Recently, in a case involving alleged solicitation of prostitution handled by attorneys Yan Huainan, Jin Yuting, and Liu Bolin of our firm, the defense team, through meticulous defense throughout the entire process, successfully kept the case within the standard sentencing bracket for Article 359, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, thereby preventing the application of the “serious circumstances” aggravating factor. Ultimately, the client was sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment; the entire period of pretrial detention was credited toward the sentence, meaning the sentence was fully served upon sentencing, resulting in a favorable defense outcome.
I. Case Challenges:
Extremely High Risk of Prosecution, with Potential for Aggravated Sentencing
During the investigation phase of this case, the investigating authorities initially filed a case against Client A on charges of organizing prostitution but subsequently changed the charge to facilitating prostitution. Based on the chat logs and transaction records on file, there were objectively a large number of suspected “referral” records in this case. If all were recognized as such, the number of individuals referred for prostitution and the total transaction volume involved would very likely meet the “serious circumstances” standard specified in the judicial interpretation—namely, referring ten or more people for prostitution and deriving illegal profits of 50,000 yuan or more—posing a risk that the sentence could be escalated to five years or more of imprisonment.
Furthermore, as this is a criminal case involving pornography, the volume of electronic data is substantial. WeChat and Alipay transactions intermingle personal loans, daily living expenses, and illicit profits; distinguishing between legitimate financial transactions and illegal proceeds is the core challenge of the defense in this case. During the initial phase of the case, the client was detained in a detention center and faced a situation of information asymmetry, making his statements highly prone to inconsistencies, which could significantly impact subsequent factual determinations.
II. Defense Strategy:
Full-Process Involvement to Strengthen Factual and Legal Defenses
Upon accepting the retainer, the defense counsel immediately began meeting with the client, conducting multiple visits during the investigation phase to provide legal guidance: On one hand, the counsel explained the elements of the crime of prostitution and the judicial interpretation standards for “serious circumstances,” clarifying the boundaries of the client’s statements; on the other hand, the counsel explained the essence of the plea bargain system, informing the client that a plea of guilty and acceptance of punishment must be based on facts and evidence, thereby laying the groundwork for the subsequent fact-sorting process during the review and prosecution phase.
After the case was transferred for review and prosecution, the defense counsel thoroughly reviewed the case files, analyzed all evidence, and established two primary lines of defense:
1. Defense regarding the number of individuals procured for prostitution: The case file contained numerous leads suggesting that Client A had procured others for prostitution, but lacked supporting evidence; some instances of “matchmaking” did not form a complete chain of evidence. The defense counsel cross-referenced the testimonies of the sex workers and clients, chat records, and money transfer receipts item by item, arguing that acts of procuring prostitution supported solely by the client’s confession and lacking corroborating evidence should not be included in the facts of the case; Communications between certain individuals constituted the sharing of industry-related information and could not be deemed “facilitation of prostitution” under the Criminal Law. Ultimately, through negotiations with the prosecution, the number of individuals charged with and found by the court to have been facilitated into prostitution was reduced to only three. This successfully excluded a large number of questionable leads and avoided the risk of a higher sentencing tier.
2. Argument Regarding the Amount of Illegal Profits: Regarding the transaction records, which included loans and repayments between the defendant and relatives and friends as well as daily living expenses, the defense counsel reviewed each item individually and argued that not all WeChat and Alipay receipts could be directly presumed to be illegal proceeds from procuring prostitution; for amounts that had not actually been received, the defense argued that they should not be included in the actual illegal proceeds. After repeated discussions, the court ultimately determined that the defendant, Mr. A, had actually obtained illegal profits far below the 50,000 yuan threshold for “serious circumstances,” thereby completely blocking the path to a harsher sentence based on the amount involved.
At the same time, the defense counsel concurrently conducted a review of the necessity of pretrial detention, submitting a written application that focused on the following defense arguments: the defendant was a first-time and occasional offender; had made a full confession and pleaded guilty while accepting punishment; demonstrated low subjective malice; played a secondary role in the joint criminal activity; and posed a low risk to society. Ultimately, the procuratorate accepted the defense’s arguments and, during the later stages of the review and prosecution process, changed the coercive measure for Defendant A to release on bail pending trial, thereby securing favorable conditions for subsequent sentencing.
Upon entering the trial phase, the defense counsel maintained a strategy of arguing for a lighter sentence. While not disputing the charges, they continued to present a comprehensive defense centered on the following key points: full confession, admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment, status as a first-time and occasional offender, low level of subjective malice, role as an accessory, relatively small actual profits, the fact that a portion of the alleged amounts was never actually obtained, and credit for time served.
III. Judgment Outcome:
Successfully Secured the Base Sentencing Range; Sentence Offset Completed
Ultimately, following a closed-door hearing, the court fully adopted the defense counsel’s arguments, applied the base sentencing bracket, and sentenced the defendant to nine months’ imprisonment. For the period of pretrial detention prior to the execution of the sentence, one day of detention was offset against one day of the sentence; the sentence has been fully served.
IV. Case Review
1. In cases involving obscenity, “serious circumstances” is the defense’s first line of defense. The crime of facilitating prostitution immediately triggers a higher sentencing bracket—a fixed-term imprisonment of five years or more—once the defendant has facilitated prostitution for ten or more people or obtained illegal profits of 50,000 yuan or more. In practice, public security authorities often include all transaction records and leads within the scope of their investigation. The core task of the defense is to distinguish between “suspicious leads” and “facts established by conclusive evidence,” exclude acts that resulted in no transaction or lack corroborating evidence, and maintain the baseline sentencing bracket.
2. The value of client meetings during the investigative stage extends beyond simply reassuring the client; it is essential to provide thorough legal guidance. Clients in prostitution-related cases are often unfamiliar with the law and, under the pressure of interrogation, are prone to making vague admissions, which directly leads to inflated numbers of individuals involved and amounts of illicit profits. During these meetings, attorneys must clearly explain the law and reason with the client, guiding them to base their statements on objective evidence and leaving room for subsequent negotiations between the prosecution and defense.
3. Pleading guilty and accepting punishment does not mean unquestioningly accepting all facts. It constitutes acknowledgment of the criminal facts that have been verified; it does not imply that the client must accept charges unsupported by evidence. Lawyers should continue to defend against the facts, amounts, and number of clients within the framework of the plea agreement, ensuring that the plea and factual defense proceed in parallel.
4. Financial transaction records must be scrutinized on a transaction-by-transaction basis. In many cases involving prostitution, defendants have extensive financial dealings with industry peers and friends. Transfer records cannot simply be presumed to represent illegal profits; a distinction must be made between normal financial transactions and actual commissions from facilitating prostitution to accurately determine the true amount of illegal proceeds.
