Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 76

Thread: Escorts conning guys (since new laws)

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    344

    Escorts conning guys (since new laws)

    I have a few friends who have been conned by escorts in Toronto and Montreal since it is now LEGAL to advertise, but illegal to pay. These friends paid for services first and the girls tried to not provide ANY services by 1. Asking for more money 2. Trying to scare the guys 2. Trying to waste time and saying "time is almost up". 4. saying , they are not turned on yet quite enough. BE CAREFUL!

  2. #2
    Stick to reputable Agencies and Indy's and you will be fine most likely.

  3. #3
    Sadly thats not really a new issue. Its been going on since before the new laws

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by lgna69xxx View Post
    Stick to reputable Agencies and Indy's and you will be fine most likely.
    These incidents with my friends happened at Agencies who have been in business for quite a long time and, at this time, the agencies and many "reputable" indys think it is time to make more money by conning/duping unsuspecting visitors from other provices/tourists from USA.

  5. #5
    Relocated
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    761
    Quote Originally Posted by azzaro View Post
    since it is now LEGAL to advertise, but illegal to pay.
    This is incorrect, is it illegal to advertise the sale of sexual services.

    as lgna69xxx suggested, the best protection against scams is to see well-reviewed and reputable independents and agencies. Taking a chance on an unknown, often just to save a few bucks is a definite risk. It's too bad there are girls like that out there - they were there before the laws came into effect and they just have more power over the clients now.

  6. #6
    Relocated
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    761
    Quote Originally Posted by azzaro View Post
    These incidents with my friends happened at Agencies who have been in business for quite a long time and, at this time, the agencies and many "reputable" indys think it is time to make more money by conning/duping unsuspecting visitors from other provices/tourists from USA.
    Then they need to post reviews. Others should be warned of this behaviour so that the same thing won't happen to them.

  7. #7
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by tiannas View Post
    This is incorrect, is it illegal to advertise the sale of sexual services.

    as lgna69xxx suggested, the best protection against scams is to see well-reviewed and reputable independents and agencies. Taking a chance on an unknown, often just to save a few bucks is a definite risk. It's too bad there are girls like that out there - they were there before the laws came into effect and they just have more power over the clients now.
    You are totally wrong. Starting yesterday (Sunday), it is LEGAL to advertise and ILLEGAL to pay for it under the new Bill.

    Here is the link to the C-36 Bill on CTV:

    http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/confu...imer-1.1902440

  8. #8
    Yesterday was Monday
    Quote Originally Posted by azzaro View Post
    Starting yesterday (Sunday), it is LEGAL to advertise and ILLEGAL to pay for it under the new Bill.

  9. #9
    There is a very popular agency on here that I just noticed is still listing on their website (not on Merb tho) as offering the following services: GFE, BBBJ, ANAL, DFK, DATY etc.... technically, this is illegal under c36, correct?

    Quote Originally Posted by reverdy View Post
    With important nuances: only the sex worker is allowed to advertise the sale of the sexual services she (or he) provides. A third party (for instance, agency) cannot advertise the sale of said services.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by reverdy View Post
    With important nuances: only the sex worker is allowed to advertise the sale of the sexual services she (or he) provides.
    Sorry for being at Internet Cro-Magnon age. I don't know exactly what a host and a server are. My understanding is that it's illegal to host sexual services publicity. So if everyone played by the rule, for her to make publicity of her own services, she would have to be her own host or server or whatever. Is this possible or isn't there always someone upstream committing a crime?

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by gugu View Post
    Sorry for being at Internet Cro-Magnon age. I don't know exactly what a host and a server are. My understanding is that it's illegal to host sexual services publicity. So if everyone played by the rule, for her to make publicity of her own services, she would have to be her own host or server or whatever. Is this possible or isn't there always someone upstream committing a crime?
    Haha..cool question dude!. I was wondering about that too. Yeah, who would want to host such escort ads on a CLIENT/SERVER level (computer jargon) if it will get them into trouble. And yeah, he/she who puts up ads will have to have their own CLIENT?SERVER.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by reverdy View Post
    With important nuances: only the sex worker is allowed to advertise the sale of the sexual services she (or he) provides. A third party (for instance, agency) cannot advertise the sale of said services, nor is the sex worker allowed to advertise the sale of services by another provider (under 286.4).

    In fact, the sex worker herself (or himself) is committing an offence by advertising the services she (or he) provides, under 286.4. But the same sex worker is provided from prosecution under 286.5.

    http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/a...1.html#docCont

    Which means that, technically, LE would be entitled to arrest a sex worker who advertises the sexual services that she (or he) provides, but no prosecution would ensue.

    It's a technical loophole that was introduced by the Conservatives to allow LE to use the power of arrest and use that opportunity to steer sex workers toward exit programs. The now ex-Chief of Calgary Police was making allusion to this, when he served as a witness in front of the Justice Committee which was studying Bill C-36, last year in July. He was saying that LE needed their power of arrest to be maintained so that they could intervene.

    It's an aspect of the new laws that has been little discussed thus far.
    I believe that is correct. Lawmakers recognize that they cannot constitutionally make an act (or something closely related to an act) legal for some parties and illegal for others. So they legislate prosecutorial discretion. One obvious problem is that it perverts the separation of powers.

    Prosecutorial discretion exists for a reason. If would not be reasonable to make a law stating that a man commits a crime for stealing bread but a woman does not. A prosecutor might decide that a woman stealing bread to feed a small child should not be prosecuted, but that a man (or another woman) stealing in order to not have to pay should be prosecuted.

    When the legislature declares that all women (except those soliciting near a school) are victims deserving prosecutorial discretion, it has clearly acted unreasonably and has gone beyond its rightful powers. Escorts conning their customers makes the legislature look
    particularly silly. Remind us who the victims are again.

    I cannot think of another instance where the legislature in the western world legislated prosecutorial discretion, rather than rightfully leaving the decision to prosecutors, or even to the police. Most policemen use discretion regularly in their jobs.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by reverdy View Post
    Yes, that's now illegal. It's one of the rare examples I have seen where an agency didn't modify its website once C-36 became law. Just about everybody else has removed acronyms which clearly refer to sexual services.
    I think it is a bigger deal that they list some of those services as costing 50 more dollars. It is one thing to buy time and companionship for $200 and have her decide to do anal sex. Letting them know you want the $250 session indicates more intent, and there offer indicates more intent.

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Snuggletown
    Posts
    1,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Patron View Post
    I cannot think of another instance where the legislature in the western world legislated prosecutorial discretion...
    Minimum sentencing would be another example that has important consequences for prosecution, (although it has the opposite effect of giving almost all the power to the prosecutor).

    Quote Originally Posted by reverdy View Post
    Yes, that's the implication - the sex worker who wants to advertise her (his ) services would need to maintain her (his) own server. Internet service providers facilitating the ads, or web hosting services, are also considered third parties, and therefore could be charged as well.
    There is no way to know what is legal until a judge actually makes a decision on a case. The legal advice that NOW magazine got from Alan Young was that it was legal for the publisher so long as the ad was posted by the SP herself. No matter if it's a server or paper, the owner is not ''advertising''. They are just hosting people who advertise themselves. This is of course debatable, but it seems the most logical legal position in the circumstances. This is not to be confused with the material benefit provision which is a different thing.
    “Truth, Justice, Freedom, Reasonably Priced Love.”

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by reverdy View Post

    The next step would be to implement a ban list, like the one being proposed by the French Senate, which would have to be enforced by Canadian internet providers (Rogers, Bell, Cogeco, etc.), which would prevent Canadian users from accessing offshore sites. As the experience in France shows, this is difficult to implement and enforce, and not really effective in the end as these measures can be circumvented by the use of proxies and VPNs.
    But Reverdy what are the do-gooders gonna do? People are having sex....sex without love. This has to be stopped! In the USA in some of the worst cities in America where murder, rape, and all violent crimes are being committed at a record pace the vice squad will be working feverishly with BackPage set-ups and by policing street walkers at the expense of allowing murder and home evasion. They have got their priorities straight.

    Sex without love has to be stopped once in for all. Too many men are smiling. This is no good!!!!

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •