starman

raids in Liverpool

25 posts in this topic

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news//tm_headline=police-hail-major-victory-over-merseyside-sex-trade-after-15-people-arrested%26method=full%26objectid=26555544%26siteid=100252-name_page.html

Officers recovered £30,000 cash from inside two premises

the police keep 25% of any assets confiscated both at the time and from subsequent prosecutions (50% of any cash found on the premises), the reason for the raids?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news//tm_headline=police-hail-major-victory-over-merseyside-sex-trade-after-15-people-arrested%26method=full%26objectid=26555544%26siteid=100252-name_page.html

Officers recovered £30,000 cash from inside two premises

the police keep 25% of any assets confiscated both at the time and from subsequent prosecutions (50% of any cash found on the premises), the reason for the raids?

Yes I have been hearing this since it happened but thought a lot of it was rumours.

Its the new Chief Con apparently hes hard on the industry :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the reason for the raids?

Because the law is being broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last paragraph was a little strange

"We will continue to work with organisations in Liverpool to ensure that people who commit offences against women in the sex industry are brought to justice, and that women who need help, get it."

I dont believe much I read in the press these days particularly when quoted from the police but that statement does make you wonder if there was more going on or perhaps its the police's vivid imagionation making more of it that there was.

I wont pretend Im a little suprised to be reading about raids in the current climate, sounds like the stuff of political nightmares if they were keeping an otherwise sound business

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its scary but keeping a brothel is against the law

so anyone working in one must half expect something like this to happen at some point, or am I being nieve?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps this is the beginning of the end for massage parlours and escort agencies in this country .

The enormous profits made from what is a criminal activity are bound to lead to other crimes such as tax evasion, fraud and money laundering , and perhaps more worryingly , attract the attention of criminal gangs .

Would it be any great loss if all such places were closed down and the industry went back to basics and all WGs were independent ?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its scary but keeping a brothel is against the law

so anyone working in one must half expect something like this to happen at some point, or am I being nieve?

I suppose they should always be wary of such things happening but what is confusing is the way different police forces have completely different approaches to brothels, and in this case, completely change tact on a whim.

This does seem like a bit of a moral crusade by a new police chief to me. I fail to see how this is going to help any of the women involved, if indeed they want to be helped at all. More than likely this has just deprived them of a safe place to work... at best they'll find another, at worst they could end up on the front page of the national papers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps this is the beginning of the end for massage parlours and escort agencies in this country .

The enormous profits made from what is a criminal activity are bound to lead to other crimes such as tax evasion, fraud and money laundering , and perhaps more worryingly , attract the attention of criminal gangs .

Would it be any great loss if all such places were closed down and the industry went back to basics and all WGs were independent ?.

the brothel laws were introduced in 1956,when it was illegal for men to have sex with each other,whats needed is more enlightened legislation to take account of modern sexuality,there is a lot of money to be made from raiding massage parlours because of the proceeds of crime act,hopefully all the parlour owners will go to trial by jury and be found not guilty as happened recently.that will send out a message to police that juries will put the safety of women as more important than a "moral" crusade that has money as the real motivation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the brothel laws were introduced in 1956,when it was illegal for men to have sex with each other.....

Actually the brothel laws were introduced long before then, ie. by section 13 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885.

The Act also raised the age of consent from 13 to 16 and was primarily intended to protect women and children particularly those working in the numerous brothels in Victorian England.

Interestingly the maximum penalty under the 1885 Act for keeping a brothel was only 3 months for a first offence, rising to 6 months for a second offence. That remained the case when the SOA1956 was introduced.

However, section 55 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 substantially increased the maximum penalty to 7 years.

So whilst we appear to have a more sympathetic and enlightened general public the maximum penalty for keeping a brothel has greatly increased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suppose they should always be wary of such things happening but what is confusing is the way different police forces have completely different approaches to brothels, and in this case, completely change tact on a whim.

This does seem like a bit of a moral crusade by a new police chief to me. I fail to see how this is going to help any of the women involved, if indeed they want to be helped at all. More than likely this has just deprived them of a safe place to work... at best they'll find another, at worst they could end up on the front page of the national papers.

I think that the particular problem in Liverpool is that some massage parlours are owned by gangsters and assorted low lifes who are probably well known to police intelligence. Consequently, the local plod can justify the raids as they have something tangible to be able to charge them with. As you say, I doubt whether the women want to be helped as the majority will have made a concious decision that there's a better living to be made in such establishments than being dependant on state benefits in an area of higher than average unemployment and deprivation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that the particular problem in Liverpool is that some massage parlours are owned by gangsters and assorted low lifes who are probably well known to police intelligence. Consequently, the local plod can justify the raids as they have something tangible to be able to charge them with. As you say, I doubt whether the women want to be helped as the majority will have made a concious decision that there's a better living to be made in such establishments than being dependant on state benefits in an area of higher than average unemployment and deprivation.

Which ones are owned by gangsters :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"the police keep 25% of any assets confiscated both at the time and from subsequent prosecutions (50% of any cash found on the premises), the reason for the raids? "

Is this true? If so, 'reason for the raids?' enought said?

Like speed cameras, if the above is true, it makes a complete and utter arse of what the police should be doing, please tell me it isn't.

Also, if it is, what is the thinking behind it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, if it is, what is the thinking behind it?

The thinking is to take the Illegal money off of criminals and use the money to help the Police enforce the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which ones are owned by gangsters :)

To be honest, I don't know and should have said "allegedly" owned by gangsters.

I was listening to a radio Five Live interview a few days ago in which the interviewee was the bloke who has just published a biography of Wayne Rooney. He mentioned that the parlour where Rooney allegedly treated his mates was owned by dubious people.

Perhaps nearly all the Merseyside parlours are owned by God fearing upstanding people who declare and pay all their taxes but then again, I wouldn't bet on it:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
please tell me it isn't.

It is entirely true, its whats called proceeds of crime. Confiscation hearings are designed to see the return of all criminal gains made by an individual through what the law considers criminal activity, including running brothels, parlours, saunas etc.

The court will work out a persons criminal benefit, that is the turnover of said business (not profit) and seek to confiscate assets including property, jewelery, cash, savings etc. to the sum of the criminal benefit, or at least every penny that person has up to the value of the criminal benefit figure. Courts will take everything a person has regardless of how they came by it, including inheritance and lottery wins upto the criminal benefit figure.

If by any chance a person has more than the criminal benefit figure courts can seek to claim that in addition to criminal benefit if thier is any posibility that money has been made as a result of criminal funds. E.g. if you win the lottery but your only source of income at time of buying the ticket was criminal funds your lottery win can become a proceed of crime as you would have been unable to buy the ticket without tainted money. More normally would apply if profit was made from property over and above someones criminal benefit if the property was bought using money from an illegal business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"the police keep 25% of any assets confiscated both at the time and from subsequent prosecutions (50% of any cash found on the premises), the reason for the raids? "

Is this true? If so, 'reason for the raids?' enought said?

Like speed cameras, if the above is true, it makes a complete and utter arse of what the police should be doing, please tell me it isn't.

Also, if it is, what is the thinking behind it?

I was also curious,

If your a punter caught in a raid, and you still had the cash for her payment or money extra incase you wanted to extend, can the police confiscate that too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If your a punter caught in a raid, and you still had the cash for her payment or money extra incase you wanted to extend, can the police confiscate that too?

No because it's the punter's money and not the proceeds of any crime.

You could get caught speeding with £50k on you and the Police can't take the money because although you've committed a crime the £50k isn't the proceeds of that crime.

The minimum amount of cash that the Police can seize under POCA 2002 is £1,000. Initially it was £10k, then reduced to £5k and now to £1k.

So your local drug dealer dealing on the streets will make sure that he never has more than £1,000 cash on him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Iif you win the lottery but your only source of income at time of buying the ticket was criminal funds your lottery win can become a proceed of crime as you would have been unable to buy the ticket without tainted money. .

YOu can't fault their logic, if the pound is illegally obtained then why should the person obtaining it benefit from using it to win the lottery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The minimum amount of cash that the Police can seize under POCA 2002 is £1,000. Initially it was £10k, then reduced to £5k and now to £1k.

So your local drug dealer dealing on the streets will make sure that he never has more than £1,000 cash on him.

Presumably if he is found with only £500 on him, they can still arrest him and confiscate this sum until they have completed thier investigation?

I had about £200 in my back pocket when I was arrested and police held and kept it as evidence... along with a morrisons receipt for my lunch... also evidence apparently :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Presumably if he is found with only £500 on him, they can still arrest him and confiscate this sum until they have completed thier investigation?

I had about £200 in my back pocket when I was arrested and police held and kept it as evidence... along with a morrisons receipt for my lunch... also evidence apparently :)

Seizure is different from confiscation. Confiscation is more permanent

They can only seize the cash as "evidence" under section 19 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 ("PACE") but that only gives the power to seize items for their evidential purposes in a criminal investigation.

As a general rule unless it is required for forensic tests ( eg for fingerprints, DNA or drug testing) it should not be retained if a photograph or copy would be sufficient for court purposes - section 22(4) PACE.

The above principles relate to items taken as evidence only. If POCA apply then different rules kick in.

It remains your money until a Confiscation Order is made but I can't see your getting your money back until they make a decision not to charge or you are found not guilty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps this is the beginning of the end for massage parlours and escort agencies in this country .

The enormous profits made from what is a criminal activity are bound to lead to other crimes such as tax evasion, fraud and money laundering , and perhaps more worryingly , attract the attention of criminal gangs .

Would it be any great loss if all such places were closed down and the industry went back to basics and all WGs were independent ?.

Yes it would be a great loss, it would be a loss of safe working premises for ladies, it would be a loss of valuable pools of information regarding health etc for wg,s, it would be a loss of some great places for us to work with other ladies.

It is illegal for even two ladies to work from the same premises on different days let alone on the same day, how on earth can it be good for ladies to be forced to work alone, seems that brothel,s being closed down is actually doing

the opposite of keeping ladies safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It remains your money until a Confiscation Order is made but I can't see your getting your money back until they make a decision not to charge or you are found not guilty.

Im subject to a restraint order anyway, they even froze my credit cards, I guess so I couldnt accumulate debt on them :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The minimum amount of cash that the Police can seize under POCA 2002 is £1,000. Initially it was £10k, then reduced to £5k and now to £1k.

So your local drug dealer dealing on the streets will make sure that he never has more than £1,000 cash on him.

Silverado’s comment made me think of another couple of worrying aspects of this whole business of police harassment, and I am not referring specifically to cases mentioned as I am not privy to all the facts. But what we see is respectable people, through no fault of their own, starting adopt characteristics of the lifestyle of criminals.

Most ladies and parlours take due care with money, I’m sure, just for ordinary security as would any other business. But Silverado’s comment means that parlour owners, faced with unjust and impossible laws, should start to take precautions in common with a criminal element. In other words, the government, because it is seen as corrupt in such matters, pushes them towards secretive behaviour. The same goes for all the business of trying to avoid illegality on technicalities. I recently spoke to two ladies who would rent two adjoining apartments just so one could nip next door whenever a client came. It might not have given them the protection they hope, but the point is that unjust laws encourage people to try to outwit them. For some people, this will tip them over the edge into doing things that really are illegal, the symbolic power of the law being disregarded.

An example from the punters’ side: a friend told me yesterday that there had been something on the board about how punters could avoid using their real names when registering at a hotel. In days of old this might not have raised an eyebrow. If I was meeting a lover secretly and wanted to lay a false trail for the detective hired by my wife, it sounds like a jolly sensible thing to do – and I’m sure many ‘couples’ did it.* But at a time when service providers are fearful of attacks, and attacks that may not be acted on in a proper manner by the police, it is obviously open to abuse by criminal elements.

The root of the problem is criminal elements, not the methods. Whether they are traffickers or dangerous and abusive punters. Decent brothel owners need to protect themselves from the police and from dangerous ‘punters.’ Decent punters may well need to protect themselves from the police, the newspapers, or in a few cases dangerous ‘service providers.’

What is doubly sad is that real criminal elements – whether traffickers or abusers – will generally be far ahead of the general population of service providers and service seekers. They will have thought long and hard about how to escape detection.

This means that both service providers and service seekers need to be particularly vigilant. And at the same time maintain their own sense of integrity.

This is particularly hard amid a pervading social consciousness that what one is doing is supposedly 'wrong,' even when you know it isn’t. It maybe even touches on why so many service providers or service seekers are considered ‘jaded,’ ‘bitter & twisted’ or ‘hardcore.’ It happens among many people in minority groups who are shunned by the general public. I hope some heroes (and I include heroines) appear soon as strong role models – whether in the courts or the newspapers – against the oppression of the decent human beings victimised, shunned, and generally classed with the lowest of society. Or maybe a celebrity to say they enjoy visits with escorts and see nothing wrong with they are doing. That it has nothing to do with trafficking and no-one is being abused.

Everything comes with a responsibility. Learning king fu helps you protect yourself - but it probably teaches you how to inflict a lot of harm if you had a mind to. Service providers might think the ideal is to have every service seeker ID'd almost to the point of a DNA test. (Those in favour of omniscient security cameras might agree on the basis of 'if you have nothing to hide . . . .' I'm afraid I do not.) Likewise service providers might think the ideal is that every service provider is fully certified, traceable, and subject to a full complaints procedure if he is not satisfied. Again, I personally do not.

Instead of rushing to hold others accountable, we must first hold ourselves accountable. Look after our own security and well-being first and foremost, without imposing on the free-will of other people.

Look after yourselves - and then each other, as the otherwise conflagrational Mr Springer would say.

*not being married, this particular pleasure is, however, denied me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be honest, I don't know and should have said "allegedly" owned by gangsters.

I was listening to a radio Five Live interview a few days ago in which the interviewee was the bloke who has just published a biography of Wayne Rooney. He mentioned that the parlour where Rooney allegedly treated his mates was owned by dubious people.

Perhaps nearly all the Merseyside parlours are owned by God fearing upstanding people who declare and pay all their taxes but then again, I wouldn't bet on it:rolleyes:

Perhaps they do :cool:

I know I pay mine :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps they do :cool:

I know I pay mine :)

I wouldn't doubt that for a minute, Louisa but then, you are an independent and I was thinking more of the seedier back street parlours, the like of which rarely, if ever get a complementary mention or FRs on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now