Interest View From Chief of Police
- Thread starter squeezer
- Start date
Thanks for posting that!
Can't wait to see the Naked News do some reporting since a few of them, well, you know.
It's the most obvious response - basically operating the exact same way they did before and instead of both prostitute and john being charged, only the john being charged. They will go for the most basic, easiest, low hanging fruit - streets, areas near schools, businesses that employ underage girls or women that have been forced into the industry.
It seems to me like it would be a stretch to say that even in a case where an independent or escort or whoever that you made an agreement with for sex and then all fine and dandy but then later on randomly decides to "spill the beans" on you will result in a charge. Yeah, it's illegal of course and even if they have evidence, it seems like a stretch. Not saying it is possible - but truly, these guys seem fixated on going after the girls that are exploited. Not loose cannons or girls who have a sudden change of heart and want to go out of their way to destroy someone's life. All that to say - majority of what posters/members on here do should generally be ok so long as you are dealing with reasonably grounded adults who enter into agreements on their own free will.
It seems to me like it would be a stretch to say that even in a case where an independent or escort or whoever that you made an agreement with for sex and then all fine and dandy but then later on randomly decides to "spill the beans" on you will result in a charge. Yeah, it's illegal of course and even if they have evidence, it seems like a stretch. Not saying it is possible - but truly, these guys seem fixated on going after the girls that are exploited. Not loose cannons or girls who have a sudden change of heart and want to go out of their way to destroy someone's life. All that to say - majority of what posters/members on here do should generally be ok so long as you are dealing with reasonably grounded adults who enter into agreements on their own free will.
Does sound like they want the street level looked after and underage, etc. which was always what the raids/stings were for...
Oh, also, and obviously the part that irks SP's - no more ads in papers and such, so basically removing all references to 'selling sex' in public forums. I guess this just goes in line with the ensuring communities/cities are clean with 'all that dirty seedy stuff pushed to the side' - i.e. the streets. So... he doesn't really come out and say it, but he MAINLY agrees with the enforcement on streets.... but does not give a "thumbs up" to the removal of ads in papers and online... because that is one of the controversial points.
Did you guys see the follow on with the lawyer from Pivot legal services (pretty hot BTW) some sex workers are thinking of outing MPs who have used their services. Man I hope they do it for every conservative MP. And if Peter McKay is one ohhhhhhhhhhhh lol
As much as I'd like to see Conservative hypocrites exposed, SPs outing anyone could potentially end badly for them and for others.
It's hard to know the police real response to C-36, maybe the chief is just saying that because the cops want federal $$$ before they'll assign extra manpower to enforcing the new legislation and this is his message to politicians.
I would say that if the status quo remains the same don't do it, however if they start to crack down on the industry they should do it only if they mp voted for the bill.
Big change, as has been said many times, is the John will be charged.
I think it is only a matter of time until the first John gets charged and publicly hung out to dry. Never participated in the street trade, so not too worried about that, however, it sounds like they are the early targets so if picking up off the street buffet is your thing.........be careful. You might find yourself the new poster boy for the bill.
Sticking with "old friends" that a history of trust has been established might be the wise course for now, until time sorts all of this out.
To me the interesting question is if there is a court challenge will the police and crown prosecutors sit back on charging until a decision is rendered....kinda like they did the last time? Or not?
The folks making the decision on challenging in the courts have a dilemma. To push it in the courts before, during or after the election? What impact might this have on the outcome....and any future laws? Interesting considerations.
I think it is only a matter of time until the first John gets charged and publicly hung out to dry. Never participated in the street trade, so not too worried about that, however, it sounds like they are the early targets so if picking up off the street buffet is your thing.........be careful. You might find yourself the new poster boy for the bill.
Sticking with "old friends" that a history of trust has been established might be the wise course for now, until time sorts all of this out.
To me the interesting question is if there is a court challenge will the police and crown prosecutors sit back on charging until a decision is rendered....kinda like they did the last time? Or not?
The folks making the decision on challenging in the courts have a dilemma. To push it in the courts before, during or after the election? What impact might this have on the outcome....and any future laws? Interesting considerations.
This is what struck me. Business as usual from the LE's point of view is not necessarily the same as ours.
I also found it interesting that he mentioned municipal licensing of escorts and MPs in Saskatoon. I know that some take great comfort in that (i.e., if the city licenses a business, that must be tacit acceptance of the business). That may be true. Or, it just makes it really easy for them to crack down if and when they want to (e.g., if you're a customer of a licensed escort business, you must be buying ???)
Did any of you hear what he said???? Such negative vibes from you guys. Listen again to the man. Read the statement his association released.
This puts the city in a weird place to license a business which sells something illegal. Very shaky legal ground.
Good to hear more officials speaking out against c-36 I also been saying 1000X I have heard officials saying biz & priorities not gunna change
I also been saying 1000X I have heard officials saying biz & priorities not gunna changeNo it doesn't. Prostitution wasn't and isn't illegal. Anyone can sell it. You just can't buy it now.
What I find shaky is people who take comfort in municipal bylaws trumping the crim code.
A municipality is perfectly within its rights to license a business that wants to engage in legal (non-illegal) commerce. It doesn't license buyers, and it doesn't care whether a particular business is economically viable.
It just strikes me as a ginormous risk to patronize a business that is licensed to provide a sexual service. Although, I suppose some people go to bars to sip club soda....
I highly doubt that of McKay. He's far too uppity.
As someone else mentioned, outing MPs, while a big headliner, will probably not have the effect anticipated. The one outing better be able to strongly back it up with evidence.
Yes....enforcement probably won't change much.......how ladies advertise will and who gets charged is changing. Are you suggesting that this isn't something us "johns" on this board shouldn't be thinking about?
Also, he indicated that there wasn't agreement amongst the Police Chiefs in this association on how to interpret the new law. As far as I know, this Association doesn't dictate to their members how to enforce the law.....they just share ideas on how they individually may proceed. So, how the force in London responds may be different than the force in Hamilton, or Toronto etc.
"Enforcement won't change" isn't very encouraging. Notwithstanding the past 12 months, the baseline for enforcement isn't nil.
If a particular city's police investigated, on average, 50 cases a year, it sounds like we can expect them to investigate 50 cases a year going forward. The difference now will be who they may end up charging.
If a particular city's police investigated, on average, 50 cases a year, it sounds like we can expect them to investigate 50 cases a year going forward. The difference now will be who they may end up charging.
20,000 sexual acts a day in the GTA (a pure guess!) makes 50 a year look pretty small especially when most of the 50 will be pimps, public offers and trafficking.
