Sorry, I just noticed that you have. But for some reason you made them possessive rather than plural.
My considered opinion on the legality of HJ's and PM's...
- Thread starter Perry Mason
- Start date
What I would like to know, how do judges determine:Perry Mason said:
1. "standards of tolerance in the community"/"what the community would tolerate"; or
2. "the degree of harm that may flow from such exposure?"
Do they survey the community or do they rely on experts or opinions of peers etc.?
Re: Re: My considered opinion on the legality of HJ's and PM's...
Similarly, the judge will review the rules set out in the legislation, common law and associated jurisprudence. He or she will then decide about what the result should be in a case by applying the law to the 'findings of fact'.
In terms of the philosophy of law, this means that the judge makes what is called a synthetic a priori (or prescriptive) judgement which though related to values, is not derived from a mere description of the values that may prevail in society.
Hence, for example, a judge may refuse to give any credence to those who reduce all questions about indecency to matters of taste (as in the Tremblay judgement).
Appeal courts normally accept the trial judge's finding of fact and focus primarily on the trial judge's reasoning in order to determine if he/she made a mistake. If a mistake is found, then this is called an "error in law".
The judges rarely survey the community, but they do take heed of any surveys brought to their attention as well as expert opinion. But since factual evidence can vary widely, the judge has to DECIDE what facts of the case are relevant to the law; this is called a 'finding of fact'. It is a decision made by the judge and is not derived from all the facts presented.Sargon said:
Similarly, the judge will review the rules set out in the legislation, common law and associated jurisprudence. He or she will then decide about what the result should be in a case by applying the law to the 'findings of fact'.
In terms of the philosophy of law, this means that the judge makes what is called a synthetic a priori (or prescriptive) judgement which though related to values, is not derived from a mere description of the values that may prevail in society.
Hence, for example, a judge may refuse to give any credence to those who reduce all questions about indecency to matters of taste (as in the Tremblay judgement).
Appeal courts normally accept the trial judge's finding of fact and focus primarily on the trial judge's reasoning in order to determine if he/she made a mistake. If a mistake is found, then this is called an "error in law".
Re: community standard
I don't know how much it will cost but a men's rights group could be organized to raise some money to defray the cost to the defendant.
So couldn't the defence attorny have a reputable polling organization perform a survey using questions relevant to the case and present the results to the judge? Assuming off course that the results are favourable.Aircraft said:
I don't know how much it will cost but a men's rights group could be organized to raise some money to defray the cost to the defendant.
Sure she/he could, and rights movementscould -as could anyone- help to defray the cost. But this information would still have to be filtered through the procedural judicial process and polling provides, in itself little more than an estimate of the quantity of opinion rather than an estimate of its quality. Without supplemental scientific research it still wouln't have much clout in itself. And there is,of course, the well known problem of three types of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
In the end, no amount of descriptive analysis can entail what the judgement "ought" to be. But it is still a very important component to be taken into account in the course of judicial reasoning. The Supreme Court might have had reason to pause in their reasoning about the Communicating Law had they had the benefit of subsequent studies which clearly showed that that law simply made things considerably worse for the prostitution trade.
In the end, no amount of descriptive analysis can entail what the judgement "ought" to be. But it is still a very important component to be taken into account in the course of judicial reasoning. The Supreme Court might have had reason to pause in their reasoning about the Communicating Law had they had the benefit of subsequent studies which clearly showed that that law simply made things considerably worse for the prostitution trade.
A clarification...
No, it's not about polls or determining the personal opinions or preferences of members of the community, or even the majority of them... even if that were possible, which it is not unless in a compulsory vote in which all must participate.
It is about evaluating the impact of the activity on the community in terms of the perceived apprehension of harm to the community or its members. That is a totally different question in which the expertise of sociologists, sexologists, psychologists, etc. could be helpful -- but not polls.
To quote the Supreme Court of Canada, again: "The courts must determine as best they can what the community would tolerate others being exposed to on the basis of the degree of harm that may flow from such exposure..."
That is why I asked the question before: Where is the harm to the community of a HJ or PM that takes place in private between consenting adults, even if money is somehow involved?
And remember, we are talking here about "indecency," not "prostitution."
Perry
No, it's not about polls or determining the personal opinions or preferences of members of the community, or even the majority of them... even if that were possible, which it is not unless in a compulsory vote in which all must participate.
It is about evaluating the impact of the activity on the community in terms of the perceived apprehension of harm to the community or its members. That is a totally different question in which the expertise of sociologists, sexologists, psychologists, etc. could be helpful -- but not polls.
To quote the Supreme Court of Canada, again: "The courts must determine as best they can what the community would tolerate others being exposed to on the basis of the degree of harm that may flow from such exposure..."
That is why I asked the question before: Where is the harm to the community of a HJ or PM that takes place in private between consenting adults, even if money is somehow involved?
And remember, we are talking here about "indecency," not "prostitution."
Perry
Re: A clarification...
Take it all the way to the Supreme Court ... and win!
Don't try and convince us, try and convince a Judge!Perry Mason said:
Take it all the way to the Supreme Court ... and win!
In fact there have been many attempts to change the law in Canada. The Fraser Commission some 20 or so years ago advocated legalizing a "cottage industry" of brothels much like some european countries; many large municipalities such as Vancouver, Edmonton Winnipeg and even Toronto have advocated the same thing. But either Parliament has balked at the suggestion or the Courts have declared such advocacy as "ultra vires". Consequently, Canada remains with a system very comparable to the rest of the world. And in countries such as Australia and New Zealand, the experiment with legalized brothels etc. has proven to be even worse than the system that preceeded it.HaywoodJabloemy said:
The country with the most success is Sweden where prostitutes are not charged at all. The customers,however,are charged and can face serious sentences.
OK Perry, I will take a stab at this. And please everyone who reads this I am going to play devil's advocate. I don't really believe any of the things I am about to write, I am trying to help Perry analyze his situation and so I'm going to try and post the opposing view regardless of what my own view is.
Why is a HJ harmful?
(1) It's not just the exposure of the client to the HJ, it's the exposure of the MPA as well. It demeans her to have to perform this service, rather than just giving an ordinary massage. Women who might not otherwise work in this job are forced into performing a degrading service just to earn a living. This will seriously harm people at the margins. New immigrants, poor women, maybe even runaway kids who can't otherwise find a decent living will be forced into this horrible line of work and they will suffer psychological harm. (Remember my disclaimer above please! Sociologists at universities etc. likely have studies to show this kind of things, especially nazi-feminist sorts, which it seems to me there are many of in sociological circles.)
(2) It demeans the institution of marriage when this service is extended to married men or performed by a married woman. It's tantamount to publically condoning adultery. People who might otherwise try and resolve their problems with their wives instead find it easier to go outside the marriage for sexual satisfaction. (This could be the main argument from church groups in the community.) It's also demeaning to marriage when the MPA is herself a married woman, and to pretend that only single women could do this job is simply untenable--it has to be acceptable for anyone to do it.
(3) Men and women who participate in these actions come to have degrading attitudes towards women, which carry over into other aspects of their lives. The men may treat their wives worse, and may treat co-workers at work worse. Worse, since the guy can get what he wants for $50 he will be discouraged from developing a healthy relationship with a real woman, and he will wind up isolated and alone, probably eventually violent and criminal for his lack of a healthy family life. The women may come to have a negative view of women's place in society, not just their own. (Sociologists tend to be pretty lefty/moral in my experience and so they can likely dig up biased studies that show this is true.)
(4) Since these places are unregulated and unlikely clean and safe the spread of disease is promoted. People who engage in this act carry diseases home to to their families and others. (This seems like the most BS of all, but I bet people will advance it.) Especially the PM because it's penetration inside the body, and likely to lead to all kinds of foul diseases and plagues. These strain the hospital system and also put others in the community at risk, especially the poor unsuspecting wife who continues to have a sexual relationship with her infected husband.
(5) This sort of degrading activity ruins a neighbourhood by attracting less than savoury people. The area around the MPA will probably wind up falling into ruin, harming the whole commujnity. (To refute this, I think in Barrie there is an MPA right next to the constituency office of a local MPP. At least there's a massage parlour there, dunno what services are available from it. The other side will show the concentration of MPA's in "bad areas' as evidence.)
(6) HJ's will lead naturally to other forms of prostitution, and that starts with "P" which rhymes with "T" and that stands for trouble. Big trouble. If you condone the exchange of money for any sexual service where does it end? Next you'll be coming in here and telling the court that there's nothing wrong with anal sex in public in front of children.
(7) Once they know they can get rich giving HJ's in the city how are you going to keep them down on the farm? Women will be drawn by money into this degrading profession away from more productive uses of their labour. Society is harmed by this inefficiency, this waste of the women's productivity.
(8) If a man is caught by his wife doing this it will tear the marriage apart. If there are children, they will be irreperably harmed by the tensions in the home or by the resulting separation. By encouraging married men to cheat children are put in harms ways. Society is harmed by that, and ought to be against it.
So please don't throw rocks. I don't really think there's anything wrong with any of this, I just want to give Perry some ideas what the other side might say so he can prepare a good refutation.
Why is a HJ harmful?
(1) It's not just the exposure of the client to the HJ, it's the exposure of the MPA as well. It demeans her to have to perform this service, rather than just giving an ordinary massage. Women who might not otherwise work in this job are forced into performing a degrading service just to earn a living. This will seriously harm people at the margins. New immigrants, poor women, maybe even runaway kids who can't otherwise find a decent living will be forced into this horrible line of work and they will suffer psychological harm. (Remember my disclaimer above please! Sociologists at universities etc. likely have studies to show this kind of things, especially nazi-feminist sorts, which it seems to me there are many of in sociological circles.)
(2) It demeans the institution of marriage when this service is extended to married men or performed by a married woman. It's tantamount to publically condoning adultery. People who might otherwise try and resolve their problems with their wives instead find it easier to go outside the marriage for sexual satisfaction. (This could be the main argument from church groups in the community.) It's also demeaning to marriage when the MPA is herself a married woman, and to pretend that only single women could do this job is simply untenable--it has to be acceptable for anyone to do it.
(3) Men and women who participate in these actions come to have degrading attitudes towards women, which carry over into other aspects of their lives. The men may treat their wives worse, and may treat co-workers at work worse. Worse, since the guy can get what he wants for $50 he will be discouraged from developing a healthy relationship with a real woman, and he will wind up isolated and alone, probably eventually violent and criminal for his lack of a healthy family life. The women may come to have a negative view of women's place in society, not just their own. (Sociologists tend to be pretty lefty/moral in my experience and so they can likely dig up biased studies that show this is true.)
(4) Since these places are unregulated and unlikely clean and safe the spread of disease is promoted. People who engage in this act carry diseases home to to their families and others. (This seems like the most BS of all, but I bet people will advance it.) Especially the PM because it's penetration inside the body, and likely to lead to all kinds of foul diseases and plagues. These strain the hospital system and also put others in the community at risk, especially the poor unsuspecting wife who continues to have a sexual relationship with her infected husband.
(5) This sort of degrading activity ruins a neighbourhood by attracting less than savoury people. The area around the MPA will probably wind up falling into ruin, harming the whole commujnity. (To refute this, I think in Barrie there is an MPA right next to the constituency office of a local MPP. At least there's a massage parlour there, dunno what services are available from it. The other side will show the concentration of MPA's in "bad areas' as evidence.)
(6) HJ's will lead naturally to other forms of prostitution, and that starts with "P" which rhymes with "T" and that stands for trouble. Big trouble. If you condone the exchange of money for any sexual service where does it end? Next you'll be coming in here and telling the court that there's nothing wrong with anal sex in public in front of children.
(7) Once they know they can get rich giving HJ's in the city how are you going to keep them down on the farm? Women will be drawn by money into this degrading profession away from more productive uses of their labour. Society is harmed by this inefficiency, this waste of the women's productivity.
(8) If a man is caught by his wife doing this it will tear the marriage apart. If there are children, they will be irreperably harmed by the tensions in the home or by the resulting separation. By encouraging married men to cheat children are put in harms ways. Society is harmed by that, and ought to be against it.
So please don't throw rocks. I don't really think there's anything wrong with any of this, I just want to give Perry some ideas what the other side might say so he can prepare a good refutation.
Actually, a PM is the same as an AM; the only difference is that it takes place in the afternoon.
Apart from your unecessary mea culpa in your last paragraph, this is one of the most insightful posts I have read so far -but I am a newbie, so maybe there are more gems to be found.gala said:
Yes. But when a PM occurs very early in the AM and is a continuation of something that started on the prior PM, it is stll a PM even though it takes place in the AM.Aircraft said:
Perry
G
Gord's Bro
Yes, but when a PM occurs very early in AM, even though started late in PM , it is still PM in the Pacific.Perry Mason said:
No rocks, but isn't this kind of off to the side of what we were discussing...to wit, whether masturbation of another (presumably to orgasm) or prostate massage (presumably to orgasm) are illegal.gala said:
Gala's post serves up the common sociological reasons why prostitution is bad, but as with most things of this type it is mostly opinion, certainly not fact. I have a hard time believing that a judge would actually entertain these arguments in this kind of case.
BTW Perry, Aircraft and Gala, I really enjoyed reading these posts on this topic. Well done gentlemen!
Perry, WRT to your client, is there any kind of legal defence fund - frankly I wouldn't mind making a contribution. PM if there is some way that I can assist.
I wrote about this in another thread: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=675325#post675325Mr. K said:
If anyone is really interested in helping to create a legal defence fund either for my present client or anyone else that may be prosecuted in the future, please declare yourself -- here or by PM.
Perry
