Supreme Court unanimously strikes down Canada's anti-prostitution laws

[Sweet Emily J 172062]

Charlotte made a great point on this other thread today that I want to give more attention here too.

 

Post SCC ruling, Canada will be making a decision on what direction we will be going next. The SexSafetySecurity survey is a great way for clients to discreetly have their voice's heard about your thoughts, feelings and experiences. It's even more important now for people to know that clients are generally good people, and are just average Canadians! This is a perfect way to get the word out!

 

"We believe that the generalizations that groups seeking the abolition of prostitution make about the attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of ALL people who pay for sexual services in Canada are based on moral convictions and speculation as opposed to actual evidence.

 

In our ongoing effort to present a more complete and accurate picture of the diversity of attitudes, beliefs and experiences of people who have paid for sexual services in Canada we are inviting you to be a part of the largest and most ambitious study of Canada's sex industry undertaken to date. The Sex, Safety and Security Study, which is part of a larger research initiative funded the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR), seeks to provide a safe, secure and nonjudgmental environment for people who have purchased sexual services to have your voices heard and respected and the details of your experiences acknowledged."

 

Visit the website to learn more! You can even do it online! Go! The deadline is January 15, so don't procrastinate!

 

http://www.sexsafetysecurity.ca

[Studio 110 by Sophia 150333]

You can see within those definitions a couple of things that either your lawyer has right or wrong, or maybe you misremember what he said.

 

If you do an outcall, the location you go to will not be considered a bawdy house. A bawdy house definition is linked with 'habitual', which means more than one visit. It would also be why the sp having a hotel room to receive clients is a bawdy house, because she is the one in there, and she sees more than one.

 

Solicitation is always linked with 'public'. You can't discuss those things in public which means 'around other people'. You can definitely discuss them privately, in a phone call, face to face (where there is only the two of you), in an email, and any situation where you have a reasonable expectation that your discussion is private.

 

Sps don't sell time. Prostitution is sex or sex acts for money, and that is legal, so you certainly can discuss how much for a bj, or hj, or any other sexual service.

 

Outdoors is not the same as outcall. Out door sex didn't have a prostitution related law, it is covered by public indecency laws.

 

There is NO way you can say that providing an incall for time only is going to pass any kind of legal challenge. It's not that they can't prove that you were paid 80 for a bj, it is also that you can't prove that you weren't.

 

 

But reality sets in, and the fact is, that single indy sps working discreetly (as in not 24 hour rotation revolving door in a hotel) aren't going to be scrutinized the same way an mp, multiple sp incall set up, and/or potentially underage sp or illegal foreign sps are going to be scrutinized. They can do surveillance for months before they come in to lay charges. That would be a huge expenditure for one single sp working alone, and that is why you just don't hear about those kinds of cases.

 

Toronto LE are apparently knocking on hotel room doors to have chats with sps working in some hotels, not to arrest them, but to ensure they are working willingly and of age. I don't think you can look at that bawdy house law the same way when you realize that LE just doesn't care to charge indoor workers. They are forced by public scrutiny to do it to the outdoor street workers, but indoors, they can leave it alone.

 

Thanks for this thoughtful post.

My lawyer is making sure I am not crossing wires. There is a tangled web of lines that cross each other. Yes outcall to the clients location is legal as is prostuition, however if you wanna get down to the finest detail. Let's say the client calls 2 ladies in one day, then BOOM there you have Bawdy house as it has been used more then once.

 

In regards of not negotiating with acts, and for time only, this is that in the case of "incalls" as they would have to prove that donations/gifts are for sex acts, but stated earlier, LE would have a very hard time to prove it unless he himself was there. he could not prove it or have sufficient evidence if I never said" X$ for X act" as many times we also have clients that prefer not to go to the bedroom and just have companionship. But they would not know that as they are not there. So now is it an incall if no sex was exchanged for money? Or is that a friend visiting with a gift? My lawyer said that "proof beyond reasonable doubt" very well would clear that up in court.

 

Most of us are supplying the hotel room, so still applies that IF( big IF) something were to arise, then yes both client and provider is still at risk of charged for being in a Bawdy house...which is why I feel the Nordic model wont really change anything that much. I think that model is still going to be for the watch on street level activity much like it is now. Or in cases of exploitation, assault, minors....not the one or 2 ladies that work on their own discretely.

 

I pay my lawyer very well to keep informed. I will listen to his advice. He is up to date and currant and also asks his colleagues for input and they all agree in my case that this is the best way to protect my business. He gave me guidelines to fallow to be in alliance with the CC.

Or at the least, how to remain ambiguous and under the covers so to say ..hehe;) By not giving them enough evidence to build a case with, makes their job harder and they will go after the real criminals such as the case in my first post about the agency bust just this week.

 

Each have to determine what feels right, makes since for their own. For me, I will listen to my lawyer:)

 

Thanks fortunateone:) I do from time to time get him to read different perspectives with me and ask him to explain it from his side of the desk, he has been reading this thread as well:)

[Hamish 100]

Great ruling by Supreme Court. Let's hope the Government creates a useful and forward thinking law that supports and protects everyone.

[normal55555 100]

Why not have brothels in Canada like in other countries?