That's because the house is in the Wolseley area, occupied by many upwardly mobile families, When Jesse's was busted, the story didn't get nearly the same publicity because it was on Agnes Street, a high crime area. Also, Jesse was just a madam, not an outspoken activist.
prostitution house bust
- Thread starter bigben
- Start date
Just my opinion
I've been pretty much retired from this hobby since before i heard of this site(would have been nice to know back in the day).I don't have anything against anyone in this hobby.But if i heard right on the news that children in the house were exposed to this behavior,as a father of a young daughter i would have to say i'm not impressed.
I've been pretty much retired from this hobby since before i heard of this site(would have been nice to know back in the day).I don't have anything against anyone in this hobby.But if i heard right on the news that children in the house were exposed to this behavior,as a father of a young daughter i would have to say i'm not impressed.
The paper mentioned that 2 clients in their mid 50's were paying $200 for dom and service. I remember syd saying that no records would be kept of clients.
My question would be, how did they get ahold of those 2 men?
I'm glad I have never given out info to any of the SP's. If they require telephone # or place of employment I generally stay away from those SP's even if they are the "better" ones. I would recommend to you gents that you do the same or else you too will end up like those 2 men in their mid 50's.
Also, remember folks anything that touches a SP's hard drive can be retrieved and emails with your personal info can be retrieved EVEN IF THEY ARE DELETED. So play safe gentlemen and be smart about your personal information.
My question would be, how did they get ahold of those 2 men?
I'm glad I have never given out info to any of the SP's. If they require telephone # or place of employment I generally stay away from those SP's even if they are the "better" ones. I would recommend to you gents that you do the same or else you too will end up like those 2 men in their mid 50's.
Also, remember folks anything that touches a SP's hard drive can be retrieved and emails with your personal info can be retrieved EVEN IF THEY ARE DELETED. So play safe gentlemen and be smart about your personal information.
Did you read the article?
Police took their investigation to the next level on June 22 when they grabbed two alleged johns as they left the premises. A 50-year-old man told officers he had visited the brothel six times in the past year. He claimed to have paid a woman named Andrea $200 for "full service" on three occasions. His other three appointments were with Sydnee. The man said he paid her $200 for full service on one occasion and $120 for oral sex the other two times.
"He says (she) has a variety of guys and girls working out of her home. Andrea told him she provided $20 to (her) for the use of the room," Jones said.
A 55-year-old client told police he had gone to the home four times since February for Sydnee to be a dominatrix to him at the rate of $200 an hour.
It said that they busted the two men as they left. And the idiots didn't make up stories about quoting on new windows or taking a sex toy class. The information about the frequency and type of visits were volunteered by the actual johns. Obviously, they were those two men.
They also were watching the house for over a week. Police may be able to track people by license number, etc. But since they can't prove what happened while anyone was in the house (were you a plumbing contractor estimating a job, a computer trainer, etc), they'll never come after any of those.
There was no mention of any records found or used, no mention of lists. I don't think that will be a problem at all. For a john to be charged, he has to caught "in flagrente delecto", actually in the act, to get charged.
I wouldn't be worried at all.
Rubin
Last edited:
Don't take this as a personal bash, but I couldn't disagree more.
What information an sp requires prior to a visit is up to her to decide. If you don't like the request, you are more than free to move on. But should you want to partake of her services, you must play by her rules. She sets the terms, when she will see you, how much it will cost, where it will happpen, etc. She sets the terms (and a good one will do her best to accomodate a client, especially if she wants to get return business), you can agree or not.
It's a simple thing. Just like with a mechanic, a plumber, or a dentist. You'd never consider making the unreasonable requests you seem to require from sp's when you deal with any other service provider. " I need you to fix my car in the next two hours, but I'm not going to give you my phone number, and you shouldn't charge me more than $180 because that's how much Bob at the other garage would charge". So why are sp's different?
Reforming the industry would include making sure personal information of clients *is* kept, for the protection of both client and sp.
By reforming the industry, you want to take away the criminality of the services provided, so therefore you eliminate the need for anonimity. Records need to be kept for tax purposes, and in case of disputes or even attacks, to protect the sp. Or for contact information should a heath risk show up after a visit (which can happen in even the safest environment).
By removing the criminality, you make it safer for the sp, and then they can actually work for less. Prices would drop (just like if weed were legalized, it wouldn't cost a quarter of what it does now, even with gov't taxes added). They can file tax returns, qualify for RRSPs, get health coverage, even workman's comp and EI. That's what were looking for in reforming the industry.
If you want to frequent girls who don't care about their safety by not asking for "personable information", go ahead. If you need that anonimity, you'll have to settle for the less careful ladies. Maybe those street walkers discussed in another thread. Or CL "girls". But quality providers will require personal info, contact phone # or referral before the first visit to ensure thier safety. But they destroy that info after everything proves out fine. And I wouldn't want it any other way.
Rubin
Wow. The depth of your wisdom astounds me. If they want personal info, choose another sp. Umm... yeah.
Your points are diametrically opposed. Any sp that is sloppy enough to leave personal information accessable to the authorities, well, they're the kind that really don't care. The professional women who are concerned enough to want to protect themselves by requesting personal information, well, they're the ones that are concerned enough for thier clients to ensure that that information does *not* fall into the wrong hands.
If you're not comfortable with the requirements an sp requests, then by all means, seek your lovin' elsewhere. But don't try to pressure a lady into doing something she doesn't want to. It just makes for a bad session.
As to clients dictating the market, again, you are right. But there are enough of us who do care about the ladies enough to want them to be safe and comfortable to prevent the anarchy you want.
Oh, and if you think that this forum is "safe" or any other method of communication, you are sorely misguided. If LE wanted to bust you, you'd be done. Especially if you like the girls that don't ask questions. Those are the easiest for LE to use as a sting. The less they ask about you, the less you know about them. Think about it.
Reform should go the opposite that you are sugesting. More regulation, not less. Legal standing, not further underground. The worse the situation becomes, the easier it is for true pimps to make a living. If Syd was a pimp as she is being made out to be, then we should have a lot more pimps. Just not with kids/drugs in the house in a residential neighborhood.
Rubin
(wishing for a safe, legal system where people can exchange services better, cleaner, cheaper, safer.)
rubintugger empty ur pm box 
References people.... A reference from a verified provider is the easiest and fastest way to get verified. And guess what? No personal info needed Just a 'name' and/or 'handle' will normally do the job.
Keep women safe.
References people.... A reference from a verified provider is the easiest and fastest way to get verified. And guess what? No personal info needed
Just a 'name' and/or 'handle' will normally do the job. Keep women safe.
100% dead on, the SP is free to set what ever rules, prices, menu etc she is comfortable with and we have the right to accept that or walk away. To try and suggest anything else is immature. A little respect goes a long way when dealing with people, especially in an area as intimate as this.
OK now I'm lost, I thought the "point" to this thread was the bawdy house bust? Then it turned into a thread about giving out personal info. Now you want to turn it into a thread about how DB and AC feel about you?????
Maybe time to start a new thread if you can't stick to the original topic.
I didn't say YOU changed the topic, only that the topic HAD changed. Reread my post.
Please quit playing the victim and stay on the topic, you only brought this up because of the fight you had in the thread about another SP. You have an opinion that SP's should not ask for info, fine that's your opinion and your entitled to it. Some of us have the opinion the SP's are actually people as well and are allowed to chose how they conduct their business and ensure their personal safety.
Personally, I give out very little info and only to a select few SP's but to try and tell someone how they should conduct the way they work as an SP makes you no better than those who practice human trafficking in my opinion. If you want to start some kind of boycott against SP's that want to protect themselves then by all means go ahead, just don't be surprised if most SP's want nothing to do with you.
We all have our comfort levels and most of us here will defend anyones right to do as they please be it Pooner or SP.
Please quit playing the victim and stay on the topic, you only brought this up because of the fight you had in the thread about another SP. You have an opinion that SP's should not ask for info, fine that's your opinion and your entitled to it. Some of us have the opinion the SP's are actually people as well and are allowed to chose how they conduct their business and ensure their personal safety.
Personally, I give out very little info and only to a select few SP's but to try and tell someone how they should conduct the way they work as an SP makes you no better than those who practice human trafficking in my opinion. If you want to start some kind of boycott against SP's that want to protect themselves then by all means go ahead, just don't be surprised if most SP's want nothing to do with you.
We all have our comfort levels and most of us here will defend anyones right to do as they please be it Pooner or SP.
No we don't, smokie. <i>You</i> want to talk about yourself. Now - once again - can we keep this thread on topic, please!
I'm of mixed feelings about this bust. On one hand, I certainly encourage housing for the safety and protection of escorts. I've never met the co-owner in person, but on the boards she's been encouraging and supportive of other ladies and polite and friendly to all. Having read the Winnipeg Free Press article, I'm respectful of the police for keeping an eye on the establishment for so long without raiding it. According to the police, they only acted when evidence surfaced that minors could be witnesses to what was going on in the house. And, if that's the case, I don't fault the police for busting this particular establishment if it's to protect minors. Mind you, this is going by the media reports - I don't believe everything I see on the news.
I read multiple and in one it said that there was no word if the cops will be going after clients yet.
I guess we just wait and see. If some of you stop posting we'll know why
Last edited:
Cops won't go after past johns. Its just not worth it. Especially when a lot of those clients may be important people. And if they go after any, they have to go after all, otherwise the ones they do go after can claim unfair prosecution.
Smokie's proposed boycott of sp's that require references is quite the pipe dream. Its worse thn the guy who proposed a couple years ago that if we stop paying $200 eventually the sp's would drop thier rates. Well, that one worked great. As with any boycott, you need a majority of the group to be involved, otherwise you are just tilting at windmills.
Rubin
Smokie's proposed boycott of sp's that require references is quite the pipe dream. Its worse thn the guy who proposed a couple years ago that if we stop paying $200 eventually the sp's would drop thier rates. Well, that one worked great. As with any boycott, you need a majority of the group to be involved, otherwise you are just tilting at windmills.
Rubin
I remember seeing in the news a year or so back that a SP in the states got busted and the cops singled out her most frequent customers and the most notable ones, so I'm not sure unfair prosecution would apply to this.
I wonder if this whole incident can be made into a legalization issue. You would think that allowing brothels would be the obvious solution to all those missing street workers. Brothels do save lives, lets make them legal!
And when they do become legal who'll partner up with me and open a bunny ranch here in the peg? lol
Ok., so I'm the SP you called ordinary, or less than. Now you're accusing me of not being intelligent? I think the reason you may feel attacked on here is because your comments often contradict themselves, you don't take the time to check your spelling, grammar or composition and you haven't actually said 1 positive thing about the SPs in Winnipeg. Which begs the question, if we're all so stupid and ordinary, why not find yourself a different 'hobby'?
In reference to the bust, I only have a problem with an 11 year old child being subjected to it.
