GTA massage parlour busts

[james t kirk]

Here's a link to the CBC.

It would appear that they only found 5 girls who were between 16 and 18.

If this is all they (LE) were worried about, then they are doing their jobs.

If they were there to harass people, well, that's a different story.

Doesn't seem to be too much of a rucuss that's for sure. If they had found 20% of the women to be underage, I would say we have a problem. Most guys out there in the hobby aren't interested in teenage girls.

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/12/19/massage_parlours031219

 

[gala]

Pally: Yeah you did. We agree 100% on that, but despite all that, people seem to think it's controversial to suggest folks stick to licensed places (or girls that are obviously not underage at unlicensed places.)

 

[BigBlack]

Pally: Yeah you did. We agree 100% on that, but despite all that, people seem to think it's controversial to suggest folks stick to licensed places (or girls that are obviously not underage at unlicensed places.)

What was sarcastically hinted (that you missed) was that you ripped off Pally's arguement and took it as your own.

No one "seems to think something is controversial " with Pally's arguements. Many of us have been around the game a long time and know this well. This topic (licensed + unlicensed) has been discussed before.

BBLACK

 

[BigBlack]

Wow....this is exactly what I said a few pages back in this same thread but with a minor change in wording.

PAL

Yup. He's evolved from inventing things we supposedly said to taking your ideas and passing it as his own in a poor attempt to save face.

BBLACK

 

[Malibook]

You don't have to listen to me, though, you can carry on with screwing up your life and taking no responsibility for your actions.

Thanks Lyla.

 

[gala]

BBlack: Get a life. On my first post to the thread I said you should "stick to placs that are trustworthy and reputable". Pally pointed out that being licensed makes a place pretty reputable at least from the point of view of checking IDs, in the eyes of the law. I said the guy must have been in "some unlicensed hole". You replied to that "any girl can get fake ID" as if it didn't matter whether the guy was in a licensed place or not--he could still be duped and wouldn't be safe. After you wrote that I tried to show you, in detail, how a reasonable person analysis applies to what pally said: how the guy was irresponsible only if he was at an unlicensed place. But you continue to bicker. Maybe you don't want to face reality, maybe you want to keep on visiting unlicensed places with girls who "look young" and you don't want to face whether or not they might be underae. I don't know what your motives are, or why you bicker so much.

In fact, that's all you do: bicker. All of your posts are insulting and belligerent. You sneer, you insult, you twist, but you never put 2+2 together and understand what people are telling you. I'm done with you: you're not worth it. I tried to reason it out for you, show you how what pally said applies, but it's like talking to a tree stump. There's no medicine that can cure stupidity, so I'm done with you.

Sayonara.

 

[BigBlack]

There's no medicine that can cure stupidity

You're out of luck then chump. Boohoo Lyla. Cry me a river.

BBLACK

 

[bootycall28]

Christmas came early for you this year BBlack. You managed to neutralize the dumbest poster Terb has seen this year, in one thread. If only he'd leave us all alone.

Booty

 

[BigBlack]

Christmas came early for you this year BBlack. You managed to neutralize the dumbest poster Terb has seen this year, in one thread. If only he'd leave us all alone.

Booty

Ya well you can always dream. Expecting gala to reason in a debate is like asking the family dog to use the toilet when it needs to relieve itself. It' s too far beyond him.

BBLACK

 

[Dave in Phoenix]

Decriminalization would be the best bet for these types of services. You guys have to tell your politicians that you want prostitution decriminalized or these kinds of raids,or worse, will continue.

With all the public nuisance problems that street hookers cause I think the only hope of decriminalization is for all forms of PRIVATE, consenting adult sexwork.

Of course since outcall already is legal, we are really only talking about decrim of incalls which might extend to body rubs, but individual city licensing bylaws might restrict sex at body rubs just like they do different levels of contact at strip clubs even though criminally all touch short of penetration and masterbation is legal.

 

[HaywoodJabloemy]

It would appear that they only found 5 girls who were between 16 and 18.

If this is all they (LE) were worried about, then they are doing their jobs.

Maybe they're doing their job the way we want them to do it, but others could rightly point out they're purposefully not doing their job because they're not enforcing our criminal laws. Technically a HJ is a sexual service and every MP is bawdy house and the owners are living off the avails.

What's the purpose in keeping these laws around if they're not being enforced? So that corrupt police and civic officials can use them for extortion leverage? It is possible to replace them with laws against coercion and underaged workers, like other countries have done.

 

[Dave in Phoenix]

Maybe they're doing their job the way we want them to do it, but others could rightly point out they're purposefully not doing their job because they're not enforcing our criminal laws. Technically a HJ is a sexual service and every MP is bawdy house and the owners are living off the avails.

Does anyone know of any MP convicted of being a bawdy house for doing handjobs? I haven't.

And even the Edmonton Police website says if the door to the room of the massage parlor room is locked, its private - not bawdy violation.

Other cities police may interrept differently, but it seems to be a unsettled issue that has never had a court challange to determine. That may be why few MP's are charged criminally, just bylaw violations unless underaged, drugs or illegals found.

 

[Arfur]

Some bylaws state that there can't be a lock on the massage parlour room door. Pickering's for instance.

 

[Dave in Phoenix]

Yes other bylaws also say no locks... so we have a basic conflict between bylaws and being private to comply with criminal laws.

It seems in most cities the police do not want to make it an issue, since rarely have there been any bawdy charges brought just bylaw issues. In the Toronto recent raid they went out of their way to make it clear it was not going after consenting adult activities only underaged, trafficed, illigals and licensing.

Until there is police activity against MP for handjobs, I think its pretty safe. And the reason the police aren't going after MP's is because they know the charges will probably just be dropped as they have been in some of the strip club raids.

 

[gala]

D
Dave: Incall is clearly illegal in Canada. The police or the prosecutors have apparently adopted a policy of not charging or prosecuting these cases. That's nice, but that doesn't make it any less of a crime: were they to decide to prosecute you, assuming they could prove the facts, you would be convicted. The most a judge would do for you is grant you an "absolute discharge" instead of a sentence.

It's nice that people aren't being charged and prosecuted, but it's really not the same thing as decriminalizing it. Having all sorts of crimes defined that almost everyone is guilty of, and then selectively enforcing them is a form of persecution. It's how former communist-bloc nations controlled their citizenry while keeping up the appearance of a fair court: they locked people away in gulags for crimes they really DID commit--just, so did everyone else.

I agree with the previous poster: Either the police should enforce the law entirely, or the law should be removed from the books. If it's a bad law we ought not to have it; if it's worth having it's worth enforcing. If we're afraid that any change in the law would be for the worse than we should just be happy that in Canada at least outcall is legal.

 

[Douggk]

Gee Dave: I dont want to upset your day, but there have been plenty of MP's charged and convicted criminally of bawdy house charges for handjobs--its called an extra service. I know of quite a few girls. The reason you dont here about them is because they arent working in the business anymore. They lose their liscence, gain a criminal record--its impossible to keep working. I know you mean well , but the bawdy house law can really be used at all MP's and they can all be shut down if the cops want to.
Interested in finding some of these cases? Do a search under courts data bases for bawdy houses. You will find the status of many convictions in each city in Canada. You can also find many escort convictions as well, so they may be somewhat legal--doing outcalls, but if the cops set the girls up in a hotel room, then they face charges as well.

 

[Dave in Phoenix]

D
Dave: Incall is clearly illegal in Canada. If we're afraid that any change in the law would be for the worse than we should just be happy that in Canada at least outcall is legal.

Yes obviously incall is illegal in Canada, although rarely enforced. And yes at least you have legal outcall. But from what I read from Canadian sources the momentum is to eliminate or modify bawdy from the 1800s especially since more and more Canadians realize that safe legal incalls are far better than on the streets both for neighborhoods and the providers after so many killings of street hookers.

 

[Dave in Phoenix]

Gee Dave: I dont want to upset your day, but there have been plenty of MP's charged and convicted criminally of bawdy house charges for handjobs--its called an extra service. I know of quite a few girls. Interested in finding some of these cases? Do a search under courts data bases for bawdy houses. You will find the status of many convictions in each city in Canada.

Actually I have and been monitoring Canadian board for about 10 years and have never heard of a massage provider being convicted of a bawdy house violation for only doing a handjob. Of course I may be wrong, I'd love you to refer me to websites with such cases, but since I've neve seen one reported at least that I recall, it seems very rare.

I see alot of these reports, of busts with charges dropped such as:

January 09, 2003 Calgary woman not guilty on bawdy house charge
The woman accused of operating a common bawdy house out of her Canmore massage parlour was found not guilty in Canmore Provincial Court yesterday (Jan. 8). Provincial Court Judge John Reilly declared Minh Thi Nguyen not guilty based on insufficient evidence provided by the Crown prosecutor. Nguyen owned and operated the Canmore Relaxation Massage Oriental Studio, formerly at 204 999 Bow Valley Trail. In his decision following the trial, Reilly said the Crown fell short of proving that Nguyen, who lives in Calgary, did keep a common bawdy house for the purpose of prostitution.

 

[Dave in Phoenix]

Gee Dave: I dont want to upset your day, but there have been plenty of MP's charged and convicted criminally of bawdy house charges for handjobs--its called an extra service.

Gee, you should call the Edmonton Police Dept and tell them they don't know the law!

The Edmonton Police say at
http://www.police.edmonton.ab.ca/Pages/Prostitution/PublicInfo/legal2.htm

"What is Legal?
The following acts relating to prostitution are not against the law:

Performing sexual services in a massage clinic may be illegal if the police can prove the clinic is a place which has as its purpose prostitution. If it is implied that a sex act is available but will cost the client extra and a discussion ensues about price for sexual services the masseuse and client are committing an illegal act (communication for the purpose of prostitution -- s. 213) [BOLD] unless the discussion occurs in a massage room. In that case, no illegal act has been committed."[/BOLD]

I have never had a massage gal offer me and charge for a handjob as an extra service. It is simply normal to include along with the extra fee that is paid for topless, nude, or nude-reverse all which are not violation of the Canadian Criminal Code (although may be licensing bylaw violations in some cities). I have never heard to word "handjob" from a body rub provider, yet it is always part of the massage. But it is not an "act" that is discussed for an extra price.

Likewise if done in a massage room it is not public, at least per the Edmonton Police.

I realize these issues are about communicating not bawdy. But it seems like you rent a massage room by the door fee just like a hotel room.

In another section they do indicate that if the massage parlour is frequently and habitually used for the purposes of prostitution, massage parlours can be prosecuted under the bawdy law.

So that leaves the "frequently and habitually used for the purpose of prostitution" issue. But there is no extra cost for the hj. And if the massage room is private for the purpose of communications, it there would seem to be an argument it would be private for the purpose of prostitution and therefore not subject to bawdy.

I have searched and searched and can not find any report where the Courts have convicted a massasge provider under bawdy for simply a hj in a body rub.

Many people think the 1850 bawdy restrictions should be abolished. It would be much safer for the provider to work out of her own home, or a commercial sex establishment, properly zoned and business licensed, then going to the customers home.

In general, Canadian police are paying progressively less attention to bawdy house violations and off-street prostitution in general and more on street prostitution (car sex) which understandably upsets neighborhoods. This public sex is far different than private consenting adult sexual services, for which there should be no legal barriers.

In Canada, prostitution law enforcement tends to be complaint driven. The complaints are predominantly about street prostitution, not incall (bawdy houses) or agencies.

Again just as in the recent Toronto bust, they clearly stated they were not looking at consenting adult sex (the bawdy issue), but under aged chilldred, licensing violations, and trafficed and illegals.

I am happy to be shown where I am wrong since my goal is always well reserached accurate reporting, but often many Canadians simply don't know their own laws (not addressed to you)

 

[Dave in Phoenix]

D
It's nice that people aren't being charged and prosecuted, but it's really not the same thing as decriminalizing it. Having all sorts of crimes defined that almost everyone is guilty of, and then selectively enforcing them is a form of persecution.

I agree and disagree...if no one is being charged it may not be worth the fight to decriminalize...on the other hand it would be nice to have the issue settled by changes to the Bawdy law.

And across Canada I realize some bawdy charges are being made so even if tossed out by the courts, there is still the burden financially and emotionally of being charged.

I wonder if any are being charged though if ALL that is going on is handjobs and not any "penetration" similar to the strip club Supreme Court decision...although under it "masturbation" is not protected in strip clubs which would be the same as a hand job.

Of course we all agree cops should be going after real crime with real victims instead of healthy sexual releases in a body run or incall.