The Assizes
| Date | 01 July 1965 |
| Published date | 01 July 1965 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002201836502900303 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
The
Assizes
THE
MANAGEMENT OF A BROTHEL
Abbott v. Smith
THE judgment of the Crown Court at Liverpool on appeal
from the stipendiary magistrate in this case (129
J.P.
3)
provides useful guidance in
the
interpretation of s. 33 of
the
Sexual Offences Act, 1956, in relation to the offence of
managing abrothel.
The
rooms of
the
upper floors of a large
house were let off in separate apartments. Each occupant had
aright to the exclusive occupation of his or her room,
the
staircase and the lavatory and washing facilities being used in
common.
Two
of
the
occupants were known prostitutes
and
three other women, one a known prostitute, were not known
to be living there for the purposes of prostitution.
There
was
no evidence
that
any room was used by more
than
one woman,
whether simultaneously or successively for these purposes. It
was ruled, in the first place,
that
although the premises were
occupied by different persons with separate rights as regards
each individual room, the premises were a single entity which
was used by more
than
one woman for the purposes of sexual
lewdness with more
than
one man, and, therefore, the premises
constituted abrothel.
The
appeals against conviction were allowed on another
ground, namely,
the
true meaning of
the
term
'managing' a
brothel.
It
was ruled
that
managing abrothel meant taking
an active
part
in the running of the business as a business, and,
in order to establish that, the evidence
must
show something
suggesting control and not purely menial or routine duties.
The
evidence for the prosecution did not show any manage-
ment in this sense.
The
defendant did not collect rents and
had no power to evict tenants and did not receive any remu-
neration from the landlord or any rake-off from any of
the
tenants. She did once open the outer door to one of
the
known prostitutes who lived in one of
the
separate rooms.
162
To continue reading
Request your trial