Quickhit: Sex slavery just like football draft, says defence

WA Today: Prostitutes likened to AFL draftees in trial

A barrister acting for a man accused of bringing five Thai women to Melbourne as sex slaves has compared their plight to an AFL footballer being drafted to another club. […]

[Prosecutor] Mr Gurvich said the women had to see between 650 and 750 clients to work off “highly exploitative” contracts and repay debts of up to $90,000 for their passage to Australia.

He said while they were paying off their debts, the women were allowed to keep only $5 for every client they saw over a compulsory six-day working week. […]

John Dickinson, for Kam Tin Ho, continued the football analogy when he urged jurors to consider that translations of recorded telephone conversations between the men might not fully convey their original meaning.

“An example of that might be Terry Wallace screaming out, ‘Go and buy me a decent full-forward to put beside Matthew Richardson.’ He doesn’t literally mean that,” Mr Dickinson said. […] “A harsh, exploitative contract — and I’m not saying this was — would not qualify as leading to a condition of slavery,” he said.

James Montgomery, SC, for Ho Kam Ho, said his client drove the women around, including to work, the hairdresser or shops.

“The prosecution say, ‘Well, he must be controlling them,’ ” Mr Montgomery said. “Wouldn’t you like to be in a job where you had a chauffeur who took you everywhere? Ring him up, ‘I want to go to the hairdresser’, he’s there, you’re driven. You don’t have to get the tram.”

More background here:

Herald Sun: Sex workers ‘were $5 slaves’, Victorian Supreme Court hears



Categories: gender & feminism, Life, violence

Tags:

6 replies

  1. What, really? It’s *just* *like* a situation where the person can refuse a contract? Are football players in Australia forced to pay off some huge debt before they receive their money?
    …separatist compound, here I come. I swear.

  2. I hear that parents all over the country warn their strapping young sons about the AFL-traders who will forcibly imprison them, take all their money, force them into “debt”, and pay them $5 a match. And by “chauffeur” they means “guard to make sure you can’t run away, no matter where you go”.

  3. I’m at a loss for words.

  4. “Wouldn’t you like to be in a job where you had a chauffeur who took you everywhere? Ring him up, ‘I want to go to the hairdresser’, he’s there, you’re driven. You don’t have to get the tram.”
    What the fucking fuck? *snarls*

  5. Oh. My. God. It was bad enough when women who complained about being denied opportunities were told, “But you’re so lucky you don’t have to work, and can just get a man to take care of you!”
    But women denied not only opportunities but basic human rights? Not even a defense attorney’s requirement to vigorously defend a client excuses that sort of characterization.

  6. Mr Montgomery said. “Wouldn’t you like to be in a job where you had a chauffeur who took you everywhere?”
    Stone the fucking crows, Montgomery, would YOU like to trade jobs with any of these women?? Fucking tool.

%d bloggers like this: