Extract from Hong Kong Standard dated 23/7/71
38
Raped girl got a poor de
Sir,
FOR eight months I have been struggling to get justice for
Vi
through
Legal Department, but have failed. I now appeal to public opinion. Perhaps Hongkong there may be a solicitor who will take up the case since neither the child nor her parents have money, and she cannot get Legal Aid. y
The girl's name cannot be Aid as this is not given in cases given, as she is only 14 years of rape. The regulations appear old now, and was only 12 3⁄41⁄21⁄2 at to need changing on this point the time of the offence against since most cases of, rape involve her.
poor children in Hongkong v
This child was working in a factory in Tsimshatsui, starting at the age of ten; she worked 12 hours a day and received board and lodgings and $20 which was paid to her parents.
Two years after she began to work there, her employer's ́son, aged 30, began to rape her, threatening her not to shout or make a noise. The alicged rape *. wastes only discove, ed when the child became sick and the father, noticed her condition.
She was well advanced in pregnancy before›› this was
The little girl entered hospital in December and had her baby: I believe it was by Caesarian operation Reports from the Social Welfare, Department confirm that, the girl was an innocent little child, and that her parents were depressed on her behalf. The father threatened
my
}
presence to jump from the Magistracy Building in protest against the injustice to the child, but he was, permaded instead to continue the straggio on her behalf. AN DOMINA
In my negotiations with the Legal Department I met a
wall. The Acting Attorney General pleaded that "it would be, very wrong to subject her (the girl); to, the ordeal of i recounting wher experience in a public court
covered, and her mother had to explain what had happened · ́stone to her as she did not understand. She identified the alleged rapist (at Police Identification Parade ir October 1970, and the man was charged. The case made › unless it was considered headlines in some of the press
For some reason that has never been explained,' the Tsimshatsui Police sent the file to the Public Prosecutor, who decided not to make a charge.
1 wrote to the Attorney General, Legal Department, in November, 1970, asking why no charge had been laid, and the Solicitor General replied in a very rude letter, "I do not propose going into the reasons why it was considered not to be in the public interest to prosecute in this case." He also scolded me for sending the child
personally to him: Indeed, I wanted him to see the pitiful little victim of his decision.
absolutely necessary. This is a
clear admission that the child was known to be the innocent victim. And what about, the. danger to other girls of having such a man sleeping premises where ... young...... girls were housed?
It then unexpectedly came to light that this child was not the first girl worker to become a, victim to this man. A year previously another... girl,” aged 16, had been defiled, having been seduced by promise of marriage. When I asked the Solicitor General "if "this" man should go free to rape girls (the danger was obvious since girls worked in the factory), he replied facetiously that this question was in the nature of asking "Have you stopped beating your wife?”
I then obtained the original statements made by the child and her father to the Police, and was satisfied that they had told the same story to me, and that
there was a case to answer. I failed to get Legal, straightforward
#
He did not, however, on this or any other occasion my questions in a
manner,
answer
even accurately. I therefore had to write again and ask him to i check this other case. I gave a the year and the Police Station involved and considered records would be availableă“ The Solicitor General replied that no such report coùld be found.
At this point I unexpected"; witness... been wrongly named seducer of the 16-year-ol and: had been arrestét questioned. With the add details it was then poss pin-point the case and and the Solicitor Genera had to admit that thei such a... caso: Now actirs
been taken «- against pi Kholl employer on that, pecasioni because it was,, so the Police are supposed to have said, false charge made by girl to force the man to marry her,
Letters to
the Editor
and she had withdraw accusation.
named
The lie piece of lib 16-year-old witness said her seducer: She to force the her. In fact, she intimidated to use, the inan's name: he had bee of her workmates ||**
It took five afternoons hard searching to locate the "ght She confirmed” that had been seduced by promise. of marriage, that she had been intimidated into naming the wrong person, and that the seducer with police halp, had persuaded her mother, withdraw the charges
Accusations unfounde
;
pleaded "not uity
largest (
Between date and the date met dovni÷for trial_thef Director of Public Prosecutions
dis normal in such cases, gavu careful consideration to
A. SPOKESMAN for the Attorney General's Chambers referring to the letter sent by Mrs Elliott say, that the suggestion contained in it that there had been deliberate obstruction of Mrs Elliott's enquiries on the part of the Solicitor General's office is He reached the conclusion totally unfounded; as is the that there was insufficient suggestion ^, that in his evidence to require the correspondence with Mry individual to stand trial. It È Elliott the Solicitor General & not customary to give the adopted. a' callous attitude and ✨ reasons why Director of Public showed a lack of sympathy Prosecution's exercises his with the young girls concerned.
?
རྗ"
A
In this letter Mrs Elliott
refers to one child and one young girl against whom sexual offences were said., to ́have-been.... committed.
With regard to the young child, a charge was brought in a magistrate's court against an individual. He appeared and
discretion in such cases and stops a prosecution: The reason is given in this case because of the false impression that might be gained from this letter that the Case WES improperly handled.
So far as the other young girl was concerned, Mrs Elliott was informed that reports in the police books kept at the police station in question indicated that her case
A
that
order
*COW
4.In entry reporti station.
This contained in 17 letters exchanged between Solicitor November June of this