- Joined
- Aug 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,619
- Points
- 0
http://tnp.sg/news/story/0,4136,203804,00.html?
First, S'pore's Edison Chen brags about sex exploits. Now...
Is he pimping teen's services?
Online porn man claims he's just helping lover
By Liew Hanqing
June 02, 2009
The New Paper on Sunday, 22 Mar.
HE IS already known among local netizens for posting raunchy videos of his many exploits online.
But amateur pornographer Gary Ng, 29, has now taken his online activities a step further by helping one of his sex partners advertise her services online.
In doing so, he could be exposing himself to pimping charges.
Mr Ng, a regular on a popular local sex forum, posted a thread on 22May advertising sexual services on behalf of an 18-year-old who had approached him for sex recently.
The online ad stated that the teen was charging $200 for a one-hour session.
On the forum thread, Mr Ng posted a link of a sex video he made with the teen. He called her a 'baby elephant'.
He told The New Paper: 'She is someone I met online. We arranged to meet through MSN Messenger and I picked her up after school.'
Why is he helping her advertise? Mr Ng said the teen had confided in him about her money woes.
He claims he did not pay her for sex.
He said: 'She is urgently in need of money. She's the only child and her dad died a few years ago.'
'Also, her mother is ill.'
He claimed that the teen needed money to pay for her mother's treatment and for her daily expenses.
'She didn't even have enough money for her meals sometimes,' he said.
But if he really wanted to help her, couldn't he have explored other ways? Is this the only way to help? Isn't he exploiting a desperate teen?
Mr Ng did not answer these questions.
He added that soon after he got to know her, he found out that she had been offering sexual services on telephone chatlines.
'She asked me for help because she knew that my thread in the forum and my blog attracts good traffic from guys,' he said.
He added that he felt sorry for her and decided to post the advertisement on the forum even though he faces the risk of being labelled a pimp by other forum members and netizens.
Some forum members asked if Mr Ng was getting a commission.
His reply: 'I don't think I need this kind of income. She's already in need of money. I wouldn't want to take commission from her.'
The teen, who confirmed she had asked Mr Ng for help, declined to be interviewed, saying she wanted to keep a low profile.
Mr Ng told The New Paper that he has seen many listings by 'freelance prostitutes' on sex forums he frequents, many of whom charge much lower rates.
There are also websites offering 'high-end' sexual services, some charging more than $2,000 an hour. (See report below.)
Illegal to receive cut
Is he running a foul of the law?
Lawyer Adrian Wee said if the man posting the sex ad on behalf of a girl is receiving a portion of what the girl makes, then he is likely to have committed the offence of living off the earnings of a prostitute.
Those guilty can be jailed up to five years, fined up to $10,000, or both.
'The fact that the 'exchange' happened online is immaterial,' Mr Wee said.
He added that if the girl is below 16 years old and the man is her guardian or in a position to exercise some control over her, he may have committed the offence of causing or encouraging prostitution by a girl under the age of 16.
Those guilty can be jailed for up to three years, fined up to $2,000, or both.
Mr Wee added that if Mr Ng does not get a cut of the money, it is unlikely that he would be accused of living off the earnings of a prostitute.
Sex ads aside, posting a sex video online could get netizens into trouble as well.
Said Mr Wee: 'Assuming that he has made the video, he may have committed an offence under the Films Act for making an obscene film.
'If he is the one who posted the link, he may have committed the offence of distributing an obscene film.
'Finally, even if he is not the one who has been posting the film, it is probable that he has also committed the offence of advertising for the purposes of distributing an obscene film.'
Under the Films Act, any person who makes or reproduces an obscene film - whether or not to exhibit or distribute it - can be fined between $20,000 and $40,000, jailed for up to two years, or both.
Repeat offenders can be fined between $40,000 and $100,000, jailed for up to two years, or both.
That the incident occurred online may complicate matters, said Mr Wee, since several factors may determine whether Singapore is the appropriate jurisdiction to try these matters.
The factors to be considered include the nationality of the parties involved, the location of the servers hosting the postings and videos, where the videos were taken and who viewed the links or videos.
First, S'pore's Edison Chen brags about sex exploits. Now...
Is he pimping teen's services?
Online porn man claims he's just helping lover
By Liew Hanqing
June 02, 2009
The New Paper on Sunday, 22 Mar.
HE IS already known among local netizens for posting raunchy videos of his many exploits online.
But amateur pornographer Gary Ng, 29, has now taken his online activities a step further by helping one of his sex partners advertise her services online.
In doing so, he could be exposing himself to pimping charges.
Mr Ng, a regular on a popular local sex forum, posted a thread on 22May advertising sexual services on behalf of an 18-year-old who had approached him for sex recently.
The online ad stated that the teen was charging $200 for a one-hour session.
On the forum thread, Mr Ng posted a link of a sex video he made with the teen. He called her a 'baby elephant'.
He told The New Paper: 'She is someone I met online. We arranged to meet through MSN Messenger and I picked her up after school.'
Why is he helping her advertise? Mr Ng said the teen had confided in him about her money woes.
He claims he did not pay her for sex.
He said: 'She is urgently in need of money. She's the only child and her dad died a few years ago.'
'Also, her mother is ill.'
He claimed that the teen needed money to pay for her mother's treatment and for her daily expenses.
'She didn't even have enough money for her meals sometimes,' he said.
But if he really wanted to help her, couldn't he have explored other ways? Is this the only way to help? Isn't he exploiting a desperate teen?
Mr Ng did not answer these questions.
He added that soon after he got to know her, he found out that she had been offering sexual services on telephone chatlines.
'She asked me for help because she knew that my thread in the forum and my blog attracts good traffic from guys,' he said.
He added that he felt sorry for her and decided to post the advertisement on the forum even though he faces the risk of being labelled a pimp by other forum members and netizens.
Some forum members asked if Mr Ng was getting a commission.
His reply: 'I don't think I need this kind of income. She's already in need of money. I wouldn't want to take commission from her.'
The teen, who confirmed she had asked Mr Ng for help, declined to be interviewed, saying she wanted to keep a low profile.
Mr Ng told The New Paper that he has seen many listings by 'freelance prostitutes' on sex forums he frequents, many of whom charge much lower rates.
There are also websites offering 'high-end' sexual services, some charging more than $2,000 an hour. (See report below.)
Illegal to receive cut
Is he running a foul of the law?
Lawyer Adrian Wee said if the man posting the sex ad on behalf of a girl is receiving a portion of what the girl makes, then he is likely to have committed the offence of living off the earnings of a prostitute.
Those guilty can be jailed up to five years, fined up to $10,000, or both.
'The fact that the 'exchange' happened online is immaterial,' Mr Wee said.
He added that if the girl is below 16 years old and the man is her guardian or in a position to exercise some control over her, he may have committed the offence of causing or encouraging prostitution by a girl under the age of 16.
Those guilty can be jailed for up to three years, fined up to $2,000, or both.
Mr Wee added that if Mr Ng does not get a cut of the money, it is unlikely that he would be accused of living off the earnings of a prostitute.
Sex ads aside, posting a sex video online could get netizens into trouble as well.
Said Mr Wee: 'Assuming that he has made the video, he may have committed an offence under the Films Act for making an obscene film.
'If he is the one who posted the link, he may have committed the offence of distributing an obscene film.
'Finally, even if he is not the one who has been posting the film, it is probable that he has also committed the offence of advertising for the purposes of distributing an obscene film.'
Under the Films Act, any person who makes or reproduces an obscene film - whether or not to exhibit or distribute it - can be fined between $20,000 and $40,000, jailed for up to two years, or both.
Repeat offenders can be fined between $40,000 and $100,000, jailed for up to two years, or both.
That the incident occurred online may complicate matters, said Mr Wee, since several factors may determine whether Singapore is the appropriate jurisdiction to try these matters.
The factors to be considered include the nationality of the parties involved, the location of the servers hosting the postings and videos, where the videos were taken and who viewed the links or videos.
and we know who he actually is now - another ng.
