Has young child in next room while client there

[m**k 153]

What I mean is that if hobbiest x,y,z and sp's x,y,z have kids it is okay to be questioned them as well in a open forum?

 

I think that Naomi said it earlier, not the place here for open discussion this is a escort forum.

 

Well, it depends, if the hobbiest or sp is putting sp/hobbiest in harm's way or a potentially dangerous situation because of their behaviour then yes, IMHO.

 

If this forum is only about escorts...perhaps we should ask the mod to delete half the threads on here and stick to adverts and recommendation.

[CourtesanCassandra 167]

The sp in question is not a single parent and claims that her SO takes the child away when she is accepting calls.

 

My mistake, I'd made the assumption that the sp was a single parent.

 

Even if this claim is true, doing incalls in the same appartment or house where a child lives is really messed up.

 

I agree & as I said, working with a little one about is a very bad idea. I wouldn't do it. Common sense tells one that it's a bad idea, but unfortunately, not everyone has common sense.

 

Not a good enough reason to justify sex work with a child present. I'm not saying that is the case here, but there's no circumstance ever that could justify it.

 

I'm not trying to justify it at all. I'm just not trying to pass judgement on the sp in question (from what it sounds like, she does have resources & should have known better). I also didn't know what the sp's situation was.

 

I said earlier that I don't agree with having a child present. I believe parading men in your home, whether they are clients or not, while your little one is around, leaves a very negative imprint on the child's psyche. I say this because of my own personal childhood issues.

 

I also think it is foolish because first off, the child is in danger & second, the legal issues. I would not put myself in a situation where my child was in danger or where she could be taken away from me.

 

When it comes to my little one, I'm never too careful. I don't even entertain male friends when she is home. I'm very careful as to whom I leave her with.

 

I also stated earlier that I think it's a great idea to find solutions rather than putting your little one at risk, such as networking with other parents (that you trust), allotting baby sitting duties. I am lucky enough to have a group of fellow parents, including my family, where I can do this with.

[Andee 220524]

If I offended anyone with this post, then I apologize.

 

I did minimize the identifying information and the MOD removed the rest so that it doesn't have to be about a specific SP at this point - but rather a subject that is worth discussion.

 

I did not know the SPs name and did not know she was a member of CERB.

 

If she or anyone else that may be hosting while their children are on the premises is is reading this, it was not my intention to make your life miserable. I could justify it by saying I have a soft spot for kids.

 

Let's hope I was wrong and this SP is doing the right thing and has nothing to be worried about.

 

That is my hope.

[herelookin 3510]

...the child is in danger & second, the legal issues

 

No where has anyone said that the child was in, or ever was in, danger. And as for a ?legal? issue? is there one???

I really do not think that ?we? have the right to make a judgement of morality here.

We may not agree with what is being done? but we have no moral authority to judge this person. Perhaps some of our own issues cloud this fact. IMHO

[CookiesNScream 363]

This is disturbing. I hope that worker learned something after she lost the client. She could have had a babysitter for an hour...

 

She risks having the gov't take away her child, and if she puts her kids at risk... maybe she should?

[Cassey 100]

Remember this is still third party information. I never pass judgement unless I am present and involved in the situation. Other wise its me making up my mind on a situation that I actually have no real proof of.

Maybe there was a child present, maybe there wasn't.

Everyone seemed to be jumping on the moral band wagon, of protecting a child, when in reality no one actually knows if the child was even there.

 

Remember the game of telephone... Change one word and change the meaning of the whole focus of the question.

 

 

Regardless of the situation, posting a thread like this is in bad taste. This tread doesn't promote safety for the "child", it in fact notifies a large community of where to find a child possibly left alone ( dangerous ).

 

If you where truly bothered by this, I would have asked your "friend" for her email and emailed her directly about the concerns involving incalls and a child.

 

Concerns should be about the child in question, and only the child in question....

 

Just a thought....

[mod 135639]

And as for a “legal” issue… is there one??

 

YES, A BIG ONE: A incall location is still illegal (It's a common place of prostitution and that makes it a "Common bawdy house") even with just one lady working the location.

 

The police usually ignore the low traffic incalls (as long as the public does not complaint) but when you include kids (Anyone under 18) at the location your going to get targeted for sure (AND QUICKLY) - this person is probably being investigated now.

 

The police would not ignore something like this!

 

Anyone who does this should expect that they will have their children taken and that they are going to probably get a very angry judge that would show NO SYMPATHY for doing something so foolish!! It's just dumb!

 

Another SP (In another city) was running a incall where she had kids living (the kids were not home when they did calls) but just the fact that kids lived in the same location was enough to bring down the law on them VERY hard. Child services did take her kids away from her and I am not sure if she has (or is) getting them back! I doubt it.

[thatguy999 110]

Never had this personally happen to me but I think I'd leave as soon as I heard a child around.

[Annessa 22743]

mod spells it out plain and simple here. And i do believe I know the case he speaks of with the lady in question who was brutally cuffed and interrogated in front of her children, from what she said, there will be a long battle to win back ANY jury....and as mod said, her kids weren't even present!

 

I have a young child and while i mostly do outcalls I make sure that my son is taken care of...even if I have to call a friend and beg for a couple hours of babysitting due to a "last minute meeting due to a major problem my company is facing"

 

in the end, asking for help (even if in desperation) will account for WAY less explanation from a police officer accompanied by a CAS worker.

 

To the SP in question: Know when to ask for help. and there has already been an offer for child-minding here. what may seem like a big deal to ask someone about at first will eventually seem like a small request given the repercussions of not doing so

 

YES, A BIG ONE: A incall location is still illegal (It's a common place of prostitution and that makes it a "Common bawdy house") even with just one lady working the location.

 

The police usually ignore the low traffic incalls (as long as the public does not complaint) but when you include kids (Anyone under 18) at the location your going to get targeted for sure (AND QUICKLY) - this person is probably being investigated now.

 

The police would not ignore something like this!

 

Anyone who does this should expect that they will have their children taken and that they are going to probably get a very angry judge that would show NO SYMPATHY for doing something so foolish!! It's just dumb!

 

Another SP (In another city) was running a incall where she had kids living (the kids were not home when they did calls) but just the fact that kids lived in the same location was enough to bring down the law on them VERY hard. Child services did take her kids away from her and I am not sure if she has (or is) getting them back! I doubt it.

[Jabba 18389]

I'm grateful Mod decided to allow the discussion on this thread. All the opinions have merit even though I may not agree with some of them.

 

What are the "take-aways" from this discussion?

 

Heresay is bad.

Involving a child on any level in this business is bad.

People here are very sensitive to child welfare.

The SP's rep and business has been harmed.

Discussion of this nature on this board is good as long as the identity of the involved party(s) remain anonymous. This leads me to a question for the Mod - would you be compelled to act as a material witness to identify the SP (as a result of any investigation), or do you have the legal ability to remain uninvolved?

 

Regardless of the truth, I choose not to visit the SP in question.

[redmachine 1916]

yup, I didn't know until after I blew in her mouth and she swallowed, as I said hey we still have time she said she could ask one of her friends from down stairs to come up and join to make i go quicker. I said forget I'll just head out, then when we went to walk down the stairs I noticed another bed room door open slightly and could see a 5 or 6 year old girl playing with dolls on her bed.

 

wow, never called her again

 

I was really hoping this thread would be closed by now so that I would not respond to it! This maybe the worst thread I have ever seen started here on cerb. The original post on the thread easily identified the sp involved solely on third party information this stigma weather deserved or not will always be with her.

These kind of threads tend to pit one person against another and we end up with valued members of the board (Amelia) being banned.

 

irwin what does "I blew in her mouth and she swallowed" have to do with this thread. These kind of comments should only be in a reco and only with the permission of the sp. with a ymmv. Was this comment meant to demean her even more,or make her out to be a bad person. I'm sure some sp would have a issue with this.

 

Endangering a child in any way is unacceptable and is also a criminal offence. Failure to report a child who is placed in danger is also a criminal offence in most jurisdictions Right now there are 2437 views of this thread so are all 2437 viewers including myself breaking the law by not reporting? And i"M not suggesting that anyone should as we are only dealing with third hand information that never should have been posted in the first place.

 

Just another reason why this thread should be closed and removed.

[i****v***** 310]

Please. We've heard second or third-hand accounts of a couple of alleged incidents. And while if this SP did choose to do business with a child on the premises it is a serious matter it's certainly not anyone's duty that read this thread to report these alleged incidents to the authorities. I mean, get serious. Please.

[redmachine 1916]

Please. We've heard second or third-hand accounts of a couple of alleged incidents. And while if this SP did choose to do business with a child on the premises it is a serious matter it's certainly not anyone's duty that read this thread to report these alleged incidents to the authorities. I mean, get serious. Please.

 

I don't disagree but a persons reputation has been totally destroyed by second and third hand information. And some people seemed to enjoy it with a get the popcorn mentality.

[i****v***** 310]

I don't disagree but a persons reputation has been totally destroyed by second and third hand information. And some people seemed to enjoy it with a get the popcorn mentality.

 

Yes, I quite agree that a person's reputation has been destroyed. That was one of the consequences of the decision the OP made. My off-handed popcorn remark seems to have offended some, and to that I apologize. It was a knee-jerk reaction to add an air of levity to the situation. Obviously it was not well-timed and/or successful. But it did lead to PistolPete berating me. So not all is lost.

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

... These kind of threads tend to pit one person against another and we end up with valued members of the board (Amelia) being banned ...

 

Just for clarity: Amelia was banned for publicly disagreeing with mod. She never criticised or published damaging allegations against another provider or hobbyist.

 

I believe this is what RM meant, and I want to make sure that erroneous conclusions are not inadvertently drawn.

 

Cheers, Wrinkled

[redmachine 1916]

Just for clarity: Amelia was banned for publicly disagreeing with mod. She never criticised or published damaging allegations against another provider or hobbyist.

 

I believe this is what RM meant, and I want to make sure that erroneous conclusions are not inadvertently drawn.

 

Cheers, Wrinkled

 

Thanks Wrink my point was it was a deteriorating thread that should have been closed long before it reached that point just like this thread.

[mod 135639]

This leads me to a question for the Mod - would you be compelled to act as a material witness to identify the SP (as a result of any investigation), or do you have the legal ability to remain uninvolved?

 

This was "Second hand information" but this is not the first time someone has complained that "minors" were present at the incall location.

 

I Removed the identifying information as it could be just one SP trying to slander another (This does happen - not everything you read is true remember).

 

We need to show anyone who thinks this is OK that it is NOT OK!! Now that we all know how everyone feels on the subject we can close this thread.

 

If you go to a SP incall and her children (or anyone's children) are at the incall location you should report it to the police and LEAVE!! If you found that children were present in this house it will HAUNT you for ever if you do not do the right thing and report this person.

 

It is NOT the responsibility of a 3rd party to report this as it's hearsay and it could very easily be a malicious rumor to damage the ladies reputation.

 

It could be from a guy who had a bad experience who is trying to stir up problems or it could be competition trying to get rid of her (Ethics are not really high with all the people in this business unfortunately)

 

She is obviously doing low priced (80.00) bbbjcim (Something many of the other SP's do not like to see - lowball higher risk services) so she could be seen as a threat and the SP's with no ethics could just be trying to slander her here.

 

I don't know and for that reason this type of post is NOT allowed on cerb (and why I removed the identifying information from this thread).

 

The person who posted this (AngelaofOttawa) has been given a BIG warning for posting this. If the police wish to investigate this they can contact Angela directly and she can reveal her source to them.

 

AngelaofOttawa has been warned that if she does anything like this again she will be removed from the site. I know emotions run high when you comment about involving kids (that is a good reason why someone would use this to draw unwanted attention onto someone they wish to get rid of from the business).

 

Again people... DO NOT BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ

 

Hearsay is not permitted in a court of law for a reason!

 

Rumors are often maliciously made and have ulterior motives!