Is the claim that ownership of a woman's service constitutes a valid doubt (shubha) to negate the Hadd for unlawful intercourse sound?

Primary text

The assertion that ownership of her service constitutes a valid doubt sufficient to negate the Hadd is not correct. If the Hadd is not waived even when the woman offers herself and consents to the man, then it is certainly not waived by the man possessing a different temporary benefit from her. Furthermore, the Hadd was necessitated by the intercourse with a non-mahram woman (ajnabiyyah); the subsequent change in her status does not negate the established ruling, similar to the ruling if she were to die after the act.