Prostitution in Rhode Island: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia
Content deleted Content added
m |
Hmains 1,213,979 edits m |
||
Line 15: Prostitution was decriminalized in Rhode Island in 1980, when the prostitution laws were amended, reducing prostitution from a felony to a misdemeanor. The drafters of the law removed the section that addressed committing the act of prostitution itself, and only street solicitation remained illegal.<ref name="Arditi">{{cite news |author=Arditi, Lynn |title='Behind Closed Doors" How RI Decriminalized Prostitution |url=http://www.projo.com/news/content/PROSTITUTION_LAW31_05-31-09_NVEHGBH_v161.3e90048.html |work=Providence Journal |date=2009-05-31 |accessdate=2009-07-03 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090601211914/http://www.projo.com/news/content/PROSTITUTION_LAW31_05-31-09_NVEHGBH_v161.3e90048.html |archive-date=1 June 2009}}</ref> Prostitution remained legal in the state until November 2009, when it was outlawed again. It has been argued that the lawmakers who amended the Rhode Island prostitution laws in 1980 had decriminalized indoor prostitution by mistake, without realizing that the new laws were creating a "[[loophole]]." [[Rhode Island Senate|Rhode Island State Senator]] [[John F. McBurney III]] was the only member of the General Assembly at the time of the 2009 vote who had served in 1980. He stated in 2009, "We probably vote on 500 bills a year (...) They John C. Revens Jr. is a former Senate Majority leader and a lawyer who served in the General Assembly for nearly four decades. He agreed, *1976: [[COYOTE]] is a union for prostitutes led by [[Margo St. James]]. They filed a lawsuit against Rhode Island. The argument was based on how much power the state should have to control the sexual activity of its citizens in the case COYOTE v. Roberts. The lawsuit also alleged discrimination on how the law was being applied. Data was submitted that demonstrated selective prosecution, as the Providence Police were arresting female prostitutes far more often than the male customers. Ralph J. Gonnella was Margo St. James's lawyer. He argued that the prostitution law was so broad that it failed to even mention money. It could make sexual relations between unmarried adults a crime punishable by a $10 fine, and the person who initiated the offer of sex could be charged with soliciting and face up to five years in prison.<ref name="Arditi"/> *1980: Rhode Island General Assembly changed the law on prostitution, deleting the statute which prohibited the act of prostitution itself, but continuing to prohibit street solicitation. With the change in the criminal statute, the lawsuit was dismissed which was filed by COYOTE. *1998: State Supreme Court rules in ''State v. DeMagistris'' that the law against soliciting for prostitution was *2003: Prostitution charges against four women arrested at two Providence spas were dismissed after attorney Michael J. Kiselica cited the 1998 Supreme Court ruling, successfully arguing that Rhode Island had no law against indoor prostitution. *2005: Bill to make prostitution illegal, wherever it occurs, died in the General Assembly; similar bills failed in subsequent years.<ref name="Arditi"/> Line 34: She introduced Bill H5044 into the [[Rhode Island House of Representatives|House]] on January 8, 2009 (co-sponsored by Reps. Coderre, Melo, Gemma, and Fellela), and it was referred to the Committee which considered it on April 4, and substituted the text (Sub A) on April 30. The House voted on this with amendments on May 13, and the bill passed to the Senate Committee on May 28 where it remained until the Assembly recessed for the summer. In the [[Rhode Island Senate|Senate]], a similar bill was introduced by Senator Jabour<ref>{{cite web|last1=Kilgus|first1=Laura|title=Rhode Island no longer on February 25 (co-sponsored by Senators O'Neill, Lynch, Cote, and Picard). The Judiciary Committee conducted hearings on June 25. The Senate hearings attracted much media attention. Asian spa workers, recruited by [[Tara Hurley]], testified against the bill.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Arditi|first1=Lynn|title=Sex workers testify at Senate hearing on prostitution bill|url=http://www.projo.com/news/content/PROSTITUTION_BILL_06-19-09_UIEPAKU_v59.3cd847f.html|website=The Providence Journal|accessdate=16 April 2018|date= 22 June 2009|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090622171141/http://www.projo.com/news/content/PROSTITUTION_BILL_06-19-09_UIEPAKU_v59.3cd847f.html |archive-date=22 June 2009}}</ref> Line 40: which was voted on in the Senate the following day and referred to the House. Both bills were accompanied by other [[Trafficking in human beings|trafficking]] legislation, H5661 (Giannini) and S605 (Senator [[Rhoda Perry]]). As both the House and the Senate recessed, two separate versions of prostitution bills remained. Both chambers had to approve a single identical bill in order for it to be sent to the Governor, for him to sign it into law. The two bills differed in the levying of punishment. The Senate version of the bill called for staggered penalties for first, second, and third offenses. Prostitutes, their customers, and property owners found guilty of a first offense would have been punished by a civil Upon review of both versions of the prostitution bills, the State Police, Attorney General [[Patrick C. Lynch]], and Governor [[Donald Carcieri]] called for the passage of the House version of the bill, with stiffer penalties for first-time offenders. Supt. Col. Brendan P. Doherty of the [[Rhode Island State Police]] testified that the police agency, "cannot support civil sanctions for such reprehensible acts."<ref>{{cite web|last1=Arditi|first1=Lynn|title=R.I. law-enforcement officials say Senate bill outlawing indoor prostitution is flawed {{!}} General Assembly|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110604040849/http://www.projo.com/generalassembly/PROSTITUTION_BILL_OPPOSED_27_06-28-09_5CES69K_v53.38ad7c3.html|website=The Providence Journal|accessdate=16 April 2018|date=4 June 2011}}</ref> ====Media scrutiny ==== Two front page articles were published in the ''[[Providence Journal]]'' before the General Assembly returned for a special session, and [[Happy Endings?]] was released to the general public—a documentary on the Asian [[massage parlor]]s in Rhode Island.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.projo.com/art/content/HAPPY_ENDINGS_FILM_05-24-09_Q9EFHNF_v25.1ecfa95.html |title= Film chronicles R.I. [[File:spadoor.jpg|left|thumb|Front door of a Providence spa with multiple police stickers]] *On September 18, 2009, the ''Providence Journal'' reported that the [[Fraternal Order of Police]] representing the [[Rhode Island State Police]], and the Providence, Barrington, Warwick, and Cranston police had solicited donations from the spas. Many city spas have stickers decorating doors and windows, along with logos noting that the spa accepts all major credit cards. Donations from these spas also paid for ads in "The Rhode Island Trooper", the official publication of the non-profit Rhode Island State Police Association, a membership organization of [[state police]] *On October 25, the Journal reported that over 30 women representing spas in Rhode Island gathered at a Providence Community Center to voice their concern on the pending legislation. Sunyo Williams was working in a [[Pawtucket, Rhode Island|Pawtucket]] spa with three other women, and she said through an interpreter that nobody was under any force to work in that field, and that the women were willing to answer one by one and testify that it was their own choice. She said that each woman had a separate tax identification number and paid taxes, and that all her customers came from [[Massachusetts]], and that the women were making money and spending it in Rhode Island. Some of the other women also spoke or asked questions of the lawmakers, or representatives of advocacy groups such as the Rhode Island Coalition Against Human Trafficking, who attended ===Special legislative session=== Line 85: Rhode Island Coalition for the Homeless, Rhode Island National Association of Social Workers and the Rhode Island [[National Organization for Women]].<ref>{{cite web|title=Women need rehabilitation not penalties|url=http://www.riaclu.org/documents/2009ProstitutionhandoutNOW.pdf|website=Rhode Island ACLU|accessdate=16 April 2018|date= 10 June 2009 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110720183720/http://www.riaclu.org/documents/2009ProstitutionhandoutNOW.pdf |archive-date=20 July 2011}}</ref> Other groups providing testimony included the [[Urban Justice Center]].<ref>[http://www.sexworkersproject.org/downloads/2009/20090608-swp-hb5044a-memo-in-opposition.pdf Urban Justice Center: Memorandum in Opposition – H.B.5044.] Urban Justice Center Sex Workers Project, June 8, 2009.</ref><ref>[http://www.sexworkersproject.org/downloads/2009/20090618-swp-statement-to-senate-judiciary-committee.pdf Urban Justice Center: Statement to hearing of Senate Committee on the Judiciary on S.B. 0584.] Urban Justice Center Sex Workers Project, June 18, 2009.</ref> Individuals included the women's chaplain of the [[List of Rhode Island state prisons|Adult Correctional Institutions]] and [[Ann Jordan]], the Director of the Program on Human Trafficking and Forced Labor at [[Washington College of Law]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wcl.american.edu/humright/center/projects.cfm|title=Program on Human Trafficking and Forced Labor|publisher= |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100225081341/https://www.wcl.american.edu/humright/center/projects.cfm |archive-date=25 February 2010}}</ref> who provided testimony arguing that the bill would not help fight trafficking, but instead worsen the problem.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Jordan|first1=Ann|title=Letter to Senate Judiciary Committee, American University Washington College of law|url=http://www.riaclu.org/documents/2009prostitutionLetterRISenate.pdf|accessdate=16 April 2018|date= 5 June 2009 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110720183735/http://www.riaclu.org/documents/2009prostitutionLetterRISenate.pdf |archive-date=20 July 2011}}</ref> During the summer recess, two Representatives, [[David Segal (politician)|David Segal]] and [[Edith Ajello]] outlined their reasons for opposing the bills.<ref>{{cite web|title=David Segal/Edith Ajello: ==Help and support for male sex workers== | |||