Ontario Court of Appeal greenlights brothels, sweeps aside many of Canadaâ??s anti-pros

[Guest]

Posted via Mobile Device

 

Additional Comments:

Hopefully this would be good.

Posted via Mobile Device

[Gabriella Laurence 301887]

Decision coming on March 26 from Ontario Court of Appeal

http://www.cerb.ca/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=84481

[Athos 108589]

I'm sure this will be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. The court also ordered a 12 month delay before the law is invalidated, so it will be interesting to see what the feds come up with during that time.

[Subvenio 324]

I'm sure this will be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. The court also ordered a 12 month delay before the law is invalidated, so it will be interesting to see what the feds come up with during that time.

 

You're absolutely right, the Harper Government is gonna try and come down on this pretty hard. But if the reversal of the law can show positive change in the short 12 months it has, I think they're going to have a hard to trying to over turn it.

[Pink Kitty Escorts 6195]

But it appears as though the Living off the avails section is toast in 30 days. Except in the case of exploitation.

 

I think its going to be interesting.

[backrubman 64800]

But it appears as though the Living off the avails section is toast in 30 days. Except in the case of exploitation.

I think its going to be interesting.

 

Which is a kinder, gentler way of saying it's toast now, not 30 days from now. Have you ever known a case to go to trial in less than 30 days? :) What prosecutor would dare try to take this on when he knows the law supporting his case is going to go poof in a matter of hours?

 

Will it go to the Supreme Court of Canada? We will only know if and when the Government appeals yet again (to a higher Court and there is only one left) and then it is up to Supreme Court of Canada to decide if they even want to hear it. Tick-tock, it's a running clock. Better get those documents filed by the deadline.

 

I can accept (even though the arguments were poor) that the communication provision was upheld, particularly when established precedents have determined that a web site is not a public place as defined by this law.

 

So lets extend this to the other provision that has a 12 month life. Again, a mountain of evidence and a ruling that it is a Charter violation - no prosecutor wants to get wrapped up in that, if there is still something to charge the brothel with it will be a different charge by the time it gets to trial and you can't be charged with doing something illegal if it wasn't at the time.

 

All the cases I have dealt with had a 30 day appeal period so after 30 days if we don't have an appeal to the Supreme Court I guess we can expect some enterprises to start up. No?

 

Even a brothel that would start now and come in conflict with some new law that Parliament hasn't even thought of yet can't be prosecuted until they are still in operating in violation of this new law after it receives royal assent and takes full force and effect. Unless the Government or Parliament acts quickly (yeah right) it may be all over already and game on.

 

Certainly yesterdays ruling creates a window of opportunity for someone to establish a business right away?

 

I don't know how it will turn out but I do know the sky is not going to fall.

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

...Certainly yesterdays ruling creates a window of opportunity for someone to establish a business right away? ....

 

the current Bawdy-House Law remains in effect for 12 months.

[backrubman 64800]

the current Bawdy-House Law remains in effect for 12 months.

 

I get that completely. But with a two year back log in the Courts, a business started tomorrow, charged a day later, the case hits the Court room two years from now and the law under which the charge is based has gone poof by that time.

 

Even if we assumed that 12 months will become 24 will become 48, we have a mountain of trial transcripts and a rulings that has determined the charge under this law is in and of itself is a Charter violation. So my point or question was: As long as the business was willing to crease and desist should it become in violation of any new law that hasn't been struck down I can't see a viable prosecution with a reasonable expectation of conviction being able to proceed? 12 months therefore becomes 12 minutes, it's just semantics :)

[Pink Kitty Escorts 6195]

Not to sound negative, but couldn't the government just pass new laws? Considering they have a majority they could pretty much do what they want.

[roamingguy 300292]

Yes they could, but the laws they pass have to keep in line with the Charter.

RG

[backrubman 64800]

Not to sound negative, but couldn't the government just pass new laws? Considering they have a majority they could pretty much do what they want.

 

Of course they can. That's what Parliament does and any business that was not operating in accordance with these new laws would have to cease operations once they came into effect.

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

... 12 months therefore becomes 12 minutes, it's just semantics :)

 

Remember that Justice Susan Himel's original ruling, in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, first struck down this law 28 Sept 2010. However, Justice Himel at the time stayed her ruling for 30 days.

 

515 days later, this law has just been ruled to remain applicable for an additional 365 days. So the original 30 days has so far, through various subsequent decisions, been extended to 880 days.

 

And if yesterday's decision is appealed to the Supreme Court, future judicial decisions may leave the current law effective even further - until after the Supreme Court makes a ruling.

 

Anyone investing in or operating a brothel-type business surely would be prudent to remain as low-profile as they are now, or risk a business disruption from LE. Which may not (necessarily) wind up with a Criminal Code conviction, but I would think it could be costly in other ways for the business owner.

[Athos 108589]

If they pass laws, they could and likely would, be worse than what we have now. One of the issues that the court raises is that fact that while prostitution is legal in Canada, many of the associated activities are not. This is what effectively criminalizes many activities that would make a woman safer. The government could choose to simply make prostitution itself criminal, and this would certainly appeal to its base. It would largely be unenforceable, and I'm not even sure it would pass a Charter challenge in that it would be a gross intrusion on a sex worker's personal autonomy over their body, and it wouldn't address the concerns around safety that are raised in the case. But it wouldn't surprise me if this was under discussion in some Conservative quarters.

 

In the meantime, if I was a provincial Attorney General I'd be instructing police forces to stop laying charges in these areas until things are sorted out.

 

Porthos

[fortunateone 156618]

the current Bawdy-House Law remains in effect for 12 months.

 

 

 

And I feel it important to note that 'bawdy house' does not mean 'brothel'. It doesn't mean that any city is going to create brothel licenses or issue new body rub licenses which they may or may not have available.

 

The distinction can be important, and don't expect your neighbourhood massage parlour to start sending out flyers with acronyms of available services. mps are governed by city business licensing, and unless one has a body rub license that are not legally permitted to open as a brothel, afaik.

 

The most impact this ruling will have is on independent sps, who currently are concerned about breaking the law by working from home. It may inspire them to stop renting hotel rooms (risky in all sorts of ways), and possibly share apartments with one or two others with peace of mind.

[SamanthaEvans 166767]

But with a two year back log in the Courts, a business started tomorrow, charged a day later, the case hits the Court room two years from now and the law under which the charge is based has gone poof by that time.

 

Even if we assumed that 12 months will become 24 will become 48, we have a mountain of trial transcripts and a rulings that has determined the charge under this law is in and of itself is a Charter violation. So my point or question was: As long as the business was willing to crease and desist should it become in violation of any new law that hasn't been struck down I can't see a viable prosecution with a reasonable expectation of conviction being able to proceed? 12 months therefore becomes 12 minutes, it's just semantics :)

 

Well, maybe. But technically, one can still be tried under the laws that were in effect at the time one was originally charged. As for taking a gamble on the amount of time it takes to get a case to court, I suppose some might consider it, but there's more at stake than it might seem on the surface. It's very important to have a good relationship with law enforcement, or at least to avoid being on their radar unnecessarily. If or when brothels are legalized, you can be sure that people who are opposed to them will make a steady stream of complaints about publicly-known establishments in the hope that they may influence police action against those businesses. This already happens with massage parlors.

 

In the end, though, it's important to recognize that the vast majority of "brothels" are now considered to be bawdy houses which are, and will continue to be, operated by independent women who work alone, or perhaps share a place with one or two other women. Enticing as the notion of fancy Victorian-fantasy brothels may be, it's not going to be the principal option anywhere. Why? Because most gentlemen will not want to risk being discovered visiting these places if they have families or if they have public reputations that they want to protect.

[Guest]

This may be a stupid questions but I don't care. Will bylaw be able to charge independent sp's. Do they have different laws? Do they have to look into a situation if a complaint is made or is this absolute. As an escort this information would be good to know.

 

I'm not loud, I don't do drugs and I'm independent, So i'm not worried about that. I'm just worried that if a person put a complaint to the bylaw, police ect if they could do something about it.

[SamanthaEvans 166767]

I don't think there are any stupid questions, Peachy.

 

There aren't any bylaws, yet, that apply to independent ladies. It will be awhile before there are. WrinkledInTime has posted some helpful analysis in this thread in the Legal section.

 

Bylaw enforcement is different from investigating and prosecuting crime. It tends to be less formal and a person found to be in contravention of a municipal bylaw doesn't end up with a criminal record. But the standards of evidence aren't as strict as they are in criminal proceedings.

 

It's hard to imagine that independent companions would be the high on the list of things for municipalities to be concerned about. Publicly known brothels would be much more likely to be the focus of attention. Those of us who work quietly and privately aren't likely to be investigated unless there's a serious complaint made. Even now, independent providers are rarely investigated or charged by the police unless there are serious complaints made by neighbours, usually about noise or parking or too much activity in the middle of the night. The police have to put quite a bit of time and effort into monitoring someone, to gather evidence to bring a charge. It's not usually a worthwhile investment of their time right now.

 

What's clear is that things will change, in time. I don't think we need to be more anxious at the moment, however.

[Guest]

What bugs me is if a complaint was make they would have to look into the situation by what your saying. It could be a complaint by a noise neighbour who wants to cause trouble. I would never see clients past 10pm but we all know that noise person who is a pain in the ass. What happens after you are charged by the bylaw is it three strikes your going to court or do you just keep on cashing out a check. There has to be some kind of consequence. Having noise neighbours in the past I worry about things like this. Of course having my own place to work out of would be less expensive than working out of a hotel.

[tokan 16826]

What bugs me is if a complaint was make they would have to look into the situation by what your saying. It could be a complaint by a noise neighbour who wants to cause trouble. I would never see clients past 10pm but we all know that noise person who is a pain in the ass. What happens after you are charged by the bylaw is it three strikes your going to court or do you just keep on cashing out a check. There has to be some kind of consequence. Having noise neighbours in the past I worry about things like this. Of course having my own place to work out of would be less expensive than working out of a hotel.

 

From doing some reading it looks like by-law violations usually result in a warning or a fine for a first offence. Now continual violations can result in greater fines or possibly court proceedings. I found this info on the city of ottawa website, http://www.ottawa.ca/en/licence_permit/bylaw/violation/index.html , there is probably more info on there too if your curious.

[backrubman 64800]

Well, maybe. But technically, one can still be tried under the laws that were in effect at the time one was originally charged. As for taking a gamble on the amount of time it takes to get a case to court, I suppose some might consider it, but there's more at stake than it might seem on the surface.

 

I completely agree. My real point (perhaps not well stated) was that the law while still in effect technically, it is now highly diluted in that even if you do proceed with a charge (and the Crown technically can) they are arguing a case using a law that has already been determined by not one but now two competent Courts of Jurisdiction as a Charter violation. If it is put before the Supreme Court of Canada we will simply have three Court decisions as there was no fault to be found with the first two decisions (the upholding of the communication provision excepted).

 

So while I agree we won't be seeing brothels on every corner I still think it is game over for trying to prosecute and persecute them any more, in particular I think it makes a single independent SP who was previously technically guilty of operating a bawdy house in her own home or residence now criminally fire proof and not 12 months from now but from this point forward.

 

So she is better off and no longer a criminal this week where she might have otherwise been judged to be last week. While we still have a ways to go, let us also recognize how far we have come.

[SamanthaEvans 166767]

I agree with you, backrubman. The OCOA decision has changed the climate across the country in lots of ways.

 

I want to say that, as I described here some time ago, for awhile in 2010-2011 I was being stalked by a former client. I finally reported him to the police, using the Vancouver Police Department's Sex Workers' Liaison Officer. I had been very nervous about making this report because, after all, I technically operate and live in a "common bawdy house" and had never had any reason to identify myself to the police. My experience with the VPD was superb from start to finish. I was assured repeatedly that the VPD has no interest in looking for, monitoring or charging independent sex workers who aren't causing any trouble in their neighbourhoods. When they paid a visit to my stalker, the police told him that they know I'm a prostitute and that he had been one of my clients; they weren't concerned about that. What they were there to talk about was that he was criminally harassing me and that he would be charged if he didn't stop immediately. My part of the arrangement was that I had to promise to report him if he contacted me again and to assist them in prosecuting him if that happened. I was under the impression that they would assist in protecting my real-life identity because there would be no useful purpose served in revealing my real name in court or to the media.

 

Perhaps I'm terribly naive or too trusting in general--though those would not be useful qualities in my line of work--but I honestly don't expect the city of Vancouver or the VPD to have a sudden change of heart when it comes to dealing with independent paid companions like me.

 

I screen very carefully. I don't make it especially easy for anyone to see me. I'm sure I tick some people off from time to time, but that's generally in the initial discussion, long before they know anything about where I live and work. I turn away anyone I have the slightest doubt about, no matter how great they seemed to be when they first contacted me. I trust my intuition and, other than the stalker I've described, I've never had a problem with a client. Maybe I've been lucky all these years.

 

My point is that I don't see a good reason to be worried or to look for trouble too far ahead. I do think we need to be proactive. Sex workers' organizations should start working now with municipalities in anticipation of bylaw changes that may occur after the Supreme Court of Canada makes decisions in a two or three years. But for now, individually, I think we should keep calm and carry on.

[backrubman 64800]

I agree with you, backrubman. The OCOA decision has changed the climate across the country in lots of ways.

...

My point is that I don't see a good reason to be worried or to look for trouble too far ahead. I do think we need to be proactive. Sex workers' organizations should start working now with municipalities in anticipation of bylaw changes that may occur after the Supreme Court of Canada makes decisions in a two or three years. But for now, individually, I think we should keep calm and carry on.

 

That was an interesting story Samantha, of course it went down exactly as I expect it would, your initial apprehension being unfounded (but completely understandable as at the time you were technically a criminal yourself and I am relieved this is no longer the case).

 

However unlike you, I do see a "good reason to be worried" and at the same time I look forward to living in a country that now will slowly evolve into a kinder and gentler place for service providers.

 

One of my worries is that we could see a Travelocity, Expedia or Priceline style of booking agents pop up where the lowest price rules. It could not happen before as it would be living off the avails but now it can. I would hate to see this happen as it would mean intense competition for anyone that wasn't wiling to lower their price and lost business or anyone not willing to hop on board and I really believe in my heart and always have that the ladies are the only ones that can determine what fees are appropriate for them. I would hate to see this become a commodity like a hotel room as I don't see that of benefit to the ladies or their clients (just the online booking agent that gets a small cut and benefits from high volume).

 

Inversely, I have always resented the portion of the fee an agency takes and thought it was too excessive compensation for what they do (even exploitative) so for this reason I have never booked though an agency. Now the agency can no longer "bake into the cake" the cost and risks of a possibly expensive legal defense (for doing something illegal as it no longer is) so they really have to back off what portion they take to something more reasonably reflective of their real costs with a more conserative profit or risk being "exploitative" or risk loosing all their associates to another agency that does take less and I think that is generally positive (except for the agencies of course).

[SamanthaEvans 166767]

Market niche and fees are complex issues, backrubman. It may be that, one day, there will be Expedia-type booking services. But they won't apply to everyone.

 

The way I see it, the Honda Fit, Toyota Yaris and Hyundai Elantra are all decent-quality economy cars. We can argue about which is the most reliable, which is the most fuel efficient or which may have the best features and options. Many people will be satisfied with the car they select and may look for something similar the next time they're looking for an automobile. And rightly so: good value and high performance for the price are compelling factors. Even so, much as they appreciate such things, some people want a different experience and will not consider anything other than a Rolls-Royce. As far as they're concerned, there's no competition. They may even have enjoyed Toyotas in the past. But what they want and expect to pay for is a Rolls-Royce.

[Kubrickfan 12836]

Market niche and fees are complex issues, backrubman. It may be that, one day, there will be Expedia-type booking services. But they won't apply to everyone.

 

The way I see it, the Honda Fit, Toyota Yaris and Hyundai Elantra are all decent-quality economy cars. We can argue about which is the most reliable, which is the most fuel efficient or which may have the best features and options. Many people will be satisfied with the car they select and may look for something similar the next time they're looking for an automobile. And rightly so: good value and high performance for the price are compelling factors. Even so, much as they appreciate such things, some people want a different experience and will not consider anything other than a Rolls-Royce. As far as they're concerned, there's no competition. They may even have enjoyed Toyotas in the past. But what they want and expect to pay for is a Rolls-Royce.

 

Samantha -- I had to chuckle when I read this, particularly in the context of cristycurves recent string about overselling. I agree with your analogy, but it would be really funny if one of our ladies here on Cerb advertised saying they offer "high performance and great value!!"

[backrubman 64800]

Market niche and fees are complex issues, backrubman. It may be that, one day, there will be Expedia-type booking services. But they won't apply to everyone....But what they want and expect to pay for is a Rolls-Royce.

 

I think you are awesome Samantha, obviously highly intellectual and a most knowledgeable car dealer (and thanks so much for your comment on my guest book), I enjoy this discussion also.

 

But I submit to you that you are not worried about the "other" car dealers because you currently sell Rolls-Royce and have a niche market. Taking your analogy a little further, remember the affect on the American car industry when intense competition starting coming from Japan? It almost ruined the American car industry and took some time for American car manufacturers to adjust. Many Americans and Canadians lost their jobs in North American car plants because someone else could do it cheaper and soon with equal or even better quality than GM, Chrysler or Ford.

 

I just don't want to see service providers become a commodity item like hotel rooms (or cars). Hotels have had to lower their rates (and give Expedia a cut) and in the case of priceline they are selling any left over capacity at rock bottom "name your own" prices. Sure, people will still stay at the Royal York in Toronto or the Waldorf Astoria in New York or Whites Hotel in London but the majority of people will just search for the best price and value they can get. Could we ever get to the point that a service provider appointment is open for eBay style bidding on the Internet? Wow have I gotten some great deals there, items for 1/100 of their value.

 

Service providers are real people, not inanimate objects like cars. An internet booking service that lists every service provider in a given city, her availability, her rates in comparison to every other and what services she offers, with the ability to sort by price and how soon it can be delivered seems "objectionable" to me but we do have such sites that help you shop for a new car that way. If and when it should occur there is no doubt it would put pressure on anyone that wasn't willing to participate and it would put pressure on rates as well -- or perhaps I am wrong (hope so) and it makes the world a better place... only time will tell I guess.

 

If they do add "exploitative" to the new avails law then look out agencies when the judge hears how much of the ladies fee they are currently taking, he'll have no problem deciding this is exploitation and convicting them of living off the avails.

 

Ah a brave new world now, and that was really my point in the first place. It doesn't change 12 months from now, it will slowly change over the next 12 months and over the next 5 years, isn't it fun to speculate on what might or could come of this?

 

I'm just glad we decriminalized SamanthaEvans because we were so wrong to criminalize her in the first place, she has done no harm and bothers no one :)