Here we go again with laws in Canada. Instead of going by our own interpretation , better to read the law itself. Here is the link:
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/content/LOP/ResearchPublications/prb0330-e.htm#criminalcode
Remember that there is speed limit of 100 on the highways , you can drive at 140 and not been caught , if you are , you will have a fine ; you can drive at 118 , still over the limit , being caught and not have a fine . There is a lot of tolerance , just do not abuse of it . Use your own judgment.
Play safe and have fun .
Ok Roger. I actually read the Statue. Where does it apply to Outcall situations? I do not think it does, but maybe you can point it out to me.
2. Procurement
The offence of procurement is contained in s. 212 and carries the toughest penalty for prostitution-related offences under the Criminal Code, with potential imprisonment of up to 14 years for offences relating to minors.
Section 212(1) lists various methods of procurement and states that a person committing such crimes is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years. However, ss. 212(2) and (2.1) expand this offence for situations dealing with minors. Under s. 212(2), a person who lives on the avails of prostitution of a minor is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years. Section 212(2.1) provides a further offence punishable by imprisonment for up to 14 years, but not less than 5 years, for a person who lives on the avails of prostitution of a minor and who, for the purposes of profit, aids, abets, counsels or compels the minor to engage in prostitution, and who uses, threatens to use or attempts to use violence, intimidation or coercion against the minor. Finally, s. 212(4) states that every person who obtains for consideration, or communicates with anyone for the purpose of obtaining for consideration, the sexual services of a minor, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years.
Section 212(3) relates to the evidence necessary for a charge under s. 212. Evidence that a person lives with or is habitually in the company of a prostitute or lives in a common bawdy-house is, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, proof that the person lives on the avails of prostitution.
Procurement essentially refers to an act of persuasion. This accordingly excludes situations where the person whose sexual services are being sold is already or subsequently becomes a prostitute of his or her own free will.(27) Procurement encompasses the following situations:
■requiring or attempting to require an employee to have sexual intercourse with a client;(28)
■enticing someone who is not a prostitute into becoming a prostitute or into a bawdy-house for the purposes of illicit sexual intercourse or prostitution;
■procuring a person to enter or leave Canada for the purposes of prostitution;
■controlling or influencing another person for gain in order to facilitate prostitution;(29)
■intoxicating a person for the purpose of enabling anyone to have sexual intercourse with the intoxicated person; and
■living on the avails of prostitution.
On this last point, there is a rebuttable presumption that a person who lives with a prostitute, is in the habitual company of a prostitute, or lives in a common bawdy-house, lives on the avails of prostitution.(30) This offence connotes a form of parasitic living on a prostitute’s earnings, where an accused must have directly received all or part of the prostitute’s proceeds from prostitution.(31)
As noted above, the penalty for procurement offences is raised when the prostitute is under 18, creating an additional offence for situations in which the procurer lives on the avails of a child involved in prostitution and uses threats or violence to compel such prostitution.
Most importantly, s. 212(4) states that it is an offence to obtain or to communicate for the purpose of obtaining the sexual services of any person under 18 for consideration. Thus, solicitation of a prostitute who is a minor is always illegal.(32) It is no defence to say that the accused believed the complainant was 18 years old.
