Shops are quiet because of the economy not the cops
Last edited:
https://www.richmond-news.com/opini...of-sex-worker-safety-in-recent-sting-12031306Hi everyone — I want to offer a bit of clarity here because I know this situation has people concerned.
First, based on what we know, this operation involved undercover police posting ads and communicating online — not targeting or working through established, well-known providers or businesses.
So if you are engaging with known, reputable providers or locations, that is a very different situation than responding to random or newly posted ads. This was police activity, not a reflection of the safety of established businesses.
From the information released:
So this was not connected to real workers or real ads — it was entirely police-run.
- Police were posing as sex workers online
- They communicated with over 100 people in one day
- Their stated goal was to:
- reduce demand
- identify potential exploitation
I’ve been in direct communication with RCMP about this.
We agree on one thing: exploitation and violence need to be addressed
- Their position is that they are trying to identify exploitation and protect vulnerable people (including youth)
- I’ve been very clear that:
- this kind of enforcement has broader impacts
- it can undermine safety and income stability for sex workers
- and that matters because people rely on this work to feed and house themselves and their families
Where we differ is how to do that without causing harm to others in the process.
If people have concerns, happy to answer what I can — but I wanted to make sure there’s info to help people understand what's happening.
- This operation was police-run online activity, not targeting through established providers
- Well-known, reputable services are not what this was about
- There is ongoing discussion about how to:
- address exploitation
- without compromising safety or livelihoods
love susie
I can see this recent action by the RCMP reducing work for providers as clients might be staying away.. how does it make it less safe for providers?
Thank you, VinVan. I was obviously asleep at the wheel when reading Susi’s post.I think Susi stated it categorically (and correct me if I’m wrong), the cops set up fake LL profiles and entice people who respond to those profiles into a sting. This smells a little of entrapment, but that’s a conversation for another day…
If you are booking a reputable agency or going to an AMP it’s highly unlikely that either of those businesses are cooperating with the cops to bust their clients. It would be the end of their businesses.
this is exactly right, if you book with a long standing shop or provider there is no chance it is LEI think Susi stated it categorically (and correct me if I’m wrong), the cops set up fake LL profiles and entice people who respond to those profiles into a sting. This smells a little of entrapment, but that’s a conversation for another day…
If you are booking a reputable agency or going to an AMP it’s highly unlikely that either of those businesses are cooperating with the cops to bust their clients. It would be the end of their businesses.
By forcing them back out to the street or sketchy work environmentsI can see this recent action by the RCMP reducing work for providers as clients might be staying away.. how does it make it less safe for providers?





