A sex toy shop in Tsim Sha Tsui issued an article today (3rd) condemning someone who used the fitting as an excuse to perform self-masturbation in the fitting room and then left. The behavior was later discovered by the shop staff, and the shop called the police for help.
The police said the case was temporarily classified as indecent exposure, and they were looking for a middle-aged man.
Practicing barrister Lu Weixiong pointed out that according to the situation described in the shop post, it does not constitute a crime.
To constitute "disruption of public decency", "behavior against public morals" or "misconduct in public places", the first condition must have the "public" element.
If the self-blasphemy occurs in the fitting room, the customer belongs to the owner of that space at the moment, and it is a private place.
The definition of "public places" and "private places" is complicated
Lu Weixiong explained that whether the relevant behavior constitutes a crime depends on whether the place where it occurs belongs to a public place.
There are different laws and regulations for different places and buildings in Hong Kong, and the scale used to define which place is a public place or a private place is very complicated and requires careful consideration.
For example, shopping malls, restaurants, shops, etc. are originally private places, but if there are no restrictions or obstructions for citizens to enter, and the shops are open for people to enter while they are in business, the places can be regarded as public places.
The sex shop in question is therefore a public place.
The incident occurred at the Cameron Building in Tsim Sha Tsui.
(Photo by Lu Jiayu)
The moment a customer enters the fitting room, it is a private place
However, when the customer enters the fitting room, neither the owner nor the clerk can enter, so the customer becomes the owner of the space, which is a private place.
Due to the lack of the "public" element, it cannot constitute the crime of "disrupting public decency" or "acting against public morals".
Assuming that no one witnessed the masturbation process, but afterwards the clerk found a tissue with semen in the fitting room, can he be convicted? Lu Weixiong believes that it is difficult to determine who the semen is, and it may be left by the previous customer.
Therefore, in law, this evidence alone is not enough to convict, unless the clerk witnessed the customer's self-masturbation and masturbation.
Moaning in the fitting room may not be a crime
Another hypothesis, if the clerk hears the strange noise made by the customer blasphemy, can it constitute "sexual harassment"?
Lu Weixiong continued to explain that to constitute the crime of "sexual harassment", the first condition must be to affect other people. If his intention is not to harass others, but to masturbate in a corner of the fitting room and groan without his knowledge, it may not constitute sexual harassment. crime.
Barrister Lu Weixiong said that men's behavior may not constitute a crime.
(Photo provided by interviewee)
Lu Weixiong felt very helpless about the incident. Although the incident was an unacceptable behavior in the general society and was reviled by the public, so far, there is no crime that can be imposed on this customer.
The store can only pay more attention in the future and choose not to greet the man.
Lu Weixiong also reminded the store not to intercept CCTV footage, post big-character posters and publish the customer's personal photo to accuse him of sexual harassment.
Since the incident has not been verified and has not been ruled by the court, the store has the opportunity to commit a crime of defamation.
Middle-aged man suspects self-indulgence in the fitting room and the store issued a condemnation: It is not good to masturbate again
