The victims met Tyrone BURTON while he was selling drugs on the street. They began a conversation and before long were in a hotel room consuming crack cocaine, a first for one of the victims. One victim fell in love with BURTON. For approximately one week, the victims provided sexual services to clients in several hotels under BURTON’s control. BURTON set up an advertisement for the victims’ sexual services and provided them with a phone so clients could call. BURTON also set rules: the victims were not permitted to leave the premise without him; they always had to be within his sight; they could not talk to other people; the nature and cost of their sexual services was determined by him; they could not service black customers; and all money they earned was to be handed over to him. BURTON also controlled the victims’ passports. While the victims provided sexual services to clients, BURTON would stand outside the hotel room and would advise through knocking on the door when the time paid for was over. BURTON insisted the victims call him “daddy” and would have them kiss a diamond ring he wore. The victims could only wear certain clothing and were permitted on occasion to eat, but only if enough money was earned from providing sexual services to others. BURTON used fear of unspoken consequences and possible harm to control the victims.
Ontario Court of Justice
Tyrone BURTON was found guilty of human trafficking specific and related offences by a judge. There is minimal case law in Canada to provide guidance pertaining to the Criminal Code of Canada’s human trafficking specific provisions. The way in which the judge interpreted the Criminal Code of Canada’s definition of exploitation in human trafficking situations is very meaningful. This understanding will provide reference and assistance to other similar human trafficking cases currently before the courts.
Ultimately, the judge rendered that BURTON did exercise control, direction or influence over the victims for the purpose of exploitation. BURTON’s control methods were absent of any overt threats or violence. However, it was the judge’s opinion that BURTON’s behaviour, by any reasonable criteria adopted, showed his intention to control and did control the two victims with the concomitant element of threats and, in the case of one of the victims, by his use of deception in permitting her to think he was her boyfriend. Overall, the judge felt that BURTON created a context of fear and control over the victims and was, as a result, impossible for them to think they could walk away safely.