Bawdy House Laws

Canada's Criminal Code refers to a "common bawdy-house? and defines it as follows:"... a 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.?

It has commonly been said that incalls are illegal where as outcalls are legal. Looking at two scenarios:

Person A is a hobbiest who sees approx. 3 escorts per week in his own home.

Person B is an escort who sees approx. 3 clients per week in her own home.

Why would Person B be operating a bawdy house, but not Person A?

IANAL

Person B is using the location as a place of business might have something to do with it.

So safest bet is an outcall to a hotel/motel, and keep changing hotel/motel (or cities for that matter) that you use

My 2 cents

RG

It's for this very reason that I have avoided in-calls all together.......perhaps I am overly paranoid, but I guess it comes down to a comfort level.....

SNK

I tried an in-call once and the atmosphere was a little distracting - on top of thinking about legalities. I think the fact that more than one person lived there, including a SO had a negative effect. After all these encounters have a lot to do with the "mind". IMHO, I prefer an outcall in a 4-5 star hotel ....its almost level playing ground.

It's for this very reason that I have avoided in-calls all together.......perhaps I am overly paranoid, but I guess it comes down to a comfort level.....

 

SNK

"It is what it is"...your own comfort level. To be quite frank, all I ever do is in calls.

I never worried about it, the fact remains, if you are seeing an Indy who is very discrete about it, it works well for both parties.

The mature Indy that does not have that "revolving door" there is nothing to be worried about. I never had the paranoid syndrome over the many years.

So thanks to those discrete ladies.;-)

I don't know about other places in Canada, but the Ottawa police are great.

I'm going to have to vehemently disagree on that one.

Whatever the technicalities involved the fact is scarcity of LE resources trumps all. There is always more crime than resources so LE are left with decisions about how best to allocate those resources. When it comes to prostitution its likely that LE resources will be directed to the flagrant offenders, street trade, or where connections to organized crime are suspected or established.

Discreet professional Indy's just aren't going to be a concern of LE where resources are scarce or limited (everywhere so it seems). Clients operating from their houses, or indy's in hotels as long as they are discreet just aren't going to attract any attention either.

What are you going to look after first? That strange sound coming from the engine or that hairline scratch you picked up at the Canadian Tire parking lot? (car freaks with time to spare please don't crap all over my analogy LOL);-)

I believe it is based on circumstance:

"Criminal indecency or obscenity must rest on actual harm or a significant risk of harm to individuals or society" for a conviction to stand.

and to help classify what is considered a bawdy house:

"Only one question need be answered in order to establish indecency and determine whether a place is a common bawdy-house: Do the impugned acts offend the standard of tolerance of the contemporary Canadian community, having regard to the place and context in which they occurred??

I don't think it comes down to LE looking the other way, rather it is location, population/demographics and as mentioned above, context.

The "act of prostitution" is "Selling of sexual services" and not the "purchasing of sexual services" this is why the incall is illegal but the outcall is fine. The laws are crafty and worded in a way that makes the general public think that prostitution is illegal but in fact outcall prostitution is very much legal for both the man and the woman as long as nothing is discussed or done in a public place or a place where the prostitute brings the client.

The "practice of acts of indecency" I beleive was put in to include such places as dominatrix dungeons, rub and tugs, peep shows, etc... where they may not actually have sex with clients but perform some sexual arousing service. Stripclubs however are legal but debate over the VIP rooms (Grinding, lap dances, girl touching herself, girl touching another girl, man touching himself, etc...) are always being challenged as acts of indecency and at times prostitution if a dancer actually offers a undercover police officer sexual services in the club - many clubs have been put up on charges for common bawdy house with the acts of indecency being the reason for the charge and not actually prostitution offenses.

The problem is that it is almost impossible for a court (judge) to say that a persons choice to participate in such things such as S&M acts as a indecent act as they do not make decisions based on moral reasons or personal choices. It's a very hard charge to make stick I bet.

I feel that this is one of those discretionary laws that leave way too much room for debate and are really just useless words added to the actual law. Gives the police a little more to "charge" the person or place with and then the courts can decide... hits the offending parties where it counts as the legal fee's would be substantial as it's a criminal code charge.

I'm going to have to agree with Megan, the Ottawa cops are awful.

Erin... that is painting with a pretty broad brush. It would be like someone that has only dealt with SPs who use drugs saying that all SPs use drugs. We know that is not the case, but it is a perception based on limited scope.

I think that's it exactly.. There are far better people to worry about than one little escort who's not disturbing or hurting anyone.

 

I doubt there is ever a shortage of actual criminals..

 

I don't know about other places in Canada, but the Ottawa police are great. I'm not sure if they're just more escort friendly here, but they've always been overly helpful the odd time I've come in contact with them.

I agree with Lindsay, the ladies that party and are loud are going to attract more attention then the quiet and professional ones!!!:cool::cool:

Erin... that is painting with a pretty broad brush. It would be like someone that has only dealt with SPs who use drugs saying that all SPs use drugs. We know that is not the case, but it is a perception based on limited scope.

When I say the cops are awful, I don't mean each cop as an individual. I mean Ottawa Police Services as a body.

Being a newbie (in fact my first time with an sp is 48 hours away:bddog:) don't know what my opinion is worth...but here goes

If you have an existing client/sp relationship, and you both trust one another by that point, couldn't you do the exchange of money at one point (say a car in a parking lot) then meet with the sp at her place at a later set time/date. Wouldn't it be two adults meeting for a date, and thus circumventing the existing law alltogether

Laws, IMHO are designed to appeal to a moral minority anyway, it's the worlds oldest profession, the laws won't change that...and why not completely legalize it...sex is a normal part of life, why should the law treat the sp's and clients with shame

My 2 cents, for what it's worth

RG