Murderous
clients and indifferent justice
Violence against sex
workers in the UK
By:
Hilary Kinnell
In:
Research for Sex Work 4, 2001
Several UK studies have shown that
sex workers experience high levels of violence, and these
findings are reflected in the day-to-day experience of
those running projects for sex workers. In my role as UK
co-ordinator for EUROPAP1 I have
collated information about violence against sex workers,
particularly murders. Fifty-one women and girls killed
since 1990 have been identified and a further five women
are known to me as ‘missing presumed dead’.
This total rises inexorably: four new names have been
added since 1 January 2001. It is likely to be a
considerable underestimate, since my information comes
from sex work projects or from press reports. There are
no publicly available statistics on murders of sex
workers in the UK.
Levels of violence against sex
workers are rarely measured systematically, and there has
been little analysis of the variables that influence sex
workers’ risk of experiencing violence. Available
studies show that street workers are at much greater risk
of violence than indoor workers. In 1993, a study in
Birmingham showed that all forms of assault, robbery and
kidnapping were much more common amongst street workers
than indoor workers.2 However, indoor workers
are not immune from violence. Analysis of reports of
violence in London over a ten-year period, showed that
such reports from sex flats and brothels had escalated in
recent years, but also, that much of this violence was
related to robbery, rather than being sexual violence.3
The perpetrators of these ‘property
motivated’ attacks have clearly identified sex flats
and brothels as premises where considerable amounts of
cash are to be found – far more than will be carried
by a lone street worker who does business for a fraction
of what is charged indoors. They may also be aware that
indoor sex workers will often be unwilling to report
robberies to the police, as they do not wish to draw the
attention of police to premises used for sex work.
The 1993 Birmingham findings have
recently been reinforced by a study by Stephanie Church
and others of indoor and street workers in Glasgow,
Edinburgh and Leeds.4 This study found that
street workers in Glasgow were six times more likely to
have been attacked than indoor workers in Edinburgh. They
also showed that the location of work (indoor or
outdoor), not the sex worker’s age, drug use, length
of experience in sex work, nor the particular city, was
the crucial factor in determining risk of violence.
These findings are immensely
important, since it is often assumed that the sex
worker’s own problems or behaviour make her a likely
target for violence, rather than her location of work. It
is suggested that because drug use can impair judgement,
users will be more likely to be victims, or that the more
experienced will be less at risk than the ‘new
recruits’, or that violent private relationships
will predispose sex workers to violence in other
contexts. Certainly amongst the 51 murdered women, drug
use was common, but so was motherhood, and working away
from their home area. However, the most common
characteristic amongst these murdered women was their
mode of work: out of 44 where working style is known, 37
(84%) were street workers.
In the UK, at least outside London,
it is now clear: indoor work is much safer than street
work.
It is also clear that, while some
sex workers have violent personal relationships, or live
in a violent sub-culture involving drugs and other
criminal activity, the majority of murders are committed
by men who approach women as clients. Of the 51 cases, in
only 29 do I know that charges have been brought:
eighteen were clients (62%); five were partners (17%);
three (10%) were ‘other’, and three (10%)
unknown. Canadian statistics on murders of sex workers
show that of 86 cases (1992 to 1998), 56 (65%) were
committed by clients.5
In only sixteen of the UK cases is
it known that there has been a conviction and in six
cases the accused was acquitted. In half of these cases,
the men had previous convictions for violence, including
murder, manslaughter, rape and assault. This suggests
that men who murder sex workers may frequently have a
past history of violence against sex workers and others,
and shows how important it is that all violence against
sex workers is investigated with the utmost diligence.
Too often, violence against sex
workers is not taken seriously. Poor relationships with
the police mean that attacks are often not reported: the
recent study in Glasgow, Edinburgh and Leeds found that
only 34% of sex workers had reported any attack to the
police.4 Members of the public are rarely
willing to come to the assistance of sex workers if they
hear a disturbance; police do not always respond quickly
or appropriately; the suspect may not be remanded in
custody, thus leaving the victim prey to intimidation and
reprisals; state prosecutors may deem sex workers
unreliable witnesses and refuse to pursue the case;
defence lawyers will attack the truthfulness and
reliability of the women, and juries may be unwilling to
convict perpetrators.
Targeting clients is often seen as
introducing gender equity into control of sex work, and
sometimes has the support of those who regard sex workers
primarily as victims of male exploitation. However,
increasing the criminalisation of the client merely
increases the dangers for the sex workers: no attempt is
made to target clients who are known to be violent.
Neither should it be assumed that because many attacks
are perpetrated by clients, a high proportion of clients
is potentially violent. Research on the criminal careers
of clients arrested for kerb-crawling suggests that under
6% had a record of any previous criminal offences.6
Clients, like sex workers, are
important potential witnesses in murder investigations,
but the more they are publicly shamed, the less incentive
they have to come forward. In one UK city where police
are investigating an unsolved murder, they have
complained in the press of little co-operation from sex
workers, clients, or the general public, but at the same
time they have conducted a vigorous anti-client campaign,
bringing kerb-crawlers to court in the week before
Christmas. Why are they surprised that no one wants to be
associated with sex work in this atmosphere?
- Anti-prostitution campaigns
All hostile approaches to
prostitution effectively demonise sex workers, and this
may be associated with increasing levels of violence.
Frequently the language used at public forums to discuss
prostitution descends to slander and abuse: women are
referred to as ‘scum’ and ‘filth to be
cleared off the streets’. Collusion with such
attitudes gives permission to those who hate and fear
women to vent their aggression on sex workers. Studies in
Vancouver have demonstrated that escalating murder rates
of sex workers there coincided with increasing
anti-prostitution campaigns and hostile public attitudes.5
Aggressive policing and public
hostility also damage efforts to bring health and safety
services to sex workers. Possession of condoms is still
being used as evidence of prostitution offences; in
Birmingham, the outreach team has been banned from the
street soliciting area due to residents’
intimidation; and everywhere there are signs that
prostitution is going underground – and therefore
becoming less accessible – in response to
ill-conceived efforts to eliminate it.
It is social policy and law
enforcement practice that determine whether or not women
can work indoors and with other people present, which
also determine risk of violence, yet public policy and
debate on prostitution rarely concerns itself with
anything other than moral offence and public nuisance. In
the context of street work, these two factors prevent
adoption – or even discussion – of zones of
tolerance: public nuisance is cited as the justification
for hostile policing of street prostitution, but moral
offence prevents consideration of ways in which street
work could be made safer.
Public policy makers must recognise
and address sex workers’ rights to protection under
the law. The European Convention on Human Rights imposes
on public institutions the duty to protect life: since it
is clear and evident that current UK law and policing
strategies neither eliminate prostitution nor protect the
safety of those involved, a major review of such
strategies is needed.
Notes
1. European Network for
HIV/STD Prevention in Prostitution.
2. H. Kinnell,
Prostitutes’ exposure to rape; implications for HIV
prevention and for legal reform. Paper presented to the
VII Social Aspects of AIDS Conference, South Bank
University, London, June 1993.
3. Claudia da Silva, London
Centre for Personal Safety, personal communication.
4. S. Church, M. Henderson,
M. Barnard and G. Hart, Violence by clients towards
female prostitutes in different work settings:
questionnaire survey. In: British Medical Journal,
Vol. 322, March 3, 2001, pp. 524-525
(www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/322/7285/524).
5. J. Lowman, Violence and
the outlaw status of (street) prostitution in Canada. In:
Violence Against Women, Vol. 6, No. 9, September
2000, pp. 987-1011.
6. B. Brooks-Gordon, Prostitution
in public space: Kerb crawler explanations and
malefactors. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of
Cambridge, Institute of Criminology, 2000.
Hilary Kinnell
EUROPAP
United Kingdom
Safety initiatives
Most projects for sex workers
in the UK are funded to promote sexual health, and
few resources are available to tackle other problems
sex workers face. The danger of physical violence,
rape, even murder, has often been regarded as a
marginal issue, only within the remit of sexual
health if it can be shown that there is some
connection to risks of STDs or HIV. Despite this,
sexual health projects have pioneered safety
initiatives with sex workers, such as leaflets
containing safety tips; free or cheap attack alarms;
training programmes on personal safety, and lists of
violent clients. These lists, known as ‘Ugly
Mugs’ or ‘Dodgy Punter’ lists, were
started by a Birmingham sex work project in 1989, and
were a direct import from the Australian ‘Ugly
Mug’ scheme started by the Prostitutes’
Collective of Victoria. The lists give
descriptions of men (very rarely women) who have
attacked sex workers, for distribution amongst other
sex workers. These are useful but very limited
responses to the levels of violence.
Next article
|