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

[bond_james_bond]

Similar case

We had a similar case in my home state awhile ago, though it didn't involve SPs.

A guy rented his house out to a couple of college co-eds. Unbeknownst to them, the bedrooms and bathrooms had hidden cameras everywhere. When they eventually discovered the cameras, they pressed charges against the homeowner.

However, in my state, it was perfectly legal for someone to video tape within their own home. It was his home; the fact that he rented it out wasn't covered by the law. The local press made a big deal out of the case, and everyone seemed to feel that it was a heinous act. So in order to prosecute the guy, they actually had to get the state legislature to change the law. Now it says something like, legal to tape within your own home, except for purposes of sexual perversion. Of course, THAT will probably be argued even more by lawyers.

I wonder if this person could use the same reasoning in his defense. Since it's HIS hotel room that he paid for, does he have a legal right to videotape within it?

When someone walks into a casino, they're going to get videotaped. The casino has a right to do so because it's their property. The cameras are not obvious (well, at least they're not supposed to be) and there's no signs saying you will be videotaped. Could this person use the same defense as a casino?

 

[EagerBeaver]

BJB,

Very interesting issue that you raise. However, I think that the critical issue is consent, not ownership or possession and control of the property, under most of these anti-voyeurism laws. Lack of consent will make the conduct illegal regardless of where the taping occurs.

 

[Lawless]

In the Province of Quebec, some cities have video cameras on the streets...seems to be legal in those cases!!!
What about those cameras in hotels....clubs....
Local lawyer needed!

 

[eastender]

Commercial Use

Privacy laws are somewhat different in the province of Quebec - photographs taken in a public place require a consent release signed by the subject(s)
before they may be published or used commercially."Commercial use" is interpreted very broadly.

 

[bond_james_bond]

My understanding is that in the US/Canada/Europe, you have no expectation of privacy in a public area such as a street, public building, hotel lobby, etc.

Yes, I could definitely see requiring consent for commercial use, such as you're walking past a hotel and you get caught in a publicity photo which was taken at the same time.

When red-light cameras were installed in my state a few years ago, there were complaints about invasions of privacy. That argument was pretty much ignored, since you have no expectation of privacy in your car at a public intersection.

P.S. Welcome back, EB! You were sorely missed.

 

[eastender]

Please explain.

The lady that had this happen to her advertises only on the internet and was contacted by this jerk via email, which he had obtained through her webpage. It was the second time that she has seen this idiot. Needless to say, she regrets agreeing to see him last Saturday evening. She now worries that this tape will wind up on the internet on some voyeur sex site and that her close ones might find out about this one day. It's the second time that she's had this happen to her and it's making her have second thoughts about continuing in this biz......can't say i blame her.

While I agree the taper is a lowlife could you explain why someone who has a webpage is NOT concerned about her close ones finding the webpage
but is concerned about the tape being found?

 

[EagerBeaver]

There are two cases I know of in Connecticut where cameras were secretly installed in public bathrooms for purposes of private voyeurism and in each case the individual was caught, arrested and prosecuted under the Connecticut anti-voyeurism law.

The expectation of privacy goes hand in hand with the issue of consent. It's true that in a bar or in certain other places there can be no expectation of privacy and hence you are deemed to consent by law. You do not consent when you go into a public bathroom and someone has drilled a peephole through the wall and inserted a camera so he can view your pussy and masturbate.

 

[Canadian Joe 652]

A difference

Eastender,


The difference is the same as you findng out that your (mother, sister, daugther etc) has a site where she announces herself as a companion (sexual or otherwise) and you getting a screen preview of the loved one in the middle of been .............

Some providers go to the effort of hidding their face and features, changing their name, even having digitallly removed tattos and other features so that the risk of recognition even by someone that happens to run onto their site is reduced, yet it is very difficult to explain to little Tommy that the closeup of the woman been screwed doggie on the screen is not really Mom.

I guess it all depends on the individual, you consented to have your pictures (as EB said) on the site for promotion and accepted the responsability that that entails, it does not mean that because you accepted to have your pictures on your web site that you agreed to be taped without your knowledge for the sexual kicks of someone or worst the friday release of Sickos Are Us.Com

There are providers, that for a fee will endulge your fantasy, if that is your fantasy, and allow all sorts of taping to take place, heck there are a 1000 sites made just for that purpose all over the internet, but all those people signed releases and gave their consent to be taped.

 

[eastender]

Not paid

Eastender,


The difference is the same as you findng out that your (mother, sister, daugther etc) has a site where she announces herself as a companion (sexual or otherwise) and you getting a screen preview of the loved one in the middle of been .............

Some providers go to the effort of hidding their face and features, changing their name, even having digitallly removed tattos and other features so that the risk of recognition even by someone that happens to run onto their site is reduced, yet it is very difficult to explain to little Tommy that the closeup of the woman been screwed doggie on the screen is not really Mom.

I guess it all depends on the individual, you consented to have your pictures (as EB said) on the site for promotion and accepted the responsability that that entails, it does not mean that because you accepted to have your pictures on your web site that you agreed to be taped without your knowledge for the sexual kicks of someone or worst the friday release of Sickos Are Us.Com

There are providers, that for a fee will endulge your fantasy, if that is your fantasy, and allow all sorts of taping to take place, heck there are a 1000 sites made just for that purpose all over the internet, but all those people signed releases and gave their consent to be taped.

Cutting thru the verbiage your point seems to be that she was not paid extra for the taping,which is not the issue.Since neither the SP nor her website was identified nor was it stated tht she makes efforts to protect her identity
the question remains.

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.

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.

Seems to be the start of an urban legend.

 

[Jackie]

I highly doubt this kind of story is an urband legend. On more than one occasion, certain posters on this or another similar board have alluded that they record their encounters with SPs secretly. If such claims are indeed true (and it's not a hard thing to accomplish or a big stretch to believe) it isn't surprising that claims of SPs catching such clients in the act are starting to surface.

Regarding the privacy of an escort's website versus a video taped of an appointment, I can't believe that some would think it's the same. The vast majority of escorts (99%) insist on pictures that don't show their faces or identify them in other ways. Also, the majority of the pictures used for website advertizing are more of the sensual modeling style with focus being on esthetics, not displaying sex acts. To compare a video of an encounter showing her face and her engaging in sex acts to website pictures is ridiculous unless it's one of the very few providers that chooses to show her face in her web advertizing pictures.

I find it troubling to see this issue becoming more of a reality with the business today. As an SP, it's very hard to believe that a client that tapes an encounter is only doing so for his personal pleasure. If he can stoop to the level of taping without consent or care of the SPs feelings, how am I to believe he would care to keep their privacy? Impossible...

Great, now SPs will have to start checking the rooms for hidden cameras at the beginning of an appointment? Lovely way to get things heated up...

Amazing what the actions a few ill willed folk can do.

Jackie

 

[eastender]

Yes but ...........

I highly doubt this kind of story is an urband legend. On more than one occasion, certain posters on this or another similar board have alluded that they record their encounters with SPs secretly. If such claims are indeed true (and it's not a hard thing to accomplish or a big stretch to believe) it isn't surprising that claims of SPs catching such clients in the act are starting to surface.

Regarding the privacy of an escort's website versus a video taped of an appointment, I can't believe that some would think it's the same. The vast majority of escorts (99%) insist on pictures that don't show their faces or identify them in other ways. Also, the majority of the pictures used for website advertizing are more of the sensual modeling style with focus being on esthetics, not displaying sex acts. To compare a video of an encounter showing her face and her engaging in sex acts to website pictures is ridiculous unless it's one of the very few providers that chooses to show her face in her web advertizing pictures.

I find it troubling to see this issue becoming more of a reality with the business today. As an SP, it's very hard to believe that a client that tapes an encounter is only doing so for his personal pleasure. If he can stoop to the level of taping without consent or care of the SPs feelings, how am I to believe he would care to keep their privacy? Impossible...

Great, now SPs will have to start checking the rooms for hidden cameras at the beginning of an appointment? Lovely way to get things heated up...

Amazing what the actions a few ill willed folk can do.

Jackie

Posters on this and other boards make all kinds of claims BUT how many posts/claims/ have been supported with reports of such alleged tapes actually surfacing?

The initial issue was not a "privacy" issue but one of people close to her stumbling across the video which would reveal a side of her life she did not want revealed to THEM.The perception outside this undefined circle did not seem to matter as evidenced by her having her own website - the internet
targeting a greater number of people than a classified ad with a cell phone # which provides much greater anonymity.

Let's not forget the text accompanying the pictures - GFE,speaks Greek,
etc.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Just to clarify some things.....

To clarify some things:

First, the lady in question is on her own and doesn't have a driver. She goes to calls either by driving herself there or by taxi.

Second, the first time some jerk taped her, she wasn't aware of it. She found out about this some time later when it was discovered he had taped many other girls also and it was then that she was informed of it. That time, the taping was done from a private residence.

This morning, some asshole in Toronto turned himself in for taping under young girls' skirts using his cellphone videocamera. This occurred in various supermarkets and he was caught doing it on the stores' security cameras. His picture appeared on tv and it was pretty clear to see who he was. He had no choice but to turn himself in this morning. He'd wait until the child's parent wasn't looking and would then sneak up and stick his cellphone/camera under her skirt and record it. Authorities figured he'd then post this (or sell it to) on some voyeur/pedophile site.

Well, what i got from this morning's report on the matter was that it was illegal to secretely tape this since the nature of the act was sexual, which would also apply to hiding a videocamera, not telling a sex partner that you're filming one another, and then actually recording the event. Legislation regarding the use of cellphones to take pictures/tape is still in its early beginnings and are being dealt with.

 

[eastender]

Still missing the point ..........

To clarify some things:

First, the lady in question is on her own and doesn't have a driver. She goes to calls either by driving herself there or by taxi.

Second, the first time some jerk taped her, she wasn't aware of it. She found out about this some time later when it was discovered he had taped many other girls also and it was then that she was informed of it. That time, the taping was done from a private residence.

This morning, some asshole in Toronto turned himself in for taping under young girls' skirts using his cellphone videocamera. This occurred in various supermarkets and he was caught doing it on the stores' security cameras. His picture appeared on tv and it was pretty clear to see who he was. He had no choice but to turn himself in this morning. He'd wait until the child's parent wasn't looking and would then sneak up and stick his cellphone/camera under her skirt and record it. Authorities figured he'd then post this (or sell it to) on some voyeur/pedophile site.

Well, what i got from this morning's report on the matter was that it was illegal to secretely tape this since the nature of the act was sexual, which would also apply to hiding a videocamera, not telling a sex partner that you're filming one another, and then actually recording the event. Legislation regarding the use of cellphones to take pictures/tape is still in its early beginnings and are being dealt with.

Many others does not imply all - so we are working with an assumption.

Effectively money changed hands,never been denied - from the client to the provider.On a very basic level a contract was entered into for services - the exact nature of which are not clear nor specified.

The issue then becomes one of who holds the "copyright" to any ensuing
history of the encounter - audio/video/written etc and who is entitled to the
"commercial use" of same and the monetary benefits?No mention has been made of signed releases or consent.

The "upskirting" incident was disgusting and invasive and should be punished
to the full extent of the law,likewise the "bathroom" incidents reported elsewhere in this thread BUT they do not have the same contract,copyright,
commercial use issues attached to them.

Also the legal issues change - criminal/civil,jurisdictional(provincial/federal),
etc.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Your statements are irrelevant. I don't give a crap about copyright laws and whether or not the taping was legal or not, and how severe in the eyes of the law. What i do give a crap about is the fact some prick secretly taped a sex encounter with someone and never told her about it. I don't care if the girl is an sp or not. This isn't the point at all and you've been drifting away from the purpose of my post, which was to warn other providers/agencies and let this guy know that what he did was wrong and that i was on to him. Sps don't need this crap when they work. They are stressed out as is already and work under sometimes very difficult circumstances. If he is indeed reading this (which i strongly suspect), he still has time to come clean with the lady in question and admit to his error and return the tape.

His name is already listed among STELLA's bad-clients list, which is accessible by agencies and providers. I would also like local providers and agencies to contact me if they hear from him and expect him to be in town in the future. I would dearly like to meet with this person in private. Just for a one-on-one talk, that's all. Actually, i'm not alone here. A few of my friends have indicated privately that they would also like to meet this guy.

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?

 

[J. Peterman]

I could be wrong..................

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.

 

[mackbolan1]

What makes you think that the Driver wouldn't be the one getting the beating?

Your right alot of drivers are older guys and are just in it for the money. Ive seen a couple of huge guys drop girls off like 6 2 275lbs and mean looking.im sure they would take care of a situation if it happened.But for me im a lover not a fighter lol

 

[Sadie]

While I agree the taper is a lowlife could you explain why someone who has a webpage is NOT concerned about her close ones finding the webpage
but is concerned about the tape being found?

Well, this is a TOTALLY different story. Her web page photos probably cut out info that makes her really identifiable, like her face or tattoos. And plus, taking photos for a website is a totally consensual activity! I bet there would be many men out there (including you) who would be very annoyed if someone taped them and sold the 'reality porno' on the internet! Without your consent, OR any perks for you!

Sadie

 

[Canadian Joe 652]

Consent

Eastender,

I think you missed my point, with my reference to a different point concerning compensation. My point was to make it short and sweet:

No consent - No rigth to tape


To me the consent is the issue, she consented to have her pictures on the web, she did not to have herself taped for whatever reason and/or use.

 

[Sadie]

Cutting thru the verbiage your point seems to be that she was not paid extra for the taping,which is not the issue.Since neither the SP nor her website was identified nor was it stated tht she makes efforts to protect her identity
the question remains.

Seems to be the start of an urban legend.

'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

 

[HonestAbe]

Defending her honor, or something like that.

I'm left wondering why JaJ is the only person who seems ready to go to bat for her by looking for this guy to confront him and try to get the tape back. 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? If JaJ really knows who he is then it shouldn't be that hard to find him and get to the bottom of this.