Prostitution and “endangered missing”

I am, as I have said, going through all my cases looking for errors. So far I’ve been making good progress. But there’s an issue I thought I’d address with you blog readers.

There are a number of things about an MP case that will cause me to automatically list them as “endangered missing” rather than simply “missing”: such as if they are under 18 or over 65, if they left their car or other belongings behind, if they have any type of medical condition, etc.

My question: should I add prostitution to that list? After all, it is a high-risk lifestyle. But is that enough to assume that any prostitute who’s dropped out of sight is probably endangered?


6 thoughts on “Prostitution and “endangered missing”

  1. Justin December 18, 2015 / 12:22 am

    I’m not sure. Prostitutes can be pretty mobile, moving around to where there is work. I doubt many are declaring their income and they tend to live under the radar. Their work can definitely be very dangerous and when compounded by drug issues, then their life expectancy isn’t very long.

    Do you have any way of finding out in your resolved profiles on the Charley Project for those who had been prostitutes that were later found safe or have all or most of them been found deceased?

  2. Lauren December 18, 2015 / 12:44 am

    Eh, that depends…A street walker probably, but someone working in a legal brothel probably not.

  3. Mion December 18, 2015 / 1:20 am

    If the prostitution is in her past and/or there is no sign of foul play, then I don’t think it’s necessary to list her as Endangered.

    But, say there’s a serial killer operating in the same area where the woman went, or other prostitutes were disappearing from the same area as your MP. I think any woman with a history of prostitution who went missing in and around King County, WA in the 80s and 90s should be listed as Endangered Missing, even if there are no signs of foul play in her case. Everyone’s situation is different and I think you should decide it on a case-by-case basis

    • Mion December 18, 2015 / 1:22 am

      *in the same area where the woman went missing

  4. Mia December 18, 2015 / 10:45 am

    I think it’s dependent on her lifestyle (if it’s known). If she’s working in a high-risk area where other women in her position have gone missing, if she has a pimp who is known for violence, if she’s a known drug user or has prior arrests, if she has children and is usually in contact with them… I’d say all those circumstances, separate or combined, would warrant an “endangered missing” label.

  5. Dan December 20, 2015 / 3:44 am

    Along the same lines as what others have said. If the missing persons most recent interaction(s) indicates something might have happened, then yes. Also, if there’s a long term no license/ssn/bank/cell activity for a long period, and no legal interactions, then it is worth considering endangered.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s