RobX 2084 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/11/27/11949581-sun.html Unlicensed escorts, agencies fined By RICHARD LIEBRECHT, SUN MEDIA The Edmonton Sun Cops told them ahead of time a sweep was coming, but still nearly three dozen Edmonton escorts and escort agencies dodged buying city licences, earning them more than $100,000 in fines, say police. "It just becomes a point of flaunting the bylaw," said Det. Chuck Prince of the Edmonton police vice unit. "They all know, and I tell them when I see them, make sure your licence is up to date." Between Oct. 29 and Nov. 25, police levied 37 fines against 20 women and 15 agencies for allegedly offering sex services without proper documents. Fines totalled $134,000. One agency was nailed with a $20,000 bill. But it's more than a money grab. Prince said licensing escorts and agencies is key to keeping the industry clean and gang-free. Escorts face a yearly criminal record check when they hold a licence. Cops will decline or take their licences if they've been involved in violent, drug-related or recent crimes. That helps cuff the hands of organized crime to take control of the girls. "Someone has to control it. Because if we don't do that, we will have nothing but trouble as organized crime moves into the area, and the ages of the girls drop. They're not 18; they're 14 or 12," said Prince. "You take the control away, someone steps over the line, and nothing happens, they take one bigger step over the line." To add teeth to their cause, fines are set high -- $2,500 for operating as an unlicensed call girl, and an extra $2,500 for operating an agency without papers. A licence for a single escort costs $125. Agencies are charged about $3,800. "It gets expensive," said Prince. He said he thinks this sweep will sink in with the escort community. After their first night of the operation Oct. 29, "the word was out big time. When we went on .......... the next day, there were about a quarter of the ads on there as usual," said Prince. It's fully legal to operate as or hire an escort in Edmonton. They provide sexual and massage services in private residences, and are contacted by phone, said Prince. "Prostitution in Canada is not illegal," he said. "It's communication in a public place that is an illegal act." [email protected] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest W***ledi*Time Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Either this article is confused, or I am confused. The article states that fines were issued for "allegedly offering sex services without proper documents". Det. Prince says this falls under the City of Edmonton's escort licensing bylaw. Yet the City of Edmonton's bylaws define an "Escort" as: "a person who charges or receives a Fee for acting as a date or providing personal companionship for a limited period of time." (http://webdocs.edmonton.ca/Bylaws/C12452.doc). As far as I can see (although I am not a lawyer), a person selling sexual services only is not an "Escort" as defined in this city bylaw. The bylaw mentions only "personal companionship" -- sex is not mentioned in the bylaw at all. Presumably, the reason that sex is not mentioned in the City's definition of "Escort" is because collecting licencing fees from Sex Workers would effectively make the City of Edmonton a pimp (living on the avails). Per the Criminal Code, Section 212, living "wholly or in part on the avails of prostitution of another person" is illegal in Canada. Sex Workers are "Escorts" according to normal use of the term, but not according to the technical definition of the bylaw. This fudging of the definition of "escort" is ignored in the article. Det. Prince helpfully states that "It's communication in a public place that is an illegal act." But Det. Prince is not as helpful when he does not mention that it is also illegal to live off the avails., which he effectively flat-out admits that The City of Edmonton is doing by means of its (presumably deliberate) artificial definition of the word "escort". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Suzirider 737 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Either this article is confused, or I am confused. Sounds like Det. Prince is confused, or he just spilled the beans (city knows they are licencing sex services) :oops: Expect to hear a retraction any minute now ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mod 135640 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Yup, He has no clue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
