jameslondon

Still very confused about the new law

37 posts in this topic

Dear All

The part of the new law that confuses me is what will the police have to do to show that a particular lady is forced / coerced / deceived? Yes, the law is strict liability, but in theory you will only have broken the law if the lady actually is forced / coerced / deceived.

So, will the police start with a specific lady that they KNOW is forced and identify her punters, or will they start with a blanket assumption that ALL ladies are forced / coerced in some way and simply target any punters that they can identify?

I can imagine several ways in which the law might work:

1. The police somehow identify a specific lady they suspect is forced/coerced/deceived etc. They take her into custody and establish that she definitely is forced. Using phone / email records they then identify the last 100 punters to visit her and send them all a letter with a fine and a criminal record. If punters want to dispute it, they'll have to got to court.

2. The police simply identify ALL punters who have called / emailed a particular agency over the last, say, month, and send them all a letter with a fine and a criminal record. They thereby assume that ALL ladies at the agency have been forced / coerced / deceived in some way and put the onus on the punter to be prepared to go to court and show that the lady was NOT forced. Very few punters would want to face such a court ordeal.

3. The police raid flats and other establishments, arrest everybody, identify the punters and given them ALL a letter with a fine and criminal record again on the assumption that all ladies have been forced / coerced / deceived in some way.

What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your Paranoid

why should they do Alll that just to catch YOU with your trousers off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dear All

The part of the new law that confuses me is what will the police have to do to show that a particular lady is forced / coerced / deceived? Yes, the law is strict liability, but in theory you will only have broken the law if the lady actually is forced / coerced / deceived.

So, will the police start with a specific lady that they KNOW is forced and identify her punters, or will they start with a blanket assumption that ALL ladies are forced / coerced in some way and simply target any punters that they can identify?

I can imagine several ways in which the law might work:

1. The police somehow identify a specific lady they suspect is forced/coerced/deceived etc. They take her into custody and establish that she definitely is forced. Using phone / email records they then identify the last 100 punters to visit her and send them all a letter with a fine and a criminal record. If punters want to dispute it, they'll have to got to court.

2. The police simply identify ALL punters who have called / emailed a particular agency over the last, say, month, and send them all a letter with a fine and a criminal record. They thereby assume that ALL ladies at the agency have been forced / coerced / deceived in some way and put the onus on the punter to be prepared to go to court and show that the lady was NOT forced. Very few punters would want to face such a court ordeal.

3. The police raid flats and other establishments, arrest everybody, identify the punters and given them ALL a letter with a fine and criminal record again on the assumption that all ladies have been forced / coerced / deceived in some way.

What do you think?

(sigh)

I think you're a nutter. But anyway to answer your question, the police aren't going to send letters fining people....AT ALL. They'll continue raiding places as they always have done and if you're caught up in one of those raids, and they believe the girl you're caught getting jiggy with is being forced etc. then they will either

a)send you on your way as they can't be arsed (likely after the initial govt pressure for a few convictions goes away)

b)offer you a caution which means you would have the conviction for the offence but would avoid a court appearance and also the fine(I think). This may appeal for some punters with wives etc.

c)Take you to a magistrates' court where you'd be charged with the offence.

They aren't going to trace phone numbers as they would have bugger all evidence to prove what the phone call was for, or anything. You could have simply rang a wrong number. And it's too much like hard work anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Police do not have the power to send out fines/fixed penalty notices in the manner you suggest. The new section 53A is not a motoring offence.

The only real evidence that they can offer that the girl is subject to "exploitative conduct" will be the girl's evidence given in court. The opinion of a police officer will not suffice.

Calling or emailing an agency,parlour or girl proves nothing. It's not illegal.

See Punter992005's comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do you think?

I think you are asking me to second guess how an unknown Magistrate(s) is going to interpret force, coercion, deceit etc., sadly I cannot do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all correct and it's amazing how many people are ignorant on you the Criminal Justice System works. If the police wasnt to charge you with an offence they have come and arrest, then interview you in either order. You are given a charge sheet you must sign to accept the charges.

In order to access phone records they have to obtain a court order and even then it can be quite difficult. Even in these days of 'big brother' they still have difficulty actually tracing people electronically and it has to be well-worth it to them for the hassle.

As I said in another thread there are lots of laws out there which are knowingly broken all the time - usually for which it wouldn't take too much effort to find the perpetrators. It isn't however in the public interest to go around picking all these folk up, there are much bigger fish to fry. What tends to happen is these people get picked up as part of much bigger operations.

They are too busy to go around sending hundreds of letters out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is all correct and it's amazing how many people are ignorant on you the Criminal Justice System works. If the police wasnt to charge you with an offence they have come and arrest, then interview you in either order. You are given a charge sheet you must sign to accept the charges.

In order to access phone records they have to obtain a court order and even then it can be quite difficult. Even in these days of 'big brother' they still have difficulty actually tracing people electronically and it has to be well-worth it to them for the hassle.

As I said in another thread there are lots of laws out there which are knowingly broken all the time - usually for which it wouldn't take too much effort to find the perpetrators. It isn't however in the public interest to go around picking all these folk up, there are much bigger fish to fry. What tends to happen is these people get picked up as part of much bigger operations.

They are too busy to go around sending hundreds of letters out.

I agree with you, and the most high profile law I can think of to match this, is the fox hunting (hunting with dogs act). It's there but there have been very few prosecutions bought as far as I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would the new law affect overseas punters in the Uk ????

I mean if one of them falls victim to the new law ,wiil he be having a criminal record world wide ,or only in the UK ?????

Eg ,we go to Dubai on holiday ,kiss in public ,drink spirits in a public place ,and get convicted under their law . Will their criminal conviction carry any weight in the UK or the rest of the world ????

A lot of my American friends are scared shit about the new law in the UK ,but couldn't give a toss ,if they get convicted of a criminal offence under local laws in a country ,such as Dubai .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How would the new law affect overseas punters in the Uk ????

I mean if one of them falls victim to the new law ,wiil he be having a criminal record world wide ,or only in the UK ?????

Eg ,we go to Dubai on holiday ,kiss in public ,drink spirits in a public place ,and get convicted under their law . Will their criminal conviction carry any weight in the UK or the rest of the world ????

A lot of my American friends are scared shit about the new law in the UK ,but couldn't give a toss ,if they get convicted of a criminal offence under local laws in a country ,such as Dubai .

The US does have a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty with the UK regarding the sharing of information.

Criminal conviction information on US Nationals who have been convicted of offences in England and Wales is extracted from the Police National Computer and sent, via Interpol channels to the United States in cases where there are fingerprints available and when the conviction is for imprisonment for 12 months or more, or the offence is against national security, or where sharing would be in the interests of public protection.

To be honest I can see the CPS being even more loathe to prosecute a US citizen for the new section 53A offence than a UK citizen, especially if told that the US punter is returning home shortly.

The new law isn't about securing convictions- it's about scaring punters off punting. Sounds as though it could be working with your US friends :o.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fear and Ignorance rule. Not sure how we get this across really, I've tried in a few of my posts.

Fact 1 There are lots of laws making an awful lot of things illegal out there

Fact 2 You probably break laws every day

Fact 3 Umpteen crimes are reported every day

Fact 4 The police know of people commiting serious crimes

Fact 5 They can't bring convictions without hefty proof and it being in the public interest.

Fact 6 You cannot be charged without interview, during which you are allowed legal advice.

The man hours and costs required to bring about a conviction under the new laws will not be worth the £1000 fine(which would be unlikely for a first offence). In all likelyhood it'll just be used during raids etc with unwilling witnesses.

With this being a high-profile legislation there will/may obviously be some test cases which will/could go against the facts above. It may also just sink into obscurity.

Driving without a licence or insurance is against the law, do the police send out letters to all vehicle owners who aren't on insurance companies databases?No. They have to wait until they either catch you at one of their randomly rare roadblocks, until you are in an accident or they see you driving erratically right in front of them and pull you over to check your details.

One other interesting point - if guy receives such a conviction and criminal record he might decide he doesn't give a toss next time/has nothing to lose any more. Interesting thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fact 6 You cannot be charged without interview, during which you are allowed legal advice.

Er, no,Ma'am! Not true.

The Police must stop questioning you as soon as they have enough evidence to charge you. Suppose just by chance a Chief Constable and a Bishop and an Actress (to pacify Hattie) (that is to say "Credible Witnesses") were quietly hob-nobbing, when they happened to notice a vilain run up behind someone, and slit his throat, sudden, like, and, being public spirited citizens, the two men stand aside while the actress does a rugger tackle, and catches the offender.

In such circumstances the Police would not be entitled to ask any questions atall. All they could do would be to caution chummy, and record any statement that he is daft enough to make. I don't think, in those hypothetical circumstances the right to legal advice, and to have solicitor present during interview arise!

In my respectful submission, "the new law" will have absolutely no effect on any of us, here, whichever side of the bed we lie on. Where it might have some effect is in some of the sordid and evil dens run by Albanians and sometimes Turks, for an underclass, of which we hear, from time to time, when by chance the Police actually get a case together.

My behaviour will not change, but then I (and I doubt I'm alone here) for reasons both of taste and prudence, only see native born British ladies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(sigh)

They'll continue raiding places as they always have done and if you're caught up in one of those raids, and they believe the girl you're caught getting jiggy with is being forced etc. then they will either

a)send you on your way as they can't be arsed (likely after the initial govt pressure for a few convictions goes away)

:ooffer you a caution which means you would have the conviction for the offence but would avoid a court appearance and also the fine(I think). This may appeal for some punters with wives etc.

c)Take you to a magistrates' court where you'd be charged with the offence.

They aren't going to trace phone numbers as they would have bugger all evidence to prove what the phone call was for, or anything. You could have simply rang a wrong number. And it's too much like hard work anyway.

Can they really offer you a caution or take you to a magistrate's court simply on the "belief" that a girl is being forced etc? Wouldn't they have to establish some sort of level of proof first? If during a raid a girl claims that she has been forced, is that enough under the new law to count as "proof", or would her claim first have to be heard in a separate trial of the alleged "exploiter"?

After all, if I claim to have been mugged by X and X denies it, doesn't the truth or otherwise of my claim have to be tested in a court of law to ascertain whether X is actually guilty of the offence I claim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my respectful submission, "the new law" will have absolutely no effect on any of us, here, whichever side of the bed we lie on. Where it might have some effect is in some of the sordid and evil dens run by Albanians and sometimes Turks, for an underclass, of which we hear, from time to time, when by chance the Police actually get a case together.

That's always been my view.

Lithuanian pimps also seem to be particularly "exploitative" in the reported legal cases that I've read

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Er, no,Ma'am! Not true.

The Police must stop questioning you as soon as they have enough evidence to charge you. Suppose just by chance a Chief Constable and a Bishop and an Actress (to pacify Hattie) (that is to say "Credible Witnesses") were quietly hob-nobbing, when they happened to notice a vilain run up behind someone, and slit his throat, sudden, like, and, being public spirited citizens, the two men stand aside while the actress does a rugger tackle, and catches the offender.

In such circumstances the Police would not be entitled to ask any questions atall. All they could do would be to caution chummy, and record any statement that he is daft enough to make. I don't think, in those hypothetical circumstances the right to legal advice, and to have solicitor present during interview arise!

In my respectful submission, "the new law" will have absolutely no effect on any of us, here, whichever side of the bed we lie on. Where it might have some effect is in some of the sordid and evil dens run by Albanians and sometimes Turks, for an underclass, of which we hear, from time to time, when by chance the Police actually get a case together.

My behaviour will not change, but then I (and I doubt I'm alone here) for reasons both of taste and prudence, only see native born British ladies.

Generally after being rugby tackled the Police will arrest and Caution you. As part of that Caution you are told you are entitled to legal advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The US does have a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty with the UK regarding the sharing of information.

Criminal conviction information on US Nationals who have been convicted of offences in England and Wales is extracted from the Police National Computer and sent, via Interpol channels to the United States in cases where there are fingerprints available and when the conviction is for imprisonment for 12 months or more, or the offence is against national security, or where sharing would be in the interests of public protection.

To be honest I can see the CPS being even more loathe to prosecute a US citizen for the new section 53A offence than a UK citizen, especially if told that the US punter is returning home shortly.

The new law isn't about securing convictions- it's about scaring punters off punting. Sounds as though it could be working with your US friends :).

Why don't the police on both sides of the Atlantic,put all their time and effort in tracking the real threat to societies ,namely terrorists.?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay.. has anyone actually seen it written down anywhere - for definite - that this new law cannot be applied retrospectively?

Despite the fact that Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights is supposed to forbid such laws, the UK does already have some - such as laws relating to the seizure of assets belonging to drug barons.

Can we bet sure that nobody can be prosecuted under the terms of this new law for anything occurring before April 1?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Okay.. has anyone actually seen it written down anywhere - for definite - that this new law cannot be applied retrospectively?

Despite the fact that Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights is supposed to forbid such laws, the UK does already have some - such as laws relating to the seizure of assets belonging to drug barons.

Can we bet sure that nobody can be prosecuted under the terms of this new law for anything occurring before April 1?

AFAIK all legislation is prospective unless it is clearly indicated that it is retrospective, I have seen no indication that the Policing and Crime Act 2009 in general, or that Section 14 (Paying for sexual services of a prostitute subjected to force etc: England and Wales) in particular, is retrospective. Judicial decisions however can in rare cases be retrospective, but as Section 14 is summary conviction only, I think that whilst it is not impossible, it will be very improbable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can they really offer you a caution or take you to a magistrate's court simply on the "belief" that a girl is being forced etc? Wouldn't they have to establish some sort of level of proof first? If during a raid a girl claims that she has been forced, is that enough under the new law to count as "proof", or would her claim first have to be heard in a separate trial of the alleged "exploiter"?

After all, if I claim to have been mugged by X and X denies it, doesn't the truth or otherwise of my claim have to be tested in a court of law to ascertain whether X is actually guilty of the offence I claim?

They can only offer you a caution if they have sufficient evidence to take it to court and you have already admitted your guilt. As with any court case they need to feel they have enough evidence to get a guilty verdict and they need to believe it's in the public interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer my own question, there are several laws within this bill that are to be applied retrospectively and several where it expressly states they may not be. For example forcing a child into prostituion is an area where new regulations will apply retrospectively. Running a brothel is another such area. Conversely, the act explicitly states that new rules on soliciting may not be applied retrospectively.

As for the new forced women|strict liability law, no comment is made within the act about its application, time wise.

It may be that the reason that several areas of the act have such comments attached and the strict liability one does not is because all those which have comments by them deal with things that were already crimes before April 1. Therefore, the authors of the law may have thought there would be no presumption against retroactivity and that's why they've said yes or no in each case.

Alternatively, hh's mob have done it on purpose to encourage the police to try it on retrospectively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be quite clear here - the new section 53A SOA 2003 ( as inserted by section 14 PCA 2009 ) is not retrospective.

There is nothing in the Act, the Commencement Order, the Human Rights Act, the Rule of Law etc etc that is going to encourage the Police (let alone the CPS) to try it on in this respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How would the new law affect overseas punters in the Uk ????

I mean if one of them falls victim to the new law ,wiil he be having a criminal record world wide ,or only in the UK ?????

Eg ,we go to Dubai on holiday ,kiss in public ,drink spirits in a public place ,and get convicted under their law . Will their criminal conviction carry any weight in the UK or the rest of the world ????

A lot of my American friends are scared shit about the new law in the UK ,but couldn't give a toss ,if they get convicted of a criminal offence under local laws in a country ,such as Dubai .

I live in the Northeastern US and have hobbied in the UK and all over for that matter. In fact, I go to the UK a lot. I avoid hobbying in the US because of the law (except Nevada). I can tell you that your new law makes many of us pause. I'll wait and see how it all works out before I hobby again in London.

I can tell you how draconian is can be here. It varies from state to state and region to region. And you would think that the smaller more conservative towns here are the worst and you would be mistaken. I go on business to Chicago often (I used to hobby there and all over the US a long time ago. Before they started escort stings). Chicago, one of the most liberal areas of the country is probably the most strict. Ladies will skip Chicago that go on tour for fear of being caught! You get caught as a John here, you can go to jail for up to a year (rare), get a hefty fine (thousands), your name can be published in the paper and posted on police web sites, your wife will find out because you will spend the night or more in lockup, your job will find out, they do send letters in some places TO WIVES, etc.. They have vice units that often will bust a girl and offer her a deal. You got to see your favorite girl and she's working for the cops. They setup fake girls on web sites to lure in John's and bust you with your pants down in a sting. My point is, if there are people that are in power who are anti-prostitution religious nuts, do NOT put anything past them. They will go to any length to impose their morality on you. We are scared here to punt at home. We now have a wait and see approach to London because we know what can happen. Your new law can be applied to just about any provider. If I want to, I will continue my journey to Amsterdam, Germany, Poland, etc.. The LAST thing I would want is to be detained in another country for violating the law. I travel a lot. The laws of the country you are going to apply. We can wind up in a foreign prison. Even worse than being in one at home!

Now I'll just hop over to the North (I am close to Canada), the true land of the free!

I have spent countless hours with some of the most beautiful creatures on Earth in London. You have some of the most gorgeous escorts around (for whatever reason or reasons). I hope I can indulge myself again someday in London.

I'm not meaning to scare you. :confused: But please be careful out there...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a very interesting perspective from the US.

I think that your attitude is wise. While the odds of any particular individual being caught MAY be low, I do think that people underestimate both the lengths to which politically-motivated politicians may go and the powers which they have now given themselves in the UK.

For example, it is eye-opening to read about the RIPA Act on Wikipedia - for exmaple many councils are now routinely using covert surveillance for minor crimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It always amazes me how many guys think that sting operations go on in the UK. Yes had a few green newbies ask if I work for the police etc etc.

Just isn't done here. And under the new law would incriminate the Police as they would be forcing the girl to work!

Whilst your post is accurate regards the US, all our law seems to be doing is attempting to scare guys off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Okay.. has anyone actually seen it written down anywhere - for definite - that this new law cannot be applied retrospectively?

No law can be applied retrospectively!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No law can be applied retrospectively!!!!

There are some retrospective laws. I'm aware of some banking and tax laws that are retrospective but can't be bothered at the present time to look them up.

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