Independent escorts, agencies and ‘protectors’

[dave101]

Forgetting about pure legalise, surely the term trafficking should include elements of ' against will ,control and fear '.

I presume a landlord who knowingly offers accommodation at a rent acceptable to a fully independent , fully consenting escort is still likely to be guilty of some criminal offence involving taking advantage of/ profiting from prostitution etc in line with brothel keeping/pimping.

In the cases in the media there was a combo of control in some people interviewed in safeguarding visits while others clearly said they weren't coerced.

Depends on the nature of the 'agency', but lets face it, this is pimping no mater how we cut it.

[Moocher]

In the cases in the media there was a combo of control in some people interviewed in safeguarding visits while others clearly said they weren't coerced.

Depends on the nature of the 'agency', but lets face it, this is pimping no mater how we cut it.

Yes in the eyes of the law, where also apparently paying for sexual services like kissing and hugging makes you a criminal too.

[dave101]

Yes in the eyes of the law, where also apparently paying for sexual services like kissing and hugging makes you a criminal too.

In the law it's an offence to even text or phone a sex worker, never mind physical contact.

[Moocher]

In the law it's an offence to even text or phone a sex worker, never mind physical contact.

What about offering one of them your seat on the bus ? Best just to sit tight I think.

[Moocher]

Profile wording limited to " Hi, I'm new in town" doesn't give cause for comfort.

Will a truly independent escort always clearly state on their profile that the escort is independent and if not, why not ?

[Boobsandbumlover]

In the law it's an offence to even text or phone a sex worker, never mind physical contact.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/e...alties%20apply.

This is the ‘law’ …interestingly as I see it…if you take this to a human rights court you’re very likely to win your case. Based on a number of aspects.

1. Consensual sex between two adults could and should never be a crime whether money is exchanged or not.

2. No one can ever prove that a ‘buyer’ of sex actually paid for the sex unless there’s a third party present to witness the transaction. Money found on the premises is not evidence that this money was exchanged for sex, just that it is there.

3. The whole premise for questioning anyone entering or leaving a certain property is against that person’s basic human rights and only serves to intimidate that person to answer questions they have no obligation to do.

And I’m sure a good lawyer could come up with pages and pages of arguments that this is a violation of people’s basic human rights.

The above should of course not be taken as a condonation of the criminality in sexwork that is clearly present. The problem is however that the ‘punter’ also maybe the victim of those crimes just as the sexworker is. The crime should not be sexwork. Many young women and men are also used as cheap labour where people are trafficked to work as cleaners, maids, etc where passports are being held back and other criminality such as rape takes place. In those cases the victim of those practices do not commit a crime by working for someone. Cleaning is not a crime, serving someone is not a crime as much as having consensual sex, paid or not is not a crime. It’s the peripheral activities by third parties that are often criminal.
That’s why for example in the Netherlands prostitution or sexwork is de criminalised.

[dave101]

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/e...alties%20apply.

This is the ‘law’ …interestingly as I see it…if you take this to a human rights court you’re very likely to win your case. Based on a number of aspects.

1. Consensual sex between two adults could and should never be a crime whether money is exchanged or not.

2. No one can ever prove that a ‘buyer’ of sex actually paid for the sex unless there’s a third party present to witness the transaction. Money found on the premises is not evidence that this money was exchanged for sex, just that it is there.

3. The whole premise for questioning anyone entering or leaving a certain property is against that person’s basic human rights and only serves to intimidate that person to answer questions they have no obligation to do.

And I’m sure a good lawyer could come up with pages and pages of arguments that this is a violation of people’s basic human rights.

The above should of course not be taken as a condonation of the criminality in sexwork that is clearly present. The problem is however that the ‘punter’ also maybe the victim of those crimes just as the sexworker is. The crime should not be sexwork. Many young women and men are also used as cheap labour where people are trafficked to work as cleaners, maids, etc where passports are being held back and other criminality such as rape takes place. In those cases the victim of those practices do not commit a crime by working for someone. Cleaning is not a crime, serving someone is not a crime as much as having consensual sex, paid or not is not a crime. It’s the peripheral activities by third parties that are often criminal.
That’s why for example in the Netherlands prostitution or sexwork is de criminalised.

Soliciting sex or 'attempting' to purchase sex is a crime. So being found there (irrespective of money changing hands) is enough for conviction with phone records showing the rest needed to prove why you were there at that specific address.

The only thing a hotshot solicitor is doing here is getting charges watered down to caution or something else. A caution for this offence in NI still gets you placed on sex offenders register, rendering you unemployable.

[Palatine]

Soliciting sex or 'attempting' to purchase sex is a crime. So being found there (irrespective of money changing hands) is enough for conviction with phone records showing the rest needed to prove why you were there at that specific address.

The only thing a hotshot solicitor is doing here is getting charges watered down to caution or something else.

I don't know about NI, but this is not true for ROI. Being on a premises is not in itself likely to see you charged, nevermind convicted of a crime. We still have the concept in this country of innocent until guilty and a criminal conviction requires a "beyond reasonable doubt" level of evidence. So, your chances of being charged in the first place depend on the overall weight of evidence available to the gardaí and provided to.the DPP. A typical.guard would hope to get evidence such as:

- Presence at location
- Financal records (did you wishdrawal from an ATM just beforehand and have nothing now)
- Text messages that can be attributed to you showing you offered to pay.for sex
- Witness testimony either from you, her, or anyone else involved in the transaction
- Evidence that sexual activity occurred or was planned
- EI advert records including favourites and other words in the ad likely to mean that sexual services were offered.

I'm here long enough to know that people will argue the toss about this without having a clue, or because they have their own agenda to put the frighteners on people. I'm not planning to argue this out. I'm only planning on saying I have reasonable experience and knowledge of this area and punters who are caught on premises should not presume they are now as good as convicted and should just splurge information in the hope of garda or court leniency.

You keep your mouth politely shut, except to confirm your name, address and desire to consult with a solicitor before answering any questions under caution. And then you let the gardaí do their job to try and accumulate enough evidence to charge you and get a potential conviction. That's it.

There isn't a single.prosecution, nevermind conviction in this.country that was secured on the weight of just being on a premises known to be used for the purposes of prostitution. Not one.

[Palatine]

Regarding "receptionists", a lot of this is becoming moot. Not too long ago, the suggestion on this forum that escorts should have whatsapp or telegram as a contact option was not a popular one here particularly.among the girls. Now, I'd say 40% use one or both and adverts even suggest that whatsapp is the preferred initial contact method. The trend is only going one direction. Good or bad - not sure. It makes detecting a receptionist very hard, but makes communication much easier for those who struggle with Irish accents, slang, traffic noise etc.

[dave101]

I don't know about NI, but this is not true for ROI. Being on a premises is not in itself likely to see you charged, nevermind convicted of a crime. We still have the concept in this country of innocent until guilty and a criminal conviction requires a "beyond reasonable doubt" level of evidence. So, your chances of being charged in the first place depend on the overall weight of evidence available to the gardaí and provided to.the DPP. A typical.guard would hope to get evidence such as:

- Presence at location
- Financal records (did you wishdrawal from an ATM just beforehand and have nothing now)
- Text messages that can be attributed to you showing you offered to pay.for sex
- Witness testimony either from you, her, or anyone else involved in the transaction
- Evidence that sexual activity occurred or was planned
- EI advert records including favourites and other words in the ad likely to mean that sexual services were offered.

I'm here long enough to know that people will argue the toss about this without having a clue, or because they have their own agenda to put the frighteners on people. I'm not planning to argue this out. I'm only planning on saying I have reasonable experience and knowledge of this area and punters who are caught on premises should not presume they are now as good as convicted and should just splurge information in the hope of garda or court leniency.

You keep your mouth politely shut, except to confirm your name, address and desire to consult with a solicitor before answering any questions under caution. And then you let the gardaí do their job to try and accumulate enough evidence to charge you and get a potential conviction. That's it.

There isn't a single.prosecution, nevermind conviction in this.country that was secured on the weight of just being on a premises known to be used for the purposes of prostitution. Not one.

One look at your phone or other devices after leaving a premises and its game set and match. From that your browsing history, plus calls made/texts sent and received and your locale at the time. There's no reasonable doubt issue here. It's clear in this instance you found EI, made contact and went for sex, not to discuss philosophy.

With such overwhelming evidence, the cops may then offer a settlement in the station between you and your solicitor to keep it out of courts to save wasting the time, especially if this is your first offence. But maybe not, we often see people in court and in the papers for minor speeding offences. So, why wouldn't a cop keen to make an example of someone go all the way.

There have been multiple charges of the purchase of sex in NI - all out all disposed of out of court with cautions and community notice orders - both very serious offences in their own way.

Possibly the best way to avoid a lot of this is using a burner phone plus obviously not getting stopped at a location, or alternatively, don't do it at all in NI or Eire.