Terri-Jean Bedford threatens to name names if C-36 passes
- Thread starter groggy
- Start date
And another thing: Bad laws are not respected and police tend to not enforce them ....... This is VERY TRUE ...... ALSO when the majority of the public is not liking the law & see it as sensless to appy ( Low public sentiment for a law ) then Police do not enforce vigorously. You hear time & time again Police Chief say apply enforcement based on community desires, standards & concerns. From all I read in the Media & hear ..... there is VERY LITTLE Liking of this C-36
They support the bill for various reasons. The application of the law ...... when needed to be applied ...... can be used to arrest for Human Trafficing & forced Prostitution. The Police like the old laws too & applied were & when needed. They did not in the past or say now they are going on a crazy crusade . This law makes things much like in the United States ..... look in U.S. They do not go on a crusade. They focus most on street prostitution . Plenty of thriving In-Calls , spas etc in most every mid size to large city in America. Just look on Backpage in any given city.
I have seen you mad and you still would not have lied about spending $500K on legal fees that were pro bono, would not have gotten yourself kicked out of a committee hearing or threaten to out your clients. Also, you do not feel the need to wear your work uniform to a senate hearing, TV interview, etc. You have class and tact and it has shown in every interview you have done. Holding a temper is not the issue with her. Not the only one anyway.same! flattered, thank you Femme.
I don't know that I would have held my temper in that room either, however. Just sayin'
YOU DO NOT READ MY THREADS CAREFULLY!!! ..... In several threads I mentioned that in U.S. guys respond to an ad , go to a hotel room & encounter an undercover posing as a S.P. They REQUIRE & use video/audio to get proof. That is why they set up in Hotel room. They just can't sit outside a s.p. apartment & arrest guys spending time with her
In Markham before the law was struck down by the SCC LE was in Hotel Parking lots questioning potential clients. Prior to the SCC ruling in Vaughan they successfully chased out massage parlors. Charges, raids etc... have been on hold because of the SCC ruling. This all comes to an end when the new law is enacted if enacted in today's present form.
Was at East Beaver Creek the night the cops where shutting all the MPs down, lots of cops and a police motor home. I went to a MP around the back of the plaza for my last massage in that area.
Driving around the area now, and there seems to be almost more MPs in some plazas.
I ALREADY said they can stop & question. MUCH easier in Hotel parking lot. Regardless ..... they can ask BUT you do not need to answer & without specific evidence they cannot arrest. Spas are LICENCED & Open to THE PUBLIC !!! NOT the same as private home. Waaay harder for search warrant into private home. Plus 2 people in a home having sex proves nothing. 2 people having sex in a SPA means violation of municipal laws & SPA licence agreement!!!! TOTALLY DIFFERENT You know what???? Sounds like if you guys are THAT WORRIED .... spend a few dollars .... Get some real legal advice. I have on many occasions & done giving to those who do not trust or believe me.
Your posts would be easier to read if you didn't use CAPS and over punctuation so often.
Because the Calgary Police Chief is not the sharpest knife in the drawer, to be as polite about it as I can. He can enforce all he wants, but at the end of the day, he is forced to bend to [elected] political will. If he doesn't, his budget might be affected or he could get the sack. It costs money to prosecute, and there will be little in return in fines, and certainly little benefit to society when it concerns consenting adults behind closed doors. At the same time, there is less money and resources for enforcing and prosecuting laws that are of much better benefit to society.
If you get intercepted by police in a parking lot, just say
You: 'Is there a problem, constable?'
Cop: 'No, I just want to ask you what you were doing inside'
You: 'I have nothing to say, constable; am I being detained or under arrest?' (don't lie or they are going to corner you)
Cop: 'No'
You: 'Can I go now? Have a nice day, constable'
If he says that you are being detained, you have the right to remain silent. You have the right not to incriminate yourself. You can incriminate yourself even if you've done nothing wrong. What you say will be used against you in a court of law, in spite of any assurances they may give you, especially if they try to make a deal with you, and it will cost you a pile more money for your lawyer (at $700 an hour) to extricate you from the mess you created for yourself. Police are not your friends; their job is to enforce the law, and they will use every trick in the book to get an arrest and conviction.
Very good advice and I hope most are taking notes because unfortunately some of us will get caught in the snare of this ridiculous bill.
A bawdy house is defined as "any place that is kept or occupied or resorted to by one or more persons for the purpose of prostitution or the practice of acts of indecency".
A hotel room can fit the definition.
A bawdy house would no longer be a bawdy house when it stops being used by sex workers for prostitution.
Technically, is becomes a bawdy house when the same sex-worker uses it for work at least twice, or the person who rents it allows more than one sex-worker to use it. However, a hotel room is considered a private dwelling from the time you rent it, so they need a search warrant to enter forcibly... unless you allow them in yourself.
Cops just don't go around getting search warrants just to check up on what goes on in hotel rooms. They might go to that length if they got a complaint and get a search warrant to enter. Given it takes days to get the cops to show up if someone breaks into your home, why would they speed over with all sirens blaring, on the say-so of some busybody who has too much time on their hands. A bust would follow an investigation into a location that had a history of community complaints of street nuisances. Hotel management are also not in the habit of driving away business.
Also, his official position on the law does not necessarily reflect his objective as chief of police. I know he is a religious man, and I imagine that his credential as chief of police are mostly used to make his his moral opinions seem legitimate
If the client rents the room it is considered his private place and not a bawdy house. If it was rented by the escort it could be considered an incall place. On the other hand they could still have questioned you as you walk out by claiming to investigate underage or trafficked workers. In that case I don't know. Refusing to answer could be considered obstruction.
Absolutely not!
You have the right to remain silent. It's a fundamental principle of Canadian law. You can remain silent and it's not supposed to affect your defense, since the burden of proof is with the police/crown. You have the right to not incriminate yourself. You don't even have to testify in court as an accused, if you don't want to, although it would be foolish if you don't want to contradict what the Crown had to say against you.
If you get intercepted by police in a parking lot, just say
You: 'Is there a problem, constable?'
Cop: 'No, I just want to ask you what you were doing inside'
You: 'I have nothing to say, constable; am I being detained or under arrest?' (don't lie or they are going to corner you)
Cop: 'No'
You: 'Can I go now? Have a nice day, constable'
