CRIMINAL CASE NO. 67 OF 2010
COURT: Fan Fu-lok, you have pleaded guilty to two counts of trafficking in dangerous drugs, contrary to sections 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 134.
As to the 1st count, you were jointly charged with Chiu Shuk-mei who has today pleaded not guilty to that charge and been discharged by me after the prosecution offered no evidence against her. In the 2nd count, you were charged alone. The particulars of count 1 charged you with unlawfully trafficking in 196.36 grammes of a powder containing 146.23 grammes of ketamine.
The Summary of Facts admitted by you reveals that at about 5 pm on 6 September last year, you and Chiu Shuk-mei were observed exiting from the ground floor of premises at 187-189 Cheung Sha Wan Road in Sham Shui Po. You were intercepted by police officers. In a paper bag which was then being carried by Chiu, the police officers found a paper cup which in turn contained 11 packets of what they suspected to be dangerous drugs. Along with the 11 packets of suspected dangerous drugs, there was a black electronic scale. At the scene, you admitted that you were delivering the drugs for a person named Ah Hung.
The police officers’ suspicions proved to be correct. Subsequent analysis by the Government Chemist revealed that the 11 plastic bags contained 196.36 grammes of a powder containing 146.23 grammes of ketamine valued in excess of $25,000.
The police inquiries of you at the scene revealed that you resided at premises known as Flat C at 187 Cheung Sha Wan Road. Together with the police officers, you returned to those premises. They were searched and a further quantity of suspected dangerous drugs was found. In addition, there was paraphernalia suitable for packaging dangerous drugs. This included yet another electronic scale and numerous transparent plastic bags. Of the items in the flat, you said to the police officer as follows: “Ah Sir, this is the first time I helped people to carry K Chai”.
The dangerous drugs in the flat were determined, upon analysis, to be 329.07 grammes of a powder containing 268.02 grammes of ketamine. This quantity of ketamine was valued in excess of $39,000.
When subsequently interviewed by the police in a video-recorded interview, you told them that: (1) the person Ah Hung whom you had earlier referred to, had asked you to deliver the ketamine; and (2) having taken possession of a quantity of ketamine, you were contacted on that day by Ah Hung and instructed to weigh and take 11 plastic bags of drugs to the Dragon Centre. You were in the process of doing that when you were apprehended by the police.
As I have earlier indicated, you have pleaded guilty to two counts of trafficking in dangerous drugs. I am told by Mr Khosa on your behalf that you are 19 years of age. You have been educated up to Form 4 level. The apartment where the drugs in the 2nd count were found had been rented in your name, but all of the expenses in respect of that had been paid by this person Ah Hung who, in turn, had a key to that apartment.
In addition to the above, I am told - and it is apparent from the interview that you gave to the police - that whilst you yourself were a user of ketamine, the reason you became involved in trafficking was simply because of the money.
In addition to the above, there is nothing in the matters that have been advanced on your behalf by Mr Khosa which would place you in any exceptional circumstances for the purposes of sentencing. The Court of Appeal guidelines for sentencing for those who traffic in the dangerous drug ketamine are clear and unambiguous and they are set out in the reported decision of The Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD at 1.
In addition to providing guidelines for sentencing, the court made a number of comments as to the dangerous nature of the drug ketamine. Those guidelines indicate as follows. The appropriate sentence after trial for trafficking in the quantity of drugs referred to in Count 1 would be a sentence in excess of 7 years, and that for the drugs in Count 2, for a starting point after trial, a sentence of 8 years and 6 months’ imprisonment is appropriate.
From those starting points, you are entitled to a full one-third discount for your pleas of guilty and other mitigating factors. This would reduce the sentence in Count 1 to 4 years and 8 months’ imprisonment and for Count 2, a term of 5 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.
Bearing in mind there are two counts, I must now consider the question of totality. The course I adopt is as follows. I will consider the total weight of the drugs to determine a notional starting point. The total weight of drugs is 414.25 grammes of ketamine. On the guidelines that I have earlier referred to, this would equate to a starting point after trial of a sentence slightly in excess of 10 years’ imprisonment. A full one-third reduction from that would result in a sentence of 6 years and 8 months’ imprisonment. I am satisfied that that is the end result which is appropriate in this case.
To give effect to that, the following sentences are imposed. Count 1, a sentence of 4 years and 8 months’ imprisonment; Count 2, a sentence of 5 years and 8 months’ imprisonment. I will order that 2 years of the sentence on Count 2 be consecutive to the sentence on Count 1.
This will result in an overall sentence to be served of 6 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.