamanthaEvans 166766]

To live on the avails of prostitution means either to be earning an income from working for a prostitute in a personal capacity--generally as a driver, security staff or someone who takes calls and makes bookings for the lady, but also includes cleaning ladies, nannies and gardeners--or to be living in the same house or apartment as a prostitute even if you're not sex worker yourself. The rationale for living in the same space is that, were it not for the income provided by the prostitute, you would not be benefiting from living in that particular place solely on the basis of your own contribution to the living expenses. Roommates and live-in nannies may therefore be considered to be living on the avails. If a landlord rents or leases accommodation to a prostitute, knowing that she will use it for business purposes, the landlord may also be found to be living on the avails. While supporting our own children who live with us is technically considered to be forcing them to live on the avails, my understanding is that the courts are extremely reluctant to prosecute us for it and no one has been charged for it in years.

 

It's perfectly okay for prostitutes to spend their income on things other than staff and rent. We can buy groceries, drop off dry cleaning, take our kids to daycare, pay for school fees, orthodontists, car insurance and order in a pizza quite legally. I can't see why we can't give money to others, including family members who don't live with us. Plus, if your mother gives you money for your tuition, I would hope that you, in turn, would give her the info she needs to be eligible for income tax deductions!

 

As for taxing income, in Canada, income from all sources, including income received in exchange for sexual services, is taxable. The government is not living on the avails, however, because they don't live in our homes or incall locations, don't do personal work for us and they're not our landlords.

 

With respect to sending text messages to an escort when you're both in a public place, I think you can do that. Text messages and e-mail are considered to be private communication. They can't be overheard by others nearby, which is one of the issues about soliciting in public.

[ostirch 1668]

I can't see why we can't give money to others, including family members who don't live with us. Plus, if your mother gives you money for your tuition, I would hope that you, in turn, would give her the info she needs to be eligible for income tax deductions!

 

Thank you for the clarification. I am hoping anyways that these laws will be stricken down this year. Also, I was speaking hypothetically, my mother is not an escort. Although if she were, I would have no problem with that.

 

I think the text messaging is a good way to get around the "soliciting sex in a public place" law.

[CristyCurves 169032]

Prostitution laws as one judge said are "alice wonderland",very confusing,the one I am not sure about is " talking over the phone" considered public or private.Some points on the law have said talking on the phone about your business is considered private ,others have said if it is a cell phone it is considered public,anyone know the truth?

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

... is " talking over the phone" considered public or private.Some points on the law have said talking on the phone about your business is considered private ,others have said if it is a cell phone it is considered public,anyone know the truth?

 

(Bearing in mind that I am not a lawyer: )

 

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that a land-based telephone is a private communication.

 

Part VI of the Criminal Code ("Invasion of Privacy") expressly states that its privacy provisions also apply to "radio-based telephone communications" (i.e. cell phones). Section 183 defines "private communication" for the purposes of Part VI:

"private communication" means any oral communication, or any telecommunication...

that is made under circumstances in which it is reasonable for the originator to expect that it will not be intercepted by any person other than the person intended by the originator to receive it

...

When one places a phone call from a private place, one has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Therefore, the communication is private, and legal.

[Butterfly Kisses 2301]

I would find it very interesting to see how you could be charged for driving someone around to their appointments. Wouldn't it be difficult to prove:

1. you were being paid to do this

2. if you were being paid - how would they prove you knew your ride was escorting

3. if they busted the escort for whatever reason they could, how does that extend to a driver who may or may not even be near the location.

 

Not being a smart ass, but these were just a few scenarios that had me wondering?

 

Thanks for any input.

[canuckhooker 19203]

I would find it very interesting to see how you could be charged for driving someone around to their appointments. Wouldn't it be difficult to prove:

1. you were being paid to do this

2. if you were being paid - how would they prove you knew your ride was escorting

3. if they busted the escort for whatever reason they could, how does that extend to a driver who may or may not even be near the location.

 

Not being a smart ass, but these were just a few scenarios that had me wondering?

 

Thanks for any input.

 

True that it might be hard to get a conviction in court, but it doesn't mean they couldn't charge you. The effect of being charged could have as many negative effects on someone, as being found guilty. And nobody wants to go to court.

[fortunateone 156618]

I would find it very interesting to see how you could be charged for driving someone around to their appointments. Wouldn't it be difficult to prove:

1. you were being paid to do this

2. if you were being paid - how would they prove you knew your ride was escorting

3. if they busted the escort for whatever reason they could, how does that extend to a driver who may or may not even be near the location.

 

Not being a smart ass, but these were just a few scenarios that had me wondering?

 

Thanks for any input.

 

 

They do this often in Alberta, I believe the driver has to have a city license maybe? Not sure, but most stings are city bylaw officers contact an sp advertising (who does not have a license or does not provide the license # in her ads), and bust her for working without a license, and at the same time were able to charge the drivers without licenses.

 

http://www.globaltoronto.com/police+nab+17+in+escort+sting/40189/story.html

 

 

They do not seem to attempt to bust for federal laws tho

[roamingguy 300292]

I would find it very interesting to see how you could be charged for driving someone around to their appointments. Wouldn't it be difficult to prove:

1. you were being paid to do this

2. if you were being paid - how would they prove you knew your ride was escorting

3. if they busted the escort for whatever reason they could, how does that extend to a driver who may or may not even be near the location.

 

Not being a smart ass, but these were just a few scenarios that had me wondering?

 

Thanks for any input.

 

First, as has been said, the Police/Crown may not get a conviction, but you will still go through a legal wringer in the Criminal Justice system.

But questions would come up...such as asking the driver why he/she drove the lady to a hotel, and picked her up an hour or two later?

Really, short of an incall, a lady seeing a client at his place (outcall) is not illegal

When the Police/Crown get involved, usually it it noticeable indiscrete actions on the part of a lady or one or more gentlemen seeing her...such as booking a hotel room, and guy after guy after guy shows up, all hours, guys carrying items (big bouquet of flowers, a gift bag from Victoria's Secret etc)...it draws the attention of hotel staff. Or having an incall that's an apartment/condo/house where car after car and guy after guy after guy show up all hours

As long as you don't draw attention to yourself, whether a lady or a gentleman, you should be reasonably safe from LE.

My guess, those who came to the attention of Police did something somewhere along the line to bring attention to themselves.

One key word to remember...discretion

RG

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

They do this often in Alberta, I believe the driver has to have a city license maybe? Not sure, but most stings are city bylaw officers contact an sp advertising (who does not have a license or does not provide the license # in her ads), and bust her for working without a license, and at the same time were able to charge the drivers without licenses.

 

http://www.globaltoronto.com/police+nab+17+in+escort+sting/40189/story.html

 

They do not seem to attempt to bust for federal laws tho

 

As fortunateone points out, the Edmonton example is in regards to purported violation of a municipal licensing by-law, not violation of the federal criminal code regarding prostitution-related activities.

 

In the Alice-in-Wonderland by-law parlance, an "escort" is someone who does not provide sexual services. The city rakes in licensing fees by pretending they're not licensing prostitution, and those who agree to pay the licensing fees, or who plead guilty to violating them, play along with this game by pretending they're not engaged in prostitution.

 

This charade is reflected in the news article, where those charged are carefully referred to as "escorts" - the words "prostitution" and "sex" are deliberately never mentioned.

 

As Judge William E. Wilson noted in Strachan (c.o.b. Kats) v. Edmonton (City) (2003), 38 M.P.L.R. (3d) 72 (Alta QB):

 

[7] ... The bylaw ... is replete with requirements that no sexual services are to be offered by the agency or the escorts and prohibitions against lewd behaviour in conduct on the premises or in the advertising. The prostitutes all testified that in their opinion the City authorities and some of the Aldermen were fully aware of the true nature of the business as were the bylaw enforcement officers and police. This was denied by the bylaw officer who testified for the City ...

 

http://www.albertacourts.ab.ca/jdb/1998-2003/qb/Civil/2003/2003abqb0309.pdf

[Guest]

I know that incalls are a grey area at the moment and are somewhat confusing. What are the escort laws of working out of a hotel? Can bylaw prove that you are indeed escorting and if they did what can they do?

[Gabriella Laurence 301887]

I know that incalls are a grey area at the moment and are somewhat confusing. What are the escort laws of working out of a hotel? Can bylaw prove that you are indeed escorting and if they did what can they do?

Working out of a hotel/incalls are illegal in Canada.

[roamingguy 300292]

As fortunateone points out, the Edmonton example is in regards to purported violation of a municipal licensing by-law, not violation of the federal criminal code regarding prostitution-related activities.

 

In the Alice-in-Wonderland by-law parlance, an "escort" is someone who does not provide sexual services. The city rakes in licensing fees by pretending they're not licensing prostitution, and those who agree to pay the licensing fees, or who plead guilty to violating them, play along with this game by pretending they're not engaged in prostitution.

 

This charade is reflected in the news article, where those charged are carefully referred to as "escorts" - the words "prostitution" and "sex" are deliberately never mentioned.

 

As Judge William E. Wilson noted in Strachan (c.o.b. Kats) v. Edmonton (City) (2003), 38 M.P.L.R. (3d) 72 (Alta QB):

 

[7] ... The bylaw ... is replete with requirements that no sexual services are to be offered by the agency or the escorts and prohibitions against lewd behaviour in conduct on the premises or in the advertising. The prostitutes all testified that in their opinion the City authorities and some of the Aldermen were fully aware of the true nature of the business as were the bylaw enforcement officers and police. This was denied by the bylaw officer who testified for the City ...

 

http://www.albertacourts.ab.ca/jdb/1998-2003/qb/Civil/2003/2003abqb0309.pdf

 

I'm only playing devil's advocate here, but couldn't the ladies just say they are escorts providing "outcall only" sexual services and thus not required to be licensed.

This farce the city is putting on is so they can scoot around the fact that they too, by charging licensing fees, are living off the avails

RG

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

I'm only playing devil's advocate here, but couldn't the ladies just say they are escorts providing "outcall only" sexual services and thus not required to be licensed.

 

Absolutely! By definition, the by-law does not apply to those who provide sexual services.

 

How many of those who pay the license fees understand the by-law? I'd guess that not all of them do. How many view the licensing as a business tax in exchange for the local police being directed to look the other way as much as they can and to not harass them? I'd guess that most of them do. But obviously, I'm not in a position to know.

 

This farce the city is putting on is so they can scoot around the fact that they too, by charging licensing fees, are living off the avails

RG

 

Yes, that's the precise point. Although the issue of whether the city would legally be found to be living on the avails in this situation has never, to my knowledge, been resolved in court. In the court case that I cited earlier, the part of the claim regarding this (city living on the avails) was withdrawn by the complainant without a ruling being made.

[SamanthaEvans 166766]

I know that incalls are a grey area at the moment and are somewhat confusing. What are the escort laws of working out of a hotel? Can bylaw prove that you are indeed escorting and if they did what can they do?

 

Incalls are illegal, but not always prosecuted.

 

If a prostitute takes a hotel room and uses it to conduct business, once two or more men have visited her, that room becomes "a common bawdy house," which it is illegal for her to keep. Note: it is not illegal for her to entertain one man in that room because one visit is not considered to be a sign of her habitual activity. In addition, even prostitutes are allowed to have personal lives, friends, families and lovers, so entertaining one visitor can easily mean that she's just living her normal, non-professional life.

 

If the hotel becomes aware that a prostitute is renting a room and using it to conduct business, the hotel must evict her from the place because it is illegal for them to allow a bawdy house to operate on their premises. The hotel would be living on the avails of prostitution if they knowingly permit a prostitute to work there.

 

It is perfectly legal for a prostitute to visit a man in a hotel room he has rented, however.

 

For the most part, in Canada, four and five-star hotels are safe places to work very discretely. Despite the legal limits, it's still a fact that innkeepers and prostitutes have been in cahoots forever. We're good for each other's business, though I don't think we'll hear statements to that effect from hotel owners or managers anytime soon. Nonetheless, if you don't find charges related to someone keeping a common bawdy house at the Hotel Vancouver or the Royal York or the Chateau Laurier, don't imagine that prostitutes never take rooms there to work. We do. We behave very well: there's nothing to report!

 

Many of the ladies who tour stay only in the best hotels because those places are also the most private and discreet. They have no need to be concerned that the front desk will slip up and give their names to anyone who inquires about the person in room 1225. Staff in these hotels do their best to be as invisible as possible unless invited to be otherwise.

 

In general, unless the woman is calling attention to herself by having a high volume of clients visit her and/or hosting late-night engagements, her activities are likely to go unnoticed. But if she or her visitors disturb other hotel guests, that's where problems usually begin. The same goes for women who entertain clients in their homes or apartments.