A call for action to end violence against women in the sex industry.

Introduction.

IUSWLondonVAWresponse

The International Union of Sex Workers is an organisation of individuals who work in the sex industry. We campaign for human, civil and labour rights and the full protection of the law for everyone who works in the sex industry, and for the inclusion of sex workers in decisions which will affect our rights and safety.

Sex workers need a VAW strategy that prioritises the rights and safety of people in the sex industry and successfully targets violence – reported and unreported – against us. There is no more valid group of stakeholders in this debate than we who work in the sex industry: we will bear the damaging consequences of ill-informed policy, however well-intentioned.

Prostitution is having sex for money, and neither having sex nor getting paid is inherently degrading, abusive, exploitative or harmful. However, the draft strategy seems to imply that prostitution itself is a form of violence against women. This is unhelpful: respecting women’s right to choose for themselves when, why and with whom to have sex is fundamental and must be plainly acknowledged; a clear distinction must be drawn between coerced and consensual sex.

The strategy must make clear that all sex workers are entitled to the same respect as other women, whether in the sex industry by choice, circumstance, or coercion; that we too deserve the full protection of the law. Failure to do so – a refusal to acknowledge sex workers as anything other than victims – incorporates unequal treatment of sex workers at the heart of the strategy. If disrespect of sex workers is built in at a policy level, policy makers are culpable.

Policies that solve problems are based in reality and on evidence, rather than on ideology, assumptions and stereotypes.

Summary.

The reality of the sex industry is complex, diverse and rarely complies with the assumptions and stereotypes which often hold sway. This is a specialist area, and so it is unsurprising that the draft strategy demonstrates limited awareness of the wide range of organisations that work in this field and complete ignorance of the substantial body of academic research available to inform policy. The strategy contains poorly evidenced comments on sex work and lapdancing which are contradicted, often strongly, by official government figures and documents, academic studies, the expertise of frontline services and the experience of women who work in the sex industry and adult entertainment.

Although there is passing acknowledgement of sex workers’ vulnerability, none of the policies suggested by the draft strategy will do anything to tackle VAW in the sex industry, which is encouraged by stigmatisation, social exclusion and disrespect. This must be confronted at a policy level by a recognition in the strategy that sex workers, and our description of our own experience, are as worthy of respect as other women; that sex workers, like all other women, have the right to consent to sex and that our right to do is respected. If this is not the case, the strategy builds in disrespect, exclusion and unequal treatment of sex workers at a fundamental policy level.

Evidence and established good practice provides a wealth of information on which we can base effective, practical solutions to VAW in the sex industry: we can facilitate reporting and build trust in the police by ensuring sex workers are treated with respect and as equally entitled to the protection of the law; we can deter offenders by making clear sex workers are encouraged to report crimes against us and that such crimes will be prosecuted; we can show commitment to sex workers’ safety by treating crimes against sex workers as hate crime.

To see what can be done, we look especially to Liverpool, where policies like these have been pursued to great success. With the assistance of specialist services, Liverpool police are achieving a 40% detection rate for rapes committed against street sex workers reported to the police; six times higher than the national average for all women. 90% of cases for violence against sex workers that went to court during 2005 to end March 2009 resulted in convictions.

London can do the same.

It’s time for London to take action to end violence against women in the sex industry.

The International Union of Sex Workers
July 2009

The evidence base of the draft strategy – “What is already being done?”

“What is already being done?” mentions only the work of charities “more than a century ago”. In fact, much work on this issue has been done far more recently, which seems to be unknown to the authors of the strategy. There are specialist frontline projects which see the day to day reality of the sex industry, offering services and support to a broad range of sex workers – indoor and outdoor, migrant and UK born (and male and transgender, as well as female).

There are up to twenty organisations in London that are members of the UK Network of Sex Work Projects [1], including long established services with a wide range of expertise such as Clash, Open Doors, the Praed Street Project, SHOC, Spires Streetlink and SW5. These services offer the opportunity to draw on a broad practical knowledge base about the harmful impact of poorly evidenced policy and enforcement decisions and what works in assisting those in sex work who need assistance.

There are also several organisations run by or for sex workers: the English Collective of Prostitutes, the GMB sex workers’ branch, the International Union of Sex Workers, the Sex Workers’ Open University and the xtalk project. Since brothel keeping legislation often criminalises sex workers who work together, these projects help overcome the legally enforced isolation of many sex workers. They offer a place for sex workers to meet, to organise and to set the priorities that we see as most important – human rights and safety. It is to be hoped that the human rights and safety of people in the sex industry will be enhanced and protected by the Mayor’s Violence Against Women strategy.

“Women know best about their own safety and well-being, and when they have greater sense of control while working with agencies, they find the services more helpful and effective.” [2]

Resolution 1579 of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe recognises voluntary adult prostitution, and requires states do not force sex workers underground and make us more vulnerable, but seek to empower us. The resolution recommends “respect the right of prostitutes … to have a say in any policies … concerning them”. When sex workers are “excluded from ‘civil society’ … this has very serious consequences for their social status and well being.” [3]

Without those who see the day to day working of the sex industry, it is impossible to create effective policies to target the abuses which take place within the sex industry.

The evidence base of the draft strategy – academic research.

Regrettably, the draft strategy also demonstrates no knowledge of the extensive academic literature on sex workers, clients and client behaviour, the effects of stigma and social exclusion, or the reality of violence against sex workers. Particular omissions are the work of Belinda Brooks-Gordon, Helen Self, Hilary Kinnell, Jane Scoular, Julia O’Connell Davidson, Maggie O’Neill, Phil Hubbard and Teela Sanders.

Of the nine references relating to sex work, trafficking or lapdancing, none are academic. R. Barri Flowers, author of the only book referenced (“Prostitution of Women and Girls”, published in the US in 1998), is described as a “Crime, Suspense & Romance author” who writes “page-turning books of mystery, suspense and criminality”. [4] One reference concerns children, not adult women. Two of the documents referenced (Profitable Exploits and Sex in the City) drew widespread criticism for employing unethical research methods (information was gathered by deceiving respondents); the references relating to lapdancing will be further discussed in “The reality of lapdancing”. Four references are from NGOs or authors with a clearly stated belief that prostitution is violence against women. This extreme ideological view, their entirely subjective opinion, necessarily affects their estimation of abuses in the sex industry. Denise Marshall, Chief Executive of Eaves Housing, sees the sex worker/client relationship as one of “hunter/prey” [5] and Helen Atkins of the Poppy Project comments: “it has been said that we are never more than six feet away from a rat in London.  Apparently, something similar applies to brothels…” [6]

To give one detailed example, the strategy states “Between 1,000 and 10,000 women and girls are trafficked into the UK each year for sexual exploitation” and later asserts that “research suggests” this figure. However, this number is not based on research, at least in any academically recognised use of the term. The footnote (given twice) is in fact an unattributed comment from a newspaper article in The Observer (December 16 2007) [7] which is refuted by both Home Office and police data. The journalist, Mark Townsend, is not a specialist reporter on sex work or trafficking but writes generally on crime, and is frequently described as the newspaper’s Defence Correspondent. Townsend writes, “Officially, the Home Office believes the number of illegal immigrants being sexually exploited at any one time is about 4,000. Investigators and support groups, however, calculate numbers are likely to be in excess of 10,000 and describe known cases as the ‘tip of the iceberg’.”

The widely accepted Home Office figure (4,000) has been in use since 2003, unchanged over the past six years despite greatly increased media and policy attention to this issue. In the Home Office research from which it is taken, there is clear recognition that the figure of 4,000 is an upper estimate derived from a series of approximations, incomplete information and extrapolations. [8]

Although the draft strategy refers to the successes of Operation Pentameter, there is no reference to the information these operations gave us about trafficking into the sex industry. Pentameter 1 and 2 – nationwide, intelligence-lead police operations – raided 1,337 premises (estimated as more than 10% of the total) over two years, and found 255 victims of trafficking (equivalent to approximately 2550 across the entire industry). [9]

In the draft strategy, unsubstantiated generalisations are repeatedly stated as if they are facts:
·       The proliferation of lap dancing clubs and brothels may [italics ours] further legitimise violence against women and undermine efforts to prevent it.
·       The majority of women in prostitution in London are foreign nationals, many of whom have been trafficked either directly from their home country into Britain or via another European country.
·       There has been a significant increase in the number of brothels in London in the last ten years, with many posing as saunas.
·       Cutting demand is key to reducing trafficking into prostitution.
No evidence is given for these assertions; for at least some, no evidence or contrary evidence exists [8, 9,10,11, 12, 13, 14]. Most importantly:

There is no evidence that demand for commercial sex is the primary cause of trafficking: trafficking occurs in the sex industry for the same reasons it occurs in other industries.

There is no evidence that if demand for sexual services diminished, there would be a corresponding fall in trafficking for sexual exploitation.

There is no evidence that most purchasers of sexual services wish to buy services from the unwilling.

The reality of the sex industry – the legal context.

British legislation on the sex industry is not merely useless, it is actually harmful, effectively withdrawing the protection of the law from women who sell sex.

No British legislation on the sex industry actually refers to coercion, violence, abuse or exploitation; neither does our trafficking legislation. Although selling sex is legal, many activities around the sale of sex are criminalised. The only way to work in the sex industry free of the risk of prosecution is to work for yourself in complete isolation.

Two people working together fulfils the legal definition of  a brothel, so the law results in the isolation of sex workers. Many working flats decrease their likelihood of being raided by arranging for only one individual to work on each day of the week, which can contribute to exploitative working conditions. Independent workers are less likely to work collectively due to fear of arrest and prosecution: such prosecutions may fail or may, and have, succeeded.

Anyone who runs a brothel, working flat or escort agency is criminalised under legislation against controlling for gain, brothel keeping etc. so is at risk of arrest if s/he contacts the police. Controlling for gain, as defined in law, is entirely unconnected with trafficking or exploitation: it explicitly includes people who working of their own free will, and covers almost every way of working with or for a third party [15]. If this term were applied to other industries, it would include actors, authors, models, many hairdressers, mini-cab drivers, anyone who works for any kind of temp agency or other third party who arranges their work, including most barristers in chambers.

Prosecution for controlling for gain requires no evidence of coercion, violence or abuse; there have been several recent successful prosecutions where it was accepted in court that the defendant offered a safe, fair and honest working environment to women who freely chose to work there. Drivers, security staff or receptionists paid by independent sex workers to offer them some measure of protection are at risk of prosecution for controlling for gain; the definition is so broad that some will be found guilty.

Thus UK law on the sex industry fundamentally infringes sex workers’ human rights, most particularly our rights to equal protection of the law, freedom of association, equal access to public service and free choice of employment (articles 7, 20, 21 and 23 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights).

Preparing for the Olympics – the reality of sex work, trafficking and major events.

There certainly is evidence that major events of all kinds – sporting events, political party conferences, even papal visits – can see a rise in prostitution. Every effort must be made to prevent an increase in trafficking for sexual exploitation as a result of the 2012 Olympics: to be effective, these efforts must be grounded in the broad evidence base and build on successes elsewhere.

The World Cup was a far larger and longer event than the Athens Olympics (from 9 June to 9 July 2006 as opposed to13 to 24 August 2004; 3.36 million attendees as opposed to over a million visitors and about 70,000 volunteers and media members). The only text referenced by the draft strategy regarding major events states “The German Government … reported five (italics ours) cases of human trafficking to have a direct link to the 2006 World Cup. In these five cases, five victims of human trafficking were found, four women and one man…  There was no “significant increase” in the number of “illegal stays in connection with the practice of prostitution”. [16]

As regards adult trafficking during the Athens Olympics, the draft strategy quotes the increase in the number of victims as 95%. Although a vast proportional change, the number of victims remains small – 93 in 2003 and 181 in 2004. However, the number of cases rises from 49 to 65 (an increase of only 32%) – a relative change that potentially indicates a small number of successful gangs were responsible for the transport of a large number of victims. Furthermore, it is not specified that these data refer only to trafficking for sexual exploitation. According to the same report at least one local NGO reported that child trafficking for prostitution did not increase during the Athens Olympics, despite concerns that it would occur; in fact the number of children on the streets declined.

The Athens data in the Future Group report is from one source only (the Greek Ministry of Public Order); the International Organisation for Migration conducted comprehensive more research on the far larger event in Germany:
·       a systematic review of media and statistical sources
·       an analysis of previous large-scale events and their impact on trafficking
·       in-depth interviews with representatives of key agencies responsible for combating human trafficking in Germany: six experts from the relevant departments of German Länder Criminal Police Offices or the City Police Offices of selected World Cup Cities and ten in-depth expert interviews with civil society organisations (street work and assistance to victims of trafficking)
·       gathering information on trends in connection with the World Cup in cooperation with IOM missions
The IOM concluded “All data, information and experts’ statements that are available to date strongly indicate that an increase in human trafficking, during and after the World Cup did not occur” (italics ours). [17]

Furthermore, both reports observe that “trafficking requires a lot of logistics and investment” and speculate that a short term event may not generate sufficient return to make the process worthwhile (the London Olympics runs only from 27 July to 12 August 2012).

The reality of migration in London’s sex industry.

The draft strategy’s statement “The majority of women in prostitution in London are foreign nationals, many of whom have been trafficked either directly from their home country into Britain or via another European country” (italics ours) is not merely unevidenced but is contradicted by academic research, the Metropolitan Police’s Clubs & Vice Unit (CO14) and the day to day experience of the many projects which provide outreach and health services to London’s indoor and outdoor sex workers. We particularly draw your attention to the ESRC funded study Migrants in the UK Sex Industry at London Metropolitan University’s ISET centre. This is the largest qualitative study ever of migrants in the sex industry; there have been no quantitative studies.

Some NGOs believe they can identify “indicators of trafficking” which unfortunately show complete ignorance of how the sex industry actually works. For example, the presence of different women on different days of the week in the same premises has been seen as a sign of “well-organised gangs moving the girls around”. However, in an industry where two people working together are automatically criminalised (as the premises will be considered to be a brothel), this is standard practice, and does not indicate the presence of organised gang activity.

Other “indicators of trafficking” are considered to include comments by receptionists such as “Kissing available for £20 “depending on what you look like”, “£30 extra for anal if caller is ‘smallish down there’”, “Anal price negotiable ‘depending on size’”. The only person able to make this assessment is the provider of sexual services: these comments show freedom of choice, not trafficking. [5]

We estimate that 70-85% of sex workers in London are non-UK nationals – in common with other service industries in the capital, most of which pay minimum wage. There is great difference between a victim of trafficking and a migrant working in the UK sex industry, even when entry to the UK was achieved by resorting to being smuggled by criminal networks. The prevalence of irregular migrants in sex work is primarily due to the low wages available in other unregulated industries (for example, the hourly wage for sex work is equivalent to a 10-12 hour shift in a commercial kitchen).

“…three related factors are key to … exploitative conditions … (a) The unregulated nature of the labour market segments in which they work; (b) the abundant supply of exploitable labour and (c) the power and malleability of social norms regulating the behaviour of employers and clients…the absence of effective regulation is one of the factors that help to create an environment in which it is possible and profitable to use unfree labour.” [18]

The reality of lapdancing

The material on this issue referenced in the draft VAW strategy is all from groups who are openly anti-lapdancing/stripping.

When a premises notes on its license application that it wises to offer adult entertainment, the licensing authority can dictate rules such as opening hours, visibility of outside signage, distance required between performers and audience etc. The licensing is not the same as for a café, as campaigners are fond of saying – this is an over-simplification of a more complex licensing situation.

The draft strategy states “Research has identified that some lap dance club owners and managers create conditions in which prostitution is likely to occur… The clubs run in a way that implicitly encourages the customers to expect and seek sexual services from the dancers.” Again, we reiterate that the research quoted is not academically credited and is in fact contradicted by more academically based research. [14]

It is strongly against club owners’ interests to encourage or permit prostitution as this may lead to the venue being shut down. In fact, clubs ban any such activities and take steps to enforce these bans: security or CCTV in private dance areas, rules against leaving the club with customers and against handing out or accepting business cards or phone numbers – this is a sackable offence in most clubs. Club rules also dictate against soliciting or promising to engage in sexual activity with a customer outside the club. These rules are part of the code of conduct dancers sign in many clubs.

Clubs where bodily contact is taking place and sexual services being offered are breaking the law: action should be taken on such clubs. They should not be used as an example to shut down well-run law-abiding venues that meet the stringent licensing terms imposed.

Management in some clubs may sometimes book an excessive number of dancers in order to boost profits through the dancers’ house fees. Whilst this is a practice the IUSW does not condone, and does make the work more competitive, it does not automatically follow that ‘prostitution is likely to occur’.

An IUSW member states: “I have worked in over 30 venues, mostly in London but also in the rest of the UK. In none of them could I have performed anything more than a dance for the customer if I had wanted to (which I didn’t); should I have wanted to perform a more intimate sex act I could not have done so without easily being caught  – in which case I would have been instantly dismissed.”

The vast majority of customers do not expect or seek sexual services from dancers. If this were the case, the lapdancing industry would have gone bust, as no sexual services are on offer, hence all those customers expecting sexual services would be disappointed and not return to the clubs. Customers understand they are entering a fantasy environment.  In fact clubs are run in such as way as to make clear sex is not on offer: communal dance rooms, security presence etc.

The draft strategy states “Dancers have also revealed problems such as threats of physical violence from customers and demands for sex.” Proposals to change the license title to describe dance venues as “Sex Encounter Establishments” may give impression sexual services are in fact available. IUSW dance members do report occasional requests for sex from customers who have misunderstood the services on offer, but these are not “demands” – any customer “demanding” sex would be asked to leave the premises. These requests or suggestions are certainly not accompanied by threats of violence: any customer threatening the dancers with violence would be escorted from the premises or the police called. These clubs have a much higher staff/security to customers ratio than most entertainment venues, as Chief Inspector Adrian Studd of the Metropolitan Police noted when giving evidence to the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee in October 2008. [19]

The draft strategy states “Anti-trafficking and prostitution organisations have highlighted that lapdancing clubs are used by traffickers to ‘hide’ women trafficked into prostitution, or bribe them for good behaviour.” An IUSW dance member states: “In seven years dancing I have never met or heard of anyone trafficked in a dance club.” Such venues are too ‘open’, visible and there is too much exposure to the general public for this to be a good place to ‘hide’ trafficked women. Looking for such women here would divert valuable resources from looking in more likely places. Neither Nick Mai’s research (which included both dancers and people who sold sexual contact) nor Phil Hubbard’s work on stripping has found evidence of trafficked women in strip clubs, or use of such work as a “reward” to trafficked women. [11, 14]

The draft strategy states “Research has suggested possible links between clubs opening in an area and an increase in reports of rape and sexual assault upon women in that area and harassment from men leaving the club or touts outside also increased significantly after the opening of a club.” This ‘research’ (Lilith Report on Lap Dancing and Striptease in the Borough of Camden) has been widely discredited, to the extent that The Guardian newspaper was required to print corrected figures from the Metropolitan Police. [20] The Metropolitan Police figures 1999-2007, which were quoted only selectively in the Lilith publication, could be used to show a decrease in rapes and assaults with clubs opening, rather than an increase, if different years are chosen, and the total figures do, in fact, show a decrease. [21] Although these data are no longer easily available more recent figures show a substantial decrease in the number of reported rapes and sexual assaults in London (2002/3: rapes 2731, other 7696; 2006/7: rapes 2304, other 7001) [21] at a time when anti-lapdance campaigners state “… the number of UK lap dancing clubs has doubled since 2004 when their number was estimated at 150 … our research indicates that the current number of UK lap dancing venues stands today at approximately 310.” In our view (and that of in-depth studies of prevalence, reporting and successful prosecution of rape and sexual assault [22, 23, 24]) this is a complex issue: to attempt to draw a direct line from any one event to crime statistics for a wider geographical area is simplistic and unhelpful in tackling sexual VAW – but if anti-lapdance groups wish to argue on these grounds, the figures contradict the view they espouse.

In terms of nuisance outside clubs, Chief Inspector Adrian Studd told the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee: “…there is no evidence [lapdancing clubs] cause any crime and disorder, or very rarely, because they tend to be fairly well-run, they tend to have a fairly high staff ratio to customers, the people who tend to go there tend to be a bit older, so they don’t tend to drink so excessively and cause… problems outside.” [19] An IUSW dance member states: “Out of all the women who may be concerned about ‘harassment’ outside a club I, as a dancer, should surely be most concerned, when leaving my shift after work. In fact, in seven years, I have never encountered any such ‘harassment’.”

Although Adrian Studd is a Chief Inspector in the Metropolitan Police Clubs and Vice Unit and is considered sufficiently expert to give evidence to a parliamentary Select Committee, a more localised, front-line police view is that “…within the last year, none of the premises …, when using their striptease clause, have come to their [police] attention – either as a result of complaints from the community, or through crime and disorder incidents. Therefore they do not see these venues as generators of crime and disorder and cause them relatively little concern. Further research, shown in Figure 2 [table showing incidence of crime at and around strip clubs, Apr 06-Feb 07 and Apr 07-Feb08], seems to corroborate this view. [25]

The reality of violence.

If left unchanged, the draft strategy will do nothing to prevent or prosecute violence against women working in the sex industry. Fortunately, we can build upon the considerable evidence of “what works” to improve this.

Evidence shows that the majority of robbery, abuse, harassment and physical or sexual violence experienced by sex workers in the course of their work comes from those who do not pay for sex. Many assailants make no pretence of being clients, but express hatred of sex workers and appear to feel their actions are legitimated by the social attitudes of abhorrence for commercial sex. Others may approach as if they were clients, but then refuse to pay, commit assaults and robberies, or violently force return of payment after having had sex. Deterring “demand” or criminalising clients will have no impact upon these perpetrators of abuse who are already committing criminal acts against sex workers.

A substantial proportion of violence experienced by indoor sex workers is through robbery. Gangs make a rational choice, in the expectation of a small number of people on the premises, cash available, reluctance to report, and the knowledge that if the robbery, rape or other assault is reported, the police may be dismissive in their response, the CPS wary of prosecuting due to low expectations of a conviction, and judge and jury may be influenced by their perceptions of sex work in the unlikely event a case does get to court. Predators knowingly target migrant sex workers for robbery or rape since the police will pursue possible visa infringements simultaneous to any investigation of VAW and migrant women choose not to report assaults against them to avoid deportation. [26, 27] “Women who are endangered because of current or past violence and who have insecure immigration status must be afforded equity of protection to guarantee their safety.” [28]

The vulnerability of street sex workers is commonly accepted: a high proportion are survivors of child sexual abuse, have been in care, have poor educational achievement, are IV drug users and are homeless or in insecure housing situations. [29] Despite this, the strategy offers no suggestions for decreasing these women’s vulnerability and treating them as members of the community.

It is widely acknowledged that criminalisation of street sex workers or their clients is ineffective in addressing their problems, often simply requiring women to spend more time on the streets to raise money to cover fines. Again, contrary to frequent assumption, clients are not the main source of violence against street sex workers. Violence may be perpetrated by those presenting as clients, but a substantial amount of violence to street sex workers comes from members of the ‘general public’, such as gangs of youths, aggrieved local residents and vigilantes. Attacks include shouted abuse, projectiles (e.g. cups of urine) thrown from cars, and assaults requiring hospital treatment. [26, 27, 30]

Targeting clients will do nothing to tackle this violence. In fact, there have been many studies showing the long- and short-term ineffectiveness of anti-kerb-crawling campaigns: they will disrupt, displace and disperse markets for sexual services temporarily, but do not offer solutions. [26, 27] The Home Office’s own research shows that enforcement and police crackdowns are ineffective in terms of reducing disorder, and that the most effective solution was “the right support … available at the right time”. [30]

The reality of targeting clients.

Although all sex workers will be harmed by actions to criminalise clients or decrease demand, the most concrete evidence comes from action against the clients of some of the most vulnerable sex workers, women who work on the street. [26, 27, 30]
·       Crackdowns on kerb-crawling, whilst satisfying for those with objections to street sex work, show a correlation with increased violence against street sex workers.
·       Aggressive prosecution of kerb-crawlers does not increase the options and support available to street sex workers, but increases antagonism between street workers and police.
·       The clients deterred by knowledge of police campaigns against kerb-crawlers are the most law-abiding; such campaigns do nothing to affect the behaviour of the worst. An individual intending to assault, rape, abduct, rob, or kill will not be prevented by the prospect of a fine for kerb-crawling.
·       There is evidence that a small minority of clients’ excitement is increased by a sense of doing something outside the law, so this proposal could, by increasing the risk, increase their desire to pay for sex.
·       A smaller number of clients does nothing to reduce the amount of money the women need, so street sex workers work longer hours, compete more aggressively with other street workers, and are more likely to cut prices in order to secure a client, take greater risks and engage in activities they would prefer to avoid, including sex without a condom.
·       Greater desperation leads women to work in more isolated locations (further from other sex workers) and to go with clients without negotiation as they have no time to assess potential clients or agree prices, boundaries, safe sex and other limits. Women are more likely to find themselves in a situation they would have declined with more time to make a decision.
·       Disrupted working hours and dispersal over a greater geographical area makes it more difficult for outreach workers to contact sex workers for safe sex counselling, drug rehabilitation or support in exiting prostitution.
·       As a result of dispersal over a wider area, more aggressive competition to attract clients and between women, and the longer hours needed to generate the same amount of money, kerb-crawling crackdowns not only harm women selling sex but result in greater impact on communities. In addition, women revert to other forms of crime as a way to make up the money that cannot be earned from sex work.
·       If it is more difficult to make money on the street, some women will trade sex for drugs in crackhouses, a profoundly unsafe environment, which gives them far fewer choices than earning cash which they can use for purposes other than drug purchase. Thus, kerb-crawling crackdowns may actually increase women’s drug consumption.

Kerb-crawling crackdowns increase violence, make street working women’s situation worse in both the short- and long-term, exacerbate the impact on communities
and fail to solve the problems associated with street sex work.

Although there is most evidence of the harmful consequences of targeting the clients of street sex workers, indoor workers’ vulnerability will also be increased by doing so.

If measures to reduce demand are successful, providers of sexual services will face reduced options to generate income. Everyone, UK national or migrant, will face financial pressures to offer a wider range of services and/or lower prices and/or to accept clients they would prefer to refuse. This may include services which are physically less pleasant or more dangerous – for example, decreased condom use. If sex workers work in a brothel or for an agency, they may face pressure from owners and managers to increase variety of services/take lower fees/see unpopular clients.

If there is greater police enforcement, particularly if targeted at premises in which migrants work, greater financial rewards will be sought by people running such flats and agencies to compensate for the greater risks undertaken. This will result in poorer working conditions and reduced income for migrant sex workers and pressure on them to reduce prices and see clients or perform acts they would otherwise refuse.

With increasingly limited opportunities, migrant workers will end up in premises run by people more cavalier about breaking the law, more likely to be criminals prepared to exploit and abuse, less likely to report suspicions of trafficking.

The reality of the role of “demand”.

There is no evidence that trafficking for sexual exploitation is demand-led: trafficking occurs in the sex industry for the same reasons it occurs in other industries. There is no evidence that if demand for sexual services diminished, there would be a corresponding fall in trafficking for sexual exploitation. There is no evidence that most purchasers of sexual services wish to buy services from the unwilling.

According to the 2000 National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles 9% of men in London had paid for sex in the past 5 years, compared with 4% across the UK. [31] In a survey of 16,000 gay & bisexual men, 10.4% had bought or sold sex in the past year. [32]

Less than 5% of clients said they would be deterred by legal sanctions, though 20% said they’d stop buying sex if they had a girlfriend. [33]

London, where the vast majority of sex workers are non-UK nationals, is accepted as the UK location with the greatest proportion of migrant sex workers. However, demand in London seems to have fallen. Prices for sexual services have been static for the past 8-12 years, a fall in real terms as measured against inflation. Many well-established working flats and individual sex workers report less custom now than in previous years.

If the market for sexual services (and thus for trafficked women) is demand led, static or falling prices imply that demand has fallen. This has made no difference to trafficking (given that the Home Office estimate has not risen in six years), so attempts to reduce demand will make no difference to trafficking.

If the market is in fact supply led (as static/falling prices in a situation of increased supply most directly imply), again, targeting clients will be completely ineffective in reducing trafficking.

Not only is targeting clients useless in reducing trafficking whether the market is demand or supply led, dissuading clients from using the services of migrant workers is directly against migrants’ interests, whether entrapped or independent.  If they are independent, this will directly affect their income and therefore the resources available to them.  If they are entrapped, clients are one of the few groups of people likely to see victims of trafficking who could report anxieties: as already described, all brothel and agencies owners and support staff run the risk of prosecution if they contact the police. “For women to have confidence in the CJS, reporting violence must increase their access to safety, support and justice and not expose them to further victimisation.” [34] There are numerous cases of clients assisting victims of trafficking – for example, in the Oriental Gems case, one of the largest trafficking investigations in London in recent years, part of the reason the prosecution was viable was due to evidence from a victim of trafficking freed from slavery as a result of a client paying £20,000 of her debt. [35]

“…we could almost say that supply generates demand rather than the other way about… attempts to suppress the prostitution market, whether focused on sex workers or their clients, necessarily implies subjecting those who sell sex to what Radin describes as “the degradation and danger of the black market … it is … hard to see why anyone genuinely concerned with protecting and promoting human rights would place measures to tackle consumer demand for commercial sex at the top of their policy agenda” (italics ours) [36]

Practical solutions to tackle violence against women in the sex industry.

·       Listening to sex workers to create policies that target violence as experienced by sex workers, rather than blurring the line between consensual and non-consensual sex by describing all sex work as violence.
·       Prevention – a publicity campaign saying violence against sex workers is a crime, that it will be prosecuted as such and that sex workers are encouraged to report: posters, articles in local newspapers, relevant internet sites etc.
·       Consistency of policing is vital to create the trust which will result in increased reporting. Although there are many examples of good practice from the police, the behaviour of some police officers towards sex workers is offensive and discriminatory. Sex workers are entitled to the same quality of treatment as other members of the public. This has been part of successfully tackling violence in Liverpool.
·       A specialist unit to which people in the sex industry report crimes against them. Sex workers should be given a named contacts for cases in which they are involved.
·       Crimes against people in the sex industry should initially be treated as hate crime – this has been part of successfully tackling violence in Liverpool.
·       Training for all police officers regarding the diverse reality of the sex industry, involving front line support services and sex workers themselves.
·       Fund a London-wide Ugly Mugs scheme developed in association with sex work projects.
·       Training for projects and sex workers organisations to support third party or assisted reporting up to and including the collection of evidence – this has been part of successfully tackling violence in Liverpool.
·       Expert witnesses in all cases involving sex workers. Most jurors (and often legal staff) have little knowledge of the reality of the sex industry and will be able to make fairer and more responsible judgments if they are given a more accurate context for testimony.
·       Training for legal staff, including magistrates and judges.
·       When migrant sex workers report crimes, treat the crime against them as more important than their visa status.
·       Negotiate with street working women to create safety zones in which to work and support services which meet their needs – counselling without judgement and without bias that explores sex workers’ practical options; more accessible drug services, housing options and more support for partners. (Although the cliché “pimp” does exist, it is simplistic and profoundly unhelpful to categorise all sex workers’ partners as pimps. These are often long term relationships, possibly with children, that may be damaged or dysfunctional but will not be simply abandoned by women – treatment and services for partners are an essential part of creating effective, sustainable change. This is particularly the case since there is no substitute for crack cocaine – it is changed life circumstances overall which enable crack users to move on, not only drug treatment.)
·       Education – talking with young women and young men, and girls and boys, about sexual boundaries and treating sexual partners with respect – in a context of all sexual interactions, not just commercial exchanges.

There are no more vehement or dedicated opponents of the abuse of sex workers than sex workers ourselves: we have most to gain from safe, fair and non-exploitative working environments, and from an end to social exclusion and discrimination against us.

Appendix – successfully targeting VAW in the sex industry in Liverpool

PRESS RELEASE – SEX WORKERS URGED TO REPORT ATTACKS AS CONVICTION RATES SOAR EMBARGOED UNTIL 16.00 HOURS ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 3, 2009

Groundbreaking work by Merseyside Police and outreach service Armistead Street is leading to nine out of ten people charged with crimes against sex workers in Liverpool being convicted of their offences in court.
The success of the partnership work, which has also seen detection rates for rapes against sex workers increase from 5.6 per cent in 2006/07 to 40 per cent in the past year, comes as a monthly drop-in centre for victims is launched by the police at Armistead Street’s offices in Stanley Street, Liverpool, tomorrow night (Thursday, June 4).
The figures, which are among the best in the country, send a clear message to both victims and would-be offenders that the police are determined to bring perpetrators of hate crimes to justice, increase victims’ confidence in the police and encourage them to use the support services out there for them.
The partnership between the police and Armistead Street stems from Merseyside Police’s commitment to treating all attacks on sex workers as hate crimes – one of the first forces in the UK to pledge to do so.
It involves police officers and staff from the Force’s hate crime investigation SIGMA unit, CID detectives and the Force Diversity team working closely with the outreach and support service’s Independent Sexual Violence Advisor (ISVA).
The officers act as a link between sex workers who are being helped by Armistead Street and Merseyside Police with the aim of encouraging them to report crimes committed against them and feel confident that support will be given to them when the case goes to court.
The police officers also use valuable information given through the ‘Ugly Mugs’ reporting scheme run by Armistead’s ISVA to investigate potential attackers who are committing crimes against sex workers.
Armistead’s ISVA can also use the information to alert other sex workers to the danger and have been trained by the police in photographing injuries sustained by sex workers and assisting in conducting interviews on camera that can be used by the Crown Prosecution Service as evidence in court.
These pioneering initiatives have led to a number of successful prosecutions, including:
A man being jailed for a minimum of 12 years after ‘Susan’ bravely came forward to report that he had raped her twice on two seperate occasions in 2006. Susan provided the police with DNA evidence which also linked the offender to an attempted abduction of a 16-year-old schoolgirl. When she heard about this incident Susan agreed to give evidence in court, supported throughout by Armistead Street and Merseyside Police.
A man being sentenced to a minimum of four years for twice raping ‘Jenny’ at knife point in Anfield in 2007. Jenny called the police straight away, despite being terrified, because she wanted other women to know of the dangers out there. At the trial she was praised by the judge for conducting herself with ‘dignity and respect’. Jenny is no longer a sex worker and after being rehoused, has recently had a baby. (for further details about both woman’s stories, please see Editors Notes below).
Detective Chief Inspector Tim Keelan of Lower Lane CID, said: “Merseyside Police takes all forms of hate crime very seriously and will not tolerate attacks on women who work in the sex industry who are victims of violent crime. They are people’s mothers, daughters, sisters, friends, and will be treated by our officers in exactly the same way as any victim of crime should be – with care, professionalism and respect.
“The formation of the SIGMA unit and the close working relationship we have with the Armistead Street project has helped break down the boundaries that once existed between the police and sex workers and we are seeing more reporting of hate crime as a result.
“The high 90 per cent conviction rate of those responsible for such attacks not only demonstrates the excellent work being done by police officers and outreach workers to put together strong cases against the perpetrators of these crimes, but also the guts and determination of the victims to report attacks against them and give us the vital evidence we and the Crown Prosecution Service need to secure justice for them.
“I am confident that we can build on these successful figures and encourage even more people to follow these brave womens’ lead and report hate crimes to us so we can bring those responsible before the courts and send out a clear message that this kind of behaviour will not be tolerated in Merseyside.”
Shelly Stoops is the Independent Sexual Violence Advisor (ISVA) at Armistead Street. This is the only such post to be funded in the UK within a dedicated support service for sex workers and her role involves supporting people in sex work who have been victims of rape and sexual assault.
She said: “Armistead’s groundbreaking partnership with Merseyside Police has enabled a greater understanding of the issues around sex work generally and has highlighted the significant levels of crime committed against sex workers.
“Our joint approach has encouraged people involved in sex work to report crimes committed against them and to access appropriate support services and we have been impressed with the police’s commitment to both Armistead and to the clients that we work with on a daily basis.
“The increasing conviction rates for crimes against sex workers sends out a clear message that attacks on them will not be tolerated.”
Shelly is due to address the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) National Vice Conference which is being held in Gloucestershire in July to talk about the work being done by Armistead Street, Merseyside Police, and other agencies like Victim Support.
To report a hate crime through the Armistead Street project or to seek advice, support and information about the monthly drop-in sessions, call 0151 227 1893. For more information about how Merseyside Police works with Armistead to help tackle crimes against sex workers visit www.merseyside.police.uk/html/support/sex-workers

Notes to Editors
Media opportunity:  Wednesday, June 3, 2009, 2.30pm-4pm
There will be an opportunity to interview and photograph/film two former sex workers who have been victims of hate crime and, after receiving help and support from Merseyside Police and Armistead Street, saw their attackers convicted at Liverpool Crown Court and receive lengthy custodial sentences. These interviews have been granted by both women on condition of complete anonymity and any media who wish to interview and/or film/photograph them are asked to make arrangements to ensure this can be guaranteed
An opportunity to interview and photograph/film Detective Chief Inspector Tim Keelan and Armistead Street’s Shelly Stoops are also available.
Please contact Nick Lakeman at Merseyside Police press office on 0151 777 8566 to arrange an interview slot.

Case Study One:
‘Susan’ has been working as a sex worker in Liverpool for the past 10 years and works to fund her heroin addiction.
In 2006 she was raped twice by the same man on two separate occasions after being picked up and taken to West Derby Road.
Immediately after the second attack, Susan flagged down a passing police car and her swift action allowed good quality DNA  evidence to be provided.
‘Susan’ also reported the rapes to Armistead Street who, through the ‘Ugly Mugs’ scheme, were able to alert other sex workers in the city about the danger posed by this offender, as well as a description of him and the areas he frequented.
Several months later the police matched the DNA taken following the attacks on ‘Susan’ to that taken from a man who had been arrested for attempting to abduct a 16-year-old school girl.
Shelly Stoops approached ‘Susan’ and asked if she would be prepared to give evidence against this man. Susan had only reported the attacks against her so that other woman could be warned, however when she heard about the attack on the 16-year-old, she agreed to go to court, sparing the schoolgirl from having to.
Merseyside Police and Armistead Street provided support for Susan throughout and she was given provided with somewhere safe and comfortable to live during the court case.
She was allowed to give evidence from behind a screen in court to protect her identity  as a victim of a sexual offence and thanks to her evidence and the forensics linking her attacker, he was sentenced to an indeterminate sentence for the public’s protection with a minimum of 12 years in prison.
Shelly said: “Susan was absolutely over the moon, especially because she heard for the first time the full history of this man’s offending, which had escalated from flashing at people to raping women and attempting to kidnap teenage girls.
“This shows exactly why it is so important we get cases like this to court – to get justice for the victims and to get the people who commit these offences off the streets so they can’t hurt anyone else.”

Case Study Two:
‘Jenny’ is from Anfield and in 2007 was raped twice at knife-point by the same man.
She called the police straight away, despite being terrified, because she didn’t want her attacker to be able to hurt anyone else.
Good quality DNA evidence was provided by Jenny who also provided a full statement to the police, supported by trained workers at Armistead Street, who circulated the suspect’s details to other sex workers through the Ugly Mugs reporting scheme.
A detective sergeant from Merseyside Police’s SIGMA team was assigned to the case and she worked closely with Shelly Stoops and Jenny throughout the investigation and court case.
When the case went to trial, Jenny was shown around the courtroom before it began and talked through what would be required of her as a witness.
She was allowed to give evidence from behind a screen and at the end of the trial the judge said he respected her bravery and praise the ‘dignity’ in which she conducted herself.
Unfortunately the jury in the first trial failed to reach a verdict but Jenny made the brave decision to go through the ordeal of a retrial and this time her attacker was convicted and given an indeterminate custodial sentence for the public’s protection with a minimum of four years.
Following the trial, Jenny was given help in getting out of the sex industry. She now has her own home and has recently had a baby.

http://www.merseyside.police.uk/html/support/sex-workers/

Support for sex workers in Merseyside

Merseyside Police recognises that Merseyside has a diverse population and that some ‘socially excluded’ groups within our communities have individual needs when coming into contact with the Police. We acknowledge that those involved in street sex work live and work within our communities, but have had difficulty historically when accessing our services.
Merseyside Police are currently working in partnership with Armistead Street (outreach and support project) and City Safe to produce a strategy / guidelines which encompasses; prevention, harm reduction, routes out, enforcement and ensuring justice (preventing and addressing crimes against sex workers). This will both benefit police officers and outreach workers who deal with sex workers on a daily basis.

http://www.merseyside.police.uk/html/support/sex-workers/hate-crime.htm

Hate Crime Investigation Unit

Merseyside Police Force is one of the first forces to treat crimes against sex workers as hate crimes. Merseyside Police is committed to providing the best service to the people of Merseyside. To provide this service, dedicated units have been set up in each area of Merseyside, They will provide quality investigation and customer service to the victims of Hate Crime, taking into account their individual needs. The Sigma  (Hate Crime Investigation) Units, will deal with crime relating to the following strands of Diversity, Disability, Race, Religion and Belief, Sexual Orientation, Transgender.
In addition if any sex worker is the victim of an assault or other crime that would appear to be motivated by the fact that they are a sex worker, such incidents are recorded as a Hate Crime.
In most cases the case is investigated by a detective from the Sigma (Hate Crime Investigation) Unit.  (Reports of robbery will continue to be dealt with by the Robbery Reduction Team).

http://www.merseyside.police.uk/html/support/sex-workers/armisteadst-isva.htm

Armistead Street and the Independent Sexual Violence Advisor for Sex Workers

Armistead Street is an outreach and support service for street sex workers in Liverpool. The project is located within the Armistead Centre, Liverpool Primary Care Trust. If you have any queries about the project contact Armistead Street on:
Armistead Office: 0151-227-1893
In October 2006 Armistead Street were awarded a grant from the Home office to employ an Independent Sexual Violence Advisor (ISVA), This is the only such post to be funded within a dedicated support service for sex workers. The IVSA at Armistead Street is Shelley Stoops. The role is to support people involved in sex work who have been victims of rape and sexual assault. The ISVA will support the client through the criminal justice system, if this is a route they wish to take. They will also address their safety and support service needs.
The IVSA will work in partnership with a number of agencies ie. health, drugs, housing, police and voluntary sector. The ISVA also co-ordinates the Armistead Street “Ugly Mugs” scheme. This scheme enables sex workers to report crimes committed against them to the project. The project can then alert other sex workers to potential attackers. Ugly Mugs is also another means of encouraging sex workers to report crimes to the police.

http://www.merseyside.police.uk/html/support/sex-workers/liason-officer.htm

Police sex work liason officer
Two police officers, as part of their wider duties, will share the role of “Police Sex Work Liaison Officer”. The Liaison Officers will work closely with Armistead Street to encourage people involved in sex work to report crimes committed against them and access appropriate support services. The officers in this role will act as a link between the sex work support project and Merseyside Police, they will be an initial contact point for “Ugly Mugs” information and alongside Armistead Street staff will support sex workers through the criminal justice system.
Ensuring Justice
This role is in line with “Ensuring Justice” strand of the Home Office “Co-ordinated National Strategy on Prostitution”. It also builds on local good practice in joint work between Merseyside Police and Armistead Street who worked closely together to support a women involved in street sex work who was a victim of rape. In this case a male was found guilty of two counts of rape and received a 12 year sentence.
The responsibilities of the officer include:
* Working closely with Armistead Street to encourage people involved in sex work to report crimes committed against them and access appropriate support services.
* Work with the Armistead Street staff to support sex workers through the criminal justice system.
* Provide a professional service in obtaining detailed crime reports and evidence from victims.
The Sex Work Liaison Officers also attend a drop in at Armistead Street the purpose of this is to provide a single point of contact between police and sex workers. This is also an opportunity to gain trust and be a friendly face to sex workers. Every other week an officer not in uniform will attend the Friday drop in. At the drop-in the officer will see clients in a private counselling room, maintaining confidentiality. There is also an option if the clients want to see the officer outside the drop in hours
To make arrangement for this facility contact Armistead Street on: 0151-227-1893
Vulnerable Witness Interviews and Visual Evidence Scheme
Merseyside Police is one of the first Forces to work in partnership on Vulnerable Witness Interviews and Visual Evidence Scheme.
Armistead Street team will be trained by Merseyside Police in to take photographs of any injuries sustained by sex works that can be used as visual evidence. These photographs can also be taken in cases where a client does not want to make a full report to the police at that time, the photo’s can be storedand used at a later date if the client wishes to take the matter further. This scheme will be conducted in line with police and CPS guidance re: standards for evidence gathering.
Armistead Street and Merseyside Police secured funding for video equipment. This video equipment will be located within the centre and for video interviews. It will be used for those clients who are victims of rape and other crimes. The clients will have and option to make a video interview statement. In the national guidance such video statements are seen as having advantages for vulnerable witnesses and improving in ‘Achieving Best Evidence’ Shelly Stoops has been trained by Merseyside Police in the principles of Achieving Best Evidence and video interviewing.

http://www.maghullstar.co.uk/maghull-aintree-news/maghull-aintree-news/2009/06/11/new-figures-reveal-all-criminals-who-target-liverpool-sex-workers-are-jailed-104897-23828477/

New figures reveal all criminals who target Liverpool sex workers are jailed
Jun 11 2009 by Richard Down, Maghull and Aintree Star
ALMOST all criminals who target Liverpool sex workers are jailed, new figures reveal.
Conviction rates have soared for crimes against the city’s vice girls with nine out of ten offenders now being punished in court.
Detection rates for rapes against prostitutes are also up by nearly 35% from 5.6% in 2006/07 to 40% in the past year.
Police say their groundbreaking work and that of outreach service Armistead Street is responsible for the results, which are among the best in the country.
Building on this success, Merseyside Police has now launched a new monthly drop-in centre for victims at Armistead Street’s offices in Stanley Street, Liverpool.
The force has also pledged to treat all attacks on sex workers as hate crimes – making it one of the first in the country to do so.
DCI Tim Keelan of Lower Lane CID, said: “These are people’s mothers, daughters, sisters, friends, and will be treated by our officers in exactly the same way as any victim of crime should be – with care, professionalism and respect.”
DCI Keelan praised victims for having the courage to come forward.
He said: “The formation of the SIGMA unit (the force’s hate crime investigation unit) and the close working relationship we have with the Armistead Street project has helped break down the boundaries that once existed between the police and sex workers and we are seeing more reporting of hate crime as a result.”
Officers also use the ‘Ugly Mugs’ reporting scheme run by Armistead’s Independent Sexual Violence Advisor, Shelly Stoops, to investigate potential attackers who target sex workers.
She deals with 354 street workers and said that 73% had experienced violence. But police and Armistead are determined to cut this figure.
She will outline the project’s successes to the Association of Chief Police Officers National Vice Conference in Gloucestershire in July.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2009/06/04/police-convict-90-of-those-who-rape-sex-workers-in-liverpool-100252-23786007/

Police convict 90% of those who rape sex workers in Liverpool
Jun 4 2009
ALMOST all criminals who target Liverpool sex workers are jailed, new figures reveal today.
Conviction rates have soared for crimes against the city’s vice girls with nine out of ten offenders now being punished in court.
Detection rates for rapes against prostitutes are also up by nearly 35% from 5.6% in 2006/07 to 40% in the past year.
Police say their groundbreaking work and that of outreach service Armistead Street is responsible for the results, which are among the best in the country.
Building on this success, Merseyside police has now launched a new monthly drop-in centre for victims at Armistead Street’s offices in Stanley Street.
The force has also pledged to treat all attacks on sex workers as hate crimes – making it one of the first in the county to do so.
Detective Chief Inspector Tim Keelan of Lower Lane CID, said: “These are people’s mothers, daughters, sisters, friends, and will be treated by our officers in exactly the same way as any victim of crime should be – with care, professionalism and respect.”
DCI Keelan praised victims for having the courage to come forward.
He said: “The formation of the SIGMA unit (the force’s hate crime investigation unit) and the close working relationship we have with the Armistead Street project has helped break down the boundaries that once existed between the police and sex workers and we are seeing more reporting of hate crime as a result.”
Officers also use the ‘Ugly Mugs’ reporting scheme run by Armistead’s Independent Sexual Violence Advisor to investigate potential attackers who are targeting sex workers.
Shelly Stoops (ISVA) deals with 354 street workers and said that 73% had experiences violence.
But police and Armistead are determined to cut this figure.
She will outline the project’s successes to the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) National Vice Conference in Gloucestershire in July.
Liverpool prostitute recalls her knife point rape
SEX worker Linda from Anfield was raped twice at knife-point in a terrifying attack carried out in 2007.
She fell into sex work despite a private education and supportive family.
She said: “The night I was raped I approached a man and asked him if he wanted to do business.
“I took him to a piece of waste land we used and we agreed on a price but when we got there he pulled a knife and told me he’d do what he wanted.
“He raped me and then told me to stay there and count to 10 while he walked off.
“I didn’t for some reason and followed him. I was about three or four steps behind whispering on the phone to the police.”
She was immediately taken seriously and as the case was put together she was refered to the Armistead Centre, who, through the Ugly Mugs scheme, warned other sex workers about him.
She said: “No-one asked any questions that weren’t relevant to the crime. Normally they ask about drug dealers and where you go to score.”
At court she was gave evidence behind a screen but she had to go through a retrial after the first jury failed to reach a verdict.
Her attacker was convicted and given an indeterminate sentence.
Linda has now quit the sex industry, has her own home and now a new baby.

References

[1] http://www.uknswp.org/members.asp

[2] Effects on Victims of Victim Service Programs Funded by the STOP Formula Grants Program (Zweig, Burt, Van Ness, 2003) quoted in Realising Rights, Fulfilling Obligations (End Violence Against Women, 2008)

[3] Men, middlemen and migrants: the demand side of sex trafficking’, (O’Connell Davidson, 2006) http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2006-07-27-davidson-en.html

[4] www.rbarriflowers.com

[5] Big Brothel (Poppy Project, September 2008)

[6] Big Brothel press release (Poppy Project, September 2008)

[7] Mark Townsend “’Sex slaves’ win cash in landmark legal deal” The Observer (December 16 2007) http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/dec/16/immigration.ukcrime

[8] The impact of organised crime in the UK: revenues and economic and social costs (Dubourg & Prichard, 2003)

[9] http://www.pentameter.police.uk/news.php?id=5
www.pentameter.police.uk/docs/pentameter.pdf
Vernon Coaker (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Home Office) speaking in parliament Wednesday, 16 January 2008 http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2008-01-16a.992.0&s=sex+work#g1040.0
Anthony Steen (Totnes, Conservative) speaking in parliament Tuesday, 8 July 2008 http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?id=2008-07-08a.369.0&s=prostitution#g390.0

[10] There is no reliable data on the number of brothels and whether or not the number of brothels has increased. There is no reliable data on whether brothels or strip clubs result in increased violence (see section on lapdancing for more information).

[11] Migrant Workers in the UK Sex Industry (Dr Nicola Mai, London Metropolitan University, July 2009)

[12] Is Trafficking in Human Beings Demand Driven? A Multi-Country Pilot Study (O’Connell Davidson, 2003) http://publications.iom.int/bookstore/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=17_20&products_id=226

[13] Men, middlemen and migrants: the demand side of sex trafficking’, (O’Connell Davidson, 2006) http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2006-07-27-davidson-en.html

[14] Encouraging sexual exploitation? Regulating striptease and ‘adult entertainment’ in the UK (Hubbard, 2009, Sexualities accepted for publication) http://www.scribd.com/doc/6461796/Encouraging-sexual-exploitation-The-licensing-of-lap-dancing-clubs-in-the-UK

[15] Court of Appeal on R v Massey [2007] http://www.casetrack.com/crimeline/2007-247-1
“It is certainly enough if a defendant instructs or directs the other person to carry out the relevant activity or do it in a particular way. There may be a variety of reasons why the other person does as instructed. It may be because of physical violence or threats of violence. It may be because of emotional blackmail, for example, being told that “if you really loved me, you would do this for me”… It may be because the defendant holds out the lure of gain, or the hope of a better life. Or there may be other reasons…
… we do not see any ground for saying that the prosecution would have to prove absence of free will in order to be able to show that the organisers were controlling the activities of the women for gain…The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines “in control of” as “directing an activity”. It defines the noun “control” as “power of directing, command”. By contrast, it does not include the words “compel, force or coerce”, although they would doubtless be forms of control”.

[16] Faster, Higher, Stronger: preventing Human Trafficking at the 2010 Olympics (Future Group, 2007)

[17] Trafficking in Human Beings and the 2006 World Cup in Germany (IOM, 2006)

[18] Is Trafficking in Human Beings Demand Driven? A Multi-Country Pilot Study (O’Connell Davidson, 2003) http://publications.iom.int/bookstore/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=17_20&products_id=226

[19] Culture, Media and Sport Committee Examination of Witnesses on The Licensing Act 2003 question 64 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmcumeds/492/8101409.htm

[20] The Guardian, Thursday 9 April 2009 ‘Corrections and Clarifications’ column http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2009/apr/09/1

[21] http://maps.met.police.uk/tables.htm; http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk

[22] Without Consent: A report on the joint review of the investigation and prosecution of rape offences (HM Crown Prosecution Inspectorate, 2007)

[23] Home Office Research Study 293 A gap or a chasm? Attrition in reported rape cases (Kelly, Lovett & Regan, 2005)

[24] Rape: Still a forgotten issue (Regan & Kelly, 2003)

[25] Licensing of Strip Clubs (Tower Hamlets Council, 2008)

[26] Violence and Sex Work in Britain (Kinnell, 2008)

[27] Ugly Mugs data and reports to numerous UKNSWP projects, reports to the specialist ISVA service, local press and many local area-based studies – comprehensive details can be supplied

[28] Realising Rights, Fulfilling Obligations (End Violence Against Women, 2008)

[29] Co-ordinated Prostitution Strategy (Home Office, 2006)
[30] Home Office Research Study 279 Tackling Street Prostitution: Towards an holistic approach (Hester & Westmarland, 2004)

[31] National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles

[32] United Kingdom  Gay Men’s Sex Survey 2004 www.sigmaresearch.org.uk/downloads/report05c.pdf

[33] It’s just like going to the supermarket (Coy, Horvath, Kelly 2007).

[34] The way forward: A call for action to end violence against women (GLA, April 2009)

[35] Numerous cases reported in the media and in research – comprehensive details can be supplied, together with data from anti-trafficking projects.

[36] Men, middlemen and migrants: the demand side of sex trafficking’, (O’Connell Davidson, 2006) http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2006-07-27-davidson-en.html

Bibliography
Profitable Exploits: Lap Dancing in the UK (Bindel, 2004)

The Price of Sex: Prostitution, policy, and society (Brooks-Gordon, 2006)

Sex Work Now (Campbell & O’Neill, 2006)

It’s just like going to the supermarket (Coy, Horvath, Kelly 2007)

The impact of organised crime in the UK: revenues and economic and social costs (Dubourg & Prichard, 2003)

Realising Rights, Fulfilling Obligations (End Violence Against Women, 2008)

Faster, Higher, Stronger: preventing Human Trafficking at the 2010 Olympics (Future Group, 2007)

The Guardian, Thursday 9 April 2009 ‘Corrections and Clarifications’ column http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2009/apr/09/1

Home Office Research Study 279Tackling Street Prostitution: Towards an holistic approach (Hester & Westmarland, 2004)

Without Consent: A report on the joint review of the investigation and prosecution of rape offences (HM Crown Prosecution Inspectorate, 2007)

Encouraging sexual exploitation? Regulating striptease and ‘adult entertainment’ in the UK (Hubbard, 2009, Sexualities: accepted for publication) http://www.scribd.com/doc/6461796/Encouraging-sexual-exploitation-The-licensing-of-lap-dancing-clubs-in-the-UK

Trafficking in Human Beings and the 2006 World Cup in Germany (International Organisation for Migration, 2006)

Home Office Research Study 293 A gap or a chasm? Attrition in reported rape cases (Kelly, Lovett & Regan, 2005)

Violence and Sex Work in Britain (Kinnell, 2008)

Four hundred thousand Swedish perverts (Kulick, Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 2005)

Lilith Report on Lap Dancing and Striptease in the Borough of Camden (Lilith, 2003)

Migrant Workers in the UK Sex Industry (Dr Nicola Mai, London Metropolitan University, July 2009, publication date October 2009)

National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles II, 2000-2001

Prostitution, Power and Freedom (O’Connell Davidson, 1998)

Is Trafficking in Human Beings Demand Driven? A Multi-Country Pilot Study (O’Connell Davidson, 2003)

Men, middlemen and migrants: the demand side of sex trafficking’, (O’Connell Davidson, 2006)

Sex in the City (Poppy Project, 2004)

Big Brothel (Poppy Project, September 2008)

Contested Commodities (Radin, 1996, quoted in Men, middlemen and migrants: the demand side of sex trafficking’, (O’Connell Davidson, 2006)

Rape: Still a forgotten issue (Regan & Kelly, 2003)

Sex Work: A risky business (Sanders, 2004)

Paying for Pleasure: Men Who Buy Sex (Sanders, 2008)

Prostitution: Sex Work, Policy and Politics (Sanders, O’Neill, & Pitcher, 2009)

The Subject of Prostitution: Sex/Work, Law and Social Theory (Scoular, 2009)

Living and working in areas of street sex work (Scoular, Pitcher, Campbell, Hubbard & O’Neill, 2006)

Prostitution, women, and misuse of the law: the fallen daughters of Eve (Self, 2003)

United Kingdom  Gay Men’s Sex Survey 2004 (Sigma Research 2004) www.sigmaresearch.org.uk/downloads/report05c.pdf

“’Sex slaves’ win cash in landmark legal deal” (Townsend, The Observer, December 16 2007) http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/dec/16/immigration.ukcrime

Comments are closed.