Runningfor....
You've actually made a good point. Your argument is the same one that we, the punters, were making when the most recent legislation was passed in 2009. Namely the new offence of paying a person who is forced, threatened, deceived or otherwise coerced into prostitution. Which is strict liability i.e. it doesn't matter if you knew or not. The point is that it's impossible to know; even the police themselves are not necessarily going to get the truth. A forced prostitute has reasons to lie to the punter since she doesn't want him walking out the door (pissing off her pimp) which the punter obviously will do if she admits she's forced etc. However, a willing prostitute may lie to the police since she's in the country illegally, she thinks she's breaking the law, and she thinks the police are like those in her home country and will be absolute bastards. She may think they'll go easier on her....
The point being that uniquely for a strict liability offence you go to court and nobody really knows for certain whether the girl is forced. She told the punter one thing, and now she's telling the police and the court another.
This is NOT me saying all the girls who claim to be trafficked sex slaves are liars. I'm just pointing out that they could, and it's only their word that the whole offence is based upon.
You have the ridiculous situation whereby if you're caught in bed with a 13 year old (but willing) prostitute you can say she looked 18 to me, and the police have to prove you didn't reasonably believe her to be over 18. Otherwise you're scot-free. But if you're caught with a 25 year old who was tricked into working as a hooker, you're hung out to dry, no excuses accepted. Even though checking ID is easy, but checking "willingness" is a flip of the coin.
Also I'm not trying to perpetuate the "happy hooker" myth. I'm not claiming there are no sex slaves. There clearly are. Just as there are those who are forced to work in houses as domestic servants. There are also those like Dr Brooke Magnanti a.k.a Belle de Jour, who go into the business voluntarily and make a lot of money. Neither is a myth, they're simply opposing extremes of the same industry. The majority are somewhere in between and yes, a lot may hate their jobs and want to get out as soon as possible and would much prefer a nice office job, but they don't for the same reason I don't quit my job (which I hate) - because they need the money. And the nice office job doesn't pay quite as well. They're adults. They know about Tescos, and could get a job for £7.50 an hour or whatever it is that Tescos pay and work a 45 hour week. Or they could work part time/full time, as they want to work, and get £150 per hour, or even 200/300+ if they're in London and young/pretty/slim etc.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1155502/Suspicious-teacher-exposes-double-life-girl-15-earning-100-000-year-upmarket-prostitute.html
Now this link - whilst clearly an underage girl, and a victim, this girl was nevertheless working for herself for her own misguided reasons. She kept the money she made. Working part-time after school and at weekends she had £8000 in the loft and the police, based on what I don't know, believe she actually earned £14,000 in the 3 months she worked.
So that explains why (adult, willing) women get into the business, and why it's rather simplistic and naive to say that they need help to get out of it. I've met loads of women who tell me they're working for a year or two to get the money to buy a house or set up a business back in their own country and they're not unaware of other jobs, it's just that the other jobs don't pay £100,000 a year part-time. Which is what a slim, attractive girl under 25 could easily earn.