Vaughan Spa
Toronto Escorts

Minimum evidence for MP arrest?

wanttodo

Member
Dec 30, 2014
734
2
18
What is the minimum evidence required by LE to arrest a client at a MP, if they suspect someone has obtained sexual services for consideration?
Circumstantial? Confession from earlier clients? MPA confession?
 

TeasePlease

Cockasian Brother
Aug 3, 2010
7,740
4
38
Whatever evidence establishes that you purchased or attempted to purchase a sexual service....

hint: they'd also have to prove that whatever it was that you bought or tried to buy is a sexual service.
 

GPIDEAL

Prolific User
Jun 27, 2010
23,355
9
38
What is the minimum evidence required by LE to arrest a client at a MP, if they suspect someone has obtained sexual services for consideration?
Circumstantial? Confession from earlier clients? MPA confession?
I can't see how a confession from earlier clients would incriminate another client who doesn't confess and where there's no other evidence against him.
 

wanttodo

Member
Dec 30, 2014
734
2
18
I can't see how a confession from earlier clients would incriminate another client who doesn't confess and where there's no other evidence against him.
So why is MP referred to in several other threads as low hanging fruit?
 

TeasePlease

Cockasian Brother
Aug 3, 2010
7,740
4
38
A customers member in her mouth while she's humming Oh Canada? Just a thought.
That's a sex act. That doesn't prove the purchase or attempt to purchase a sexual service.

Low hanging fruit refers to the fact that MPs have fixed addresses and (historically) openly advertised their services with menus and such.

I believe the concern also stems from the "belief" that everyone knows what really goes on in an MP (nudge nudge, wink wink).

But like I said, they still have to prove that purchase or attempt to purchase a sexual service, which means that they have to prove that what happened in an MP is a sexual service in the first instance.

I'm not saying that's impossible. It just has to be done.

In the meantime, some MPs are playing with semantics (letter of the law vs. spirit), some more cleverly than others.
 

wanttodo

Member
Dec 30, 2014
734
2
18
That's a sex act. That doesn't prove the purchase or attempt to purchase a sexual service.

Low hanging fruit refers to the fact that MPs have fixed addresses and (historically) openly advertised their services with menus and such.

I believe the concern also stems from the "belief" that everyone knows what really goes on in an MP (nudge nudge, wink wink).

But like I said, they still have to prove that purchase or attempt to purchase a sexual service, which means that they have to prove that what happened in an MP is a sexual service in the first instance.

I'm not saying that's impossible. It just has to be done.

In the meantime, some MPs are playing with semantics (letter of the law vs. spirit), some more cleverly than others.
Sounds like with the new law, LE have complicated their jobs by having to obtain sufficient evidence for EACH individual they suspect of wrong doing. Without a common bawdy house offense with respect to prostitution any more, LE have gone from fishing net, to fishing rod.

Best to wait it out until these theories on client rights are tested in the real world.
 

TeasePlease

Cockasian Brother
Aug 3, 2010
7,740
4
38
Sounds like with the new law, LE have complicated their jobs by having to obtain sufficient evidence for EACH individual they suspect of wrong doing. Without a common bawdy house offense with respect to prostitution any more, LE have gone from fishing net, to fishing rod.

Best to wait it out until these theories on client rights are tested in the real world.

Not sure I follow. LE/crown always has to prove an individual breach of the law.

If you mean that they have to prove sexual service vs. bawdy house, IMO, it's similar. In order to prove bawdy house, they would have to prove prostitution.

The difference here is that sexual service is yet to be defined, and therefore the uncertainty is itself a major risk (for both sides).
 

stay

New member
May 21, 2013
906
2
0
judge's laughing
Not sure I follow. LE/crown always has to prove an individual breach of the law.

If you mean that they have to prove sexual service vs. bawdy house, IMO, it's similar. In order to prove bawdy house, they would have to prove prostitution.

The difference here is that sexual service is yet to be defined, and therefore the uncertainty is itself a major risk (for both sides).
When the MDS bust occured, one agency argued to the police that they hadn't established the business as a place of prostitution ( bawdy house ), therefore the lady who was charged couldn't be a found-in because it hadn't been established yet. This is different now, the owner is liable for the goings on at their establishment, the purchase of sexual service is immediate, what hasn't been established is what constitutes a sexual service. So flying in a potential grey zone may be OK. In my opinion the grey won't be the first strike anyway.
 

Cobra Enorme

Pussy tamer
Aug 13, 2009
1,173
12
38
MP's are a waste. I actually tried one last week and got nothing. no tease nothing. it was weird and i left saying i guess its done. seems everyone thinks youre a cop now and you have to 'ask' which im not doing. so the girl doesnt ask you either or she risks getting the owner of the MP busted. its a weird situation right now. better off with SP's in their hotel or apartment. make sure you know the girl from before, because theres alot of new faces on BP that may be cops.
 

wanttodo

Member
Dec 30, 2014
734
2
18
Not sure I follow. LE/crown always has to prove an individual breach of the law.

If you mean that they have to prove sexual service vs. bawdy house, IMO, it's similar. In order to prove bawdy house, they would have to prove prostitution.

The difference here is that sexual service is yet to be defined, and therefore the uncertainty is itself a major risk (for both sides).
Before Bill C36, "found-in" bawdy house charges could be laid against individuals who did not even pay for sexual services. Merely being caught inside a bawdy house was an offense. LE could go undercover posing as clients, and determine an MP was a bawdy house, without ever needing to prove prostitution occurred with other clients, only that it was on offer to the undercover.

Now with C36, LE needs to investigate what specifically happened with client A, B, C, D, E....in order to charge client A, B, C, D, E with obtaining sexual services for consideration. No everyone who walks out of an MP paid for sexual services. How can LE determine which one did and did not?
 

TeasePlease

Cockasian Brother
Aug 3, 2010
7,740
4
38
Before Bill C36, "found-in" bawdy house charges could be laid against individuals who did not even pay for sexual services. Merely being caught inside a bawdy house was an offense. LE could go undercover posing as clients, and determine an MP was a bawdy house, without ever needing to prove prostitution occurred with other clients, only that it was on offer to the undercover.

Now with C36, LE needs to investigate what specifically happened with client A, B, C, D, E....in order to charge client A, B, C, D, E with obtaining sexual services for consideration. No everyone who walks out of an MP paid for sexual services. How can LE determine which one did and did not?

I see, and I agree.

There is actually a very simple way in which LE could prove the commercial transaction...if they understood bylaw requirements. But I ain't telling.
 

wanttodo

Member
Dec 30, 2014
734
2
18
Is an offense committed under Bill C36 committed under this scenario:

Client goes to MP, pays for 1/2 massage. On the flip, If the MPA asks what would the client like to do. Client says "I just want to be relaxed", and then shuts up.
Say the MPA performs a HJ on her own free will, but the client does nothing to stop the HJ. Client tips the MPA afterwards.

In this scenario, there is no express or implied contract for a SPECIFIC sexual service for consideration, BEFORE the act. The C36 technical backgrounder mentions this as a necessary component of the obtaining offense?

Is the key to having a legal defense, to NEVER mention money BEFORE the act? This may be easy to do with an MPA you know well.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
What is the minimum evidence required by LE to arrest a client at a MP, if they suspect someone has obtained sexual services for consideration?
Circumstantial? Confession from earlier clients? MPA confession?
The same as for any other Criminal Code arrest: A reasonable certainty that you had committed—attempted to commit, or were in the actual process of committing—a prohibited act, and that they could collect sufficient evidence for a Crown to secure a conviction in court.

Sex for free is entirely legal. Don't offer to pay for sex. Don't let her set a price for sex. Pay for anything and everything, but never for sex. The judge/jury may not believe your testimony, but you and she will know you didn't break the law, and the Crown will have to prove it beyond any reasonable doubt.

Evidence for conviction could include any or all of the stuff you cited, but sufficient evidence for arresting you on the spot might only have to include evidence that you probably paid (or were going to pay), and that what you were paying for probably included a sexual service, rather than something else—like a massage or bodyrub only. An officer may well have sufficient grounds for a lawful arrest, but not in the end be able to obtain sufficient evidence to convict in court. The police responsibility to prevent and to stop crime gives them some authority to step in even if things turn out not to be certain enough to send you to jail. You should also remember that offering payment is an offence, even if that's as far as things ever get, whether its a police bust or a 'not that sort of place' one that stopped you.

Of course can charge the cops with an improper arrest later on, but then it's for you to prove the suspicion that led them to bust in on the two of you were well below any level of 'reasonable.'
 

wanttodo

Member
Dec 30, 2014
734
2
18
If LE does not eye-witness a sexual service in progress, or find evidence of a sexual service having occurred (trash bin, etc...), there is not a reasonable amount of evidence to arrest a client leaving the MP. Is this a solid assumption?

Will police have to send in undercovers as customers, to have a chance of witnessing something going on?
 

HentaiRanger

Member
Apr 26, 2009
252
3
18
Toronto
A palm full of semen will do it.
i.shouldnt have filmed my last.session ........i had permission and she took some pics herself too. no face shots. damn, I be crazy, maybe you read about me in a future police bust
......lol
i needed material.for those lonely.broke nights.
 

HentaiRanger

Member
Apr 26, 2009
252
3
18
Toronto
sometimes just go for a.massage and the concsersation. since i am learning some Japanese. Korean and Mandarin it is fun to talk to
women. i love treating them like normal human beIngs. fuck Harper!!!!
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts