They have 12 adds up on LL right now.
They handler said they have 80 ladies available in the Vancouver metropolitan area.
But there are no reviews or info available.
Is Entrapment a Concern in BC?
- Thread starter ludovico123
- Start date
They handler said they have 80 ladies available in the Vancouver metropolitan area.
But there are no reviews or info available.
Peter McKay wasn't concerned with either logic or passing a constitutional test. He was simply pandering to his right wing base by doing an end run around the SCC decision. He pretty much re-established the sections that were struck down using new words and a different approach.In response to SCC decision on Canada v. Bedford, in which SCC declared prostitution law unconstitutional, Harper government introduced and enacted Bill C-36 in Sept. 2014, which amended Canada's Criminal Code to the effect that it is illegal to buy sex but not illegal to sell it. This was based on what is often called the Nordic Model.
Apparently, the legislation was a compromise and designed to pass the constitutional test and touted as protecting providers.
So, yes, since Sept. 2014, you ladies can legally sell apple but men cannot legally buy apple.
I fail to understand the then Justice Minister Peter McKay's logic behind this legislation.
The current court case in London Ontario will be interesting.
No one has mentioned Operation Northern Spotlight that some of the more backward police departments join each year. They pose as clients then show up en mass to harass/offer help to independent SPs.
If the women were visited by a single discrete officer who paid his money, said his thing then left there might be some sympathy for the project. With no money (not even social time rates) paid, a big PR campaign afterwards and I expect lots of overtime paid to the officers I see this as an extremely abusive practice.
They do it in concert with the idiot Americans each year.
I would be happy to help any woman abused by this process with a law suit.
If the women were visited by a single discrete officer who paid his money, said his thing then left there might be some sympathy for the project. With no money (not even social time rates) paid, a big PR campaign afterwards and I expect lots of overtime paid to the officers I see this as an extremely abusive practice.
They do it in concert with the idiot Americans each year.
I would be happy to help any woman abused by this process with a law suit.
Last edited:
Entrapment and Careful Language
Entrapment is a tricky bit of law. For any given action by the police, whether or not the police have crossed the line so that you can use the defence of entrapment depends on what you were doing and where you were doing it when they did what they did.
If the police find you at random doing nothing relevant they have relatively little lee way before they cross the line and allow you to use the defence of entrapment.
On the other hand, if you respond to an ad offering services or crawl the curb chatting with all the ladies and then settle on a police officer offering those services they have far more lee way and it will be far more difficult to use the defence of entrapment. It is all gray area with no fixed points.
Then there is the ruse of an escort offering time and companionship without sexual services. This may work if the escort is offering dinner and dancing in a public place for $100/hr then finishes the evening leaving by herself in a cab but the disclaimers in the ad will be meaningless if the escort is offering an hour in her apartment for $400. Canadian judges are not idiots who believe whatever they read.
Private adult consensual relations for consideration are continuing in Canada generally without interference from the police because the police wisely choose not to interfere, but as the laws are now they could cause havoc. What they do depends largely or entirely on the choices of the local police chief or detachment commander. This is why it is so important that the laws be changed at the soonest opportunity. At present the police have far too much power to do harm.
None of this is meant as a criticism of the invitations provided by SPs who limit their offers to time and companionship. I believe this is all anyone should expect in any case. Just don’t think that such limited language provides any legal protection. It is only the whim of the police that presently protects this community. We are lucky in Vancouver and Victoria. Others are not so lucky.
Entrapment is a tricky bit of law. For any given action by the police, whether or not the police have crossed the line so that you can use the defence of entrapment depends on what you were doing and where you were doing it when they did what they did.
If the police find you at random doing nothing relevant they have relatively little lee way before they cross the line and allow you to use the defence of entrapment.
On the other hand, if you respond to an ad offering services or crawl the curb chatting with all the ladies and then settle on a police officer offering those services they have far more lee way and it will be far more difficult to use the defence of entrapment. It is all gray area with no fixed points.
Then there is the ruse of an escort offering time and companionship without sexual services. This may work if the escort is offering dinner and dancing in a public place for $100/hr then finishes the evening leaving by herself in a cab but the disclaimers in the ad will be meaningless if the escort is offering an hour in her apartment for $400. Canadian judges are not idiots who believe whatever they read.
Private adult consensual relations for consideration are continuing in Canada generally without interference from the police because the police wisely choose not to interfere, but as the laws are now they could cause havoc. What they do depends largely or entirely on the choices of the local police chief or detachment commander. This is why it is so important that the laws be changed at the soonest opportunity. At present the police have far too much power to do harm.
None of this is meant as a criticism of the invitations provided by SPs who limit their offers to time and companionship. I believe this is all anyone should expect in any case. Just don’t think that such limited language provides any legal protection. It is only the whim of the police that presently protects this community. We are lucky in Vancouver and Victoria. Others are not so lucky.
The City of Vancouver and VPD are on record (in the Vancouver Sun) as not caring about what goes on between two freely consenting adults and p4p.
This was announced at the time when the latest version of the Criminal Code dealing with prostitution was passed by the Harper government.
A few hundred lawyers wrote a collective open letter to the federal government claiming the revised law was still unconstitutional.
Human trafficking, coercion, luring, underage etc. are matters of concern worthy of LE attention and prosecution.
Otherwise, there have been no reported arrests of freely consenting adult engaging in p4p. No enforcement of a controversial part of criminal law.
Where the police have shown up at an micro-brothel apartment, it's been in the company of the landlord, to ensure public safety while the landlord tells the tenants to move out soon.
Or they have accompanied immigration authorities to collect foreign SPs working without a work visa, or over staying their tourist visa, for deportation.
No public law authority wants to start a series of court activities related to "regular" prostitution, ending up in the Supreme Court of Canada.
Everyone is waiting for the Trudeau government to at least decriminalize prostitution. After all, marijuana use is soon to be legalized and that's arguably more complex.
Decriminalization may take some time coming from a man who voiced the opinion the "prostitution is a violence towards women."
I recall about 10-12 yeas ago, there was a massive dragnet of about 70 massage parlours and spas, mainly in Richmond, Burnaby, Surrey, Coquitlam and a few in Vancouver.
It took place more or less simultaneously on one night. Johns, hookers, shop operators all were rounded up. Hit the news big-time. Not a single charge was laid.
Expect the possibility of stings for the serious stuff such as trafficking, underage etc. Paid encounters of the free adult consenting kind are not on the LE radar.
This was announced at the time when the latest version of the Criminal Code dealing with prostitution was passed by the Harper government.
A few hundred lawyers wrote a collective open letter to the federal government claiming the revised law was still unconstitutional.
Human trafficking, coercion, luring, underage etc. are matters of concern worthy of LE attention and prosecution.
Otherwise, there have been no reported arrests of freely consenting adult engaging in p4p. No enforcement of a controversial part of criminal law.
Where the police have shown up at an micro-brothel apartment, it's been in the company of the landlord, to ensure public safety while the landlord tells the tenants to move out soon.
Or they have accompanied immigration authorities to collect foreign SPs working without a work visa, or over staying their tourist visa, for deportation.
No public law authority wants to start a series of court activities related to "regular" prostitution, ending up in the Supreme Court of Canada.
Everyone is waiting for the Trudeau government to at least decriminalize prostitution. After all, marijuana use is soon to be legalized and that's arguably more complex.
Decriminalization may take some time coming from a man who voiced the opinion the "prostitution is a violence towards women."
I recall about 10-12 yeas ago, there was a massive dragnet of about 70 massage parlours and spas, mainly in Richmond, Burnaby, Surrey, Coquitlam and a few in Vancouver.
It took place more or less simultaneously on one night. Johns, hookers, shop operators all were rounded up. Hit the news big-time. Not a single charge was laid.
Expect the possibility of stings for the serious stuff such as trafficking, underage etc. Paid encounters of the free adult consenting kind are not on the LE radar.
This is an excellent article in the georgia str8: https://www.straight.com/news/10407...workers-nearly-decade-under-decriminalization
Susie has worked hard with the VPD to make things better for the most vulnerable sex trade workers.
And to answer the OP, no.
Susie has worked hard with the VPD to make things better for the most vulnerable sex trade workers.
And to answer the OP, no.
Thanks for posting this reply Angel. The review boards have been a good source of laughs over the years when people start talking about entrapment. Entrapment can only really be used if the police are putting someone under extreme duress to commit an illegal act they would have not done under normal circumstances. Less than 1% of all entrapment complaints are successful. It would be my first choice for a line of defence.That is not at all accurate. Entrapment is when an officer tricks you, usually with extreme measures, into doing something that you wouldn't do under normal circumstances. That absolutely does not apply to the scenario you are outlining.
Of course they will lie. It is their job to enforce the law. If multi year investigations could be foiled just because somebody asked them if they were a cop, there would be no point in having undercover officers.
In fact, asking if they are a cop is detrimental for you. You are basically saying that you know what you are going to do is illegal. No wiggle room for misunderstanding once you ask that.
As for touching, I am nearly positive that is ok as well. Officers who work undercover on drug operations often have to take the drugs to maintain their cover. I don't see how touching or being touched would be any different.
With all of that said, take a giant breath and relax. VPD has made it clear that they have better things to do with their resources than go after consenting adults. Different story if minors or exploitation/slavery is involved. But if you stick with people you know are of age, and are engaging in this line on their own free will, there is pretty much a zero percent chance of having an issue in Vancouver.
Susie has also also made things better for the least vulnerable and everyone in between. The laws we have now are a harmful threat to everyone in this community, not just the most vulnerable.This is an excellent article in the georgia str8: https://www.straight.com/news/10407...workers-nearly-decade-under-decriminalization
Susie has worked hard with the VPD to make things better for the most vulnerable sex trade workers.
And to answer the OP, no.
