Cape Breton men fined for prostitution

Haha this story sounds too fishy to me!

Some of the perps are in their 60s and 70s.
They should be applauded for their virility not fined wanting to get off.

I notice all the "Not guilty" verdicts come from the 60 and ups. Likely they plan on challenging the law.I'd pay good money to hear one of the seniors exclaim on the bench...."You'll pry my cock from my cold dead hands!!!!!"

GoWest8745 said:

With the local judge appointed there, I don't think they have any chance of challenging the law because it seems that the Judge supports the law as mentionned in the article, so no chance that their case would even reach higher courts

Click to expand...

That's the point of an appeal. You lose the case, but appeal because the judge made an error in law. That law would be the Charter.

Or you win the case, but the Crown appeals, also based on the judge making an error in law.

They probably have more than one judge in Cape Breton. So it's not at all certain that they will all be convicted.

But I think that the Crown will try everything to get a plea bargain on something like a reduced sentence or conditional discharge first. Failing that, they will likely drop the charges after dragging the case through cancellations and rescheduling. They will do that because if they lose the case based on Charter rights, the law could be quashed altogether. The Crown doesn't want to risk that, since we'd be back to square one with no prostitution law on the books.

The paper just won't give up listing the names and addresses of the accused. I wonder if they face a defamation suit if some are acquitted.

From the article it looks like a typical street sweep and the charges were the same old charge that street sweeps have brought for decades, "communicating for the purpose of obtaining sexual services".

Doesn't sound like it has anything to do with the new law.

GoWest8745 said:

Communicating for the purpose of obtaining sexual services is also part of the new law, the difference is that the new provision make communicating illegal anywhere, the old law made communicating illegal only in public. So those men were charged for merely communicating not for communicating in public, they could have been charged in an online/motel sting, it doesn't make any difference under the new law, it's the same charge.

Click to expand...

Still the article implies it was a street sweep. Would have been illegal before this laws.