[SWAF-Potluck] Naughty School Boy

Sun Apr 26 11:55:33 PDT 2015

Yes that's right.  Anyone can challenge one or more of the laws.  I
wouldn't advise it at this early date, but it's an option.  And you're
right, it was a client who challenged the communicating law.

K

On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Andrew Sorfleet <a.sorfleet at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thanks Kerry,
>
> So Pivot wants to challenge all new laws at once, but that doesn't mean
> that individuals or groups can't challenge small specific parts of the law.
> Right? As long as its not frivolous and vexatious. [image: 😀]
>
> That is how we began the road to striking down the last laws. The
> soliciting law was restricted twice by the Supreme Court before the
> government finally enacted the new "communicating" law in 1986 i think.
>
> I think the soliciting law was first challenged by a client.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 26, 2015, at 11:31 AM, Kerry Porth <kerrylporth at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> You are correct Andrew. You can read about the successful court challenge
> to the rules regarding who gets public interest standing here:
>
> http://www.pivotlegal.org/scc_decision_in_swuav_a_triumph_for_access_to_justice
>
> The Pivot challenge to prostitution laws was launched prior to the Bedford
> case but got hung up on the issue of standing.  Once that issue was decided
> by the Supreme Court, the Bedford case was already well underway so
> litigation was put on hold.
>
> Pivot will be launching a challenge to the new laws but is in the earliest
> stages of mapping out a strategy as they will challenge the laws as a
> scheme rather than challenging individual provisions under Bill C-36.  For
> a challenge to be successful, much evidence of the impact of the news laws
> will have to be gathered and they simply haven't been in force and effect
> long enough for the evidence to be robust enough. Challenges can be thrown
> out as "frivolous and vexatious" if the evidence isn't there. In other
> words, it is far too early to launch a challenge.
>
> And just to be clear, Pivot did not launch a second challenge but
> represented SWUAV and PACE Society and intervened in the final appeal of
> the Bedford case.  You can learn more about that in this video:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvKAVR75vMU
>
> In solidarity,
>
> Kerry
>
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Andrew Sorfleet <a.sorfleet at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Kerry please correct me if i am wrong. You do not have to be charged to
>> launch a court challenge. Thanks to the Supreme Court Kiesselbach decision,
>> a member of the public can launch a court challenge for the public good.
>> Thanks to Sheri K. who was denied standing because although she had 25+
>> years in the business she was not currently at risk of being arrested,
>> having retired from the business.
>>
>> Pivot launched the 2nd court challenge coupled in the bedford case, on
>> behalf of Sex Workers United Against Violence from the DTES.
>>
>> In other words, an association of sex workers, with the help of lawyers
>> like Pivot, could launch a court challenge any time now, if there are
>> grounds to question the laws constitutionality.
>>
>> Any takers? <emoji_u1f600.png>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Apr 26, 2015, at 1:28 AM, Chenoa Johnston <chenoadj at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jules,
>>
>> I wonder how old that post is?  The debates / testimony speeches before
>> the Senate were last summer with only a few extra in the fall.  I was on
>> the list to go in October before the Bill's final passing.  It did pass and
>> the Senate did not hear me speak, nor many others from across Canada who
>> were ready to speak! The Senate denied our requests and passed the Bill
>> anyway.  I sent a long and detailed letter which was available for all
>> Senators to read. Any letter sent with the request to speak had to be
>> circulated and also posted on the Senate's website.
>>
>> As the Bill had passed the only ways to overturn it are
>>
>> 1) a new government is voted in and they overturn it
>>
>> 2) someone is charged and they decide to make the case a Charter of
>> Rights Challenge and go all the way to the Supreme Court. ( which can take
>> 5-10 years)
>>
>> Vancouver is in favor of real safety issues of sex workers and we are
>> fortunate here that law enforcement is mostly on our side.
>>
>> However any law enforcement agency can choose to enforce the laws as they
>> interpret them at any time - and leave it up to the prosecutors and courts
>> to hash it out.
>>
>> sad sad stuff - rights and freedoms stampled!
>>
>> much love, Chenoa
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Jules Woods <julesinthewoods at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Happy Sunny Saturday, lovelies.
>>>
>>> I had a nasty caller this morning, who told me to check out PERB.ca and
>>> see my reviews. So I did, and found nothing on me, but this posting
>>> instead, which I thought I'd forward.
>>>
>>> There seems to be a groundswell happening with Bill C-36 and
>>> participating like this is a great way to add your voice to the critical
>>> mass we need to make change.
>>>
>>> Write a letter, with your positive experiences and suggestions to
>>> government on how to improve your life. Worth a try, eh?)
>>>
>>> Enjoy your day!
>>>
>>> Love Lisa
>>>
>>> the first ever HAPPY HOOKER movement ...PLEASE participate!!
>>>
>>> Dear ladies;
>>>
>>> It has become apparent that the government of Canada has not heard from
>>> a rather large sector of the adult industry: The rights of happy,
>>> voluntary, consensual sex worker who is enjoying or has enjoyed the
>>> financial, social, & liberating benefits of the lucrative trade of services
>>> for money.**
>>>
>>> We are gathering letters from workers to send to the Senate before it
>>> debates Bill C-36. It's important this side be heard because it separates
>>> the experience of choosing high end sex work versus those stuck in the
>>> survival sex trade (which is often caused by social deprivations such as
>>> poverty, mental health, addiction; whereas high-end sex work is generally a
>>> free-will choice by empowered women choosing sex work as a platform to
>>> other life goals).
>>>
>>> **We all can agree that the survival sex trade is awful and these
>>> contributing issues must be addressed.
>>>
>>> * However, more information & insight regarding consensual adults
>>> exchanging sex for money is needed ASAP! As this sector of the industry
>>> requires a different set of laws/regulation/legalization. We need your help
>>> to get this important message heard!*
>>>
>>>
>>> Here is what is needed in your letter:
>>>
>>> - today's date
>>>
>>> Dear Madames/Sirs;
>>>
>>> - Your first name, your business title (independent escort, exotic
>>> dancer, massage attendant, etc). **
>>> - how you got into the industry
>>> - why you decide on sex work
>>> - what you enjoy about your job
>>> - any accomplishments you have achieved due to the financial benefits of
>>> sex work
>>> - other positive gains you feel you enjoy in this line of work
>>> - some comments about what customers are like
>>> - one well thought-out suggestion about what the government can do to
>>> improve your experience as a sex worker**
>>> - if you have retired from the business, describe your success & exit
>>> strategy.**
>>>
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> - sign with your real 1st name ideally. It will come across with much
>>> more integrity than a stage name. If you do not feel comfortable, sign
>>> however you wish **
>>>
>>> This letter should be clear, concise, and simple, one page max!
>>>
>>> Email to me at MissJessicaLeeSP at gmail.com or to Emily at
>>> emily at musemassagespa.com do it today if you can!! We will print and
>>> deliver them.
>>>
>>> Pass this on to as many workers as you can!**
>>> *Let's start the 1st ever Happy Hooker Movement. Thank you!*
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Andrew Sorfleet <a.sorfleet at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My latest post on The Naked Truth for #Facesofprostitution Twitter.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nakedtruth.ca/2015/04/a-date-with-naughty-school-boy.html?m=1
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> SWAF-Potluck mailing list
>>>> SWAF-Potluck at lists.resist.ca
>>>> https://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swaf-potluck
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SWAF-Potluck mailing list
>>> SWAF-Potluck at lists.resist.ca
>>> https://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swaf-potluck
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SWAF-Potluck mailing list
>> SWAF-Potluck at lists.resist.ca
>> https://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swaf-potluck
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.resist.ca/pipermail/swaf-potluck/attachments/20150426/ce949023/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: emoji_u1f600.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1358 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.resist.ca/pipermail/swaf-potluck/attachments/20150426/ce949023/attachment-0001.png>