Getting busted at mp

[K T]

Here you go again making wild interpretations. You do realize that licensed and unlicensed parlours IN THAT SAME REGION, HAVE BEEN CHARGED and PEOPLES NAMES HAVE BEEN IN THE PAPER since that case.

 

[righteousjohnson]

The 1999 Canadian Supreme Court ruling also helped saying full contact laps are legal criminally, but still have the bylaw issues...but can't unreasonably restrict what is legal i.e. Brampton MP case that prevented the city from enforcement of not being nude etc.



Lets hope so!

 

[Cynthia]

stay away from Vaughan (esp Markham) as raids were common over past couple years.....Also, stay with licenced places...this forum has lots of info of the good ones.....

cheers

 

[hey!]

I certainly never heard the argument that in a privately owned strip club where you have to prove your over 18 (I assume) even to get in, just being able to be seen in a VIP room would make it public. Not sure why being public is even important - it could be for solicitation of prostitution in a public place but the Supreme Court ruling was about lap dances in strip clubs. There as no public or private issue from what I recall having read the case years ago.

However the other issue dealing with zoning is that in fact the Toronto Strip Club bylaw prohibits just about all contact. It probably has never been enforced since just like Brampton found it it would probably not be upheld and probably could get an injunction against as Brampton did for being nude in adult body rub.

However, in B.C. the Alchohol Commission bylaw restricts contact. That has to my knowledge never been challagend. Perhaps restrictions where serve liquor may or may not be upheld as a liquor license requirement.

Fortunately Ontario ABC is no similar limitation nor does Quebec as I understand.

 

[Lian]

So what? Cops can charge anyone for anything anytime. They can be stupid or smart about it, and right or wrong about the law and the strength of their evidence. Until a court decides, no one is is guilty of anything, and there is no precedent set.

There's a huge difference between what the law is

 

[time2ryme]

So what.. it should be very easy to recognize for those, with basic common sense, that the mean reason I posted it was that the article has had no impact on getting charged in the area... which is the point of the thread.

 

[Suz C]

Dave, that court ruling is by such a minor lower court that it has no real precedential value whatsoever. As that judge is on the very lowest tier of judge-hood, other judges are free to ignore him. That's probably why the Crown didn't appeal.

Judgments only really start to kick ass at the Superior Court level and then work up through the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

 

[Wade L]

Actually the point of the thread was:
But thank you for clarifying your mean reason for posting.

Since the cops don't take orders from newspaper articles, I think you meant the judge's decision "…has had no impact on getting charged in the area". No surprise there. Whether it impacts being convicted is yet to be seen.

Glad you got that sticky shift key fixed.