Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
gog

Using existing legislation

22 posts in this topic

This government for whatever reasons hates the commercial sex industry and the motive behind the proposed legislation which makes it illegal to pay for sex with someone who is controlled is to deter men paying for sex. However if the government is hell bent on destroying the industry, they could do this with existing legislation. Parlours and agencies are technically illegal but in some areas are tolerated without the authorities taking any action. If the government wants to destroy the industry, why does it not simply close down all parlours and agencies under existing laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current proposals have all the hallmarks of knee jerk. ill considered foaming at the mouth ideas, that extremists think they can bully and foist onto a docile population.

One hopes that the Mother of all democracies will have the common sense to enact some form of licensed brothels, as this will make monitoring trafficking and the controlling for prostitution more easily prevented.

Kate who runs Cleo's of Highbridge is at her wits end with her staff as she has absolutely no control over whether a girl will turn up for a shift!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why does it not simply close down all parlours and agencies under existing laws.

If they really wanted to they could - which just goes to show that the so called "new laws" are just a moral crusade by Harman et al.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This government for whatever reasons hates the commercial sex industry and the motive behind the proposed legislation which makes it illegal to pay for sex with someone who is controlled is to deter men paying for sex. However if the government is hell bent on destroying the industry, they could do this with existing legislation. Parlours and agencies are technically illegal but in some areas are tolerated without the authorities taking any action. If the government wants to destroy the industry, why does it not simply close down all parlours and agencies under existing laws.

No they could not, in the real world, do it at the moment, because in the real world they have to consider the costs of all the cases they investigate and bring to court. Its very costly to do it now. This new law will make it cheap as chips to close down a brothel and put the punters in court fine them and get more money to close more brothels.

It comes down to money...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The current proposals have all the hallmarks of knee jerk. ill considered foaming at the mouth ideas, that extremists think they can bully and foist onto a docile population.

One hopes that the Mother of all democracies will have the common sense to enact some form of licensed brothels, as this will make monitoring trafficking and the controlling for prostitution more easily prevented.

Kate who runs Cleo's of Highbridge is at her wits end with her staff as she has absolutely no control over whether a girl will turn up for a shift!

But we live in a police sate? don't we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If they really wanted to they could - which just goes to show that the so called "new laws" are just a moral crusade by Harman et al.

No it expensive right now to bring a good case and time consuming... it will be a piece of piss if they pass the new law. Just walk in to any parlour / brothel and nick any punters they find in there naked...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No it expensive right now to bring a good case and time consuming... it will be a piece of piss if they pass the new law. Just walk in to any parlour / brothel and nick any punters they find in there naked...

They would still have to prove the control thing, however it is defined, and that would need all the usual witness stuff - otherwise the punter has not been proved to have committed any offence

I thought that if more than two girls were working out of a single address, then they were breaking the law - that would be very easy to prove - the coppers' word would probably suffice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No they could not, in the real world, do it at the moment, because in the real world they have to consider the costs of all the cases they investigate and bring to court. Its very costly to do it now. This new law will make it cheap as chips to close down a brothel and put the punters in court fine them and get more money to close more brothels.

It comes down to money...

The main aspect of the law change will be they will be able to close the brothel down without alot of work, and seal it.

On the way they may nab the odd unfortuante punter

Even the home office assement put the closure rate at 1200 brothels a year, and only 300 punters a year.

So I rekon brothels will cease to exist, mainly becuase they will all be closed up, or thats how the Government sees it. When that is finished they will the go for the agencies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought that if more than two girls were working out of a single address, then they were breaking the law - that would be very easy to prove - the coppers' word would probably suffice

Currently the prostitutes are not breaking any law by working from the same premises, it is the owner/manager/ of said premises (a brothel) that is breaking the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i still can't see how a punter can be tried in court until control for someone elses gain has been established,this surely means gathering evidence and prosecuting the brothel owner first and (if pleading not guilty)being found guilty before a jury,surely its only then when the punter is tried in court?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

youmaybe verynice man but you dont read this forum

The new law requires YOU to prove the girls in not controlled

If you read the knowledgable posts here in abundance you willl see the onus is on you to prove the girl WASNT controlled in some tiny way.

And control in some wau or other applies to 99% of WGs l

The law in a simalar form has stopped punting elsewhere in Europe, stopped it dead because the punters get arrested get in the pappers their wives and workplace get to know

so the fear factor alone will kill punting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i still can't see how a punter can be tried in court until control for someone elses gain has been established,this surely means gathering evidence and prosecuting the brothel owner first and (if pleading not guilty)being found guilty before a jury,surely its only then when the punter is tried in court?

There only would need to exist a manager or any other person who had any gain from the activities of B who was providing a service for A. No proof other than to show that a person C existed and assisted the girl in any way with the expectation of any gain never mind made any money from the work.

No there is not much in the way of proof required. So lets hope there is an election called.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
youmaybe verynice man but you dont read this forum

The new law requires YOU to prove the girls in not controlled

If you read the knowledgable posts here in abundance you willl see the onus is on you to prove the girl WASNT controlled in some tiny way.

And control in some wau or other applies to 99% of WGs l

The law in a simalar form has stopped punting elsewhere in Europe, stopped it dead because the punters get arrested get in the pappers their wives and workplace get to know

so the fear factor alone will kill punting

but still,control has to be proven before a punter can be tried! a punter can be charged,but control has to be established first,which takes time, who paid the girls etc did anyone else gain?once control for gain is established its only then that the punter is tried,

any lawyers on the forum!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The new law requires YOU to prove the girls in not controlled

You can't prove a negative - the girl will obviously say she is not controlled, but she won't be able to prove it - end of story - if the courts don't want to believe her, then they will have to prove she was controlled

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies if this has already been covered somewhere but are the new laws already in place? I thought they were yet to be enforced?

As with all things I'm sure this will hit the lower end establishments more, but those with the cash to spend a few hundred quid on a punt (such as politicians and senior police) will no doubt be able to carry on as normal. Oh what a strange country this is sometimes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apologies if this has already been covered somewhere but are the new laws already in place?

No................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
youmaybe verynice man but you dont read this forum

The new law requires YOU to prove the girls in not controlled

If you read the knowledgable posts here in abundance you willl see the onus is on you to prove the girl WASNT controlled in some tiny way.

And control in some wau or other applies to 99% of WGs l

The law in a simalar form has stopped punting elsewhere in Europe, stopped it dead because the punters get arrested get in the pappers their wives and workplace get to know

so the fear factor alone will kill punting

you're slightly inaccurate there, you are innocent until proven guilty. Same as every other offence. You don't have to prove a thing. They have to prove the girl was controlled and that you paid or offered to pay for sexual services. The difference is that you can't get out of it by saying "how was I to know she was controlled". Normally they have to prove that you knew that you had commited the offence. Not prove that you knew it was illegal, but that you knew you'd done the illegal thing. This is the aspect that will come under a lot of scrutiny in my opinion. A punter arrested with an underage girl can get out of it by cliaming she lied about her age and he had no reason to think she was under 18. A man arrested for possession of kiddy porn can claim he didn't know it was on his computer, or that he reasonably thought the girl was 18+. But if you're caught with a pimped girl there's no get out. It's so backwards that JS and HH are going to have a tough time justifying it, when someone pulls them up on it. Hopefully that'll be on the 18th January during the 2nd reading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't prove a negative - the girl will obviously say she is not controlled, but she won't be able to prove it - end of story - if the courts don't want to believe her, then they will have to prove she was controlled

I think the police will just have to show the court some evidence the girls was working for a boss in a parlour of even the parlour was run by a person other than the girl so unless she is on her own your going to be at least arrested

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The legislation as it stands is more than enough to give the police all the powers that are proposed, they do not chose to use these powers because they know there is no stopping prostitution, and just tolerate it, the police monitor their own patches allowing brothels to operate provided they do not step outside the parameters they have drawn up themselves. This new stuff if passed will make not one jot of difference to the status quo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think thjis legislation shows that this government has got its priorities all wrong.

Anyone see the news about knife crime today? If you didnt see it knife crime has rocketed in the last 10 years. Now that is something to really get worried about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The legislation as it stands is more than enough to give the police all the powers that are proposed, they do not chose to use these powers because they know there is no stopping prostitution, and just tolerate it, the police monitor their own patches allowing brothels to operate provided they do not step outside the parameters they have drawn up themselves. This new stuff if passed will make not one jot of difference to the status quo.

Absolutely, I agree - that's what the title of this thread is all about. We all know that different police forces at different times and in different places can conduct very successful 'clean-up' operations in their local areas whenever they feel so inclined, and this new legislation (if it is passed) will add absolutely nothing to their ability to close down any establishment they choose to pick on, at any time, which just happens to take their fancy. All this hot air about an unprovoked government campaign to close down the trade is just hot air - if that was their intention, they could have started already.

What we have is a few government members who are keen to appear that they care about the issue of forced prostitution, and I would be amongst the last to try to suggest that the issue is not important.

If the new legislation is passed, then the police will have a new weapon which will help them to close down the practices of a few individuals who are behaving wrongly, but have hitherto managed to stay beyond the reach of the law (and that includes punters as well as pimps).

The police simply have no need for the added complication of having to prove 'control for gain' in order to close down any 'conventional' establishment - those establishments are already well within the reach of existing legislation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The post by HimAgain on the thread about Soho Closures throws this whole discussion into touch.

And the post by Psisam on the same thread re-states my suggestion that individual police forces will adopt strategies suited to their own local situation.

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0