CRIMINAL CASE NO. 18 OF 2012
COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug. The drug was 1 kilogramme of powder containing 0.77 of a kilogramme of ketamine.
The Summary of Facts, which was admitted by the defendant today, shows that police carried out an operation at Lok Ma Chau Spur Line Control Point. The defendant was seen leaving the Customs Control Area and walking towards the footbridge near the transport interchange area. He was intercepted by the police and a subsequent search revealed four transparent plastic bags containing suspected dangerous drugs which were taped to his sides and calves.
He was arrested and cautioned. He stated, “Ah Sir, those four packets of 'K Chai' will be delivered to Kwun Tong to others, just for making money to support my family”.
Analysis by the Government Chemist showed the nature and quantity of the drug as set out in the particulars of the charge. The estimated value of the seized drugs was $111,000.
Later, in a video-recorded interview, the defendant said that he had met a man, “Ah Shui”, in a mainland bar. “Ah Shui” told the defendant there were some goods to be ‘brought’ and he was aware the goods referred to were 'K Chai'. The next day, “Ah Shui” telephoned him and told him to collect the goods from the toilet of a restaurant in a mainland village. He collected the dangerous drugs and, as instructed, wrapped the drugs around his legs with adhesive tape.
It was intended that after returning to Hong Kong, he would go to Kwun Tong and await further instructions. He was to receive $4,000 if the delivery was successful.
The defendant’s Immigration Movement Record confirmed that he left Hong Kong at 1547 on 14 June 2011 from the Lok Ma Chau Spur Line Control Point and returned to Hong Kong through the same location at 1707 hours on the same day.
The defendant has no previous criminal record. His antecedents statement showed that he was 42, married, and educated up to Form 5 level in Hong Kong. He had worked previously as an insurance agent and afterwards worked as a security guard, but he had been unemployed since 2009. He then did some casual work and earned a monthly salary of around $5,000.
The defendant lives with his parents, wife and son in Siu Sai Wan Estate. His father is aged 70 and his mother is 68 years old. The defendant’s son is 4 years old. The defendant was the sole breadwinner of the family.
I am advised that he is a good son/filial son, and a good husband and father and it was submitted that this was out of character for his usual behaviour. He had committed the offence because he had lost his job and needed money to support the family.
There have been put before me letters of mitigation written by his wife, his parents, his elder brother and his elder sister. All of them confirm that this is out of character for the defendant, that he is believed to be an introverted person who does not discuss personal matters with his family, and all of them ask, rather unsurprisingly, for leniency in terms of the sentence.
The only real mitigation in his case is the fact that the defendant pleaded guilty at an early stage to this charge and he is entitled to the full one-third discount.
The guidelines for sentence for offences of trafficking in ketamine are set out in Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2009]1HKLRD1. For a quantity of between 600 and 1,000 grammes of narcotic, the sentencing range is from 12 to 14 years’ imprisonment. Where, as here, an international element is involved in the importing of the drug from China into Hong Kong, that is an aggravating factor for which the sentence should be enhanced and I refer to the case of Abdallah [2009]2HKLRD437 in that regard. However, as the narcotic quantity in this case does not exceed 1 kilogramme, such enhancement does not have to be at a minimum of 2 years as suggested by the court in Abdallah.
The only mitigation in this case which is of any value is the defendant’s plea of guilty for which he is entitled to the one-third discount. I take a starting point of 13 years and enhance that by 1 year to 14 years. I discount that by one-third and sentence the defendant to 9 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.