Silverado

Judge praises women who ran 'model' brothel

14 posts in this topic

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7719143/Judge-praises-women-who-ran-model-brothel.html

"Two women who ran a brothel which raked in almost £500,000 were told by a judge that it was a "model" for how such a business should be run if it was ever made legal.

Monika Campbell and Lisa Gaskin ran the 133 Club in Leeds under the guise of a luxury massage parlour between March 2005 and September last year.

Leeds Crown Court heard on Wednesday that the pair were meticulous in their running of the shady business keeping accounts, reliably paying income tax and rates and arranging for health advice and condoms for the women using the premises.

Sentencing the pair, Judge Scott Wolstenholme said that there was no exploitation of the employees or nuisance to the public and if brothels were ever legalised "it may be the way you were running this business may be the model of how it should be done."

However, he added: "The fact is, it is illegal. Parliament has not legalised brothel keeping. You knew it was illegal but carried on making a good living out of it and here you are now in the crown court."

The judge said that he did not see the need to jail them, particularly as they would be facing draconian confiscation proceedings.

Campbell and Gaskin, both 38, from Leeds, admitted to keeping the brothel, where employees worked willingly and no drink or drugs were found, and they were given a 12-month community order with 50 hours unpaid work.

Judge Wolstenholme told them the confiscation hearing fixed for September would mean they would end up having all your realisable assets seized where appropriate.

Heather Gilmore, prosecuting, said Campbell and Gaskin also paid to have a website set up for the club, and even received a certificate from a national sex guidebook.

Miss Gilmore said in January 2007 that Inland Revenue officials had visited the premises with police officers and women in low cut outfits were found.

Officers suspected that a brothel was being operated but no clear evidence was found on that occasion and only a warning was given.

The premises were raided again in September of last year when three prostitutes were found there, some with customers in VIP bedrooms.

Customers would pay £5 to £10 on the door to enter and the girls a fee.

Accountants revealed gross takings over the four and a half years in operation of £483,777.

Derek Duffy, for Campbell, said in the past police forces had often turned a blind eye to such premises because it was considered better for women to work there with health advice than on the streets where many were drug addicts."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know we are all biased in here, but was it really in the public interest to prosecute these two ladies?

The business was paying tax, several ladies were gainfully employed, the ladies were working safely, and no-one was causing any nuisance to the neighbours.

So why prosecute? No-one was being exploited, no-one was suffering, everyone seemed happy.

But sadly, no happy ending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...I know we are all biased in here, but was it really in the public interest to prosecute these two ladies?

So why prosecute?

Simple! 25% to CPS, 25% to the Police and 50% to the Treasury! Justice now has to make a profit!

BTW Did the learned judge forget to hit each lady £15 "victim surcharge" not a bloody penny of which goes to any victim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simple! 25% to CPS, 25% to the Police and 50% to the Treasury! Justice now has to make a profit!

BTW Did the learned judge forget to hit each lady £15 "victim surcharge" not a bloody penny of which goes to any victim?

Indeed- but the better general principle of taxation is to pluck as many feathers from the goose with as little hissing as possible, not to wring its neck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im just amazed they didnt even try and fight it, sounds like they would have been prime candidates to test the law and public opinions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed- but the better general principle of taxation is to pluck as many feathers from the goose with as little hissing as possible, not to wring its neck.

and killing the goose that lays the golden egg.

I wonder how much the prosecution cost the CPS, and how much they will realise by forceably converscating and selling the proceeds of their work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think of all the overtime police earn in these matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this lady personally, i got done 2yrs ago for the same thing and got 3mths jail suspended for 2yrs, i gave her my solicitor and she got the same barrister as me, but she got a better judge than me. Wish i had asked for a jury now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know this lady personally, i got done 2yrs ago for the same thing and got 3mths jail suspended for 2yrs, i gave her my solicitor and she got the same barrister as me, but she got a better judge than me. Wish i had asked for a jury now.

Its a real shame they didnt try and fight it, public opinion has seriously shifted over the last few years, lets hope the Claire Finch case is the first of many if people are brave enough to stand up to the system.

Any sentence is pretty crap but a 3 month suspended is still not bad in comparison to some of the sentences being handed out down this way. A lady in bournmouth got 15 months inside a few weeks ago. By all accounts that was a well run place from what I have heard. In short NEVER go guilty, not these days anyway. When we have murderers and rapists testing the "system" by going not guilty when evidence is clearly against them you would think those in this industry would be more ready to take a trial by jury

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its a real shame they didnt try and fight it, public opinion has seriously shifted over the last few years, lets hope the Claire Finch case is the first of many if people are brave enough to stand up to the system.

Any sentence is pretty crap but a 3 month suspended is still not bad in comparison to some of the sentences being handed out down this way. A lady in bournmouth got 15 months inside a few weeks ago. By all accounts that was a well run place from what I have heard. In short NEVER go guilty, not these days anyway. When we have murderers and rapists testing the "system" by going not guilty when evidence is clearly against them you would think those in this industry would be more ready to take a trial by jury

I agree with both your comments regarding public opinion and pleading not guilty.

Justice is a lottery and these days it's just not worth pleading guilty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know we are all biased in here, but was it really in the public interest to prosecute these two ladies?

The business was paying tax, several ladies were gainfully employed, the ladies were working safely, and no-one was causing any nuisance to the neighbours.

So why prosecute? No-one was being exploited, no-one was suffering, everyone seemed happy.

But sadly, no happy ending.

I agree with you x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Confiscating their assets will actually cost the Inland Revenue serious money in lost taxes. This is criminal in the midst of such a phenomenally bad financial crisis for the UK where we need every tax pound we can get!! :D:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay. Just an idea based on all I have just read on this thread and around the website. You know that the 'new' government has a public website for the public on which the public can suggest spending cuts. On it the public can put forward ideas on how to cut public spending. The only problem currently being, as soon as a topic is posted on the government website, it dissappears into the archives within minutes. This also means a topic does not get rated positively enough to appear in the websites top rated entries. Solution: organise our members. Before doing so we need to post the ultimate ... Sorry need to stop. I am in Greece and the moment and thing there is an earth quake... will update later

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep was fortunately only a small earth quake.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/us2010yubx.php

Okay. Just an idea based on all I have just read on this thread and around the website. You know that the 'new' government has a public website for the public on which the public can suggest spending cuts. On it the public can put forward ideas on how to cut public spending. The only problem currently being, as soon as a topic is posted on the government website, it dissappears into the archives within minutes. This also means a topic does not get rated positively enough to appear in the websites top rated entries. Solution: organise our members. Before doing so we need to post the ultimate ... Sorry need to stop. I am in Greece and the moment and thing there is an earth quake... will update later

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