SamanthaEvans

Gosh... it seems like this thread is about ready to merge with the Fat Bastards BBM. :icon_lol:

<I received this release today in connection with some volunteer work I do with a project in the Downtown Eastside.--Samantha> Sergeant Rich Akin VPD Vice Unit In Farsi, "sabr" is defined as: probing (a wound); testing; trying; examining (any business) to the bottom. You might wonder why I'm giving you the definition of a Farsi word. Often when we begin an investigation and it morphs into a complex and involved project, we're tasked with finding an appropriate name for it. In this case, sabr defines exactly what we did and couldn't be more apt in terms of what we wanted to achieve. While some of the results of Project Sabr are complete, with an arrest made and charges laid, there remains more work for us to do. Information about the victims and any witnesses are the subject of a publication ban, but today I will share with you what I can of the limited details of Project Sabr. Reza Moazami, a 27 year old Vancouver resident, was arrested in a single family residence located in South Vancouver, by the VPD's Vice Unit on October 7th, 2011. At that time, Moazami was arrested and charged with two counts of living on the avails of prostitution of a juvenile and one count of keeping a common bawdy house and he was remanded into custody. During the course of arresting Moazami, two juvenile females were found within the residence and were taken into care. Prior to this arrest, Project Sabr began back in August, when MOAZAMI was identified as a suspect in a prostitution-related probe. Sabr quickly developed into an investigation into juvenile prostitution and suspected inter-provincial human trafficking. Despite the arrest and charges on October 7th, our work was not done, and over the course of the next two weeks we probed all of the details, discovered new information and worked to develop evidence to support more charges. On October 25, 2011, Reza MOAZAMI was formally charged by the Provincial Crown, with a total of 18 criminal offences. The October 7th charges are included in the indictment laid on October 25th, 2011. These offences are alleged to have occurred between February 2009 and October 2011 against four juvenile females (below the age of 18 years). The charges laid to date include the following: four counts of living on the avails of a juvenile (five-year minimum mandatory sentence if convicted) four counts of living on the avails of a juvenile while using, threatened to use or attempt to use violence, intimidation/coercion(five-year minimum mandatory sentence if convicted) four counts of trafficking in persons under the age of 18 (five-year minimum mandatory sentence) two counts of sexual interference four counts of sexual exploitation This is only the second time in Vancouver Police history that human trafficking charges have been laid in a case of sex trade workers and the first involving youth. Moazami's next scheduled court appearance is on November 21st, 2011, at 9:30 a.m. in Provincial court at 222 Main Street. As I mentioned earlier, Project Sabr does not end here. Vice Unit Detectives are still actively investigating the activities of Reza Moazami and are encouraging anyone with pertinent information relating to this case to contact investigators in the VPD Vice Unit at [email protected] or by contacting Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-8477.

Happy birthday, Pete. I hope you had a splendid day that sets you up for a wonderful year ahead.

Congratulations! You're on a roll now!

Congratulations! Keep 'em coming!

Congratulations! You're definitely a Cerb Treasure!

Maybe. Cool days and much cooler nights do a lot for me. So much nicer for cuddling and the things that tend to follow from it. And it's getting dark earlier, too!

Yes, Lee, that vehicle certainly does give a new meaning to the term "watersports," I agree. :icon_twisted: But Reddog, what is "Scotch style" beer? And how stylish (and Scottish) is this, anyway? Please assure me that no one is mixing scotch--even bar scotch--with beer. Scotch is wonderful. Guinness is divine. But the two should never be mixed!

It was a truly wonderful evening! I'm so glad that you slept well after I left!

Following your argument, WiT, the client's premises could be considered to be a bawdy house in that it is a place where immoral acts take place on a habitual basis. That doesn't mean that prostitutes who go there would necessarily be chargeable if they didn't know that it was a bawdy house. They go there, legally, to provide a legal service. The problem relates solely to the owner/occupant of the premises and his habitual activities. I don't know of anyone being charged for this, either. I imagine that someone would have to be causing a lot of trouble for neighbours before anyone would intervene. I remember hearing about the argument that the Picton farm qualified as a bawdy house, too. Picton only brought prostitutes to the place and, as the families of missing women have been testifying yesterday and today at the inquiry in Vancouver, sex workers in the Downtown Eastside knew about the farm years before Picton was arrested.

The word on the streets in the Downtown Eastside is that prostitutes' groups were denied funding to pay for legal support in the inquiry because too many of the street-based sex workers knew about the Picton farm years before Picton was arrested. While it is generally assumed that only one woman survived going to the Picton farm, in fact many women had been there and had been subjected to violence and threats. Some had seen things that horrified them. The police were informed about Picton and the farm, many times but these reports weren't taken seriously or investigated because they were made by prostitutes, most of whom had serious addictions to illegal substances. There are also reports that some of the drug dealers knew Picton and told him about some women who later went missing. It's a matter of public record that Picton lured women into going with him by offering them drugs and promising to give them more if they would go to the farm. I believe the street workers. I don't know what to make of the reports about the drug dealers and I don't know any dealers myself. What I do know is that the drug trade is an integral aspect of the Vancouver economy, and that every year more than $1 billion worth of heroin is sold in broad daylight on one particular street corner which is only a couple of blocks away from the neighbourhood police station.

Congratulations! Your contributions here really help make Cerb the fine board that it is. You're a real treasure!

I had trouble with a former client who refused to leave me alone and stop contacting me when I asked him to do so. When he persisted, recently, I reported him to the Vancouver Police Department officer who is responsible for liaison with sex trade workers. I've described what happened in another thread. I was reluctant to involve the police because I didn't want to out myself to them. I have worked very quietly, under the wire, in Vancouver for three and a half years with no problems and I had no intention of retiring just because I was being harassed. One of the prostitutes' advocacy agencies here assured me that I could speak with this particular police officer without being charged or being subjected to ongoing police investigation. When I talked to the officer in person, she told me exactly the same thing. That the VPD has no interest whatever in locating, charging or annoying independent sex workers. While what I do is illegal, I am not a problem in the community and so there's no reason for the police to pursue me. They're concerned about street workers because they work in unsafe conditions and are frequently subjected to harassment, violence, robbery and other kinds of abuse including kidnapping and murder. It was a relief--and very gratifying--to be told that my safety is more important to the police than the way I make my living and that I am as entitled to support and protection as anyone else. I think it's reasonable to interpret this to mean that no one is going to be raiding my house anytime soon.

An "incall" is anywhere a companion, massage provider or other sex worker receives clients. And if she sees clients there habitually--which can be as few as two times--the place becomes a "common bawdy house." Those of us who work out of our homes or out of apartments we use for business purposes are operating bawdy houses even if we're the only one working there or we share the place with another worker who may or may not live there full-time. If a provider rents a hotel room and sees clients there, the first one she sees is considered to be a private visit. It is only when she sees more than one person in that room, for business purposes, that the place becomes a bawdy house and the hotel must evict her if there's a problem. If the hotel knowingly tolerates a prostitute operating on their premises, they are guilty of living on the avails of prostitution. Innkeepers and prostitutes have been in cahoots from the dawn of time. The mutually lucrative arrangement is most likely to break if other hotel guests are inconvenienced. Noise, traffic and late hours are the problems most likely to alert other guests and the hotel management.

What is the point in raising anxiety about the theoretical possibilities of being arrested for seeing an independent paid companion? I really don't understand this at all. We do not live in a repressive, totalitarian dictatorship. Big Brother is not watching your every move. As long as you're engaging in activities with competent adults (that is, adults who are capable of giving consent freely), in private, without disturbing the neighbours, you have nothing to worry about. Paid companions are not enemies. The overwhelming majority of us are not here to upset anyone's life; out them to their spouses, families or employers; or to rob, coerce or blackmail them. We are businesswomen making a living. Setting up clients to get caught by law enforcement agents is simply bad for business. No matter how important you are, or imagine that you are, with few exceptions, the police are not very interested in how you're spending your time. Really, they're not. If you're a major politician who needs to have the RCMP around you most of the time, you probably won't spend a lot of time with paid companions on a regular basis, not because of the legalities, but because your privacy is significantly limited by your role in public life. Otherwise, unless you're part of an international drug cartel, a suspected terrorist or someone whose activities are likely to put the public at risk, the police are not camped outside your residence, watching you. They haven't bugged your car, your landline or your cell phone. Everyone wants to feel important, but the fact is that most people are only important to those with whom they have direct, personal contact. So relax. Get over yourself. Don't let your ego run away with you. Independent paid companions are very rarely raided. Why? Because the police tell us that they're not interested in what we're doing as long as no one complains about it! Keeping a low profile while being careful about whom we entertain, how many we see and how late at night makes all the difference. You are more likely to be arrested for being found in a common bawdy house if you're visiting a massage parlor staffed by women who speak little English. When the authorities receive enough complaints about those places, they may raid them, particularly if they consider the management to be involved in human trafficking or if they appear to be employing underage women. Established, reputable massage parlors are very, very rarely raided. This is not because everything that goes on in them is legal, but because for various reasons the police elect to ignore what happens as long as the neighbours don't complain too much. Seeing an independent massage provider is no riskier than seeing an independent paid companion. Instead of finding things to be upset about--and ways to distress others--why not focus energy on finding ways to ensure that your encounters with companions are as unique, satisfying and rewarding for both parties as possible? The karma police will be happier!

Thanks Kasey. (Welcome to Cerb, by the way!) My boyfriend's car is just fine. I took some photographs, showing the egg splattering, and then washed it. Egg does nasty things to paint if it bakes on!

Expect to hear more lunacy from Lee Lakeman and others at Vancouver Rape Relief throughout the hearing, unfortunately. That agency sometimes makes Andrea Dworkin look moderate. Their inflammatory rhetoric boils down to one thing: the interaction between prostitutes and clients is, by definition, violent and degrading for the prostitute. Period. That there are some police officers who rob prostitutes is an age-old problem. They seize the money in prostitutes' possession because, they say, it's obviously the proceeds of crime.

Happy birthday!

As Lowdark and Code Blue have pointed out, this guy planned this before you arrived. Most clients know that most companions expect to be paid upon arrival. He decided to short-change you because he planned to pay when the meeting ended. If you don't ordinarily charge more for travel expenses, that's up to you. Personally, I do. I also charge more to meet a client at his office than to meet him at his hotel because it's a much riskier place to meet. I wouldn't see this guy again for an incall or anything else.

I've just posted a very good summary of the reasons that various groups have dropped out of the Missing Women's Commission Inquiry that originally appeared in The Rabble earlier this week. One significant point that I haven't seen emphasized elsewhere is: The actions of the police during the inquiry have been to protect sex offenders instead of vulnerable women. The VPD opposed an application for procedural protection of vulnerable witnesses, including the opportunity to testify through anonymous affidavits. The police have argued that evidence from vulnerable women should be able to be used against them in any potential criminal proceedings later on. The police are well aware that without anonymity and confidentiality, witnesses from the DTES will not testify. On the other hand, police want to protect sex offenders and have advocated for the names of sex offenders to be removed from the public record of documents.

Why the B.C. Missing Women's Commission Fails by Harsha Walia, in the Rabble.ca, October 11, 2011 The very same grassroots community of women who have been advocating for a public inquiry into the deaths and disappearances of women in the Downtown Eastside for over two decades are now denouncing the B.C. Missing Women's Commission of Inquiry as an insult to the women of this Vancouver community. The Women's Equality and Security Coalition are calling for the inquiry to not proceed without significant changes to better include those most affected. The Downtown Eastside Women's Centre and Feb. 14th Women's Memorial March Committee rallied on Tuesday during the first day of the hearings, with over 200 women blocking traffic and calling for a "new fair, just, and inclusive inquiry that centres the voices and experiences and leadership of women, particularly Indigenous women, in the DTES." "This inquiry has a responsibility to highlight those systemic injustices that allowed the unimaginable deaths and disappearances of so many women from the Downtown Eastside. We have been raising awareness on this issue for over 20 years and demanding an inquiry for decades, but this sham inquiry is flawed and unjust. We cannot endorse it," said Carol Martin, victim services worker at the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre. This morning, three sex-worker serving groups also pulled out of the faltering inquiry, placing the final nail in its coffin. In their letter to the commissioner today, WISH, Providing Alternatives Counselling & Education Society (PACE), and Sex Workers United Against Violence write: "We do have faith that no matter how hard counsel for the VPD, RCMP, Crown counsel and police unions try to protect their clients from the truth, the evidence will reveal many injustices... Despite our inability to participate in the inquiry process, we will continue to work tirelessly with women in the DTES who live and work in conditions of extreme violence and face ongoing barriers." For decades, Indigenous women raised the alarm about missing and murdered women in the DTES and across the country. The Missing Women's Commission of Inquiry was established in 2010 to explore how police handled the investigation into the murders of over 30 women by Robert Pickton in the DTES. The establishment of the Inquiry was cited as a "substitute" for why B.C.'s attorney-general's office would not be conducting a full trial on the 20 outstanding charges against Pickton. But a series of significant concerns were raised about fundamental flaws and structural injustices damaging the legitimacy, effectiveness, and credibility of the inquiry. Just to list a few: 1) The inquiry is replicating the very same dismissive attitude and the same patterns of systemic marginalization that it is supposed to address. Attorney-General Shirley Bond and commission counsel have repeatedly stated that they are unconcerned with the inability of DTES, women's, and Indigenous groups to participate in the inquiry. The inquiry has shut out those very same voices that have been silenced by government institutions and that led to the tragedy in the first place. How can the commission possibly uncover the truth about systemic violence against women in the DTES without hearing from those women who actually experience it? 2) The "independent" commissioner of the inquiry is Wally Oppal, once a Liberal Party MLA and a former attorney-general of B.C., who did not even believe that an inquiry was necessary. Now he gets paid $1500 a day to preside over it. The terms of reference of the inquiry set by the commissioner were arbitrarily limited from 1997 to 2002, despite the fact that women went missing well before that date. 3) Simply stated, there is over protection of police officers. Officers and their unions have at least 14 publicly funded lawyers. These lawyers will subject any women who appear without legal counsel to rigorous cross-examination in an adversarial trial-like process. Three embedded police experts from the Peel Division are reviewing all the commission's legal documents, which the community has not even seen, and are advising the commission. Individual police officers are granted automatic participant standing in the inquiry while community groups had to go through a hearing process to be granted standing in the inquiry. 4) The actions of the police during the inquiry have been to protect sex offenders instead of vulnerable women. The VPD opposed an application for procedural protection of vulnerable witnesses, including the opportunity to testify through anonymous affidavits. The police have argued that evidence from vulnerable women should be able to be used against them in any potential criminal proceedings later on. The police are well aware that without anonymity and confidentiality, witnesses from the DTES will not testify. On the other hand, police want to protect sex offenders and have advocated for the names of sex offenders to be removed from the public record of documents. 5) The commission has attempted to remedy the structural imbalance in the inquiry by hiring two "independent" lawyers to represent the "DTES community" and "Aboriginal women." This move has been widely condemned by community groups and in an open letter by legal experts across Canada: "The appointment of independent counsel will result in further unfairness, and introduces a new form of discrimination." Parallel to the evidentiary hearings, the commission has also established a more "informal" study commission, which will essentially produce another toothless report and is absolutely not a replacement for a full and proper inquiry. As articulated by Alex Neve, secretary general for Amnesty International Canada: "At its very heart this commission of inquiry is grappling with critical concerns about access to justice and human rights protection for some of the most marginalized communities in the province. But it is going forward in a manner that only adds to that longstanding sense of exclusion and discrimination." Earlier this month, 20 organizations wrote a joint letter to B.C. Premier Christy Clark. "Our concerns are simple but fundamental: that those with information critical to the inquiry are assisted and supported so that their information can come before the commission; that the hearings, when held, provide a fair and safe opportunity for those with evidence to share their information and be heard; that groups granted standing have representation by legal counsel of their choice, just as the police do, so that they may probe and engage with the evidence that comes to light; and that, when the hearings are concluded, government will act in a constructive way in reforming policy based on the information collected." The Assembly of First Nations, who have also withdrawn from the inquiry, wrote: "We hoped the inquiry would shed light to uncover truths that could help with the healing process for the families as well as to begin to point the way forward so that all women and the most vulnerable have access to justice. Without equity and balance, systemic issues will not be brought forward and will therefore not be reflected in the recommendations of the inquiry." Given the failures of this inquiry, the Native Women's Association of Canada has called on three United Nations Special Rapporteurs to make an urgent joint appeal to Canada regarding the inquiry. The Downtown Eastside Women's Centre and the Feb. 14th Women's Memorial March Committee have also submitted a complaint to the Committee for the UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women and are urging the UN to make a country visit to Canada and to conduct their own unbiased inquiry into the systemic issues that have led to the tragedy of missing and murdered women. Indigenous feminist scholar Andrea Smith has recently written that "Native feminisms must be oriented less toward questions of representation and more toward questions that interrogate the material conditions that Native women face as subjects situated within a nexus of patriarchy, colonialism, and white supremacy." Indeed, women surviving in the Downtown Eastside are products of an unflinching political system that creates cuts in public programs while prioritizing corporate bailouts; a fundamentalist capitalist system that places basic necessities such as shelter onto the market; a colonial system that has forced assimilation onto Indigenous people; and a patriarchal social system where families are predominantly headed by single mothers and where Indigenous women are five times more likely to die as a result of violence than non-native women. It is more comfortable to dehumanize and judge women living in the DTES, to rob them of their basic dignity, to tell ourselves that the violence of poverty and abuse is their fault because "they are all hookers and lazy addicts." The reality is that the DTES, the poorest postal code in Canada, is becoming home to an increasing number of women due to societal dynamics of inequality and oppressive government policies that allow for such inhumane realities to persist. Abdicating our responsibility to transform these injustices does not make them disappear or absolve us of our obligations to humanity. Hopefully one day soon we will learn how to affirm the sacredness of all life before another one is lost. RIP Verna Simmard, Lisa Arlene Francis, Ashley Machiskinic. Harsha Walia is a South Asian activist and writer based in Vancouver, Coast Salish Territories. You can find her on Twitter.

Hindsight is always 20/20. I do think there's a lot of legitimating sex work after the fact, given what we now know was going on in the late 1990s and early part of this decade. I don't think that many people in residential neighbourhoods would welcome street prostitution outside their doors today. Nonetheless, there does seem to be a growing understanding that SWs are actually working, which is different from supporting an addiction. To be sure, street sex work is portrayed as a desperate, last-chance, faint-hope kind of work, and there's very little analysis about why women find themselves without alternatives. I think that the public's mindset has become one of deploring the police's inattention to what was happening, such that the police are seen as the bad guys, not the sex workers.

I think that nearly all of us are feeling considerable relief after the recent turn of events. The SCC decision about Insite makes a favourable decision about Bedford far, far more likely, in the end. In addition, the inquiry into the missing women began this week here in Vancouver. While the thing is hideously flawed in most respects, the public in general is siding with the women and organizations that have decided not to appear at the inquiry because they wouldn't have the benefit of legal counsel to help them, or to cross-examine the many, many police witnesses. Right now, in Vancouver at least, my sense if that there's enormous sympathy for ensuring that women should be able to work safely. The evening news reports emphasized how street workers had made agreements with residents of the Downtown Eastside neighbourhoods where children were living that they wouldn't work on those streets, for the sake of the children and families there. The women would have been far safer if they had worked the residential streets; because they didn't, they were much easier prey for Picton and others. The whole tenor of the news reports was that SWs are hard-working women who care about families and who can be trusted to keep the promises they make. It's early yet, but so far, responses on open-line radio programs are favourable with the fear-mongers receiving very little airplay.