How does the new law affect people who barter with sex workers?

[Ms.FemmeFatale]

Im in the industry (photographer) and usually the ladies suggest sex instead of payment. can i go to jail now if i accept?

Yes.

For people like us, we have to show that we are working for them as any other professional. Therefore rates for escorts and mainstream clients must be the same and within the realm of reasonable. You will be considered to be exploiting them for sexual services. Even if they suggest the bartering.

Protect your ass and get paid in cash.

There's the nub, I'd say. If there was 'consideration' whether monetary or in kind, then there would be 'income', which must be reported and taxed. That's what makes the sex acts come under C36.

However, people—even professional photgraphers—do take pictures that others ask them to with no expectation of payment, and people—even prostitutes—do have sex without expectation of payment. If that's what happened, then clearly neither the CRA nor the Crown Prosecutor has any business with you.

Given the professions involved their burden of proof would seem somewhat easier than your task of reminding the judge/jury of the reasonable doubt and that you could be just good friends doing friendly favours. But it's interesting to consider if she was an actor and made the same offer, or if you always charged everyone, no exceptions, but not her because she was your wife. GF …?

Like almost all the hypotheticals, it can be read—and can go—either way until a definitive Court decision dictates the way such cases get decided from then on. Laws that criminalize ordinary matters such as these and yet can go either way are stupid and abominable. But they get votes.

Good luck.

While that is true, people like us do that for family, close friends, etc. If the OP has no information other then escort name and hotel location, it is hard to prove that you are doing as a favor freebie to a friend.

 

[KBear]

If the girl is not happy with the quality or timely delivery of the pictures, the girl can now go to the police with immunity and report the guy and have him charged. There have been a few Toronto photographers charged with sexual assault, now it will be much easier for the girls to come forward.

Have heard stories from the girls that guys are saying they normally charge $1,000+ for a photo shoot. Guys charging $1,000+ for pictures had better be well known, show up with substantial equipment, a makeup artist, and have a nice location.

 

[Marla]

I have a fabulous female photographer who takes a lot of MPA's pix as well. She has props, jewelry and parphernalia to enhance the shoot and is under $500 for 150 shots that she narrows down to 15. PM me for details and I will furnish my website details so you can see if you like the kinds of pix she does. I am not promoting her, I just think women would benefit by knowing of her.

 

[thirdcup]

As far as bartering for escort services goes, we can learn from the Japanese.
They love playing Pachinko, which is like a pinball machine where the object is to accumulate points. However, gambling is against the law in Japan. So points are redeemed for prizes, which they can sell back to the House for cash.

The history of bowling has a similar workaround. Nine pin bowling was made illegal, so people added one pin to make it legal. The government then figured out this was a battle not worth fighting.

 

[MadonnaLove]

I understand. The photo in the footer of your post doesn't have a head. And according you what you tell us, that's where your money maker is.
At least the guy could have included your head. I mean, now how do we even know this is you?
I think it's time you hired a female photographer.

I want a female photographer but most that i have asked are not in my area ……….all my pics are me 100%……I take them my self on my webcam ………infact the picture in my signature …….i had to run to the wall in heels on a 3 second timer so i was lucky to get my whole body in …….for an amateur i think i do all right ……….but i would love pro pics done one day

 

[Smallcock]

There have been a few Toronto photographers charged with sexual assault.

I agree that accepting sex instead of payment has always been risky business.

Unless you're shooting porn, it's best to take cash payment. Once you have sex, the SP can make any bogus claim that you had sex without her consent, and your life is over.

 

[GPIDEAL]

The law reads "material benefit", not cash or currency. So yes, you would be off to jail just as if you had taken cash.

Not quite.

286.2 (1) Everyone who receives a financial or other material benefit,

The material benefit provision relates to those who RECEIVE, not pay.

However, 'consideration' which is the law's word for payment by a john, can mean cash or other thing of value.

 

[GPIDEAL]

this just irks me cause its so hard to find a photographer that is professional and that doesn't want sex in exchange for payment !

Cobra didn't ask for sex as payment.

It was offered to him as payment.

 

[GPIDEAL]

How does the law affect John's who barter for sex?

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/john-offers-chicken-dinner-for-sex-687432

Besides being U.S. law, he offered food and cash for payment. The OP says the SP offered him sex for payment, after he performed his photography service. (Not quite the same).

 

[GPIDEAL]

to clarify, i want to get paid, i show up expecting to get $200 for the 2 hour shoot. Its them that want to offer sex instead of paying. I dont show up asking for that. Im open to that of course if thats what they want to do.

If your intent was to obtain sexual services in the first place, I would think that doing the photo shoot before hand is equivalent to handing over an envelope prior to a session.

In your case, SP offers to buy your services for a fee, which you agree. Then you perform those services. She does not pay you your standard fee but still owes you, leaving you with an account receivable (AR).

Then she makes a second offer to sell her own services, in return for you extinguishing her debt (your AR) with you. You accept this second offer.

It is the last transaction which gets you in trouble under C-36 because you obtained sexual services for 'consideration', being the satisfaction of her debt with you.


P.S. 'Consideration' can be money or anything of value/or acceptable, given up.

 

[oldjones]

Cobra didn't ask for sex as payment.

It was offered to him as payment.

If the sex was payment for the pix, then they weren't free; that would make them a 'consideration' for the sex if he accepted it. It would be hard to imagine how these two parties would ever be caught and charged for this one act, except as part of a larger operation, but it would then be a matter for the two sides to argue and the judge/jury to decide.

Sorta like the never-to-be-settled question of whether that tip is a free expression of your gratitude, or the undefined but expected quid pro quo for that service.

 

[fuji]

The most likely way this leads to charges is if there is a dispute between the two parties. Perhaps the escort is unhappy with the work, or demands additional services for no additional charge, and the dispute becomes heated.

In such a situation the escort may self report the transaction to the police. Unlikely if the escort is stable and sensible but we have seen more than one escort flame out spectacularly on terb, so not every escort is stable and sensible.

Judgment call for the photographer.

 

[GPIDEAL]

If the sex was payment for the pix, then they weren't free; that would make them a 'consideration' for the sex if he accepted it. It would be hard to imagine how these two parties would ever be caught and charged for this one act, except as part of a larger operation, but it would then be a matter for the two sides to argue and the judge/jury to decide.

Sorta like the never-to-be-settled question of whether that tip is a free expression of your gratitude, or the undefined but expected quid pro quo for that service.

My quote that you replied to was my response (post #30) to Madonna's insinuation that the photographer exacted sex for payment, if the OP's account to the contrary is accurate.

Accordingly, the NEW offer of sex by the SP was to satisfy a debt incurred per the original contract, not a direct payment for the pix in the first place.

If he agreed to this NEW offer, then he obtained sex for consideration and technically broke the law. (She basically sold him a session after the first deal).


I think if the initial photo-shoot contract provided for a 'payment in kind', then perhaps it is legal, but God knows if the prosecution will buy that, or if they just look at the end result (that he obtained sexual services for a fee).

 

[fuji]

I think if the initial photo-shoot contract provided for a 'payment in kind', then perhaps it is legal

Not a chance. It may be more difficult to prove but it certainly isn't legal.

 

[oldjones]

You're right fuji. What makes it an illegal transaction is that their is a quid a pro and a quo. One of them is sex, and one is photos, and pro is the exchange of one for the other. If you can prove there was only two of the three, you* get off.

Never mind before or after, any sort of 'contract', dooms you if it says there's an exchange (the pro/for) of sex for anything, or anything for sex.
---------------
If 'you' are positioned as the sex-consumer, you also have to be aware that the sex never has to be on offer, nor delivered for you to have overstepped the legal line. Don't ask. Though this case was her doing the offering (like the ladies on the street), since she made it clear it was an exchange, the only safety-net left is not getting caught.

 

[GPIDEAL]

Not a chance. It may be more difficult to prove but it certainly isn't legal.

I should have said that 'maybe' it would be legal, but let's say perhaps a slim chance, but I wouldn't bet on our government taking that view (like I said, they probably would just look a the end result).

 

[GPIDEAL]

You're right fuji. What makes it an illegal transaction is that their is a quid a pro and a quo. One of them is sex, and one is photos, and pro is the exchange of one for the other. If you can prove there was only two of the three, you* get off.

Never mind before or after, any sort of 'contract', dooms you if it says there's an exchange (the pro/for) of sex for anything, or anything for sex.
---------------
If 'you' are positioned as the sex-consumer, you also have to be aware that the sex never has to be on offer, nor delivered for you to have overstepped the legal line. Don't ask. Though this case was her doing the offering (like the ladies on the street), since she made it clear it was an exchange, the only safety-net left is not getting caught.

Yes. Ultimately, 'any sort of contract' involving such an exchange is doomed.

 

[lomotil]

The law reads "material benefit", not cash or currency. So yes, you would be off to jail just as if you had taken cash.

This bill C36 really throws a wrench into the works it seems. What is stopping any jilted lover, vexed and vengeful mistress, spurned kept woman, sugarbabe etc from using the new law for extortion or criminal prosecution? Evidence of bartered gifts, payment of rent, trips, meals , all with likely paper trails and video evidence with respect to comings and goings all might come into play. Cash only transactions without a receipt for services rendered leaves no trail. This is really the anatomy of melancholy. Of course income splitting which could be viewed as being on the same side of the coin would be conveniently exempt. What a retrograde cocksucker this guy is who currently occupies 24 Sussex Drive.

 

[oldjones]

This bill C36 really throws a wrench into the works it seems. What is stopping any jilted lover, vexed and vengeful mistress, spurned kept woman, sugarbabe etc from using the new law for extortion or criminal prosecution? Evidence of bartered gifts, payment of rent, trips, meals , all with likely paper trails and video evidence with respect to comings and goings all might come into play. Cash only transactions without a receipt for services rendered leaves no trail. This is really the anatomy of melancholy. Of course income splitting which could be viewed as being on the same side of the coin would be conveniently exempt. What a retrograde cocksucker this guy is who currently occupies 24 Sussex Drive.

Bingo! But surely that was one of the first defects you noted in this law.

Phase Two is OHG's income splitting which gives a sizable tax-benefit to those whose considerations for sexual services are sheltered by a marriage contract. But if that isn't your reality …. Well then, it's all in how you look at that dinner, excursion, gift or whatever isn't it? And no law says people can't change their minds.

 

[GPIDEAL]

This bill C36 really throws a wrench into the works it seems. What is stopping any jilted lover, vexed and vengeful mistress, spurned kept woman, sugarbabe etc from using the new law for extortion or criminal prosecution? Evidence of bartered gifts, payment of rent, trips, meals , all with likely paper trails and video evidence with respect to comings and goings all might come into play. Cash only transactions without a receipt for services rendered leaves no trail. This is really the anatomy of melancholy. Of course income splitting which could be viewed as being on the same side of the coin would be conveniently exempt. What a retrograde cocksucker this guy is who currently occupies 24 Sussex Drive.

Bill C-36 does not immunize unscrupulous SPs against the offence of extortion. Assuming you had evidence that she was blackmailing you, it might be mutual-assured destruction.

That being said, there's more risk with sugar babies, etc., exactly like you say. We discussed this before, since they are not professional sex workers, and may turn against you over money or even jealousy.

In any event, even if all your transactions were done in trace-less cash, mere communications retained by said Sugar-Baby could be used against you too, and it wouldn't make a difference.