psisam

If you were arrested in a brothel.. would you fight the case?

70 posts in this topic

In response to what SASfan says in another post I thought I would pose this question.

If the law came in and you found yourself person A with a prostitute, B, who police said had a controller person C... would you fight the case tooth and nail and go to crown court on appeal if the magistrates convicted and fined you... or would you just pay the fine and get out... and would you visit a brothel again if this did happen to you or would you stop punting other than with single indies or stop punting altogether?

I am sure polls could be done on these questions but I have no idea how... and I hope I dont end up in premod if this is ion the wrong section of thhhe board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to consult my lawyer... If I don't fight it and accept it, I get a criminal record anyway. What are the ramifications of getting a criminal record? If that means I'll lose my job, of course I'd have to fight it. After I've lost my job, who cares if I'm on the papers or not? It's a given that I'll lose the relationship I'm in (wife, etc) either way, and consequently, most of my money. Therefore I don't think I'd be in any condition to punt again for a long time after that.

Edited by MikeThePlayer
Wanted to add more sentences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would have to consult my lawyer... If I don't fight it and accept it, I get a criminal record anyway. What are the ramifications of getting a criminal record? If that means I'll lose my job, of course I'd have to fight it. After I've lost my job, who cares if I'm on the papers or not? It's a given that I'll lose the relationship I'm in (wife, etc) either way.

To lose your job? I guess it depends where you work. I would not lose mine. I go shagging with the boss sometimes. But some people may get fired. Is having paid sex with a controlled woman reason to be fired I wonder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In response to what SASfan says in another post I thought I would pose this question.

Would you mind quoting what I have posted, thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would you mind quoting what I have posted, thank you.

Are you allowed to post from one to another? the simple fact seems that its very easy to say one thing on the board... we can assume all sorts and make all sorts of cases but the real world I fear is very different. Nit picking with the words and what they may or may not mean is fine for the board too. I accept that fully, but in the real world I would like to know how many punters would take the cops on. It does seem that you do not have to do very much to get arrested these days in a brothel. And I am not sure how to paste from one post to another.... I think you know what I am trying to state and that is what happens in the real world of punting when you face the cops. I doubt many punters will argue about the meaning of words at least until they get into the court. They then can pay a lawyer to do that for them. But honestly I think most will cave in a cop a guilty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To lose your job? I guess it depends where you work. I would not lose mine. I go shagging with the boss sometimes. But some people may get fired. Is having paid sex with a controlled woman reason to be fired I wonder?

At the moment, going punting with the boss may not be considered very different than going to the pub with the boss, as far as the law is concerned. But once you have a criminal record, there may be implications for one's current employment, or future employment prospects. I don't know enough about this. That's why I'd need to consult my lawyer.

If having a criminal record doesn't matter, why is everyone so exercised about this then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but the real world I fear is very different.

You are right, the real world is very different, and in the real world there is currently no consensus of judicial opinion on what "Controlled" means in relation to "Controlled for gain", in fact there are 2 opinions that are diametrically opposed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the moment, going punting with the boss may not be considered very different than going to the pub with the boss, as far as the law is concerned. But once you have a criminal record, there may be implications for one's current employment, or future employment prospects. I don't know enough about this. That's why I'd need to consult my lawyer.

If having a criminal record doesn't matter, why is everyone so exercised about this then?

I got my record years ago.............. have not been arrested this year yet...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are right, the real world is very different, and in the real world there is currently no consensus of judicial opinion on what "Controlled" means in relation to "Controlled for gain", in fact there are 2 opinions that are diametrically opposed.

That is perfectly true... but it could well be that many cases go to court and many punters are found guilty and it does not get tested to the highets level ever.

It does look like just having a manager makes you controlled for the reasons I have said in other posting... being told when to work and when not to is being controlled to some degree. The Romily Street story is a good example...

The bill does state what it thinks the meaning is... C get benefit.... from the money A paid to be... that must be all parlours owners etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It does look like just having a manager makes you controlled for the reasons I have said in other posting... being told when to work and when not to is being controlled to some degree. The Romily Street story is a good example...

In which case then in the real world all prostitutes that are, using your description of"Controlled for gain", will know that they are "Controlled for gain" and will be guilty of assisting another in comitting a criminal offence if a punter is found guilty of Section 53A?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I would fight the case and win or lose I would continue to frequent brothels. :cool:;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I would fight the case and win or lose I would continue to frequent brothels. :cool:;)

Jimmy, I would do the same as you... I have fought the police for 40 years... but I have also worked and helped them when I feel what they are doing is right... for example I exposed 7 cops in a child porn ring to customs some years back... and many more things I have fought too. I have been in at least 50 TV programs doing it. So I have personal experience being fitted up by and also helping the police.. I have also had as much if not more pussy than most on here... with the help of Viagra I will get a bit more before I am put in the box.

But SASfan seems to think that controlled is not defined... it may not be to his satisfaction, but I promise you for a police officer or magistrate its very clearly set out. I am not going to argue the point as he will not be a magistrate hearing my case... if he was I am sure he would let me go free as he would the rest of those arrested for it.

But he is right in the very strict sense in practice what he says has no relevance at all to most of us. The proposed bill sets out B is controlled if she has any help form a C who does or expects to gain from the money she gets from A for a shag or blow job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But SASfan seems to think that controlled is not defined... it may not be to his satisfaction, but I promise you for a police officer or magistrate its very clearly set out. I am not going to argue the point as he will not be a magistrate hearing my case... if he was I am sure he would let me go free as he would the rest of those arrested for it.

But he is right in the very strict sense in practice what he says has no relevance at all to most of us. The proposed bill sets out B is controlled if she has any help form a C who does or expects to gain from the money she gets from A for a shag or blow job.

I have stated before, and I will state again that I have no idea what "Controlled" means in relation to "Controlled for gain", so how you can say what I would do if I was a magistrate is quite beyond me.

I see no mention of the word "help" in the proposed legislation, what I do see is the word "controlled" and variations, I also see a statement, twice, how can a repetition be a definition?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimmy, I would do the same as you... I have fought the police for 40 years...

I regard myself as a law abiding citizen and I am subjected to a check by the Criminal Records Bureau every three years but this proposed law is a step too far ---------- if I choose to pay a prostitute for sex that is my business and nothing to do with this stupid government.

I am willing to risk my taxi licence and my income for my principles ---but first the law would have to be passed and then they would have to get a successful prosecution in a court of law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Psisam,

What would be your defence? I don't agree with the proposed legislation, but if the offence is one of Strict Liability and the police can prove control (which presumably they would have to do before charging you), then you're automatically guilty whatever your intent. A fine (most likely) and a criminal record would follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have stated before, and I will state again that I have no idea what "Controlled" means in relation to "Controlled for gain", so how you can say what I would do if I was a magistrate is quite beyond me.

I see no mention of the word "help" in the proposed legislation, what I do see is the word "controlled" and variations, I also see a statement, twice, how can a repetition be a definition?

I have posted the meaning as set out in the proposed act..... I have a punter in 2 minutes so am not typing it again.... but its as clear as mud....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole thing has a potential for unintended consequences.

Working in a seafaring environment, there is little chance of a work problem (short of a massive outbreak of corporate hypocracy).

Years ago the wife said "If you want wild sex, go ahead & find it. Just don't bring it home".

The stupid thing, even if not required to register as "a sex offender", would be that the publicity would probably make it impossible to continue as a volunteer & occasional coach of young people in my other sport. This would deprive a "community" club of scarce help; idiotic when my entire punting career has been based on seeking out sexual skill & competence & avoiding under 25s as being not likely to know much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Psisam,

What would be your defence? I don't agree with the proposed legislation, but if the offence is one of Strict Liability and the police can prove control (which presumably they would have to do before charging you), then you're automatically guilty whatever your intent. A fine (most likely) and a criminal record would follow.

If a guy was in a Parlour and paid the maid or anyone else apart from the WG herself, the guy would be guilty if Strict Liability is passed, as you say automatically. Even if he paid the WG herself he still might get done if it can be proved by the Police etc, that she gave the money to someone else, even though the guy would have no way of knowing that she was intending to give it to someone else. Madness and totally unfair.

If Strict Liability does come in, then all Parlours and a lot of Agencies will have to change how they operate, and i think a lot of guys will stop going or using these places due to the fear factor, which the Government and Police know will instantly scare off a lot of punters. I would expect high profile raids on well known places, to instill this fear.

By far the hardest Wg to catch will be Independents, who the Police would have to spend considerable resources to build a case. In contrast, Parlours, Walk-ups, Agencies, Saunas and Parties will be relatively easy and cheap to build a case against.

The plus side is firstly, at this stage it is a proposal and will hopefully be watered down, and secondly, the Police are unable to stop Street Prostitution, even though they know exactly where the WGs and punters meet up and have CCTV. What this shows in my opinion is the incompetence of the Police, which could be the WG and punters saving grace. Where will the resources in terms of money and manpower come from, is a question i have not seen answered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I would just accept it, after all the police have to do their job dont they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No I would just accept it, after all the police have to do their job dont they?
My memory may be failing me (it often does) but you are NOT an active punter at present, right? In that case, your supreme sacrifice would hardly benefit mankind in any way.:cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would have to consult my lawyer... If I don't fight it and accept it, I get a criminal record anyway. What are the ramifications of getting a criminal record? If that means I'll lose my job, of course I'd have to fight it. After I've lost my job, who cares if I'm on the papers or not? It's a given that I'll lose the relationship I'm in (wife, etc) either way, and consequently, most of my money. Therefore I don't think I'd be in any condition to punt again for a long time after that.

Maybe that;s want Ms Smith wants to happen.

If your name was in the papers, your employer could say you were guilty of gross misconduct - an immediate termination or forced resignation jobbie. Or they could say you fiddled your expenses - same result. Last week I had to sign some crap about standards in business life, so would be screwed under that, I guess.

Big companies can afford smart ass lawyers to stitch up a cast iron case in many cases. (two cases in one sentence? tut tut)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In answer to you question, yes I am but not in brothels.

And I was trying to be slighly sarcastic. On the off topic site I posted about the Damian Green case and how people should quite rightly check that the police have a warrant, unless of course it is a case when one is not required.

Anf finally, would a punter be arrested in a brothel in the UK, I dont think they would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was arrested in what the police allege is a brothel, I would fight it tooth and nail.

If I pleaded guilty the conviction would still be seen by friends and family and so may as well go the whole hog and give the issues a run.

Trouble is the government are calculating that most middle aged punters would rather not be arrested in the first place and so are likely to desist from their hobby rather than get any police interest.

This is a fascist way of getting away from the rule of law.

Sort of Gestapo approach of rounding people up for the inference that they may be a jew etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i too would fight the case as far as i could ie appeals,also i would be inclined to defend myself initially at the magistrates court and try to drag out the case as long as possible using timewasting tactics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i too would fight the case as far as i could ie appeals,also i would be inclined to defend myself initially at the magistrates court and try to drag out the case as long as possible using timewasting tactics

I think you would do better on your own as the court would give you more time to say what you wanted to say. But if your in a brothel and the new law is in force I imagine there is no real defence as it seems to me that the wording if it stays the same pretty much covers all that is needed to make any place other than with a single girl working is controlling. I was hoping that there were some lawyers on here with a view to this issue. I think it is about as important as an issue can get.

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