cringmaster

What's the new Law's stance on Massage Parlours?

27 posts in this topic

Hello,

As the title suggests, I was wondering how HH new law impacts massage parlours.

I have back problems, and I have been to Chiropracters and physiotherapists which help during big flare ups.

I have periodic massages to prevent recurrences and it works.

In particular reference to Ego (MK) as it would be the only one I consider - does the new law simply view it in the same category as Brothels etc.

Basically I am asking if I can have an innocent massage (without HE/HR) and not be worried about being arrested.

The new law seems very grey to me - one could argue are the girls being exploited/coerced there... and since they are "touching" me it could be deemed sexual, even though in this case it isn't.

Also consider some people request HR/HE - is that illegal?

I have really struggled to find someone who massages my back well/professionally and has a personality too.

But if I'm unknowingly straying on the wrong side of the law - then I must change.

Please could someone advise me on this situation.

Thank you for your time. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In particular reference to Ego (MK) as it would be the only one I consider - does the new law simply view it in the same category as Brothels etc.

Put quite simply a brothel is premises where 2 or more prostitutes use said premises for the purposes of prostitution, prostitution is the supply of sexual services in return for gain, so logically if premises are used by 2 or more prostitutes not for the purposes of prostitution then the premises are not a brothel. For example if 2 or more prostitutes use 23 Acacia Avenue for the purposes of prostitution then 23 Acacia Avenue is a brothel, however if 2 or more prostitutes use 23 Acacia Avenue not for the purposes of prostitution (a licensed massage parlour where sexual services are not supplied for example) then 23 Acacia Avenue is not a brothel. Just because 2 or more prostitutes use premises for purposes other than prostitution, the fact that they are prostitutes does not automatically make said premises a brothel, the premises must be used for the purposes of prostitution in order for said premises to be classed as a brothel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also consider some people request HR/HE - is that illegal?

I'm not quite sure that I understand the question, however the supply of sexual services is not illegal, neither (new legislation notwithstanding) is the requesting of sexual services.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Put quite simply a brothel is premises where 2 or more prostitutes use said premises for the purposes of prostitution, prostitution is the supply of sexual services in return for gain, ....

I hestitate (for a second) to correct my elders and betters, but, at least according to CPS' guidance, gain or payment is NOT required for premises to be a brothel!

"...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. Section 33A is also capable of covering premises where people go for non-commercial sexual encounters, such as certain saunas and adult clubs."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to my last (I tried to edit it, but the five minutes allowed had expired):

That a massage parlour offering HJ, but never a fuck, is not a "Brothel" is of little help, where the "new Law" is concerned, because it doesn't mention brothels! It is concerned with A, B & C!

A is you who pays, or promises to pay, for "sexual services" (which, pace Bill C has to include a hand shandy) of B, a prostitute, who has been coerced (to put it briefly) by C, who expects that he or someone else, but not, I think, B, will profit by the deal.

So, mmmmmmm!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hestitate (for a second) to correct my elders and betters, but, at least according to CPS' guidance, gain or payment is NOT required for premises to be a brothel!

"...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. Section 33A is also capable of covering premises where people go for non-commercial sexual encounters, such as certain saunas and adult clubs."

What you say is quite correct, however I have never been able to get my head around the seemingly contradictory nature of Sections 33 & 33a and their usage of the definitions of "prostitute" and "prostitution", it has always seemed to me that they want it both ways thus making a bit of a mockery of quite clear definitions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hestitate (for a second) to correct my elders and betters, but, at least according to CPS' guidance, gain or payment is NOT required for premises to be a brothel!

"...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. Section 33A is also capable of covering premises where people go for non-commercial sexual encounters, such as certain saunas and adult clubs."

Interesting.

So on weekends when my daughters invite their friends to stay over, including their relevant boyfriends, my house becomes a brothel and I become a brothel keeper ! Hmmm...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... however I have never been able to get my head around the seemingly contradictory nature of Sections 33 & 33a and their usage of the definitions of "prostitute" and "prostitution", it has always seemed to me that they want it both ways thus making a bit of a mockery of quite clear definitions.

Look at another way! If you could get your head round it, and all definitions were clear, and interlocking, then what need would you have for decent solicitors and shifty barristers?

On a point of demarcation, brother Chairperson!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... ummm... back to my original query -

I'm on dodgy ground technically if I go to these places?

All I need is a legally determined answer as to whether according to this law - it is legal or illegal to go to these kind of places.

I'm not wondering if I'm probably going to be OK or not.

I just need to know if it's legal or illegal.

I don't want even a 1% chance of it being raided whilst I'm there thinking I'm getting a normal innocent massage and then being accused of acquiring sexual services/trafficked women etc.

I want to go somewhere to relax, not get worried and stressed further lol!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I can gather from the miles of text written about this subject, the starting point for this new law is to instil dread into anyone who visits someone who is offering sexual services in exchange for money, that said the law only applies to probably one or two per cent of those offering sexual services, they being subjected to force or threats to carry out the service. Police will only raid an establishment that offers sexual services for financial reward, if they have solid intelligence that the person or persons offering the service is being threatened for forced, in this instance if a punter is found to be in compromising situation during the raid, then an arrest will be made on suspicion of breaking the new law, if a punter is just chatting to girl or having a cup of beverage, then it is unlikely that an arrest will be made. To pay money for just a massage whether the provider is forced or not is not an offence, there are no laws covering other forced labour, where the customer is concerned, other then that covered by the new legislation for sexual services, the police may prosecute the employer for harrassment of the employee if it is a serious case where violence is involved, but not the customer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So... ummm... back to my original query -

I'm on dodgy ground technically if I go to these places?

All I need is a legally determined answer as to whether according to this law - it is legal or illegal to go to these kind of places.

I'm not wondering if I'm probably going to be OK or not.

I just need to know if it's legal or illegal.

I don't want even a 1% chance of it being raided whilst I'm there thinking I'm getting a normal innocent massage and then being accused of acquiring sexual services/trafficked women etc.

I want to go somewhere to relax, not get worried and stressed further lol!

Firstly the new legislation does not change the legal status of a brothel, secondly the word "brothel" does not appear in the new legislation, and lastly the new legislation does not change the legal status of a visitor to a brothel, however the only way to ensure that the premises that you visit are not included in a brothel raid, is not to visit premises that are a brothel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So... ummm... back to my original query -

I'm on dodgy ground technically if I go to these places?

All I need is a legally determined answer as to whether according to this law - it is legal or illegal to go to these kind of places.

I'm not wondering if I'm probably going to be OK or not.

I just need to know if it's legal or illegal.

I don't want even a 1% chance of it being raided whilst I'm there thinking I'm getting a normal innocent massage and then being accused of acquiring sexual services/trafficked women etc.

I want to go somewhere to relax, not get worried and stressed further lol!

It's not illegal to visit a chiropractor or physiotherapist.

It's not illegal to have a back massage.

It's not illegal to visit a brothel or massage parlour.

What is illegal is to pay for the sexual services of a prostitute subject to exploitative conduct etc - (section 53A).

For the statutory definition of "sexual " see section 78 SOA2003.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2003/ukpga_20030042_en_5#pt1-pb20-l1g78

To put it bluntly if you are caught in a brothel by the Police having an innocent back massage by a coerced girl then you're going to have a difficult job in persuading the Police and Magistrates that you weren't having a sexual service. Most people with back problems go to chiropracters, osteopaths etc and not prostitutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was my thought exactly - it's going to be a very weak argument that you visited a brothel [massage parlour] in order to have a back injury treated.

If you are concerned about legalities, and of course your physical health then perhaps you need to visit a trained physio/chiropractor etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Sections 33 & 33a...

Er, in this case it is Section 33A, not 33a, which does matter!

When you get a lower case letter following the section number, that is a sub-section, but the upper case letter signals that this is a "new, improved, biological" section inserted into the old Act by some newer Act. If the two are drafted by different statutory draftsmen, or several years have passed since the first was enacted then the new section may very well not fit comfortably into the old statute!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello,

As the title suggests, I was wondering how HH new law impacts massage parlours.

I have back problems, and I have been to Chiropracters and physiotherapists which help during big flare ups.

I have periodic massages to prevent recurrences and it works.

In particular reference to Ego (MK) as it would be the only one I consider - does the new law simply view it in the same category as Brothels etc.

Basically I am asking if I can have an innocent massage (without HE/HR) and not be worried about being arrested.

The new law seems very grey to me - one could argue are the girls being exploited/coerced there... and since they are "touching" me it could be deemed sexual, even though in this case it isn't.

Also consider some people request HR/HE - is that illegal?

I have really struggled to find someone who massages my back well/professionally and has a personality too.

But if I'm unknowingly straying on the wrong side of the law - then I must change.

Please could someone advise me on this situation.

Thank you for your time. :)

I thought "Sexual services" in the new law was pretty well defined...

"Sexual services" is given the same meaning as section 4(4) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, if the service provided involved penetration of B's anus or vagina, penetration of B's mouth with a person's penis, penetration of a person's anus or vagina with a part of B's body or with anything else, or penetration of a person's mouth with B's penis.

(from this link)

As far as I understand, Ego doesn't offer anything that would fit the above definition, so you couldn't possibly be breaking the new law there. A massage with HR would not be classified as a "sexual service" using the definition above.

I'm not sure if Ego is still technically a brothel though, as the definition could be different for that law, but there is no mention of brothels in the new law so it shouldn't make any difference.

If my understanding is correct, the only way you could be arrested at Ego would be if the police made a massive mistake or you were committing a totally different crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought "Sexual services" in the new law was pretty well defined...

(from this link)

As far as I understand, Ego doesn't offer anything that would fit the above definition, so you couldn't possibly be breaking the new law there. A massage with HR would not be classified as a "sexual service" using the definition above.

I'm not sure if Ego is still technically a brothel though, as the definition could be different for that law, but there is no mention of brothels in the new law so it shouldn't make any difference.

If my understanding is correct, the only way you could be arrested at Ego would be if the police made a massive mistake or you were committing a totally different crime.

"Sexual" is defined in section 78 SOA2003 which states that:

For the purposes of this Part .....penetration, touching or any other activity is sexual if a reasonable person would consider that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Sexual services" is given the same meaning as section 4(4) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, if the service provided involved penetration of B's anus or vagina, penetration of B's mouth with a person's penis, penetration of a person's anus or vagina with a part of B's body or with anything else, or penetration of a person's mouth with B's penis.

I do not think that the above is describing "Sexual services" but is saying that if the service provided involved .................... that it will be classed as "Causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent". I'm not exactly sure if that is what it was intended to mean, but because of the word "if", that is as I interpret it. BTW, not forgetting that "Sexual services" do not have to be supplied in order for the offence to be committed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Sexual" is defined in section 78 SOA2003 which states that:

For the purposes of this Part .....penetration, touching or any other activity is sexual if a reasonable person would consider that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To put it bluntly if you are caught in a brothel by the Police having an innocent back massage by a coerced girl then you're going to have a difficult job in persuading the Police and Magistrates that you weren't having a sexual service. Most people with back problems go to chiropracters, osteopaths etc and not prostitutes.
This was my thought exactly - it's going to be a very weak argument that you visited a brothel [massage parlour] in order to have a back injury treated.

If you are concerned about legalities, and of course your physical health then perhaps you need to visit a trained physio/chiropractor etc.

I think I may not have explained my thoughts clearly.

But firstly, thank you all for the replies and attempts to clarify.

a) When my back is bad - I always go to a physiotherapist, and on occasion a chiropracter.

:) My original question was more to do with the scenario when my back is settled - but maybe a little stiff and benefits from a simple massage. In these circumstances - it feels that physio is a bit overkill and unnecessary.

c) As such, I wanted to clarify if a Massage Parlour - Ego in question was considered a brothel or a venue deemed of illegal purpose by the new law.

d) If so, I continue getting massage by the local physio. Just not very talkative... and a man!

If not deemed illegal/brothel and safe for the law abiding citizen - then I would go there for a monthly massage and nothing more. The lady there is nice and good to talk to also.

e) This was never to substitute or treat my back pain. Just to loosen up muscles when my back is settled.

I just felt physio was overkill in that situation and wanted to know my options before going.

I know of people going there who don't want sex/sexual services but just a simple massage. Just wanted to know if it safe for those people.

Hope that clears things up regarding my thoughts/intentions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not think that the above is describing "Sexual services" but is saying that if the service provided involved .................... that it will be classed as "Causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent". I'm not exactly sure if that is what it was intended to mean, but because of the word "if", that is as I interpret it. BTW, not forgetting that "Sexual services" do not have to be supplied in order for the offence to be committed.

My guess as to what has happened in relation to the Guidance Notes is that the person who drafted them knew that there was a definition of "Sexual" in the SOA 2003 as well as the definitions of "Prostitute" and "Gain" but that he or she couldn't easily find the "Sexual" definition in section 78 and wrongly referred to the wording in section 4(4).

I know that some people have read it as saying that if the sexual service involves penetration etc then the CPS should proceed using section 4 ( causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent). That has a maximum penalty of life imprisonment in the Crown Court - whereas section 53A is a £1,000 fine (Magistrates only).

That interpretation cannot be correct - and begs the question of why the CPS did not also refer to section 1 (rape), section 2 (assault by penetration) and section 3 (sexual assault) in the same paragraph of the Guidance Notes.All of these involve the same principles ie. lack of consent to the touching or penetration.

In any event the relevant paragraph appears to relate solely to the meaning of "sexual services" and doesn't purport to offer guidance as to the use of the alternative offence.

That's just my take on the paragraph.....very misleading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's just my take on the paragraph.....very misleading.

By accident or design I wonder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the new Law's stance on Indy's working on their own?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's the new Law's stance on Indy's working on their own?

It doesn't have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It doesn't have one.

sorry wrong bit

Edited by Melanieabz
posted wrong thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Barmy Harman's" Law is framed to put the skids under the punter who use the hundreds of illegal brothels in the UK, ex-Scotland. A piece of legislation that was originally floated to make it illegal to buy sex from someone who is trafficked, highjacked by Harman and her nutty band of feminist sisters to encompass a wider remit, which was passed as the vindictive law that it is today. Confirming the laws' stance on Massage Parlours, if not a legit massage only service and most offer full sexual services, the law interprets this a brothel where 2 or more are working and therefore illegal. The laws' stance on Indies, a girl working on her own; it is not illegal for her to offer sex for payment, what is now illegal is if she is pimped by someone who has forced her to offer the service, the punter now is the villain in this scenario and can be fined up £1000 and receive a criminal record. The laws surrounding prostitution now are completely at the behest and interpretation of local law enforcement.

2010 sees not only the provider continually in the frame but now the punter as well. A cruel and unnecessary situation that could be clarified by sensible debate in Parliament and a way forward that is fair to all. It won't happen in Police State UK 2010.

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