Nothing. The new law is not in effect yet. Although if you went to an incall today, it is illegal, incalls are illegal as the law stands now. If you get caught, at least you won't get 5 years in prison.
Bill C-36 tabled (New Prostitution Law)
- Thread starter DigitallyYours
- Start date
- Obtaining sexual services for a fee carries a punishment of up to five years, and/or a fine of $1000-$4000
- Penalties are stiffer if sex is purchased in public, or near a park, school, or religious institution.
Once the bill passes into law… give it a month or less.
Yeah, but I've hung up the towel before too and came back. So thats why voted maybe in your poll.
I guess I should never say never. Its just the risk doesn't look good at the moment given how even just getting charged would be a big mess for me.
Sometimes the smaller head still wins….
Most won't. Look at the states. Look at the DC madam list of clients, look at that Yoga instructor chick from last year. You have secret service men using in other countries that happened last year too. Some of these men had everything to lose.
I am with AK here. I am not the type of person who would enjoy a job like that. Some get off on the power trip, I am not one.
Sometimes the smaller head does the thinking…
If I ever find myself in Amsterdam, Germany, Spain or New Zealand…
Maybe it is an addiction after all?
The need to release is strong in men, I agree but addiction is a little far. For most anyway. LOL
However, I can see an addiction to the hobby. The rush from risk, the release, the anticipation behind meeting a stranger. All that can play.
Neither am I.
I know of cops who would enjoy literally throwing a bucket of ice water on an SP and client that are going at it.
ok...so enough panicking over what the media is telling us. Has anyone actually read the Bill who understands law. I'm no lawyer yet i have read the bill a few times and my understanding is that if 'i' as a john decide to see an independent who is advertizing her own sexual services then i am doing absolutely nothing wrong and its all legal?
can anyone clarify?
286.5 (1) No person shall be prosecuted for:
(a) an offence under section 286.2 if the
benefit is derived from the provision of their
own sexual services; or
(b) an offence under section 286.4 in relation
to the advertisement of their own sexual
services.
(2) No person shall be prosecuted for aiding,
abetting, conspiring or attempting to commit an
offence under any of sections 286.1 to 286.4 or
being an accessory after the fact or counselling
a person to be a party to such an offence, if the
offence relates to the offering or provision of
their own sexual services.
can anyone clarify?
286.5 (1) No person shall be prosecuted for:
(a) an offence under section 286.2 if the
benefit is derived from the provision of their
own sexual services; or
(b) an offence under section 286.4 in relation
to the advertisement of their own sexual
services.
(2) No person shall be prosecuted for aiding,
abetting, conspiring or attempting to commit an
offence under any of sections 286.1 to 286.4 or
being an accessory after the fact or counselling
a person to be a party to such an offence, if the
offence relates to the offering or provision of
their own sexual services.
I'm no lawyer either but I have read the entire bill and the corresponding criminal code. The section you're referring to deals with advertising of sexual services, not purchasing sexual services.
An indie would be allowed to advertise her own sexual services as opposed to an agency who would not. Purchasing sexual services would be illegal in both instances.
I expect the Toronto crown to be dropping these charges in exchange for john school and maybe some charitable donation. If the charges would not be dropped, the judges will be asked by defence to impose sentence under minimum (and likely they will do, at least some of them), which the crown would then have to appeal.
As to challenging the law with respect to not the sentence, but the finding of guilt, I believe johns have no standing* complaining about how it looks from SPs standpoint. So it may be doomed.
As to outside of Toronto, there is no saying what may happen. Very possibly people will be given criminal records.
*Section 24 of the Charter contains a test of standing, providing
that anyone “whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter,
have been infringed or denied” might seek an appropriate and just
remedy...
That means if I were to provide photography and web design services for the indy escort. I am not breaking the law.
Only if you have something to give to the crown to negotiate lesser penalty. Something like your knowledge of drug trafficking/exchange about to take place.
charges on small stuff like shoplifting or found-in are routinely dropped now and will be in the future. What you give is you are not clogging the system.
Especially in circumstances where everybody expects the law to fall anyways.
