I’ve been getting a flood of emails asking me whether AV can track members down.
Rather than to continue to respond on an individual basis, I’ve decided to start a thread on this matter so that the information is shared by all.
The answer is very simple. unless you disclose your real identity voluntarily, I don’t have a clue who you are and I don’t log any IPs either so I have no idea where each post originates from. If I can’t see who you are, then neither can anyone else.
In addition, patronising a prostitute, PROVIDED SHE IS 18 AND ABOVE, is perfectly legal so there is no reason for any law enforcement agencies to hunt you down in the first place.
You only cross the line if you go from being a customer to being a pimp. This happens when you start recommending girls and receiving a commission either in cash or in kind. If you’re just spreading the word about a good lay, no crime is committed.
Prostitutes aren’t breaking the law either as long as they don’t solicit in public. However, foreign prostitutes who arrive in Singapore on social visit passes aren’t supposed to work during their stay so getting paid for sex would be in breach of the visa conditions.
Running an escort agency is not an offense either. There are many escort agencies in Singapore and they’re listed on the yellow pages.
I hope this clarifies matters.
What about those links to the various stables posted all over SBF? Aren’t the links and the ads forms of solicitation?
I hope it will not happen, but I foresee efforts being made to crack down on such ads in the near future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sgjoey
What about those links to the various stables posted all over SBF? Aren’t the links and the ads forms of solicitation?
I hope it will not happen, but I foresee efforts being made to crack down on such ads in the near future.
Girls who advertise independently are not committing any crime whatsoever. Take Natsuki as an example. She has been in the business for SEVEN YEARS! She is advertising her services on line which is not an offense. She only commits an offense if she solicits in public eg standing by the side of the road and approaching potential customers with an offer of sex for money.
Her thread
has almost 5000 posts and contains all the details regarding what goes on. All perfectly legal.
Geylang, KS, Petain etc… all 100% legal.
Now let’s come to the stables. If the girls are operating independently, no crime is committed. If they have a pimp, then the pimp is committing a crime by living off the earnings of a prostitute if he takes a cut of each transaction.
However, if the business is set up as an escort agency, it would appear that it is perfectly legal as I see hundreds of registered escort agencies operating in Singapore without ever being prosecuted.
The escort agencies hire the girls out by the hour as social companions. Any sex between client and escort is a private arrangement and the escort agency plays no part in this transaction. I know it is farcical but that’s the way the law appears to work.
As far as I’m concerned, when I accept a banner advertisement from someone who is advertising an escort agency, it is not up to me to check on the legality of the set up. I wouldn’t be able to even if I wanted to as I’m 5000km away from the action. Accepting such adverts is also legal. If it wasn’t, the
would have been prosecuted a long time ago.
Take a look
for yourself.
As far as clients are concerned, I see no reason why any laws are being broken even if you hire a whore from one of the stables. It is not your responsibility to find out what the financial arrangements are. The customer pays the girl for sex which is a legal transaction. How the money is shared after the deed has nothing to do with the customer. If the girls keeps all the money to herself, then no crime has been committed. If someone else is taking a cut too, that person is deemed to be living off the earnings of prostitution which is a crime.
The ads I refer to are clearly not escort agencies but have to do directly with sex work. The time and number of shots are also clearly stated. Wouldn’t this count as online solicitation? I am referring to FL1, FL2 and FL3 sites generally, plus their banner ads in various places.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sgjoey
The ads I refer to are clearly not escort agencies but have to do directly with sex work. The time and number of shots are also clearly stated. Wouldn’t this count as online solicitation? I am referring to FL1, FL2 and FL3 sites generally, plus their banner ads in various places.
On line solicitation is not a crime.
Public
solicitation is a crime.
Boss, if the girl shows a FAKE passport which indicates that she is 18 or above, when actually she is not, and we cannot spot the fake and continue with the deed, how safe will we be?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
thomas999
Boss, if the girl shows a FAKE passport which indicates that she is 18 or above, when actually she is not, and we cannot spot the fake and continue with the deed, how safe will we be?
This involves and area of the law which I’m not that familiar with involving “due diligence”.
If you can prove that you performed the necessary due diligence to establish that the girl was 18 and above, then you would not have committed any offense as you genuinely believed that the transaction was legal.
However, the key word is “necessary”. To what extent do you have to go in order to establish age? I don’t have an answer to this. Some precedence needs to have been set in a previous case of a similar nature. Perhaps a lawyer could help.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sammyboyfor
On line solicitation is not a crime.
Public
solicitation is a crime.
But isn’t online (posting on forums) part of something called “public domain”,
hence indirectly it is also “Public Solicitation” ?
They might update the law and might actually put public to include online
This was what was said in Parliament 7 years ago. Since then, the age has been raised from 16 to 18 but I believe the rest of the statutes have remained the same.
http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2004/yax-383.htm
Quote:
3 Sept 2004
Straits Times
Cases of forced prostitution are ‘very rare’
These women are not offenders, but if they solicit for sex in public, they will be prosecuted, says Ho Peng Kee
Women brought here and forced to be prostitutes will not be prosecuted. Neither will foreign women who come here to earn money as prostitutes.
The reason they are not treated as offenders is that prostitution is not an offence here. However, if they solicit for sex
in public
, they will be prosecuted.
Senior Minister of State Ho Peng Kee, in assuring Nominated MP Braema Mathi that these women are neither treated as offenders nor victims, gave updated figures to show that trafficking of sex workers is not a significant problem here.
Quote:
The government recognised that many women come into Singapore on social visit passes with the intention to work, voluntarily, as sex workers.
But Ho stressed that unless they posed a nuisance to the public by brazenly soliciting on the streets
, no action would be taken.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Camel
But isn’t online (posting on forums) part of something called “public domain”,
hence indirectly it is also “Public Solicitation” ?
They might update the law and might actually put public to include online
The law is always open to interpretation. That’s why lawyers make an obscene amount of money.
The way I see it now, “in public” means making a nuisance of themselves on the streets and in public places. However, if the law is changed to include on line forums that are accessible to the “public”, then I would suggest that this forum should go “private”.