I'm in Canada, I have to follow the laws in Canada, and in this country (Canada) we do not consider what consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedrooms to be the slightest bit newsworthy or criminal.
Gina
Originally Posted by GinaXXX
I got involved as a well known advocate thought it was for real and sent me the e-mail which I thought important enough to distribute to about 400 folks on my Phoenix private list about 4:30 AM
However within a few hours I retracted and updated it making clear it was a hoax with total support as always for Gina and P411.
I have researched however the foreign issue and while obviously Gina is totally legal (prostitution solicitation totally legal in Canada) there is a Treaty on criminal matters between the U.S. and Canada similar to with other countries that could get info (but hard). So not having info is more important than being foreign.
This comes up related to a BIG site which is hosted in Europe but in a country with a similar treaty and any "control person" can be served in the U.S. even without the Treaty. Which is why they fired a lot of their moderators.
Again I am totally supportive of P411 and have worked with Gina on issues (long ago) in the past and totally impressed as the safest one can possibly be these days.
For those interested in the legal stuff, I offer:
The Treaty Between the United States and Canada on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, Mar. 18, 1985, U.S.-Can., 24 I.L.M. 1092 ("MLAT" or "Treaty"), was signed at Quebec City, Canada on March 18, 1985, the advice and consent of the United States Senate was received on October 24, 1989, and the Treaty was entered into force on January 24, 1990. The Treaty obligates the two governments to provide "mutual legal assistance in all matters relating to the investigation, prosecution and suppression of offences." MLAT, art. II, ¶ 1. The MLAT with Canada is "one of a series of modern mutual legal assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States in order to counter more effectively criminal activities." Letter of Transmittal from Ronald Reagan, President of the United States, to the United States Senate, February 22, 1988, S. Exec. Rep. 100-14, 100th Cong., 2d Sess. (July 1985).
MLAT has the desired quality of compulsion as they contractually obligate the two countries to provide to each other evidence and other forms of assistance needed in criminal cases while streamlining and enhancing the effectiveness of the process for obtaining needed evidence. This MLAT between the United States and Canada provides for a broad range of cooperation in criminal matters.
Mutual assistance available under the Treaty includes: (1) the taking of testimony or statements of witnesses; (2) the provision of documents, records, and evidence; (3) the execution of requests for searches and seizures; (4) the serving of documents; and (5) the provision of assistance in proceedings relating to the forfeiture of the proceeds of crime, restitution to the victims of crime, and the collection of fines imposed as a sentence in a criminal prosecution. (Letter of Transmittal from Pres. Reagan)
The Treaty mentions it is similar to other bilateral mutual assistance treaties with a long list of countries (including Netherlands where I believe a large board is hosted).
The treaty needs a good lawyer to understand, but it seems to require the request to come from the U.S. Attorney General but can be on behalf of a "competent authority" defined as any law enforcement authority related to the investigation of an offence for which the penalty is at least one year in prison or more or any offence related to securities, wildlife, environmental or consumer protection.
In the U.S. it is getting common to charge felony criminal enterprise if any escort has a driver, call taker, or of course an agency massage parlor etc that is more than just a individual companion/escort. All of these have at least one year prison terms.
On the reverse side - A Canadian subpoena fight against a U.S. person is discussed in a complex case discusses the Treaty is Commissioner's Subpoenas.United States of America, Appellant United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. - 325 F.3d 1287
----
These views are purely editorial and do not reflect the specific legal strategy of any case. These are in NO way indicating the intention or defense of those indicted. All criminal charges are alleged and discussions of charges does not imply any guilt. I am not a lawyer; any legal issues should be addressed by a competent attorney.