A theoretical question. You walk into an MP and pay for a room. An MPA walks in and you ask for a bodyslide and do things that would qualify as sexual services. In mid-session the cops bust in and find you both in session. Seeing as no money has been given to the MPA for anything and nothing was specifically discussed about money.....Has anything illegal been done. Can you be charged. You never paid for a sexual service.
police raid question
- Thread starter Czar
- Start date
MPAsquared
www.musemassagespa.com
Go to the massage section & look back a few pages for a locked 9+ page thread about LE. This is answered in great detail in that thread. In short, no, depending where/which spa.
And what if the cop bursts into the room, you leap off the table, the officer sees your raging boner and fearing for his life pulls out his taser and zaps you until your hard-on goes flaccid? Huh? what then!?
If you're so worried about raids you're probably not going to enjoy the massage session anyway so why bother.
If you're so worried about raids you're probably not going to enjoy the massage session anyway so why bother.
This happened to me yesterday, tried calling Velvet girls (Markham) and the # was out of service, and their incall unit was dark, not sure what's going on there, visited last week using the same # and there's always an outside light on.
Anyways,,, having no luck there I decided to go visit one of my fave York mp's, even though I had previously decided not to, post c36. I was already paranoid, checking the lot for le and 2nd guessing myself whether this trip to my fave could be a big mistake. Continued despite my nervousness. Walk in and my fave mpa is not there, she was the only reason I was willing to risk this Beaver Creek adventure. After being told she's not there I was introduced to the "new girl", this girl was so hot, my old fave was soon forgotten.
Start the session, things are going great, total babe with a liberal attitude, turning into the best session, with the hottest girl (imho) I've met during my hobby career. So we're testing all items on the menu and get to the special of the day, it;s an expensive dish but well worth it. As I'm enjoying the last item on the menu I here the bell at the front door; and that's where things start to go south. The room I'm in has a monitor showing all the security cams, after I hear the entrance bell my focus changed from this hottie on top of me to the two guys coming in the front door together on the monitor. She 's not paying attention and doesn't care, she's busy, me I can't think of anything but that this is the cops and it's about to go down. Luckily I'm wrong and it's just a couple of customer that happen to come in at the same time, but by the time I realized there was nothing to worry about it had totally killed the mood for me.
Bottom line Matt is your right, I was so worried it killed what could have been my best session ever.
Does it really matter what the expectation is? Imagine this scenario as a comparison. A person suspected as a serial shoplifter enters a store and unknown to him, the police are waiting and watching. The suspect picks up an item and puts it in a bag that he brought into the store. While still in the store, he is arrested and charged. Is he guilty of shoplifting prior to exiting the store without paying?
Yes, it is well established in Canadian law that a reasonable expectation of payment incurs a debt.
If you go into a restaurant and eat some food, there is an expectation that you will pay for what you have eaten. If you go into a bar and drink some beer, you are expected to pay your tab and can be charged with fraud if you do not. If you go to a strip club and get some dances you are expected to pay. If you get a massage at a parlor, same thing.
You cannot go into an establishment that routinely provides a service for a fee and then claim you don't owe a payment for what you got there.
Your shoplifting example is different. In that case you have not yet left the store so you could reasonably be expected to pay for it still, or potentially put it back on the shelf. Certainly if you pick up an apple in a grocery store and eat it, there is a clear debt incurred, you are expected to pay for the apple before you leave the site.
To make this clear: future consideration is still consideration. You have an implicit contract to pay for the massage you are consuming.
Yes, if the Crown can convince a judge or jury that there is no reasonable possibility that he would stop at the cash, empty his bag an pay for the goods. Evidence such as the sign saying 'Leave all bags at the Cash', his prior record in that store and elsewhere, whether other customers also shopped without baskets or carts might be relevant.
Rather than deal with the uncertainty of such court proceedings, smarter security guys would wait until their suspect had left without paying. Even then he might manage to convince the triers of fact—the jury or judge—that he'd just forgotten to check out. And even if they thought he might be lying, as long as some doubt remained, he should be acquitted.
Point is, there's no sure thing except not to do 'it' in the first place, or not to get caught at all in the second. After that, it's a bit of crap shoot whether you can raise a doubt or the cops can beat you with certainties. But remember: Just as hobbyists and hookers find clever ways to achieve their purposes, so do cops and crowns. They don't have to do anything any particular way as long as they remove that last reasonable doubt. And you'll be in a public court while they try.
In this case, no. You would have to leave to the store, though you COULD be asked to remove the item and leave.
Fuji's example of the restaurant is more apt.
That said, a situation as described by the OP would be far too much of a headache in terms of prosecution and likely would not go all the way. As a scared straight tactic, it would probably be pretty effective.
Let's be clear: you could very well be charged. Heck, they could charge you with exceeding the speed limit.
The question is what would happen to those charges. Clearly, the charge of exceeding the speed limit would be dropped as there is no evidence to back up that charge (and the cop could get a slap on the wrist for laying such an unwarrented charge).
The cop and the prosecutor could decide to press the charge, and see if you'll plead out. If you intend to fight the charge, they'll have to provide evidence to a Judge to back up their claims. Sometimes that evidence is circumstantial, sometimes it's forensic.
If you didn't leave the store, the shoplifting charge is much less likely to result in a conviction. But that doesn't mean you can't be charged, or that witnesses can't testify against you.
Still, the fact you were charged could cause you trouble later in life, depending on what job you want to apply for, or where you want to travel.
So it's all entirely possible. But that doesn't make it likely. Just as voters have their own agenda when they demand politicans enact various laws, police are entrusted with an agenda when it comes to enforcing them. If there is a desire to remove a nuisance from a particular neighbourhood, charges could be pursued against anyone breaking the law until there is no longer a nuisance. It's usually a simple matter to track a suspected shoplifter until there is enough evidence to warrant a conviction. For other cases, the timing may be different.
When you take part in certain activities where you might be treading in territory difficult to justify before a Judge, make sure it's not in any way causing problems for those around: neighbours whose quality of life is impacted, businesses whose customers may shy away because of what goes on.
Correct. But if you paid for a massage, then that is what you expecting to pay for. Sex happens sometimes spontaneously in a multitude of situations. Just because one was paying for other services at the time doesn't mean that the spontaneity of the moment has broken the law.
Good luck with that argument. I think it might work in a cartoon court. Not likely to fly in a real one.
Your best hope is that the police don't enforce the law, and there's some hope for that in Toronto given the letters and statements that have been published lately But if (or more likely when, based on a complaint you may not be aware of) they do enforce it, arguments like that will fall flat in front of any actual judge or jury -- they aren't that stupid and they will consider circumstantial evidence in determining what you were actually paying for. If everybody on terb knows what's for sale, then for the exact same reason, so will the judge and jury. They don't need it to be spelled out. They can figure it out as easily as anyone here can.
It doesn't happen often but juries have sometimes acquitted a defendant because they thought the law was unjust.
Has happened a few times with drug laws. If we can get public sentiment shifted against the prostitution laws then it could happen as well. Which goes to the point that ultimately this will be fought in the court of public opinion and that will ultimately hopefully also produce a legislative solution.
I am not too hopeful though. A majority of Canadians think that prostitution is immoral. It's still heavily stigmatized. Those who think it should be legalized mostly think so because they buy into the argument that it puts the prostitute in danger to have a criminal element, and only a minority because they think (as presumably everyone here does) that there is nothing wrong with what consenting adults do in private for cash.
Plenty of people go to these places for just a massage. So if that was the intent to pay for and something else happened, then that is the argument. I only intend to pay for a massage when I go and so do many others.
I think a jury will have a hard time not laughing out loud, hearing a tale like that. Some people seem not to understand the difference between a possible doubt and a reasonable doubt. If your story fails the laugh test your goose is cooked.
The jury will determine what you really intended to do from the circumstances.
Also note with your tough to believe claim of spontaneous sex based on the MP's overwhelming attraction to you, she will certainly then be called as a witness and required to testify under oath as to her motives, how often she spontaneously had sex with people, and so on. And note that she faces no legal repercussions for saying she did it for the money, while if she is found to be lying she goes down herself on a perjury charge.
It's not against the law for the girl and client to be naked in the room, Bodyrubs in Toronto offer a Nude Reverse and clearly indicate the price of a Nude Reverse both on their website and at the front door, just go into Royal Spa, the prices are indicated right at the front desk, exception is Windsor where the girls cannot be naked in the room according to Windsor bylaw
Correct. But if the police can establish that there was more on offer then nudity, they can lay charges. I suspect the legal line gets drawn at genital stimulation but without a court ruling on that no one can say for sure.
How much effort the police will put in to charging individual clients in that sort of situation is the open question. Most likely they won't bother doing the investigative work that would be required to prove a sexual service was transacted, but if for some reason they were motivated to seek charges (say the girl was trafficked or underage) then they could gather evidence including from the girl herself and from undercover work and other circumstantial evidence.
Remember that c36 enables the police/crown to force the SP/MP onto the stand to testify as a witness against you (since she was present as a participant but not guilty of a crime she can be a witness). An extreme measure, probably not something they would do for a minor case, but if they thought they were unraveling a trafficking ring, or decided to go on a moral crusade, they could.
Wrong. Bodyrubs in Toronto are prohibited by the terms of their licenses from offering nude services of any kind and Royal Spa is not in Toronto; it's in Brampton.
