First prosecution under Nordic model

[dannylad]

If that's the way they are, they must be fairly horrible folk!

A mate of mine who is from a working class area in Galway city centre and is a highly respected professional told me a few years ago, a psycho with the exact same name as himself, but totally unrelated to him, stabbed and killed another bloke in the same area and of course it was reported in the local Rag with full names and general location.
He complained to the paper and demanded clarification that it was not him and he was just laughed at!

yes that whats they'll be saying and everyone knows everybody's else's business, people who don't visit escorts are like that, they see it so differently,

[TheKnight]

Theres nothing out there worth getting arrested for, i'm sad to say

[Barney Rubble]

his name was published, now everyones knows he paid for sex, you don't know the tyrone people. he'll never live it down,all he'll hear on the streets now is 'there's that dirty bastard that was shagging prostitutes up yonder'

Just as well he's from Armagh then. Armagh folk never gossip!!

[Hallie]

this could have been me, was caught few months back but let off, I think its all down to the cop who you get and I feel so lucky as would hate to be this guy, my heart goes out to him

[The Libertarian]

this could have been me, was caught few months back but let off, I think its all down to the cop who you get and I feel so lucky as would hate to be this guy, my heart goes out to him

Was this in The Republic? The Gardaí tend to have a lot of discretion in how they apply a law. It may have been the case, the bucks were told to leave clients alone for the time being or for a particular operation.
Down the line there may be a focus on clients, when brothels are raided, in which case, pressure will be brought to bear on the sex workers to grass on clients!
However, from a fine collection pov, prosecuting sex workers for 'brothel keeping' is much more lucrative for the state and gets more brownie points and doesn't alienate otherwise law abiding clients, than targeting clients!
Or they may be waiting for a test case before risking arresting clients, or they realize it's a completely unenforceable laughing stock of a law!
May be they are human too or more likely to fucking lazy to be arsed!

[SteveB]

From the press and in the public domain; [bit long I know, but reproduced in entirety]

Last minute delay in paying for sexual services case against Armagh man

ONE of the first cases to reach court relating to alleged payment of sexual services, has been adjourned, after the injured party was unable to attend.
Despite strenuous objections by defence lawyers, a Judge agreed to allow the case not to proceed although he described the last minute delay as “quite disturbing” given the seriousness of the offence.
J**** M***** (23) of D*** V***, Armagh is accused of attempting to obtain sexual services from a woman on 28 August 2016, in exchange for payment made or promised.
He denies the allegation and the case was scheduled to be heard as a contest at Dungannon Magistrates Court on Tuesday 30 January.
However a prosecution lawyer explained she was in difficulties as, whilst the Police officer involved was present, the injured party had not attended. It also emerged there was no interpreter who would have been required for the injured party who does not speak English.
The court heard she had indicted her willingness to attend the hearing, and this had been the position since the decision was taken to prosecute M****.

The prosecutor said: “The injured party has sent a message to say she cannot attend as she working. There is a possibility she is of the view she may lose her job if she fails to report for work. The Police officer advises me there are some language difficulties and the injured party has no English. I accept this excuse does not hold much weight, but this is the first time of listing for contest and the first application to adjourn. It is essential I have the injured party here to give evidence.”
It was accepted the PPS were responsible for booking an interpreter, which had not been done.
As a result the prosecutor sought an adjournment: “To ascertain whether the injured party will be available on another date or whether a summons will have to be issued.”

But defence counsel strenuously opposed this maintaining the case against his client “is very weak”.
He stated: “This matter was first in court in October 2017 when a not guilty plea was entered. Two weeks later a contest date of 30 January was identified. There were repeated reviews — one no later than 10 January — during which all parties were in agreement of the date and everyone was ready to proceed. The PPS are here, the defence are here and the investigating officer is here. Only the injured party is absent.”
The defence urged District Judge Michael Ranahan to treat the explanation for non-attendance “with a high degree of scepticism”.
He said: “This incident is alleged to have happened in a garage forecourt, where the injured party works. Her employer is well aware of this case and it would be his duty to arrange for her to be off in order to appear. It may well be this lady doesn’t want to attend and is using work as an excuse.”
He concluded: “This is a very weak Crown case. It is imperative this matter proceeds today, and the Crown be invited to call their evidence, and let this conclude today”

After some consideration Judge Ranahan said: “The excuse for non-attendance is flimsy at best, as is the lateness of the application to adjourn. In fact it is quite disturbing. This is a very serious offence. However it is the first time of listing and I have to give credence to the possibility of language issues.”
He agreed to adjourn the hearing on this occasion but warned evidence would be required proving the injured party’s work status and showing what efforts she made to take the day off.

The case has been adjourned until 14 February when a new date is to be fixed for hearing

[Cassandra]

Sweet fucking hell.
The word farcical simply isn't enough.

[SteveB]

Sweet fucking hell.
The word farcical simply isn't enough.

Indeed.

“This incident is alleged to have happened in a garage forecourt, where the injured party works". Who needs Escort Ireland when you can simply approach someone at their place of work? Someone who doesn't speak English?

[LozzoD79]

From the press and in the public domain; [bit long I know, but reproduced in entirety]

Last minute delay in paying for sexual services case against Armagh man

ONE of the first cases to reach court relating to alleged payment of sexual services, has been adjourned, after the injured party was unable to attend.
Despite strenuous objections by defence lawyers, a Judge agreed to allow the case not to proceed although he described the last minute delay as “quite disturbing” given the seriousness of the offence.
J**** M***** (23) of D*** V***, Armagh is accused of attempting to obtain sexual services from a woman on 28 August 2016, in exchange for payment made or promised.
He denies the allegation and the case was scheduled to be heard as a contest at Dungannon Magistrates Court on Tuesday 30 January.
However a prosecution lawyer explained she was in difficulties as, whilst the Police officer involved was present, the injured party had not attended. It also emerged there was no interpreter who would have been required for the injured party who does not speak English.
The court heard she had indicted her willingness to attend the hearing, and this had been the position since the decision was taken to prosecute M****.

The prosecutor said: “The injured party has sent a message to say she cannot attend as she working. There is a possibility she is of the view she may lose her job if she fails to report for work. The Police officer advises me there are some language difficulties and the injured party has no English. I accept this excuse does not hold much weight, but this is the first time of listing for contest and the first application to adjourn. It is essential I have the injured party here to give evidence.”
It was accepted the PPS were responsible for booking an interpreter, which had not been done.
As a result the prosecutor sought an adjournment: “To ascertain whether the injured party will be available on another date or whether a summons will have to be issued.”

But defence counsel strenuously opposed this maintaining the case against his client “is very weak”.
He stated: “This matter was first in court in October 2017 when a not guilty plea was entered. Two weeks later a contest date of 30 January was identified. There were repeated reviews — one no later than 10 January — during which all parties were in agreement of the date and everyone was ready to proceed. The PPS are here, the defence are here and the investigating officer is here. Only the injured party is absent.”
The defence urged District Judge Michael Ranahan to treat the explanation for non-attendance “with a high degree of scepticism”.
He said: “This incident is alleged to have happened in a garage forecourt, where the injured party works. Her employer is well aware of this case and it would be his duty to arrange for her to be off in order to appear. It may well be this lady doesn’t want to attend and is using work as an excuse.”
He concluded: “This is a very weak Crown case. It is imperative this matter proceeds today, and the Crown be invited to call their evidence, and let this conclude today”

After some consideration Judge Ranahan said: “The excuse for non-attendance is flimsy at best, as is the lateness of the application to adjourn. In fact it is quite disturbing. This is a very serious offence. However it is the first time of listing and I have to give credence to the possibility of language issues.”
He agreed to adjourn the hearing on this occasion but warned evidence would be required proving the injured party’s work status and showing what efforts she made to take the day off.

The case has been adjourned until 14 February when a new date is to be fixed for hearing

Sorry not been following this, but what is the "injured party"?

[AZ99]

Sorry not been following this, but what is the "injured party"?

I think it's the woman who this guy tried to buy sexual services from.

This sounds like a really bizarre and unusual case. First of all, was she even offering sexual services? This happened at a garage! Second, why would an escort want to give evidence against a client at court? Most escorts wouldn't do that. Is she being forced to attend court against her will? If so, that's a really bad way to apply a law which is supposedly about protecting women.

What's going on here? I don't understand this at all.