THE QUEEN v. LAU WAN FOUR

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 592 OF 1991

___________

BETWEEN

____________

__________

JUDGMENT

__________

1. This appellant was convicted by Mr. Tanzer in the North Kowloon Magistrates Court of Living on the Earnings of Prostitution.

2. There is an appeal against conviction on a number of grounds that have been taken by Mr. Whitehouse, appearing as he does on behalf of this appellant, relating to the evidence given during the trial and the calling for the Witness statement made by the woman who was the prostitute.

3. The Magistrate, in my judgment, made very careful and clear findings and directed himself correctly upon the law, and at the end of the day it was for him to decide whether or not he was sure that the case against this appellant had been made out. This young girl who had been a prostitute for some time, was apparently acquired by the appellant for a sun of money and worked for him for nearly 20 days. The Magistrate believed her evidence and, as I said, his findings are set out very clearly and I can see no reason whatsoever for interfering with those Reasons and therefor the appeal against conviction is dismissed.

4. However, as far as the sentence is concerned, this man was in trouble some years ago and one would have thought he would have put those matters behind him. He runs a hot-pot cooked food stall and has been in regular employment. He did live with this young girl for a short period of time and because she was a prostitute asked her to go and continue to have prostitution.

5. The young girl in question, was as far as I can see, in no way coerced. She has a number of convictions for serious offences. She has been a prostitute for some time. It is quite wrong for this man to have been living on her immoral earnings. Nevertheless, there are factors which should be taken into account when examining the sentence. There is no evidence whatsoever of any coercion or ill-treatment. Indeed, she appears to have been fond of hint.

6. The Magistrate who gave no detailed reasons for sentence, approached the matter on the basis that an immediate custodial sentence was required and that generally speaking was the correct approach. However, each case depends on its own facts and it may be the Magistrate was under the impression that for this 20 days, with the activity of this young lady, he had accumulated some substantial sun of money. I confess having looked through the papers and the submissions of Mr. Wnitehouse, that may not be so albeit that the defendant did day a cheque of $50,000 to acquire this girl. There is no doubt, in my judgment, that such contact on his behalf merits a custodial sentence. The real question is whether or not that should be suspended.

7. I bear in mind that this man has been out of trouble for some years; it may well be therefore a greater benefit were the sentence to hang over his head for a period of time so that he is under no illusion, that he must not break the law again. Furthermore, he has already spent one month in prison which is equivalent on the normal remission to about six weeks in prison so he has had a short sharp shock of being in prison which he has never had before, I must take into account that even though I suspend the sentence here, he has already received a period of custody. I do consider this is an appropriate case on the particular facts for a suspended sentence.