Massage parlour owner acquitted of charges of running brothel

The owner of a massage parlour that was used to offer sexual services has been exonerated of running a brothel after a court said that there was insufficient evidence as to her knowledge of what was going on.

Guohong Rekkers, 47, was charged in 2014 with detaining a person against her will, living off the earnings of prostitution, running a brothel, using an establishment in breach of licensing conditions, offending public morals, and human trafficking. The latter charge was subsequently dropped by the attorney general.

The Beijing Bella massage and beauty parlour, in Birkirkara, was owned by Rekkers through the company LJR Ltd, of which she served as director.

In November 2013 and the preceding months, it had two employees: a Chinese national and a Bulgarian national.

In her testimony, the Chinese national explained in detail how arrangements had been made for her to come work in Malta. She also described her working conditions, testifying that she and Rekkers would split any earnings made at the parlour between themselves.

The witness said that she and her colleague were alone at the parlour most of the time – as Rekkers would only show up briefly throughout day – and that it was she who received payments according to rates pre-established by Rekkers.

Regarding the work she carried out, the former employee explained that she had been employed as a masseuse and that the majority of the clients at the salon were males. She also said that some of the men who went for a massage had also asked her to masturbate them, something she used to do for a charge over and above the pre-established rates. She also testified that she had accepted to do this after obtaining Rekkers’ approval, with whom she agreed to split the earnings, including these ‘extras’.

Two former clients told the court that they had been given a sexual service by “an Asian female.”

Rekkers had told officers investigating the case that a box containing some 74 condoms was for her own personal use, explaining that she did not want to leave the condoms in her car while she was abroad.

Despite this and the seizure of a mobile phone containing exchanges between prospective clients and an unidentified person at the massage parlour, there was nothing directly linking Rekkers to such activities. She denied asking her employees to provide sexual services, pointed out that in her days as a masseuse, she had also been propositioned by male customers, but had refused to provide “extra services.”

As she opened more salons and began employing others, she said, she had always insisted that they do not give these “extra services” because she did not think it was right and because she did not think it was hygienic.

After examining what constitutes prostitution for the purposes of the offence in question, the court held that, based on the evidence brought before it, “there can be no doubt that at least one masseuse at the Beijing Bella beauty salon was participating in sexual activity with clients against payment… Consequently, neither can there be any doubt that Beijing Bella was being used for purposes of prostitution...”

“However, for these offences to subsist, the law requires another important element: the defendant’s knowledge that her salon was being used for the purpose of prostitution and that, consequently, the earnings she was receiving were being derived from that illicit activity.”

It appeared, from the acts, that the defendant used to go to the salon for a very short time, to collect her share of the income and to take supplies required for the business, the court said.

There was nothing to show that the accused had been involved in taking bookings for the salon. “In the court’s opinion, the evidence produced does not constitute proof beyond reasonable doubt of the defendant’s knowledge of the sexual activity going on at the salon,” said Magistrate Doreen Clarke as she acquitted Rekkers.