Classy Angel
Montreal Escorts

It's Official Canada has adopted Nordic Model Prostitution Law

BookerL

Gorgeous ladies Fanatic
Apr 29, 2014
5,789
7
0
Northern emisphere
The reason they are changing the law is because they are forced to.
.
Hi all
Yes they where force too but, its not like its the first time howewver http://www.abortionlaws.ca/1980s.html,
And the Supreme Court abortion Saga of Chantal Daigle http://www.theinterim.com/issues/abortion/chantal-daigle-case-was-legalistic-gobbledygook/
Canadian history is filled with legislator being forced to change law ,laws must evolve !For the better, but sometimes worst !!
These laws won't have any impact on actual business, .
Well there was major bust under the old law Joelle Ghosn-Chelala can certainly testify to this http://forums.beyond.ca/showthread/t-343248.html,
If people follows law changes over a period of 5 years and another follows over a period of 40 years the memories and complexity of the actual debate will not have the resonance!!!
but they are tools that police and prosecutors can use to charge people they want to arrest
I do fully agree ,The question is when will they hit and on who ?????
t gives them leverage on those people to get evidence against their pimps.
From my previous post,
Law enforcement will be well equipped to make some arrest and intimidate unexperienced Johns and escort owners,bookers,drivers !
intimidate
Different word same results ,I will agree that your word might be more polite then mine but if you are ever bullied by the Police in a illegal arrest like have been a quantity of time you might change your mind ????
Regards all
BookerL
 

Bobinnyc

New Member
Jul 27, 2013
56
1
0
Bobinnyc

1 About tax revenues: there are ways to increase tax revenue of prostitution, but they cost more to implement then what they earn. Nowhere does this industry generate significant tax revenue, even for cities, even Amsterdam. But then every 100$ count for cities you could say.

2 You just cannot expect significant changes in large cities. There is no new money for LE. They will not divert resources from other activities to start going after johns. Allocation of resources of police forces are very much constrained. But then, of course, some police chiefs can do that. My impression, however, is that those we saw at the Justice Committee this week are just expressing their personal convictions or political orientations. Does the York police department in Ontario really spend more on prostitution law enforcement? I don't know the answer but I doubt it.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply and perspective gugu.

Just a US perspective: Regarding point #1, in areas of Nevada where prostitution is legal, it does generate pretty good tax revenue for the county. However, I think your larger point is that prostitution in a metro area is a different animal than in a desert.

Hope you are right on point #2. We probably have more escort agencies + brothels here in NYC than you do in Montreal and Toronto, the vast majority of which are left alone because of inadequate law enforcement resources and, as I mentioned, some upside in tax and hotel revenue. (Smart agency owners know to contribute to the tax man). But what is troubling here, and you Canadians may find out soon enough, is the inconvenience of the screening process and looking over your shoulder for our men in blue with a badge. However, the industry still flourishes here.
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
Bobinnyc, I don't predict much change in the screening process. Don't forget, escorts will not be criminalized and do not have to protect themselves from legal problems. The fact that only clients are criminalized would in fact make it harder for escorts to require personal info for screening. It will be the opposite, clients having to make sure they do their homework. In the US, escorts themselves can be arrested so they have to screen clients even more thoroughly.

We are just going from a criminalized situation to a slightly different criminalized situation. It's like when they change the bottles of Coke; it's still the same crap. The name of the offenses change, but the ''machine'' is already working here and there is no incentive for the police to change how they operate. It's not like in Sweden, where it was more legal before the ban. Sweden invested large amounts of money into policing and social propaganda and the opposition at the time was almost null. Here, it's too polarized and the government is just trying to sweep it under the rug.

About Nevada, when you have this draconian legal system, most people just choose to work illegaly in the black market and you end up having as much problem with illegal prostitution, plus you have to waste funds on the licensing system. I'd say overall they probably waste more money than places that are either fully criminalized or places that are fully de-criminalized.
 

gugu

Active Member
Feb 11, 2009
1,741
18
38
It's not like in Sweden, where it was more legal before the ban. Sweden invested large amounts of money into policing and social propaganda

It's very hard to get a account of what was really spent and really done.There is no budgetary analysis in the Skarhed report. Converted in C$ it's supposed to be around 10M$ a year for policing and additional funding later on human trafficking. Public health costs were never estimated, at least to my knowledge. They have a team specializing in helping sex workers to transit. But we don't know how much they cost and how many people they assist.

On the simple base of the number of sex workers they pretend they have in Sweden (less than 2000, ridiculous of course) and the number of client arrests, (150-200/y) it's hard to see where the money goes.

Of course, it would be interesting to know the amount spent lobbying political parties in Europe and international organizations.
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
10M$/year just for policing prostitution in a little country about the size of our province; that's enormous. You ask where the money goes, but the goal there is not really to arrest people. The goal is to somehow ''educate'' men. I wonder if we're going to see posters and TV ads like they have over there. ''I want you boys to all stop paying for sex, m'kay?''
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
Certainly disturbing that one of Toronto's primary escort service owners is saying she will call it quits if the bill passes, as opposed to taking the position that she is merely providing perfectly legal assistance to the non-prosecutable victims who might choose to continue engaging in sex for compensation if the bill passes.
She doesn't really mean it, I suppose. It's just rethoric to illustrate that she is doing a vital work for the safety of the workers. Like in a court case, every side is making his argument as vocal as possible. Pro-C36 claim that young girls are going to be trafficked by the truckload if the bill doesn't pass. Sex workers and agencies say that the law will be a terrible catastrophe for all workers. In fact, according to the new bill it might be easier for third parties to operate legally. She just has to call herself ''administrative assistant'' instead of agent and charge a reasonable market price for her services.

Like you say it really depends on how it is enforced by each chief of police. The police just want some flexible laws that allow them to operate the way they choose. In a sense, police are not servants of the law. The law is just a tool they use to keep the order as they think is best. I think police have things under control. The system works and they know how to police it. If they start to change their priorities it will transform the scene into something else and it will make it more difficult for them to police it. The law doesn't change anything of substance and there is no special anti-prostitution budget forthcoming for the police, so they have no reason to change.
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
''The bylaw has been very effective ... now everybody knows what the rules are ...''
This is key. If police start changing the local rules it will become a mess, and it will make it harder for them to find and help victims.
The new law is very vague and gives no clear direction. Police have no reason to make their work more difficult by changing the scene. Especially if there is a good chance the law gets thrown out in a few years, and they have to re-adapt again.
 

gugu

Active Member
Feb 11, 2009
1,741
18
38
Lowman's written submission:

http://184.70.147.70/lowman_prostit...int_Lowman_Brief_to_the_SCJHR_on_Bill_C36.pdf

Pretty damn good.

He insist on Charte s. 15: "One can imagine a defence lawyer calling evidence to establish that many sex workers do not see themselves as victims, are not trafficked, and choose to prostitute, in which case, demand-side prohibition constitutes institutionalized entrapment of male sex purchasers, a government made honey-trap.

I'm no law specialist but where this law hurts me as a citizen and (very) occasional client is precisely the gender discrimination. I just cannot accept that because she's a woman and a sex worker she should have different rights than me. They often earn more than their clients.

Note to Sincnarf, I agree about the Swedish resources. But there has to be something wrong. They are disproportionate with the (small) task.
 

BookerL

Gorgeous ladies Fanatic
Apr 29, 2014
5,789
7
0
Northern emisphere
From what I have read about Haper/Mackay, I just have a bad feeling that they might go after some agencies for show. Hopefully I am wrong.
Well actually I do have the same fear !!!!
The danger is very likely that they will go after the more prominent ones, to be able to gloat and show some results on how good they are !!
Unless C-36 is amended and leaves the agencies legal ,witch is highly unlikely at the moment ???
Regards all
BookerL
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
Pretty damn good.

I listened to him during the commission and I'm glad to see his brief. Here's an interesting part:
''The system resulted in a two-tier prostitution trade; the off-street trade operated with relative impunity while police enforced the communicating law extensively. Would asymmetrical prohibition result in different enforcement patterns? Probably not.''

Basicaly Joy Smith argued that the old laws were not aimed at reducing prostitution and that's why agencies were rarely targetted. But that's not true. It's just the dynamic of how things work. When they went after agencies in the past, they got more street prostitution, which is worst.
 

Bobinnyc

New Member
Jul 27, 2013
56
1
0
I hope so, since I think the strong agency system is the most important reason that Montreal is simply the best market in the world when it comes to 18-25 year old women. But I have seen a market in which law enforcement activity with respect to agencies has caused that market to be almost exclusively independents and that market is Los Angeles. LAPD is brutal to agencies and few of them last for long. On the other hand, LAPD is also famous for leaving alone the independent escorts who work out of their own apartments. There was an exchange between a "concerned citizen", also known as a nosy old bitch, and the sheriff about this subject. The citizen had printed out escort ads and done some research to determined where they were working. The sheriff explained that the department had made a decision to not pursue sex workers in their private residences if there was no evidence of more serious crimes. He basically told her to fuck off. It was a long time ago so I do not remember all of the details, but my point is that in a criminalized system, where the police choose to apply their resources largely determines where the market is allowed to thrive. In Chicago, there is plenty of hassling of independent providers even when they work in their apartments but the police there have completely left a couple of long-standing agencies alone for years. Might have something to do with corruption in that city!

From what I have read about Haper/Mackay, I just have a bad feeling that they might go after some agencies for show. Hopefully I am wrong.

Thanks Patron. I didn't realize that about the LA market. I have no doubt police will target agencies at least initially to grandstand and make a point, with the media as a tool. Also, the client fear is that if you ever have an issue with an escort's performance under C-36 you would have no recourse to complain for fear of prosecution or retaliation. Thankfully in the US we don't have a national prostitution law and we don't discriminate based on gender who gets arrested. Even if police in cities like Montreal don't target agencies, won't agencies still live in fear they may be targets and change their whole approach as to how they communicate (acronyms, screening to ensure client isn't a cop targeting the agency, etc). The NYC/NJ escort scene is among the best but still pales to Montreal. I feel like it's an end of an era up there. Sad, very sad.
 

Bobinnyc

New Member
Jul 27, 2013
56
1
0
Bobinnyc, I don't predict much change in the screening process. Don't forget, escorts will not be criminalized and do not have to protect themselves from legal problems. The fact that only clients are criminalized would in fact make it harder for escorts to require personal info for screening. It will be the opposite, clients having to make sure they do their homework. In the US, escorts themselves can be arrested so they have to screen clients even more thoroughly.

We are just going from a criminalized situation to a slightly different criminalized situation. It's like when they change the bottles of Coke; it's still the same crap. The name of the offenses change, but the ''machine'' is already working here and there is no incentive for the police to change how they operate. It's not like in Sweden, where it was more legal before the ban. Sweden invested large amounts of money into policing and social propaganda and the opposition at the time was almost null. Here, it's too polarized and the government is just trying to sweep it under the rug.

About Nevada, when you have this draconian legal system, most people just choose to work illegaly in the black market and you end up having as much problem with illegal prostitution, plus you have to waste funds on the licensing system. I'd say overall they probably waste more money than places that are either fully criminalized or places that are fully de-criminalized.

Thanks Siocnarf. Regarding screening, I think it's possible AGENCIES may screen to ensure a client isn't law enforcement. Girls won't be prosecuted, but agencies will be targeted. I'm aware of commentary of how agencies can mask themselves as admin assistants, body guards, etc. That seems like a bit of a reach based on how this C-36 measure is written.
 

Poolguy

Banned
Sep 12, 2013
68
0
0
Hopefully I am wrong about two things. Hopefully the Montreal police will view agencies as useful middlemen who provide security for the workers and leave the agencies alone. If not, hopefully the 18-25 year olds will learn to conduct business independently and will still be available. They are on their phones nonstop 24/7 anyway. Will it really be that hard to trade emails/texts with customers and maintain a schedule on the phone? Montreal has a very good mass transit system and cabs available to take if walking distances are very far. In theory, screening is an issue but most dangerous clients do not register at hotels and the if there are a lot of independents they should be willing to accept that most johns like variety and the ladies should be willing to provide references for each other. It has just been my general observation that relatively younger girls prefer agencies when those exist in a market and relatively older ladies prefer to work as independents (with exceptions of course). Maybe technology will change that.

lol, I guess we can all dream can we?
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
''One of our regular clients who is in a wheel chair has told me, once this law passes, he will book an escort, call a TV news crew to his house, and call the police that he is now about to break this irrational, Taliban style law. True story.''
That's awesome! I would do it too, if I was rich enough to get the best lawyer in town.
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
Idea for some civil disobedience. It would be funny if every merbist would set up advertisements for their own sexual services. Just create a gmail account and set up a little free personal webpage. If thousands of men flooded the internet with perfectly legal sex ads, it would make the government look silly. I think if a group can make the public laugh, they go way up in public opinion. Hey, if we can’t buy anymore, we might as well become sellers! That would be our way of arguing that targeting demand does not reduce supply. And if by chance a Conservative politician replies to your offer, you can report him to the police. State-sponsored entrapment! Perfectly legal.

An interesting thought: if an indy has an advertisement with a fake name, fake stats, fake age, fake picture, etc… well… can she be arrested for pimping? She’s setting up an advertisement for someone who is not herself. Next time you have a bait-and-switch, report them to the police! Seriously, unless photos are clear and show the face, how do they know legally which woman the ad is really for?
 

BookerL

Gorgeous ladies Fanatic
Apr 29, 2014
5,789
7
0
Northern emisphere
An interesting thought: if an indy has an advertisement with a fake name, fake stats, fake age, fake picture, etc… well… can she be arrested for pimping? She’s setting up an advertisement for someone who is not herself. Next time you have a bait-and-switch, report them to the police! Seriously, unless photos are clear and show the face, how do they know legally which woman the ad is really for?
Hi all
Its called onus of proof ,its criminal law
General Principles[edit]

The burden of proof indicates who has the responsibility or onus to prove something.

Generally, there are two types of burdens. First, there is the "burden of pursuasion", often called a "legal burden", "primary burden", or "major burden", which is the requirement to prove the case or disprove the defence. Failure to discharge this burden results in the party losing the case. This type of evidence typically is said to impose a "onus of proof". Second, there is the "evidential burden", often called the "secondary burden", "burden of going forward", or "minor burden", which is the requirement of putting an issue before the court using the available evidence.
Presumption of Innocence[edit]

It is well established in law that all persons are entitled to the legal presumption of innocence for all charges they are not convicted for.[1]

Therefore the Crown has the burden of proving all the elements of the offence.[2] The onus of proving guilt never switches from the Crown to the accused.[3]The “accused bears no burden to explain why his accuser made the allegations against him”[4]
In civil litigations Preponderance of Evidence apply
preponderance of the evidence n. the greater weight of the evidence required in a civil (non-criminal) lawsuit for the trier of fact (jury or judge without a jury) to decide in favor of one side or the other. This preponderance is based on the more convincing evidence and its probable truth or accuracy, and not on the amount of evidence. Thus, one clearly knowledgeable witness may provide a preponderance of evidence over a dozen witnesses with hazy testimony, or a signed agreement with definite terms may outweigh opinions or speculation about what the parties intended. Preponderance of the evidence is required in a civil case and is contrasted with "beyond a reasonable doubt," which is the more severe test of evidence required to convict in a criminal trial. No matter what the definition stated in various legal opinions, the meaning is somewhat subjective!
Regards all
BookerL
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
I'm not sure that this commission has an effect on public opinion. I don't think anyone watches this except people with a special interest. It's clear in the news that sex workers are against this law and that most experts say it is unconstitutional.

The train explosion killed 50 good upstanding citizens last year and Harper is not doing anything much to improve railroad safety. No one with even half a brain thinks that this government cares if someone kills 50 streetwalkers.

From what I've read, what is happening in this committee is pretty typical of how it is in every committee since they have a majority.
 

BookerL

Gorgeous ladies Fanatic
Apr 29, 2014
5,789
7
0
Northern emisphere
No one with even half a brain thinks that this government cares if someone kills 50 streetwalkers.
.
Hi all
Evidence of the federal governments conduct suggest you are right in this assumption ,Robert Picton a big Farmer from B.C is suspected of 100 plus prostitute homicide over a period of 30 years or so , even he was only convicted of 26 ,the attitude of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police was nothing short of disastrous in the investigations here is the article linK,http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/06/12/tories-tried-to-scale-back-rcmp-apology-to-pickton-victims/,
Tories tried to scale back RCMP apology to Pickton victims


Douglas Quan, Postmedia News | June 12, 2012 7:26 PM ET
More from Postmedia News


REUTERS/Andy Clark
omen sing during a protest outside the Missing Women's Inquiry in Vancouver, British Columbia June 6, 2012. The inquiry, which is in its final day of arguments, is probing why it took so long to catch serial killer Robert Pickton, who is believed to have killed more than 20 women before he was arrested in 2002

Twitter Google+ LinkedIn Email Comments More

Tories tried to scale back RCMP apology to Robert Pickton victims

The federal public safety minister’s office tried to scale back an apology the RCMP delivered earlier this year to the families of serial killer Robert Pickton’s victims, Postmedia News has learned.

A senior adviser to the RCMP commissioner later wrote that the government’s proposed revisions — which ended up not being adopted — drained the apology of its “purpose” and “impact,” according to internal emails obtained under access-to-information laws.
Related

Brian Hutchinson: Pickton inquiry under fire to the end

Robert Pickton inquiry commissioner gets four extra months to finish report


A Public Safety spokeswoman and top RCMP officials insisted this week that the email exchanges reflected a natural back-and-forth dialogue that occurs between government and its agencies. Experts were divided over whether the government had overreached or not.

On Jan. 27, just days before RCMP investigators were scheduled to start testifying at the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry in Vancouver, British Columbia’s top Mountie, then-assisstant commissioner Craig Callens, released a statement to media regarding the force’s handing of the Pickton investigation.

“I believe that, with the benefit of hindsight, and when measured against today’s investigative standards and practices, the RCMP could have done more,” the statement read in part.

“On behalf of the RCMP, I would like to express to the families of the victims how very sorry we are for the loss of your loved ones, and I apologize that the RCMP did not do more.”

Pickton, a pig farmer, was arrested in 2002 and eventually convicted of six counts of second-degree murder, though the remains or DNA of 33 women were found on his property in Port Coquitlam, B.C. He once told an undercover officer that he killed 49.

Email records show that shortly before the RCMP statement was issued, Julie Carmichael, press secretary to Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, wrote to Daniel Lavoie, the RCMP’s executive director of public affairs in Ottawa, requesting changes to the text.

“Daniel — please find attached the revised product,” she wrote.

The next line was underlined for emphasis: “Please ensure the statement issued is reflective of these changes.”

The revised statement did not include any acknowledgement that the RCMP “could have done more” in the Pickton investigation and the apology was limited to saying “how very sorry we are for the loss of your loved ones.”

“Here is the text,” Lavoie wrote later that day in an email to RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson. “I have removed what they did not want issued. Truncated this way, it looses (sic) its purpose and its impact.”

But in the same email, Lavoie wrote that the revisions had come “too late” and that Callens had already delivered the apology to reporters in B.C.

A spokesman for Callens, now a deputy commissioner, confirmed Tuesday that any recommendations received by Public Safety were not received in time for him to consider.

“Callens stands by his statement,” the spokesman said.

Carmichael refused to explain this week why the minister’s office sought to pare down the wording of the apology.

“We always work with the RCMP to ensure that we communicate with Canadians as effectively and appropriately as possible,” she said in an email.

Carmichael added the government extends its “heartfelt sympathies” to missing and murdered aboriginal women, and noted that the government supports a number of law-enforcement initiatives designed to help locate missing people.

The RCMP commissioner said Tuesday that the government had a “legitimate interest” and was “entitled to give advice” regarding the apology.

“In the end, we said what we had to say,” Paulson said via email.

Paulson also confirmed that he was originally going to deliver the apology in B.C., but that the timing of a plane flight prevented him from doing it.

Lavoie, who had initially expressed disapproval of the proposed changes, said via email Tuesday that the government’s feedback was “part of the process” to ensure that Public Safety and the RCMP “can respond appropriately to the public.”

“We work with partners and the process yields good results,” he said.

Darryl Davies, a professor of criminal justice and criminology at Carleton University in Ottawa, said there is no need for a public apology to be “scripted and edited and re-edited and wordsmithed.”

“The government seems to bureaucratize even an apology,” he said. “What people are looking for is genuineness and sincerity.”

Davies speculated that concerns about legal liability were likely behind the government’s attempts to revise the wording of the apology.

Troy Riddell, a political science professor at the University of Guelph in Ontario, offered a different take.

“While one may disagree with the nature of the requested changes, it was not an inappropriate request in terms of the relationship between the executive and the RCMP, particularly given that there was no interference with police operations,” he said. “Given that it’s a public announcement and could impact on the perception of force, it is a legitimate concern of the government.”

Under a “communications protocol” signed between the RCMP and Public Safety Canada in September 2011, the RCMP agreed to give “advance notification” to Public Safety of any public statements related to “major events,” that were defined as incidents, events, announcements and speaking engagements “likely to garner national media attention.”

The protocol states that communications “products” ñ such as media advisories, news releases, media lines and talking points — for major, non-operational events were to be approved by RCMP communications staff at headquarters in consultation with Public Safety communications staff “PRIOR” to public use.

“Public Safety Canada will provide timely feedback on these documents,” the protocol states.
Does the Tories care?well you have your answer here !!
One of the worst Police scandal in history !
BookerL
 
Toronto Escorts