This line always upsets me when I read it. What we hear when people say that is that we, sex workers, deserve to see abusers and let them release their frustration on us so that the civil women don't have to.
Nice la Presse Article on XO this morning
- Thread starter felixLg
- Start date
Just as an aside I subpoena cellphone records all the time. Unless there is a motion to quash the subpoena asking for a court order stopping it, any private attorney can do it. It's easy and at least here in the USA there is little resistance. Usually I do this in motor vehicle accident cases to prove someone was on a cellphone at the time of the accident. More recently I did it in litigation over an Estate to prove that the defendant made or didn't make certain calls to certain people. Which was an issue in dispute. I subpoenaed both his personal cell and his company phone and got both. If this guy was seeing escorts and I was inclined to sleuth it out I could have done so, but didn't care about that.
It's easy as shit for LE to subpoena cellphone records.
All of this being said I seriously seriously doubt prosecutors would waste time and money doing this to go after clients. It's doable, yes. It's also a huge waste of time, money and resources. And in most cases the evidence wouldn't prove anything.
Last edited:
A lot of politics and dynamics.
No doubt my new escort friends on here like Luna are correct in many respects, they sometimes endure abuse and degradation.
And I’d also say, to your point, the government doesn’t care. There is a war on men in many respects. Weed legal, but you have crazy politicians trying to outlaw Zyn. Why? Weed makes you passive, Zyn can increase testosterone and clear thinking. Therefore it’s “bad”. You can’t have men with testosterone who think clearly. They’re a threat to corrupt politicians. I’m exaggerating here, but see my point.
Don’t expect the government to do the right thing, for escorts or men.
Great perspective. Thanks. EB, I think my larger point was, or my question should be, would a court grant a subpoena in a case like this to prove two people actually met up?
Because meeting up is not illegal. That’s a total waste of resources. You’d have to be in the room to prove transaction.
That is no way, shape or form, what I was trying to Say.
You, as a human being, DO NOT deserve any form of violence regardless of your profession, gender or race!!!
I'm saying you run the risk of being exposed to it.
I'm saying that there is paid services you can consider before dropping a rooffy in a drink...
I hope this clarifies my point of view.
I still do not want to see a guy that might have tendencies to drug and abuse women.
No women want to be alone with guys like that.
Abusers should use their hands and that's it.
Last edited:
They will disclose cell phone number ownership data with a warrant (often times only a subpoena is needed). LE can get the contents of the messages from the XO phones they likely seized.
This has been done in the US where the laws are essentially the same: https://www.boston.com/news/crime/2...-hearings-more-alleged-sex-buyers-identified/
I feel like you want to steer it in a direction I was not aiming for.
No women want to be in a violent relationship either.
It still happens.
We are focussing on the agression, agressor point of view here.
I'm saying what if he sees you, before he becomes one?
I won't pretend that I know your business better then you do.
But i'm sure you've seen abusers before.
You've seen Sociopaths and a whole lot of messed up people, that do exactly what you do, currate their image for the purpose of the encounter.
If you know about it or not, I don't know. But I assume that you are smart enough to stay away from those people, as much as you can.
That is again, in no way, shape or form, the message I was delivering.
If I faulted, please indicate me where.
I kept your point of view in mind, please respect mine as well.
The Canadian law requires only that you "communicated for the purpose" of paying for sex. You don't actually need to do it.
Within canada many spicy sites and casinos are hosted in Indigenous sovereignty land (native land territory).
I am trying to indicate you where. Let me use other words.
Violent tendencies in men don't decrease with the number of time they come. They don't decrease with the number of time they made love that week, or their lack of sexual frustration. Their sexual needs are not related with their violent needs. Abusing women is a need for power, not sex. So no, we are not keeping the sexual crimes in check. We are the receivers of sexual crimes, just as their wifes are, just like any other women in our society are.
Sex workers are not responsible for stopping men from developing abusive tendencies. Just like no other women are. It doesn't work this way.
We're all in a lot of trouble then!
That brings to mind the subject of burner phones. I've always bought a new SIM when I get into town, and I registered under a fake name ... but I bought the SIM with a credit card, and used it with my standard phone, so I didn't really get myself any extra protection, did I?
It's a question of evidentiary value and not discoverability. As I said the records may have no evidentiary utility. It's not a discoverability question, it's an evidentiary value question. The Courts do not block discovery requests like this. However if the discovery has no evidentiary value, there is no point in doing the discovery in the first place. The prosecutors all know this and that's why it's a big waste of time and money.
I apologies about my comment, if it caused any kind of frustration.
I don't and didn't mean any disrespect.
I was aware about the Power/control need; and didn't reflect on it while making my point.
It is not your responsibilities to keep violent or abusive behaviour in check.
I though it did help indirectly.
I also sense there is a bigger picture at stake here, so for the purpose of keeping this thread in it's lane, may I ask you a question in private regarding this?
No, thank you. I don't have anything to add on this matter at the moment.
The IMEI associated with your device is registered with the cell towers along with the phone number you used. So basically no, you weren't fully anonymous.
If you are using a device in this day and age, you are always trackable if authorities needed it to be.
Having said that, they are not going to pull up cell tower records unless there is further evidence against you, because the cell tower records only tell that you were in a certain area and does not pin point your exact location. So at maximum it is a supporting evidence
Last edited:
I've been told stuff like that by SP too : I'd rather they come see me instead of raping someone. It alwas throws me off and kinda insults me too. I've had long periods of no sex in my life and It never brought me close to even entertaining the notion of sexually abusing a women because I was getting too horny or whatever.
It sure does damage you in other ways though, but that's something else.
Last edited:
At 900 posts it would be a good time, too, to close the thread pending any further significant developments in this file. This thread has become a catch-all on all things related to sex work ethics, politics and legal risks/consequences.
10% of the cients will cause 90% of the issues. And by creating fear or discomfort in Sp we stray even further from what could be a genuine moment. Where at some point it might feel like ordering from a mc menu...Fake smile, check. nervousness, check. No one wants that. Yes it is theatre, and beautiful make belief in the end. But the time, experience can be real and fulfil both parties. I do enjoy your inputs, and I do beleive it does educates or at least inform. Please keep going (If you do feel like it...)
And amazingly, only 10% or less who contact me get to make it to a booking. It's not 10% who cause issues, sorry.
Similar threads
