R v Webb
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE |
| Judgment Date | 16 July 1963 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1963] EWCA Crim J0716-1 |
| Court | Court of Criminal Appeal |
| Docket Number | 420/63 |
| Date | 16 July 1963 |
[1963] EWCA Crim J0716-1
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
Royal Courts of Justice
The Lord Chief Justice of England (Lord Parker)
Mr. Justice Widgery
and
Mr. Justice John Stephenson
420/63
MR. ASHE LINCOLN, Q. C. and MR. GERALD OWEN appeared as Counsel for the Appellant.
MR. PAUL WRIGHTSON, Q. C. and MR. P. POLLOCK appeared as Counsel for the Crown.
This Appellant was convicted at the Central Criminal Court on four counts of an indictment; two counts were for attempting to procure a woman to become a common prostitute; the third count was of procuring a woman to become a common prostitute, and the fourth was one of living on the earnings of prostitution. The Appellant was sentenced in all to 2 years' imprisonment, and he now appeals against his conviction only.
The short facts were these. As regards count 1 a girl of 19 answered an advertisement for a female assistant for a masseur, "No previous experience required". According to the Appellant's promises, and she complained to him that some of the men had the wrong idea, and indeed one of the men had invited her to masturbate him. According to her the Appellant said: "If you want to earn tips, you do it. Also you could get them through faster that way". At any rate, her evidence was that the Appellant had conveyed to her that it was part of her job to do this.
Count 2 dealt with procuring another young girl aged 17, and her evidence again was that she understood from the Appellant that she was to do what the client asked her to do. Count 5 concerned a third girl of 19, who said that on her very first day another girl had told her in the Appellant's presence that sometimes men would become physically excited, and that then it was her job to masturbate them and this she did.
Count 4 was dealing with living on the immoral earnings of prostitution, and there evidence was given by the Police that on a number of days men and girls had been seen on the premises in dubious positions and there was a tape recorder and microphone found connected to one, of the rooms where mass age was given.
The defence was that at this establishment the Appellant carried on a legitimate business for providing a relaxing type of massage, and that if any of the girls had done what was suggested, it was done of their own accord and without any encouragement from him. It is quite clear that the Jury felt themselves unable to accept the Appellant's evidence, and found the case for the prosecution proved. The sole question here is whether these' facts which the Jury by their verdict must have found proved, in fact constituted the offences charged. This in turn depends upon the proper moaning to be given to the word "common prostitute" in the procuring charges, and of the word "prostitution" In the fourth charge dealing with living on immoral earnings.
The learned Judge, in directing the Jury on this matter term 'common prostitute'. That is not limited to meaning a woman who commonly permits actual sexual intercourse for money. It has been held by an Appeal court that prostitution is proved if it be shown that a woman offers her body commonly for lewdness in return for payment. Now, as far as the facts of this case are concerned, if the girl or woman did in fact masturbate any men who having chanced to see the advertisement came to seek that particular form of sexual gratification and paid for it, that constitutes acting as a common prostitute". It is that direction which is challenged in this Court, and it is said on the facts as they must have been found by the Jury there was no prostitution and no procuring of these girls or attempts to procure them to become common prostitutes.
As long ago as 1918 in the case of de Munck, reported in 15 Criminal Appeal Reports at page 113, it was sought by Counsel for the' Appellant to confine the moaning of "prostitute" to the woman who offered her body to man for the gratification of normal sexual...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v McFarlane
...are of opinion that prostitution is proved if it be shown that a woman offers her body commonly for lewdness for payment in return." 16 In R v Webb [1963] 3 WLR 638, the issue was whether girls employed in a massage parlour were acting as prostitutes if they masturbated male customers. In o......
-
Rose v DPP
...was clearly public, there was no criminal offence. 18 The decision in Watson was followed by the Court for Crown Cases Reserved in 1848 in R v Webb (1848) 3 Cox CC 183. The headnote reads: "An indictment for a nuisance at common law charged that the defendant, at, etc, in, etc…did expose an......
-
Armhouse Lee Ltd v Anthony Chappell and Another
...to finding this a somewhat surprising proposition. In support of it Mr. Cordara cites three authorities: Rex v De Munck [1918] 1 KB 635, Reg v Webb [1964] 1 QB 357, and R v McFarlane [1994] 2 AER 283. The first two establish that prostitution is proved by showing that a woman offered her bo......
-
R. v. Tremblay et autres, (1993) 156 N.R. 30 (SCC)
...Ltd, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 494; 59 N.R. 101, consd. [para. 12]. R. v. De Munck, [1918] 1 K.B. 635 (Eng.), refd to. [para. 16]. R. v. Webb, [1963] 3 W.L.R. 638 (Eng. C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. Lantay, [1966] 3 C.C.C. 270 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 16]. R. v. Côté & Vézina, [1986] 1 S.C.R. ......
-
The minor offences act and prostitution in Barbados: new cloth on an old garment
...that a man cannot in law (in England) be a common prostitute: D.P.P. v. Bull [1994] 3 W.L.R. 1196 (see, infra , a 138). 75 See Webb [1963]3 All ER. 177, Kelly v. Purvis [1983] 1 Q.B. 663; and in Scotland, Smith v. Sellers 1978 S.L.T (Notes)44, 45: a common prostitute is one "who offered her......
-
Prostitutes and Persons
...Behrendt v. Burridge (see below), and R. v. Webb(see below).28 [1960] 2 All E.R. 859.29 [1976] 3 All E.R. 285.30 id., p. 286.31 [1963] 3 All E.R. 177.32 [1918] 1 K.B. 635.33 [1994] 2 All E.R. 283.34 Compare Fisher v. Bell (1961) 1 Q.B. 394, also a criminal case, where to ‘offer’ for salea fl......