Warning for Sps/Agencies: Client caught taping sps this weekend!!!

[Holdmedown]

JustaJohn - Do you really know who he is?

< JustaJohn wrote >

"Well, i'm writing this because i know who he is, and will expose him if the tape in question isn't returned to this lady a.s.a.p. The hotel also has his name on file and it won't be difficult to track him down if he doesn't cooperate. If anyone else has other information regarding this person 'visiting from a northern state', possibly in his mid-40's and very thin, let me know by pm."

I don't get it - if you know who he is why are you asking people for information. Just say who it is...

By the way, J Peterman is correct, recording a conversation is illegal when it is done by a party other than those being recorded. Thus a camera in a grocery store is not illegal since the store is aware of it - even though the client is not.

 

[wilko26]

With all the rumours I've heard about the Hells Angels, various mafias', and street gangs who have a hand in prostitution in Montreal why hasn't she had anyone hunt this guy down yet?

This is simply rumours... dont think its true that they are involved in all thoses business... (there's some agency linked too but not much has people think) Lot of people in that business say they know people blablabla... but when it's time to get to action its totally another story!

Wilko

 

[eastender]

Urban legend

Not wanting to change the topic, but i never did incall in my life since an sp friend of mine from the past once told me that she started out doing incall and she had heard on many occasions that some sessions elsewhere were being secretly taped. The girls would then sell what they had. She strongly advised me never to go incall places at private residences/apartments due to this. I always took her advice and glad today that i did. I wouldn't want my ass to wind up on some sleazy internet site. Nor would i want the potential for blackmail to be out there somewhere. Now, if you'd find out today that you'd been secretly taped during an incall encounter a few years ago, how would you feel about that?

How many of these alleged tapes have ever surfaced?.How many of the
previous tapes you reported have ever surfaced?The "upskirt" incident
featured cold hard undisputable evidence,likewise the "bathroom" tapings.
In another thread there is debate about taping at spas - again how many such tapes have surfaced?

All we have to date is an URBAN LEGEND.

 

[eastender]

Somewhat true.....

I was told once that if one person on the premisis knows that they are being video tapes or the phone conversation recorded, then it is all legal. An example is when you are video taped in a grocery store or department store, of if you tape a phone conversation. It is only illegal when a third party installs and records images or conversation without a court order.
I was also told that if a court order was ever issued to tape you conversations, you have to be notified 90 days after the fact.

Depending on the jurisdiction.

ONE knowing cannot ever imply ALL knowing.

Consent - most stores video taping for security purposes have clearly visible signs posted to this effect at all entrances.When you walk past these signs you agree to be video taped for security purposes.The store would not have the right to sell such a video tape to someone requiring a store scene in a movie.

You have to differentiate between the act of taping or recording and how the result is used especially if it is different than the stated purpose.

 

[eastender]

Consentuality/Consensuality/Exploitation

'It seems that this has happened twice to the same SP.What was the resolution the first time?Twice with the same SP in Montreal by different
clients but no reports of similar incidents in Montreal involving others?
Odds are quite long.'

I'm sure that lots of SPs are videoed secretly all the time, and this girl is probably just a little more on the ball, as it as happened to her before!

The difference between a secret taping and web site pictures is 'consensuality', Eastender. Have you heard of this word? Maybe you should install the 'dictionary' tool on your spell check.

I think most SPs do make efforts to hide identity on websites, so I would assume that she has, and again, it is about being 'consensual' and not whether she has already put pictures of herself on the website.. Like, just because you give someone on the street a dollar once, it doesn't mean everyone has the right to take a dollar off you just cos you are walking on the street again the next day!

'Most of the doctored photos of service providers tend to be of photo models whose images are used without permission by operators running a bait and switch outfit.'?

I don't know which SPs you have seen, but I don't know anyone who uses other peoples photos on her website!

Sadie

Not that it matters but there are two accepted spellings of the word,
consentuality/consensuality.Regardless your reasoning falls apart when exploitation is factored in.Consenting to a situation where you are exploited
or are commiting illegal acts would not be recognized .

I guess all the threads and posts on this site about unverified photos,bait & switch tactics,etc do not exist.

 

[The Woodworker]

Wasn't there a guy who wrote on MERB, that he saw an SP and she freaked on him when, as he put it (to the best of my memory), "she looked over to see a camera pointing at her"? As I recall he was blasted by a couple of people. He didn't think she would mind so he couldn't understand why she freaked. But I think he gave her the tape. Oh, yes, and he was a little upset because he had other SPs on there too... with consent apparently. Actually, I think he was a lot upset.

I'll have to look and see if I can find the post.

 

[Gee]

okie dokie, If you know who he is, report it to the police with as much info as you can.

Normaly they should go see him and ask him for the tape, if he refuses or denies, they will confiscate all of his video equipment and look through it, If they find the tape, regardless of if he has copies hidden or not, she will have a case against him and will be able to sue him for invasion of privacy.

 

[eastender]

Facts please .............

Legal or not...peoples privacy should be respected..Its more in the area of one having a moral obligation to inform the second party that "hey I'm going to record you buck Naked having sex and gettin down and out freaky"..

You can debate the wording in legal terms all you want..talk about video cameras installed in grocery stores, malls, schools..whatever..if you get caught..and eventually you will get caught..eventually..hopefully..you should be exposed.

Yeah..its about PRIVACY..most people want their privacy respected...actually some would even get into a tizzy over their birthdate being shown on their profile of their fictitious Handle on a message board..Believe it or Not..

But..besides all that..I think there are a lot of wierdos out there doing the recording thing..I would say that most escorts somewhere down the line have been recorded. You see 5, 10, 40, 100 clients..your bound to run into a few of these freaks. Video cameras today being so tiny, its easy to conceal the little buggers anywhere. There are devices available on the market today that are able to detect cameras.. If the Ladies want to protect themselves against this sort of stuff they should look into getting one of these devices..or learn to tell the signs..lots of lighting in the room is one of them, doing everything in one place is another..look behind glass doors you find on cabinets..and be alert.

SA

Let's deal with facts and not your imagination.

The birthday issue was not personal since I never give it out on the net -
you just admitted that you were to lazy too check my profile when you posted in the other thread.

Now you imagine that a percentage of clients are taping providers - well produce some tapes - this challenge has been issued in this thread before and no one has met this very simple litmus test.No hearsay - just real hard
evidence.

 

[eastender]

Just the facts................

Again Eastender..how many times do I have to tell you nobody cares about your personal profile on here..stop telling everyone to look at your profile..Gee!!..thats not the issue. Do you think a hidden camera invades privacy and under no circumstances should someone be recorded without their consent ?..thats the issue..

And what kind of hard evidence do you want?..copies of actual videos?..get real..Most of those recording will even deny such a problem exists..so your out of luck there. These recordings would be done for personal private use not for mass distribution...those doing it sense its kinda illegal to begin with.

Common sense would show that most likely at least some are making recordings...and that most escorts have been recorded at some point in their careers..Take the girl in question in this thread..she discovered the incidence 2 times..most likely it happened to her many more times that she was not aware of. Do you think this girl simply attracts those type of clients that like to videotape their sessions?..Don't you think that if it happened to her say perhaps 10 times..its safe to say most SPs will have perhaps 1 such incidence like this in their careers?

Point is...to deny that hidden cameras don't exists..and all is cool..is pure nonsense...and why Eastender is it so important for you to get your point across that such is not the case?

SA

Because facts are important.To date in this thread not one SP has come out and posted that she was ALSO taped - if this is so commonplace then why
hasn't any other SP reported it?Where are the reports?Why do people just assume and imagine?

No one is denying that video cameras exist BUT when things exist their existance is not arbitrary.Not only in hotel rooms,not only in homes but as an example in strip clubs.To date NOT ONE dancer,stripper,bouncer has posted that this is also a problem in Strip Clubs.No bouncer has reported catching a client with a video camera taping the show on stage,no dancer or stripper has reported being taped.Is there a secret agreement amongst "video tapers"
not to tape in strip clubs?

My position on PRIVACY is very clear and I have always defended PRIVACY
when it is a legitimate issue and have offered other legal remedies for the
those whose privacy has been invaded.That people choose to read selectively,that people do not investigate before posting is their problem.

When people assume and imagine thereby creating URBAN LEGENDS they weaken PRIVACY.False or imaginary reports simply mean that future true reports will not be taken seriously.

 

[Canadian Joe 652]

Hijacking the thread

I think this thread has been hijacked, I went back to the begingin of it an JaJ original comment, he was providing SPs and other members of MERB information on a situation that happend to an SP.

Then it desintegrated into an endless discussion of Eastender against the world.

I think SmackAppel puts it best lets go back to the basic question:

Taping someone getting sexually freaky with you without their consent is wrong.


Period.

 

[Uncle Kracker]

welll well
has anyone seen this tape or is just a nice story
unless you have seen it with your own eyes its just hearsay and possibly bullshit
oliver

I've been following this thread, but keeping my comments to myself for that very reason... Thanks Oliver...

My 2 cents...

--Secretly taping someone for your own personal safety... Fine.
--Secretly taping someone for your own sexual fantasy... Some moral issues, but still legal.
--Secretly taping someone for profit of sales on said tape... Illegal without a signed release. But I'll bet you you could still find loopholes in this one. And the chances of getting caught are pretty slim.

And another thing, sending a malitia of bruisers to "get the tape" isn't legal either... He doesn't legally have to give it up. She came to HIS hotel room, if he went to HER's and secretly taped, she'd have more rights to it. It's the same as all the massage places having cameras in the rooms... Try going into one of them and demanding the tape, because you didn't know they had cameras until it was too late. See how far that goes.

If she's really worried about cameras, and has such bad luck that it's happened twice, just inform her to do a quick walk through of the room when she arrives and if there is one, tell him to turn it off... Or leave.

But as Oliver stated, nobody's seen this tape yet...

 

[Sadie]

This is simply rumours... dont think its true that they are involved in all thoses business... (there's some agency linked too but not much has people think) Lot of people in that business say they know people blablabla... but when it's time to get to action its totally another story!

Wilko

I agree, although I know the angels are pretty involved in the strip clubs of montreal. However, I don't think we can make generalisations about all SPs.. I don't know any bikers

Sadie

 

[Magda]

But as Oliver stated, nobody's seen this tape yet...

This story is not so hard to believe, do people really need to see the tape in order to believe it? I suppose that includes veiwing it since it could be any tape, right?

If you have viewed the tape, you are quite possibly also criminally liable for supporting this behavior, especially if you are aware this is the same damn footage that was filmed illegally!!

This has happened before, and Stella's wouldn't waste their time help out some SP who is wishing to start rumours. I assure you, if Stella's is involved I will find out about it through them also. There is a reason they have a bad tricks list, because things like this do happen! Thank you JaJ for actually caring enough to inform everyone. The fact that you haven't just mentioned the person here tells me you are not just looking to slander someone and that this is serious. However, as I said, I will find out more about this from Stella's.

Also, If this was for safety, then the client should take other precautions with his belongings, NOT RECORD HIS ENCOUNTER! There are other ways to deal with protecting ourselves. Video taping sexual relations with an SP is not one of them.

This is WAY wrong. To some you I ask: If it was someone's sister or mother, would your statements on this be different?

This was an SP, who - because she works in the sex industry - the client/public/LE sometimes tend to think they are fair game for all sorts of perversions, concsentual or not. Just because she was working as an SP does not exclude her from any human rights, AT ALL!

IT IS NOT LEGAL TO SECRETLY TAPE ANYONE IN A SEXUAL MANNER WITHOUT CONSENT, WHETHER FOR PERSONAL OR COMMERCIAL USE!

It is the equivalent of a digital peeping tom, and it is definately illegal!

BTW, if some of you are noticing that some agencies are using recycled nude stock photos, those women already gave their consent a long time ago. They do not have to give it everytime their pic is used. The release was for the pic and not for specific usage of said pic.

 

[EagerBeaver]

Magda,

I completely agree with you. This was a legit report, and I think JaJ has not shared all the details on this public board. I think JaJ hoped that the guy would return the tape, fearing his exposure on this Board.

As far as some posters questioning why the SP herself has not reported this, why should she, since she has already notified Stella and the client is on a bad client list as a result? What more would be gained for her by posting herself on the issue on MERB? The audience here is primarily hobbyists, not other SPs who need to be warned. That objective has already been accomplished by the SP reporting the misbehavior to Stella.

I am very shocked and appalled by some of the very insensitive and callous posts in this thread. Some of you guys really should be ashamed of yourselves!

 

[Magda]

Thanks EB. I was a little shocked too at some of the responses.

 

[eastender]

Interesting but....

Thanks EB. I was a little shocked too at some of the responses.

Your post is interesting but more so for what you did not say than for what
you said.Specifically you did not address the question of whether unauthorized video taping by clients is a problem or issue inside strip clubs.
Effectively your silence may be viewed as an indication that this is not a problem or an issue.

What is disturbing is the irresponsible way that people toss out assumptions
and numbers without having proof.Example somebody will say well it must have happened to at least 50 SPs.Do you have proof - tapes,signed affidavits,witnesses,etc?No.

Okay,so out of 50 alleged incidents we have one semi - supported report,be it hearsay or Stella(bad trick list - you did not say how many are listed as tapers nor did JaJ report that Stella has multiple reports of such clients).1 out of 50 equals 2% so effectively 98% of the concerned SP's did not see it as an issue worth reporting.Yet it is a very serious issue and a major concern
that gets trivialized because people are irresponsible with words and numbers.

On the other hand when I challenged Oliver Kloseoff about a post he had made that included a photo,he was very forthcoming,direct,open,structured
and impressive to the point that his approach could be used as a starting point for procedures to properly address the problem of video taping.

 

[Doc Holliday]

My last post in this thread.....

For the idiots who think the guy hid a videocamera in order to protect himself, you are completely wrong about this. His original intention was to enjoy seeing himself getting fucked by a much younger woman, in a hotel room. Whether or not he'd sell the tape or just send it to some voyeur site, i have no knowledge of this. I do believe he also filmed at least one other girl on that particular weekend. Don't ask why, i just know. By the way, i really do know the guy's name....first name starts with one of the letters in the name T-O-R-O-N-T-O. How do i know? I have a source that works in hotel reservations....and no, not in Mtl. I also won't mention him by name since STELLA and the other agencies/sps have his name on file already and for now, this is good enough.

Take it from JaJ: 'I'm 110% certain that this occurred.' I have no doubt about it. Don't ask me how i know or what proof i have, since i won't give it and it wasn't the purpose of my post. I also won't name who the lady is, and don't bother pm'ing me about it since i'm sworn to secrecy. It's irrelevant anyways. And if some of you still have doubts if it happened or not, i honestly don't give a fuck. The thread was mostly meant to be read by people involved in this biz and to the people who do care about the well-being of the sps.....not for the mysoginists on this board, who are more numerous than you would think. Lots of women-haters on this board, i may add.

I won't post in this thread anymore, except for possibly one last time: when i finally have proof of this asshole's handle. Once i find this out, i will show no mercy. Bank on it!

JaJ

 

[Mod 2]

Gentlemen,

I think everything (and in fact way too much) has been said on this subject.

The girl was taped WITHOUT HER CONSENT. What's wrong with you people? Why are some of you trying to minimize the importance of this behind "legality" bull-shit? What if YOU were taped?

Everyone is entitled to some level of privacy, and legal or not (that's beside the point), everyone deserves AT LEAST that respect: Being asked first.

Anyway... At this point the thread is getting nowhere... Closed.

M2

 

[Mod 2]

Freewill,

I just merged your post at the end of the closed thread... And I'll leave that thread closed.

Yes, there are SPs who are willing to be captured on tape, some for free, others for a fee, but the subject here is someone being taped WITHOUT HER CONSENT.

This issue came up in the past and I remember removing that thread completely given the illegal nature of this. This time I decided to just close it and leave it there. Don't make me regret.

M2