HKSAR v. SARJUNI AND ANOTHER

HCCC283/2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 283 OF 2008

----------------------

-----------------------

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above case

COURT:  Sarjuni and Fu Su-fong, you have each pleaded guilty to trafficking in a variety of dangerous drugs in January last year.  Neither of you could have been in any doubt that very serious consequences would follow if your activities were detected.

In your case, Sarjuni, you have pleaded guilty to four counts, Counts 1 to 4.  Counts 1 to 3 relate to your involvement in the supplying of cocaine on three occasions to an undercover police officer. 

On the first occasion, which is the subject of Count 1, the narcotic content of the cocaine you supplied to him was 1.08 grammes, for which he paid you $3,600.  You admitted keeping $600 of that sum. 

On the second occasion, which is the subject of Count 2, you were the person who took his order for a further amount of cocaine.  On that occasion the narcotic content of the cocaine he was supplied with was 0.84 grammes. 

On the third occasion, which is the subject of Count 3, you supplied him with a much greater quantity.  The narcotic content was 8.72 grammes.  He paid you $15,000.  On that third occasion you were arrested, and the police went to your home at Jade House in Hennessy Road.  There the police found the six drugs that are the subject of Count 4.  Those drugs included methamphetamine hydrochloride, ketamine and cocaine.  The quantities of those particular drugs were: 1.35 grammes of a crystalline solid, containing 1.34 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride; 0.46 grammes of a powder, containing 0.39 grammes of ketamine; and 1.35 grammes of a solid, containing 0.85 grammes of cocaine.  While the quantity of each drug was not particularly large, an aggravating feature is that you were in a position to supply a variety of drugs to those who wanted them. 

I am prepared to accept that your trafficking activities were not primarily from your own supplies at that address, but on behalf of someone else from a much more significant store in Island Building in Hennessy Road.  You received a financial reward for each delivery of drugs you performed. 

Insofar as Charges 1 and 2 are concerned, I adopt a starting point of 2 years’ imprisonment in respect of each charge. 

Insofar as Counts 3 and 4 are concerned, I adopt starting points of 4 years’ imprisonment in respect of each charge.  I am satisfied that an overall starting point of 6 years is appropriate in respect of all counts. 

The only significant mitigation in your case are your pleas of guilty.  They entitle you to the usual discount of one-third, which takes into account your previous good character. 

For the purpose of sentence, I will start with the most serious counts.  On Count 3, I sentence you to 32 months’ imprisonment.  On Count 4, I sentence you to 32 months’ imprisonment, 8 months of which are to run consecutively to the sentence on Count 3.  On Count 1, I sentence you to 16 months’ imprisonment, 4 months of which are to run consecutively to the sentences on Counts 3 and 4.  On Count 2, I sentence you to 16 months’ imprisonment, 4 months of which are to run consecutively to the sentences on Counts 3, 4 and 1. 

That means you are sentenced to a total of 4 years’ imprisonment. 

Fu Su-fong, you have pleaded guilty to three counts. 

Count 2 is a joint charge with Sarjuni, the 1st defendant, and relates to your supplying the undercover officer with the cocaine referred to in the charge, namely with a narcotic content of 0.84 grammes.  You delivered the drugs to the undercover officer on 5 January last year outside the Novotel Century Hotel in Jaffe Road, and the officer paid you $2,400.  On that count I adopt a starting point of 2 years’ imprisonment. 

Count 5 relates to the drugs found in your home in Gresson Street in Wan Chai.  Eight different drugs were involved, the most significant being 6.01 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 5.95 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, 3.66 grammes of a powder containing 3 grammes of ketamine and 5.52 grammes of a solid containing 3.53 grammes of cocaine.  I am prepared to accept that as Mr Andrews says, and bearing in mind the finding of equipment for consumption in the premises, part of those drugs were for your own consumption.  I adopt a starting point of 6 years’ imprisonment in respect of Count 5.

The most serious charge is Count 6, which relates to the drugs found in Island Building in Hennessy Road.  Mr Andrews has not suggested that any of those drugs were for your own consumption.  He has told me that you were induced by your supplier - because of your dependence on drugs - to rent the premises to provide a store room to which others would have access.  A total of four types of drugs were found: 825 tablets, containing 91.92 grammes of 3,4- methylenedioxymethamphetamine;  58.95 grammes of a powder, containing 49.0 grammes of ketamine; 37.50 grammes of a crystalline solid, containing 36.92 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride; and 13.43 grammes of a solid, containing 8.46 grammes of cocaine. 

I adopt a starting point of 10 years’ imprisonment in respect of this count.  In my view, an overall starting point of 11 years’ imprisonment on the three counts before the court is appropriate.  Again the only real mitigation in your case are your pleas of guilty, for which you are entitled to the usual discount of one-third, which takes into account your previous good character. 

Taking the most serious offences first, on Charge 6, Count 6, I sentence you to 80 months' imprisonment.  That is 6 years, 8 months.  On Charge 5, Count 5, I sentence you to 4 years' imprisonment, 4 months of which are to run consecutively to the sentence on Count 6.  On Charge 2, I sentence you to 16 months’ imprisonment, four months of which are to run consecutively to the sentences on Charges 6 and 5. 

In other words, you are sentenced to a total of 88 months' imprisonment, 7 years 4 months.