CRIMINAL CASE NO. 101 OF 2011
COURT: The defendant has pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely, 1168.85 grammes of a powder containing 766.77 grammes of ketamine.
On 18 October last year, at about 7.42 pm, he was seen exiting premises inside a building in Sham Shui Po, Kowloon. Upon being searched by the police, a white plastic bag containing 40 plastic bags, later found to be ketamine, was found in his left front jeans pocket. He was arrested and cautioned and under caution he said he was delivering the drugs for others in order to earn money.
Using keys found on the defendant, the police gained entry to the unit wherein they found, amongst other things, a spoon which were found to have traces of ketamine and an electronic scale. Some resealable plastic bags, empty, were also found and, most importantly, 40 more resealable plastic bags containing ketamine were found.
The drugs that were found on the defendant’s person and found inside the premises were sent for Government Chemist analysis and found to contain the amount which is stipulated in the charge. The total street value of the drugs is in the region of HK$140,000.
Under caution, the defendant said that he had collected the ketamine from Shek Kip Mei and when he returned home with the drugs he subsequently received a telephone call instructing him to take some of the drugs downstairs, and that was when he was arrested.
The unfortunate fact is the defendant is only aged 20. He is going to spend the best part of his life in prison. The defendant also has a criminal record of burglaries when he was very young, but nothing similar.
In mitigation, Mr Loftus submitted that he comes from a broken home and that at the time he committed this offence he was seeking money because his mother’s cancer had flared up again. Unfortunately, this sort of mitigation is all too often heard in these courts. A lot of the people charged with drug-trafficking are always needing money but the court has to impose a severe sentence in order to deter people from making easy money by dealing in drugs.
The only mitigation I see in this case is the fact that the defendant has entered an early plea. As Mr Loftus has correctly pointed out there are guidelines laid down for trafficking in ketamine. In the recent case of Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1, it was recommended that for trafficking in between 600 to 1000 grammes, 12 to 14 years’ imprisonment after trial is recommended. The amount here is 766.77 grammes, which would fall into the 12 to 12½ year bracket.
So taking everything into account, including the mitigation and the facts of this case, I will impose a starting point of 12 years’ imprisonment reduced by one-third because of the defendant’s plea to 8 years’ imprisonment.