CaptainBeefhead

Bukkake Party Legalities

8 posts in this topic

Hi

can anyone tell me the legal position if I organise a bukkake party in my flat please ? If I took payment beforehand (Paypal perhaps) so no money changed hands at the time would it still legally be prostitution ?

Thanks

Beefhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a paid sexual act, so yes it's prostitution.

The method of collection of the fee involved has no bearing on your benefiting from the proceeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

can anyone tell me the legal position if I organise a bukkake party in my flat please ? If I took payment beforehand (Paypal perhaps) so no money changed hands at the time would it still legally be prostitution ?

Thanks

Beefhead

It would qualify you as controlling someone elses prostitution, and if you had more than one woman present you'd be creating a brothel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if Paypal found out what the payment was for, the funds would not be released. Paypal may even take action if they found out after the funds had been paid into your account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would qualify you as controlling someone elses prostitution, and if you had more than one woman present you'd be creating a brothel.

Now I am no expert on this at all, but I don't think that is entirely correct.

As I understand it, arranging a party where like minded people can perform sexual acts with each other is not illegal in itself and would not constitute the formation of a brothel. It is certainly not illegal to ask people to contribute towards the cost of any party or to make payment a condition of attendance. What can be a problem, when money is involved, is the requirement of an entertainment licence, though that would not normally be an issue for a one off event in a private property.

However, there is act of parliament called The Disorderly Houses Act of 1751, which, unfortunately, is still on the statute books and can be used to prosecute the organisers of sex parties as it has a clause that mentions "more than two couples engaged in sexual intercourse in the same room" and other such gems relating to behaviour likely to deprave or corrupt. However, as I understand it, the "Club Whiplash" case set a precedent that the attendees would not be corrupted or depraved if they were members of the same private club that had organised the event and were aware of the nature of the event prior to attendance. Apparently, this is how most swinging clubs and other similar private parties get around the problem. The law is a mess and the chances of any prosecution being successful in this day and age seem very slim. In answer to the original question, I am pretty sure that what you are planning is extremely unlikely to lead to a prosecution, but, if not done correctly, could be technically illegal in the UK :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it, arranging a party where like minded people can perform sexual acts with each other is not illegal in itself and would not constitute the formation of a brothel. It is certainly not illegal to ask people to contribute towards the cost of any party or to make payment a condition of attendance.

No. It's a brothel, and it's illegal to keep or manage a brothel (sections 33 and 33A SOA 1956). The case law on brothels is so wide and encompassing that parliament didn't need to insert a definition of "brothel" in the SOAs 1956 and 2003.

A brothel exists even where women offer sexual intercourse without charging (Winter v Woolfe [1931] ).

We've covered this before on several occasions.

However, there is act of parliament called The Disorderly Houses Act of 1751, which, unfortunately, is still on the statute books and can be used to prosecute the organisers of sex parties as it has a clause that mentions "more than two couples engaged in sexual intercourse in the same room" and other such gems relating to behaviour likely to deprave or corrupt. However, as I understand it, the "Club Whiplash" case set a precedent that the attendees would not be corrupted or depraved if they were members of the same private club that had organised the event and were aware of the nature of the event prior to attendance. Apparently, this is how most swinging clubs and other similar private parties get around the problem. The law is a mess and the chances of any prosecution being successful in this day and age seem very slim. In answer to the original question, I am pretty sure that what you are planning is extremely unlikely to lead to a prosecution, but, if not done correctly, could be technically illegal in the UK :wacko:

The 1751 Act was finally repealed by the Statute Law (Repeals) Act 2008, although most of the Act was repealed many years before. I don't believe that section 8 (even when it was in force) contained the phrases that you've quoted. The "deprave and corrupt" test is relevant to the Obscene Publications Act 1959 and nothing to do with the DHA 1751 or sex parties. I'm not aware of any relevant case-law that states that organisers of sex parties cannot be prosecuted for brothel-keeping. I would be interested if you could find such a case.

There is still the common law offence of keeping a disorderly house, although it's very rarely prosecuted. Cynthia Payne was prosecuted and imprisoned for the offence in the early 1980's.

AS Strawberry rightly states, it's also controlling prostitution for gain (section 53 SOA 2003).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, as I understand it, the "Club Whiplash" case set a precedent that the attendees would not be corrupted or depraved if they were members of the same private club that had organised the event and were aware of the nature of the event prior to attendance.

That case (Rv Church [1996]) didn't really set any sort of a precedent. The jury heard the evidence and found Mr Church not guilty of keeping a disorderly house. The jury no doubt considered that the BDSM was consensual but the decision of that jury in that case doesn't bind another jury considering a similar case in a different court..

If a jury happens to find Mr Fred Bloggs not guilty of robbing a bank, that doesn't set any sort of a precedent that it's not illegal to rob a bank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you just love the internet!!

Silverado, I accept your comments completely as you clearly have much more knowledge of the subject than I do, as I stated at the top of my original post, I am no expert on this at all. What I do think is very interesting is the amount of contradiction there seems to be on the subject all over the internet, even on official sites. I have just read some pages on the official CPS site that, IMHO, seem to completely contradict themselves.

Under the section "Keeping a Brothal" it says:

"The difference between offences under sections 33 and 33A arises because the definition of a brothel in English law does not require that the premises are used for the purposes of prostitution since a brothel exists wherever more than one woman offers sexual intercourse, whether for payment or not."

Yet further down, in the same section, it says:

"Premises only become a brothel when more than one woman uses premises for the purposes of prostitution, either simultaneously or one at a time (Stevens v Christy [1987] Cr. App. R. 249, DC). This implies that if two women are present, both must be there for the purposes of prostitution. In circumstances where prostitutes are working individually out of one flat but there is a rotation of occupants and the young women are moved on a regular basis; i.e. sole occupancy and a rotation of sole occupants, it does constitute a brothel."

Now, if the crown prosecution service can't get their heads around what a brothel actually is, then what chance have I got? It seems to me that under English law a brothel can probably be anything they want it to be as long as more than one couple are having sexual intercourse. I guess that could make every hotel in the land a brothel!

Oh well, the law is an ass - Nothing new there then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now