Log in

View Full Version : I Got Arrested!!!!



Pages : 1 [2]

sexy_celeste
09-21-2006, 05:24 PM
If she had fake ID, I don't know why they're charging you. It would be different if you hadn't checked it.

Please get professional legal advise.

Thanks Babe, I do have professional legal advice. Yeah Im also wondering about the whole fake ID thing. One of the lawyers thinks I may even have grounds for wrongful arrest!

sexy_celeste
09-21-2006, 05:26 PM
It really isnt that hard to get fooled by underagers anymore. They look older and older, and the quality of fake IDs is going up and up.

Exactly!
She also knew of some of the other performers, as they mixed in the same wider social circle, and they had no idea.

Plus the fact that she had walked into a 18+ area, AND had visited to watch the girls in the past....

Katrine
09-21-2006, 07:46 PM
Why did you take this position again? Are they at least paying you?

scarlett_vancouver
09-22-2006, 02:30 AM
^ Tips, probably.

That sucks. Being 'head girl' sounds like a shit job, and I'll reiterate that I would never work in a club that had an official heirarchy amongst the dancers anyways.

Celeste, it sounds like your case is strong. Best of luck-

Melonie
09-22-2006, 03:20 AM
several issues here ...

throughout the world, in the last few years there has been a ton of official backlash against 'child porn', with a number of international treaties having been singed. Thus while I'm admittedly ignorant of the particulars involved with AUS law versus US law, it's pretty much a given that the subject of confirming legal age for employment in the 'adult industry' is going to be treated a whole lot more seriously than confirming legal age to buy cigarettes or alcohol. It's also pretty much a given that a charge of 'employing underage talent' in the adult industry, even if that charge is unproven, is probably going to be taken in the worst possible context by other gov't agencies, potential future employers etc. viewing your criminal record. The potential future ramifications are serious enough that a knowledgeable attorney needs to be involved ASAP. I would not rely on the legal concept that 'intent' must be proven where 'employing underage talent' in the adult industry is concerned.

I would also be careful about the 'spent conviction' deal. It sounds like this is legally analogous to the US legal concepts of 'plea bargains' and 'deferred adjudications' - and can be 'dangerous' because if you accept such an arrangement ... even though you will not be subject to a trial or potential jail time ... from a legal standpoint you have NOT been found innocent, from a legal standpoint your acceptance of the 'spent conviction' implies an admission of guilt, from a legal standpoint the 'spent conviction' counts as a prior offense if you should be charged with something else in the future etc. There's also a lot of unanswered questions as to how this 'spent conviction' will appear on your criminal record for the 10 years before the 'expungement' occurs, as well as some question as to whether this 'expungement' is guaranteed and automatic versus requiring you to bring a new court action 10 years from now at your own expense with actual expungement still being in the hands of a judge 10 years down the road. Thus there's even more need to get a knowledgeable attorney involved ASAP.

As to club attorneys, in 10 years I have never heard of single instance where an attorney retained by the club has actually worked in the best interest of a dancer. Certainly a club attorney will usually arrange a 'plea bargain' or 'spent conviction' or whatever the shortcut deal is called - and doing so avoids the dancer having to spend any time in jail or pay her own legal fees or face trial, but also because doing so serves as as an official admission of guilt on the part of the dancer which by definition means that the club cannot be guilty !

From the facts stated here i.e. the admittedly fake ID, a deposition from another dancer who you turned down due to being underage etc. it sounds like the gov't case against you is pretty weak and that you can walk away from this free and clear if you go about defending yourself properly. However, please be very careful that you don't wind up playing right into the gov'ts hands by entering a de-facto admission of guilt by accelting a 'spent conviction' deal without first understanding all of the legal ramifications of doing so. I've been down this road of bogus charges before, and after discovering the true legal ramifications and risks behind the acceptance of 'deals' I have wound up having to spend many thousands of dollars on legal fees and (threaten to) go to trial in order to 'prove my innocence'. This sucks, but it is the legal reality for people involved in the 'sex industry' that you're usually considered 'guilty until proven innocent'.

After all, if this 'spent conviction' deal is what I think it is, then if you were ever to be charged with anything else in the next 10 years - bogusly or not - it's likely that you'd be treated as a 'repeat offender' the next time, with little chance of avoiding jail time and zero chance of ever having your criminal record expunged of either charge.

Tactically speaking, the threat of bringing a case of your own for 'wrongful arrest' will serve to kick this case upward toward a higher level of scrutiny (i.e. the senior prosecuter / District Attorney or whatever that's called in AUS). I'm guessing that this will result in a higher probability that the Crown (is that how you refer to it ?) will realize that their case is weak and their risk is growing thus it may help you achieve a dismissal of the charge (which legally equals being found innocent !).
~

sexy_celeste
09-22-2006, 06:33 AM
several issues here ...

it's pretty much a given that the subject of confirming legal age for employment in the 'adult industry' is going to be treated a whole lot more seriously than confirming legal age to buy cigarettes or alcohol. It's also pretty much a given that a charge of 'employing underage talent' in the adult industry, even if that charge is unproven, is probably going to be taken in the worst possible context by other gov't agencies, potential future employers etc. viewing your criminal record.

Yes I totally agree. And Im pretty sure that the club would be ultimately responsible for the checking of ID's since Ive no idea how to do so, technically.


I would also be careful about the 'spent conviction' deal. It sounds like this is legally analogous to the US legal concepts of 'plea bargains' and 'deferred adjudications' - and can be 'dangerous' because if you accept such an arrangement ... even though you will not be subject to a trial or potential jail time ... from a legal standpoint you have NOT been found innocent, from a legal standpoint your acceptance of the 'spent conviction' implies an admission of guilt, from a legal standpoint the 'spent conviction' counts as a prior offense if you should be charged with something else in the future etc. There's also a lot of unanswered questions as to how this 'spent conviction' will appear on your criminal record for the 10 years before the 'expungement' occurs, as well as some question as to whether this 'expungement' is guaranteed and automatic versus requiring you to bring a new court action 10 years from now at your own expense with actual expungement still being in the hands of a judge 10 years down the road. Thus there's even more need to get a knowledgeable attorney involved ASAP.

Yeah that is a problem. I wont accept anything less that "innocent" but Spent Conviction is worst case scenario. Yes it will appear on my record, and if I were to re-offend it would be brought up.


As to club attorneys, in 10 years I have never heard of single instance where an attorney retained by the club has actually worked in the best interest of a dancer. Certainly a club attorney will usually arrange a 'plea bargain' or 'spent conviction' or whatever the shortcut deal is called - and doing so avoids the dancer having to spend any time in jail or pay her own legal fees or face trial, but also because doing so serves as as an official admission of guilt on the part of the dancer which by definition means that the club cannot be guilty !

Yeah Im worried about the club attorneys, Ive consulted Govt Legal Aid, plus a QC friend (hes a prosectution councillor, and a former detective) and He is contacting a few of his lawyer friends to see who can help me. Im also going independantly to see a third Lawyer on Monday, depending on Legal Aids advice. Im not taking any responsibilty for the Club, and will put the blame (if there is any) on them solely.


From the facts stated here i.e. the admittedly fake ID, a deposition from another dancer who you turned down due to being underage etc. it sounds like the gov't case against you is pretty weak and that you can walk away from this free and clear if you go about defending yourself properly. However, please be very careful that you don't wind up playing right into the gov'ts hands by entering a de-facto admission of guilt by accelting a 'spent conviction' deal without first understanding all of the legal ramifications of doing so. I've been down this road of bogus charges before, and after discovering the true legal ramifications and risks behind the acceptance of 'deals' I have wound up having to spend many thousands of dollars on legal fees and (threaten to) go to trial in order to 'prove my innocence'. This sucks, but it is the legal reality for people involved in the 'sex industry' that you're usually considered 'guilty until proven innocent'.

Yes Im hoping all this goes in my favour, Im collectin Statutory Declerations from the staff member who verifed the ID with me, and the under age girl I didnt hire.


After all, if this 'spent conviction' deal is what I think it is, then if you were ever to be charged with anything else in the next 10 years - bogusly or not - it's likely that you'd be treated as a 'repeat offender' the next time, with little chance of avoiding jail time and zero chance of ever having your criminal record expunged of either charge.

Tactically speaking, the threat of bringing a case of your own for 'wrongful arrest' will serve to kick this case upward toward a higher level of scrutiny (i.e. the senior prosecuter / District Attorney or whatever that's called in AUS). I'm guessing that this will result in a higher probability that the Crown (is that how you refer to it ?) will realize that their case is weak and their risk is growing thus it may help you achieve a dismissal of the charge (which legally equals being found innocent !).
~
Id like to at least get an apology. One of the cops was an asshole. When they searched my house he wouldnt even let me get a drink or go to the loo alone! I mean seriously I cant exactly run away from them!
Plus they set my bail quite high, so they think Im a flight risk.
Oh and had the nerve to say (counting the bail cash in front of me) "I just want you to see how much this guy is risking for you" Like Id seriously run off when the money was out of a joint account anyways.
Plus Ive done nothing wrong.

Thanks Melonie, I was hoping you would comment on my situation, you always are smart about this sorta stuff!

lilriot_atl
09-22-2006, 08:46 AM
I'm so sorry to hear that your club isn't backing you. I hope eveythign turns out ok. Good Luck!
-e

kitana
09-22-2006, 09:26 AM
Child Services for ya!

The child services will still need to 'balme' some one for her working there, unless it is another manger, then so be it, however as you took her ID etc, you took resposibility regarding her employment.

Honestly go and get a good solicitor who has experience in cases like these, dont be shy about telling him the ordeal, I am sure his more then understanding.

The fact that you told the girls when they can and cant work (you did the rostering) then you are semi guilty. See your solicitor and push for a guilty, non-conviction charge. That way you can get on with your life and soliciotr bills wont be huge!

Good Luck

They (child services) need to blame her damn parents!

Who the hell lets their 17yr old daughter work in a strip club w/o questions anyway?!

Hun, you are in my thoughts! You are not at fault here at all, it's her parents that are to blame, as well as her.

I'm sorry, but this does all come back to her parents! What kind of role models (much less parents) are they that their 17 yr old would have a fake ID, and start stripping w/o them noticing she was gone all hours of the night?!

ARGH!!!!!!!

I say throw her parents in jail, right beside her!

mild2wild
09-22-2006, 09:50 AM
I am fairly sure that a 'spent conviction' is similar if not the same then a guilty -- non-conviction both you enter into a plea bargain with the court.

Melonie
09-22-2006, 05:56 PM
Id like to at least get an apology. One of the cops was an asshole. When they searched my house he wouldnt even let me get a drink or go to the loo alone! I mean seriously I cant exactly run away from them!

Trust me I know what you're talking about ... when they bust a 'stripper' cops automatically assume that we are drug addicted whoring thieving liars (which was the reason they woundn't allow you any privacy in the bathroom for fear you would flush evidence down the drain). By the way, how in the hell did they get a search warrant for your house ??? I had assumed that you were busted while working at the club. This is NOT a good sign, since it tends to indicate that the cops thought you may be involved in other things besides the 'underaged adult entertainer' charge.

As to holding the parents responsible, no chance. The 'scenario' that the parents and prosecutor will try to paint is that their poor innocent underaged daughter was 'brainwashed' into selling her body for money. Again you must remember that there will be a huge credibility gap whenever a 'fine upstanding citizen' versus a 'stripper' comes down to a 'your word against their word' situation.

biancak
09-22-2006, 06:15 PM
Hey hun; I am so sorry to hear this bad news. If you have any statement this girl has signed stating she is 18 it would benefit you as she will be up for fraud. Then by rights you should be let off.

sexy_celeste
09-22-2006, 06:33 PM
By the way, how in the hell did they get a search warrant for your house ??? I had assumed that you were busted while working at the club. This is NOT a good sign, since it tends to indicate that the cops thought you may be involved in other things besides the 'underaged adult entertainer' charge.

LOL, that DOES make since, tho they obviously didnt check my records - my husband used to work for customs, SEARCHING for drugs, and I had to have my record clear for him to get the job.

They didnt have a search warrant. I had no idea I was in ANY trouble, I just thought they wanted the records off my computer (rosters, contact details earnings etc.) which I was happy to provide, as I thought SHE was the only one getting in trouble.

I was tipped off by another girl, but went into work anyway, as I had nothing to hide from the police. Which was dumb I realise, but I thought it would look guilty to not go into work cos I knew they were there.



As to holding the parents responsible, no chance. The 'scenario' that the parents and prosecutor will try to paint is that their poor innocent underaged daughter was 'brainwashed' into selling her body for money. Again you must remember that there will be a huge credibility gap whenever a 'fine upstanding citizen' versus a 'stripper' comes down to a 'your word against their word' situation.

I WISH her family WAS held responsible, Ive just found out that the trial may take a YEAR, and Im supposed to be going on scholarship overseas in Feb, which now wont be happening!

maximvsv
09-23-2006, 01:30 AM
She has admitted that she proved fake ID. The police have it and verified that it was the card she showed me.

Im being charged cos I didnt know she was under 18.

She started after I was running the girls, however in my favour I was approached by another 17 year old wanting work, and she is willing to sign a stat dec that I refused her as a performer on the basis that she was underage.

Also Im not a manager, im just another dancer, who does the rostering and auditions new girls. My phone bill gets covered, but I dont recieve a wage etc for doing the job. Management has final say over hiring-firing.

PLA has not been involved at all. This is Childrens services.

She is made out as the "victim" whom I enticed to perform. SHE came in and asked for work, however, AND knew how important it was to check that she was over 18.
She admits she supplied fake ID, yet is the victim?

See if she filled out any tax documentation, because that could have a date of birth section indicating her representation of her age.

Also, see if the charges are based on the auditioning or whether they are based on the hiring. If you don't make the hiring decision or execute the contracts for the club, then you should not be responsible on that part. If the act of auditioning her is the basis for the charge, though, you could have a more difficult time of it.

leogirl876
09-23-2006, 02:01 AM
Could she enter into a plea of "No Contest" that way she's not admitting anything and not saying she wasn't involved? Would that be an easier and better say to go with still coming out with your record clean and your time & money won't be spent on a trial?

Deogol
09-23-2006, 07:35 AM
Where do people get the idea No Contest means not admitting guilt? One still ends up getting convicted and that is what matters.

WeaponOfMassDistraction
09-23-2006, 08:37 AM
Hi, sorry to hear about your arrest.

I'm sure you probably know this now, but NEVER let the cops search your place without a warrant. Anything they take can be used as evidence against you and you should NEVER trust them at their word!

In these situations the minor rarely receives punishment, she could be fined for possessing fake I.D., if caught with one.

It sounds like you have a good defence and plenty of mitigating circumstances in your favour. Critically, you appear to have honestly and reasonably, but mistakenly believed her to be 18 years old when in fact, she was not. This is demonstrated by taking 'reasonable steps' to ensure that she was over 18 when hiring her: sighting photo I.D. You have no criminal record, you had nothing financially to gain from this mistake. She is only a little underage, not 14...

DO NOT willingly accept an unrecorded conviction: many employer's have access to private databases which give them the full details of ANY convictions, whether recorded or not. Australia does not have adequate privacy laws protecting this personal data and discrimination on the ground of criminal record is rife. FIGHT IT!

If this QC hasn't already told you about the Susanne Hutchinson case, ask him.

BTW someone mentioned the PLA... The PLA is a Queensland Gov Dept, has no role in W.A. (thank god)

Melonie
09-23-2006, 10:53 AM
Ive just found out that the trial may take a YEAR, and Im supposed to be going on scholarship overseas in Feb, which now wont be happening!

... as unfortunate as this development is, your attorney can turn it in your own favor by tacking it on to a civil suit for wrongful arrest. In order to 'make you whole', the local cops may wind up having to pay for your tuition at an equivalent local college to replace the overseas scholarship that their 'wrongful arrest' is causing you to lose !!!


Could she enter into a plea of "No Contest" that way she's not admitting anything and not saying she wasn't involved?

Agreed that there is a tremendous amount of misinformation in regard to innocence and guilt. From a legal standpoint, once you are charged you can only be found innocent in two ways - #1 you go to trial and the judge / jury rules that you are innocent, or #2 the local district attorney / prosecutor dismisses the charges. ANY other outcome, be it a plea of no contest, a plea bargain to a different charge, deferred adjudication (i.e. spent conviction in Aus legal lingo), sealed records (i.e. unrecorded conviction in Aus legal lingo) etc. involves an admission of guilt on the part of the person who was charged.

Specifically, a no contest plea means that the person charged is not disputing being guilty of the charge from a 'criminal law' standpoint, but is not conceding guilt from a 'civil law' standpoint. The distinction is only relevant in civil court, where for example someone pleading guilty to assault could later be the basis of a civil lawsuit for monetary damages by the 'victim', whereas the same person pleading no contest to an assault charge would force the 'victim' to prove guilt in civil court before they could attempt to collect monetary damages.

flickad
09-23-2006, 12:06 PM
Could she enter into a plea of "No Contest" that way she's not admitting anything and not saying she wasn't involved? Would that be an easier and better say to go with still coming out with your record clean and your time & money won't be spent on a trial?

There's no such thing as 'No Contest' outside the US.

flickad
09-23-2006, 12:33 PM
Hi, sorry to hear about your arrest.

I'm sure you probably know this now, but NEVER let the cops search your place without a warrant. Anything they take can be used as evidence against you and you should NEVER trust them at their word!

In these situations the minor rarely receives punishment, she could be fined for possessing fake I.D., if caught with one.

It sounds like you have a good defence and plenty of mitigating circumstances in your favour. Critically, you appear to have honestly and reasonably, but mistakenly believed her to be 18 years old when in fact, she was not. This is demonstrated by taking 'reasonable steps' to ensure that she was over 18 when hiring her: sighting photo I.D. You have no criminal record, you had nothing financially to gain from this mistake. She is only a little underage, not 14...

DO NOT willingly accept an unrecorded conviction: many employer's have access to private databases which give them the full details of ANY convictions, whether recorded or not. Australia does not have adequate privacy laws protecting this personal data and discrimination on the ground of criminal record is rife. FIGHT IT!

If this QC hasn't already told you about the Susanne Hutchinson case, ask him.

BTW someone mentioned the PLA... The PLA is a Queensland Gov Dept, has no role in W.A. (thank god)


I'm interested in this Susanne Hutchinson case. I looked for it on austlii and LexisNexis with no dice, mind telling me a bit about it?

Melonie
09-23-2006, 09:17 PM
I think that the case being referred to can be found at

major issues which would appear to be relevant to Celeste's situation ...

- was Celeste the person who legally had the authority to hire/allow the underaged girl to go to work in a 'sexually oriented business', i.e. was Celeste acting as an 'agent' of the club ? There would appear to be an important legal point in question here as to whether or not Celeste would have profited personally in any manner by hiring the underaged girl or not - or profited indirectly if Celeste was receiving additional pay in any form from the club to perform her duties as 'house mom'. (different from the Hutchinson case where Susanne Hutchinson clearly received some portion of the underaged girl's 'revenues'). This stems from the legal point of whether or not Celeste is considered a 'managerial officer' of the club.

- did Celeste take "All Reasonable Steps" to find out the true age of the person concerned per Prostitution Act 2000 ? Aus Law carries a conclusive presumption that the person was underage until proven otherwise. This is an area of risk because (from the Hutchinson case) "the clear conclusion from the learned trial Judge's directions is that it was not a matter for a police officer or any other person to say what reasonable steps might be, but for the jury itself" - leaving it for a future jury to determine whether or not Celeste's acceptance of the girl's fake ID without further efforts to verify her age by other means was or wasn't sufficient effort to constitute her taking 'all reasonable measures' to verify the girl's true age.

- would the underaged girl's physical appearance reinforce the birth date cited on the false ID which she presented to Celeste - and at the same time was the 'quality' of the false ID the underaged girl present of sufficient 'authenticity' (i.e. a picture ID on a gov't issued driver's license with a signature per the Hutchinson case) such that Celeste's acceptance of the girl's actual age being over 18 based on that 'authentic' looking fake ID would be considered an 'honest and reasonable mistake' on Celeste's part ? The appeals court in the Hutchinson case makes specific reference to an '18+' fake ID card without a picture or signature having been presented to Suzanne Hutchinson by the underaged girl as being insufficient in itself to constitute sufficient legal proof of age, and sufficient cause/reason for Suzanne Hutchinson to take additional measures to verify the girl's true age in order to satisfy the 'all reasonable measures' requirement.

- is the court's sentiment on the subject when Celeste's case goes to trial going to be different from the appeals court in the Hutchinson case ?

"When the learned sentencing Judge came to impose sentence he first recited the facts and concluded that the jury had most likely convicted the applicant on the basis that they had taken the view that she had failed to take all reasonable steps to ascertain "C's" age. The learned sentencing Judge concluded from the video record of interview that it might be said that the applicant did believe "C" was at least 18 years of age but the question was whether or not that belief was reasonably based and/or whether the applicant had taken all reasonable steps to ascertain "C's" age. The learned sentencing Judge thought there was an overlap between these two issues. He pointed out that the applicant could easily have telephoned "C's" mother on the night in question as she had her number. His Honour then said:

"You are in the prostitution or perhaps more fairly called the sex industry and you make your living from it. It's notorious I think that the drug-crazed young will stop at little or nothing to get money to buy drugs and it is known that they seek - those that can, they seek employment in the industry. I think it's notorious and unarguable that children that engage in prostitution damage themselves in innumerable ways, both from the conduct itself and with their ill-gotten gains, which often they use to support their drug habit.

The relevant provisions of the Prostitution Act, section 16, section 49, seem to me to indicate that parliament has recognised that these children who seek to make money in this way need to be protected in a sense from themselves as well as from those who would exploit them. I'm not aware of any other case that has been prosecuted, pursuant to these provisions of the act and the fact that the maximum penalty is 14 years' imprisonment and the matters to which I have referred, I think a message needs to be sent to those people in management in this industry that if you permit a person under 18 to act as a prostitute without having taken adequate steps to verify age, then you will be severely dealt with." (from Hutchinson case)

IMHO there are a lot of gray areas here, and potentially much at risk - i.e. per the appeals court one year in jail was considered to be a reasonable sentence for 'general deterrent' purposes ... i.e. that the publicized conviction and the severity of the sentence would serve as an effective deterrent to others who might be contemplating employing underaged persons in the 'sex industry'. I'm no attorney, but the apparent sentiment of the Australian Parliament and Courts on the subject of hiring underaged persons in the 'sex industry' would appear to indicate that they are likely to give little or no 'benefit of the doubt'.

IMHO there's also the issue of whether or not Prostitution Act 2000 applies at all in this situation. A quick read of the Act indicates that it is not necessary for the underaged person to actually be involved in an act of prostitution, only that she be allowed to enter a premesis where "(the) person who allows a child to enter or remain at a place at which the person knows or could be reasonably expected to know — (a) an act of prostitution is taking place". Thus if there have been any previous incidents where dancers at this club have been charged with prostitution and have pled guilty or have accepted plea bargains or have accepted spent convictions then it is very arguable that merely letting the underaged girl be present in the club brings the Prostitution Act 2000 into play. However, if the underaged girl was not involved in an act of prostitution herself, then the penalty need no longer involve jail time ... just a $25,000 fine ! . This would undoubtedly put you in the position of being put on the witness stand, being asked whether or not you have ever been aware of acts of prostitution having been performed by dancers in your club, and answering yes or no.

On the other hand, if there was no personal profit motive involved in ANY form by hiring the underaged girl or not, if there has been no 'managerial officer' authority officially delegated by the clubowner to the 'house mom', if the underaged girl's fake ID was an 'authentic' looking picture ID apparently issued by a gov't agency, if the girl's physical appearance and demeanor clearly gave the impression that she was over 18 etc. then the prosecution probably doesn't have much of a case re an 'honest and reasonable mistake' having been made.

The joker in the deck is the reliance on a court system and members of a jury that could either look at the evidence objectively or hand out a bogus conviction based on preconceived notions about 'strippers' and 'strip club management (where a 'house mom' is arguably considered to be a part of management). Even so, it's very probable that you can be found innocent on appeal, where the evidence will get a much more thorough and objective review - however getting into appeals court usually costs $10,000+ in legal fees win or lose. I've been in a somewhat analogous situation, and have been forced to pony up the big bucks in order to 'prove my innocence' in appeals court - after having been 'railroaded' by a local cop, judge and jury who thought that a bugus bust of an out of state feature dancer would be an opportunity for easy fine money and front page political headlines in an election year.

The legal severity of this charge - the potential ramifications of having such a charge on you record, and the magnitude of the potential fines and jail time involved, are such that - personally speaking - there is no way that I would ever consider accepting a spent conviction or any other plea that fails to result in a finding of innocence. Unfortunately, this charge has the potential of hanging around for a number of years between the initial trial and possible necessity of mounting an appeal, plus the potential of involving many thousands of dollars worth of legal fees to prove your innocence.

The prosecutor will likely use this fact to possibly offer you a plea bargain or spent conviction which will save you a lot of risk, a lot of grief, and a lot of money in legal fees. If you do decide to accept any sort of deal (which will constitute a de-facto admission of guilt), then you also need to make the commitment to quitting dancing and not stepping foot into a club again for the next 10 years in order to totally avoid the possibility of being hit with a possible second charge under Prostitution Act 2000 which could result in a second conviction, 'repeat offender' status, and probably some serious potential jail time.

From my read of Prostitution Act 2000, the definitions are sufficiently vague that being busted for doing a full contact lap dance could probably be used by an overzealous prosecutor to make a conviction stick under the Act. "When this Act refers to prostitution it means prostitution in which payment is consideration for the sexual stimulation of a person ( “the client” ) by means of physical contact between the client and another person ( “the prostitute” ), or between either of them and anything controlled by or emanating from the other, and it is irrelevant whether payment is in money or any other form." from - which conveniently leaves out clothed or unclothed, which conveniently leaves out direct contact with particular areas of the body, and which conveniently leaves out exactly what constitutes 'sexual stimulation'.




~

sexy_celeste
09-24-2006, 01:07 AM
- was Celeste the person who legally had the authority to hire/allow the underaged girl to go to work in a 'sexually oriented business', i.e. was Celeste acting as an 'agent' of the club ?

There would appear to be an important legal point in question here as to whether or not Celeste would have profited personally in any manner by hiring the underaged girl or not

The performers employ me to do the rostering. I receive $1 per dancer per shift. The club and the girl split her earnings.


This stems from the legal point of whether or not Celeste is considered a 'managerial officer' of the club.

- did Celeste take "All Reasonable Steps" to find out the true age of the person concerned per Prostitution Act 2000 ? Aus Law carries a conclusive presumption that the person was underage until proven otherwise. leaving it for a future jury to determine whether or not Celeste's acceptance of the girl's fake ID without further efforts to verify her age by other means was or wasn't sufficient effort to constitute her taking 'all reasonable measures' to verify the girl's true age.

- would the underaged girl's physical appearance reinforce the birth date cited on the false ID which she presented to Celeste - and at the same time was the 'quality' of the false ID the underaged girl present of sufficient 'authenticity'

Celeste's acceptance of the girl's actual age being over 18 based on that 'authentic' looking fake ID would be considered an 'honest and reasonable mistake' on Celeste's part ?

Im being charged under Section 192(1) the child and community services act 2004, rather than a prostitution act.

I would not be considered managerial staff. I am not allowed into the office to photocopy the rosters, nor am I allowed to sell strips, give change or even TOUCH the computer/till. My role involved asking the dancers when they were available over the fortnight,and how many hours they preferred, then doing a roster for the two venues.
I answer to the manager, and they have the power to insist I hire or fire certain girls. I have a few messages with instructions re:performers.
Also, by the time the girl got to me, legally she should have had her ID checked TWICE, both at the other venue, and at the venue where I was performing, as she shouldnt even enter the building without 18+ ID
On her fake ID she was 19, which was reasonable for her appearance.


IMHO there's also the issue of whether or not Prostitution Act 2000 applies at all in this situation. A quick read of the Act indicates that it is not necessary for the underaged person to actually be involved in an act of prostitution, only that she be allowed to enter a premesis where "(the) person who allows a child to enter or remain at a place at which the person knows or could be reasonably expected to know — (a) an act of prostitution is taking place". Thus if there have been any previous incidents where dancers at this club have been charged with prostitution and have pled guilty or have accepted plea bargains or have accepted spent convictions then it is very arguable that merely letting the underaged girl be present in the club brings the Prostitution Act 2000 into play.

Nope there havent been any charges for prostitution at this club...yet....


On the other hand, if there was no personal profit motive involved in ANY form by hiring the underaged girl or not, if there has been no 'managerial officer' authority officially delegated by the clubowner to the 'house mom', if the underaged girl's fake ID was an 'authentic' looking picture ID apparently issued by a gov't agency, if the girl's physical appearance and demeanor clearly gave the impression that she was over 18 etc. then the prosecution probably doesn't have much of a case re an 'honest and reasonable mistake' having been made.

No personal profit for hiring specifically her, as I receive money as long as there are ANY performers. And had I thought that she was underage, I would have NEVER allowed her to audition.


The legal severity of this charge - the potential ramifications of having such a charge on you record, and the magnitude of the potential fines and jail time involved, are such that - personally speaking - there is no way that I would ever consider accepting a spent conviction or any other plea that fails to result in a finding of innocence.

Yes I dont plan to accept anything other than a completely innocent finding.
I believe that I took all reasonable steps to accertain her age, and the managers of the club should have ensured that I knew what was acceptable photo Id, and what a fake one may look like. Ive never been asked for ID, at any club over the 5 years Ive been dancing, the club has had AT LEAST TWO underage girls to my knowledge, which would indicate a definate problem with club management.


The prosecutor will likely use this fact to possibly offer you a plea bargain or spent conviction which will save you a lot of risk, a lot of grief, and a lot of money in legal fees. If you do decide to accept any sort of deal (which will constitute a de-facto admission of guilt), then you also need to make the commitment to quitting dancing and not stepping foot into a club again for the next 10 years in order to totally avoid the possibility of being hit with a possible second charge under Prostitution Act 2000 which could result in a second conviction, 'repeat offender' status, and probably some serious potential jail time.

Im not planning on dancing again. I was nearly set to retire at the end of the year, hoping my legal fees arent too bad though!

Thanks Melonie!

Melonie
09-24-2006, 08:12 AM
Im being charged under Section 192(1) the child and community services act 2004, rather than a prostitution act

Again, I'm certainly no attorney, but the little bit of info I was able to find on the net re the Child and Community Services act would tend to indicate that charging you under this particular act is a major fuck-up by local police / prosecutor - and could very likely constitute grounds for a wrongful arrest lawsuit. However, if Aus law is like US law, there is a ton of overlap between 'Family Court Law' and 'Criminal Law', potentially meaning that the prosecutor could easily try to 'change gears' on you by attempting to bring the provisions of Prostitution Act 2000 into play. This is definitely an area where you need some very knowledgeable legal advice.


Nope there havent been any charges for prostitution at this club...yet....

well, the legal point actually is whether or not you personally had a reasonable belief that acts of prostitution were in fact occurring in your club. The existance of actual charges would serve as virtually incontrovertable proof that they were ... however the absence of actual charges does not prove that they weren't ... and by your own posts you have admitted that you did believe that acts of prostitution were in fact going on in your club and that you were willing to testify to that fact. In the case of your own charges, you'll very probably be asked to testify, but with your statement that you did believe acts of prostitution were in fact taking place at your club only serving as evidence against you.


The performers employ me to do the rostering. I receive $1 per dancer per shift.

This would mean that you did in fact derive direct personal financial benefit from hiring the underaged dancer ... albeit one whole dollar per night's worth ! Nevertheless the legal point probably remains the same. However, you can certainly make the argument that, had you not hired this girl, you would have hired a different girl in her place, thus the net personal financial benefit to yourself of hiring this underaged girl was zero.


would not be considered managerial staff. I am not allowed into the office to photocopy the rosters, nor am I allowed to sell strips, give change or even TOUCH the computer/till. My role involved asking the dancers when they were available over the fortnight,and how many hours they preferred, then doing a roster for the two venues. I answer to the manager, and they have the power to insist I hire or fire certain girls. I have a few messages with instructions re:performers.

unfortunately, this doesn't guarantee that a judge and jury wouldn't consider that you were not delegated some degree of 'managerial authority' in your job as 'house mom' i.e. the authority to hire this girl without first having to seek a specific approval from the clubowner or manager. To really escape the 'management responsibility' aspect it would have been necessary for the clubowner or manager to have actually made the hiring decision about this underaged girl prior to her being sent to you, thus the clubowner / manager would only have been directing you to take care of the already hired new dancer's ID check, 'paperwork' and scheduling (i.e. a 100% clerical role rather than a managerial one).



Also, by the time the girl got to me, legally she should have had her ID checked TWICE, both at the other venue, and at the venue where I was performing, as she shouldnt even enter the building without 18+ ID. On her fake ID she was 19, which was reasonable for her appearance.

This is HUGE from a legal standpoint ... and you haven't mentioned it until now ?

From what I'm trying to understand about your statement, before coming to your club this girl's ID was already checked at another venue by somebody else ? Thus, in addition to the fake ID with picture that the girl presented looking 'authentic', and in addition to the fake ID with picture also being checked and corroborated by someone else besides yourself at the same club where you were dancing at the same time that you checked it, you also had prior knowledge that this girl was being referred/sent to your club by another club/venue who considered her to be of over 18 and able to work as a dancer ?

Legally speaking, the previous ID check and referral from another club will go a long way in regard to you proving that you had undertaken 'all reasonable measures' to determine that this girl was over 18 !!! The fact that you were aware that this girl had already patronized your club as a customer on previous occasions, that she was acquainted with and socialized with some of the other dancers working at your club etc. further reinforces 'all reasonable measures' having been taken by you, since this implies that you already knew that this girl's ID had been checked on previous occasions by someone else at your club when she was allowed in as a customer !

This is an entirely different situation than if a strange girl had simply walked into your club off the street rather than being referred to you by another venue, wasn't acquainted with anyone else at your club, presented a fake ID to you for the very first time, and thus placed the entire burden of determining whether or not her ID was 'real' and her age was really 18+ on your shoulders.

This should constitute ample grounds for dismissal of the charges on the basis that your actions to check her ID plus have someone else at your club also check her ID were 'reasonable' given your personal knowledge that this girl's ID had already been previously checked on multiple occasions by both your club's door and the referring venue, that your sincere belief that this girl was 18+ was reinforced by your personal knowledge that this girl was a friend of other dancers working at your club, as well as by the apparent 'authenticity' of her fake ID with picture (hopefully of a type routinely issued by a gov't agency like a driver's license), and that your allowing this underaged girl to work thus constituted an 'honest and reasonable mistake' under these circumstances.

IMHO this is worth having a knowledgeable attorney prepare you a 'motion for dismissal' based on the above 'new evidence', quickly get it in front of the prosecutor / district attorney, and see what happens.
~

sexy_celeste
09-25-2006, 02:29 AM
Again, I'm certainly no attorney, but the little bit of info I was able to find on the net re the Child and Community Services act would tend to indicate that charging you under this particular act is a major fuck-up by local police / prosecutor - and could very likely constitute grounds for a wrongful arrest lawsuit.




This would mean that you did in fact derive direct personal financial benefit from hiring the underaged dancer ... albeit one whole dollar per night's worth ! Nevertheless the legal point probably remains the same. However, you can certainly make the argument that, had you not hired this girl, you would have hired a different girl in her place, thus the net personal financial benefit to yourself of hiring this underaged girl was zero.

Yes this is very true.


thus the clubowner / manager would only have been directing you to take care of the already hired new dancer's ID check, 'paperwork' and scheduling (i.e. a 100% clerical role rather than a managerial one).

THe club doesnt require me to have any paper work on performers what so ever. THis has of course changed since Weds.


From what I'm trying to understand about your statement, before coming to your club this girl's ID was already checked at another venue by somebody else ? Thus, in addition to the fake ID with picture that the girl presented looking 'authentic', and in addition to the fake ID with picture also being checked and corroborated by someone else besides yourself at the same club where you were dancing at the same time that you checked it, you also had prior knowledge that this girl was being referred/sent to your club by another club/venue who considered her to be of over 18 and able to work as a dancer ?

Legally speaking, the previous ID check and referral from another club will go a long way in regard to you proving that you had undertaken 'all reasonable measures' to determine that this girl was over 18 !!! The fact that you were aware that this girl had already patronized your club as a customer on previous occasions, that she was acquainted with and socialized with some of the other dancers working at your club etc. further reinforces 'all reasonable measures' having been taken by you, since this implies that you already knew that this girl's ID had been checked on previous occasions by someone else at your club when she was allowed in as a customer !

We have two venues in the chain, the acting manager at the other venue sent her over to me, calling me to tell me that "she's Hot, hey, you should totally hire her"
So she should have had an ID check then, on entering the venue where I was, it should have been checked a second time. Im assuming that it wasn't, or that they were happy with the ID produced.


This should constitute ample grounds for dismissal of the charges on the basis that your actions to check her ID plus have someone else at your club also check her ID were 'reasonable' given your personal knowledge that this girl's ID had already been previously checked on multiple occasions by both your club's door and the referring venue, that your sincere belief that this girl was 18+ was reinforced by your personal knowledge that this girl was a friend of other dancers working at your club, as well as by the apparent 'authenticity' of her fake ID with picture (hopefully of a type routinely issued by a gov't agency like a driver's license), and that your allowing this underaged girl to work thus constituted an 'honest and reasonable mistake' under these circumstances.


Im pleading not guilty, didn't even think to ask for a dismissal, but my lawyer thinks that the police have a shit case against me. Only problem will be the media, as my family doesnt know that I strip. I was retiring end of the year anyway, so havent told them anything.

Also the girl in question SHOULD have been charged and fined $6000 for the fake ID, but was let off with a caution, which is Bullshit IMO.

Melonie
09-25-2006, 05:53 PM
We have two venues in the chain, the acting manager at the other venue sent her over to me, calling me to tell me that "she's Hot, hey, you should totally hire her"
So she should have had an ID check then, on entering the venue where I was, it should have been checked a second time. Im assuming that it wasn't, or that they were happy with the ID produced.

You should bring this to your attorney's attention ... because it establishes the fact that this girl was 'referred' to you by the manager of a sister club ... because it reinforces the fact that the decision to hire this girl was made at a managerial level higher than your own position (thus supports the claim that a 'house mom' is not considered part of club management, and thus is not bound by the same level of 'due diligence') ... because it strongly supports your belief that this girl's ID had previously been checked at the sister club and was considered satisfactory by the sister club's manager, and strongly supports your own position that during your own check of this girl's ID you had absolutely no reasonable basis to suspect that the girl's ID was less than 'authentic'.

ozzie_innocent
09-28-2006, 08:26 AM
Thanks Melonie for offering so much help to Celeste - despite this not even being your country you seem to be going to great lengths to get your facts straight and give genuine advice - something not many people do on forums these days.

I hope it all works out in the end and that you get some sort of pay back - just the suggestion that you might be involved in child pornography or prostitution must be sickening for you. A couple of years ago my share house got searched because someone thought we were dealing, the cops found a photo of me in my school skirt (an the rest of my school uniform of course) from when me + my boy started going out years before when I was 16. He was ropeable at the insination the police made as to my age and why a guy in his early - mid 20s would have such a photo - especially when the warrant was for canabis products only.


That's nothing compared to what you're going through of course - just saying I wish you weren't having to go through this and the club should get some serious consequences for their lack of support and complete complacency in training you or keeping track of their girls.

you should never have been put in this situation and it is completely farked!


... but I guess I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.

Wilhelmina
09-28-2006, 08:55 AM
Shouldn't the club be in hot water??? Why does it seem like it's just you, even more than the 17 y.o? 17 is still old enough to have some understanding of consequence, you don't cross a golden line of abstract thought when you turn 18, so this should hound HER! They didn't have a policy or correct procedure for checking ID or rather didn't show you how to at this club, seems like their cutting the string on you and trying to have this mess float away with you and keep them high and dry when there are serious issues there that should be taken from this!

I hope you DO get that charge dropped, and take them up on wrongful arrest, and charge them with defamation of character and whatever else we can chuck at them! My thoughts are with you anyhow xxx

Melonie
09-28-2006, 03:08 PM
^^^ unfortunately, I suspect that this law ... like the Tracy Lords Law in the USA and similar laws in other countries, aims the criminal charges at the person(s) who are directly responsible for for checking ID's, and not necessarily at the company who owns the club / video production company / magazine etc. The link is even more tenuous because an 'independent contractor' is not classified as being the same business organization as the club where they work (but are not 'employed').

As far as club 'procedures', it would be wonderful if clubs actually had their attorneys research the law from points of view of the clubowner, any club employees, and any 'independent contractors' as well - but most concentrate strictly on legal ramifications to the clubowner (who is paying the retainer fee). Thus there are at least 100 examples of clubowners 'allowing' things to take place in their club which are not totally legal from the point of view of 'independent contractors' which risk being busted for doing them - but which will result in higher earnings for the club with essentially zero bust risk to the clubowner.