COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty at the committal stage to two counts. The 1st count is attempting to traffic in a dangerous drug. The particulars of the count is that he, on 20 January 2022, in Kwun Tong, attempted to unlawfully traffic 1,752 grammes of a mixture containing 1,460 grammes of heroin hydrochloride. The 2nd count is conspiracy to traffic in a dangerous drug. The particulars of the count is that he, between 1 November 2021 to 20 January 2022, in Hong Kong, conspired with others to unlawfully traffic in heroin.
The facts are as follows.
On 12 January 2022, Customs officers conducted an inspection of an inbound postal parcel at the Air Mail Centre of the Hong Kong International Airport. Parcel 1 was sent by a person known as “Billy Teoh” from an address in Malaysia to a person named “Angel Choi” at “Flat 2902, 29th Floor, King Tai House, On Tai Estate, Kwun Tong”. Customs officer found
the X-ray image of the parcel suspicious. He opened the parcel for further inspection and found that the parcel contained two sets of toy cars in which some white powder was concealed. Upon examination by way of rapid drug tests, the white powder tested positive for heroin.
On 13 January 2022, at the Air Mail Centre of the airport, another Customs officer conducted an inspection of another inbound parcel. The parcel was likewise sent by a person known as “Billy Teoh” from an address in Malaysia. This parcel was addressed to a person named “Zhao Jo” at an address in Sham Shui Po. Upon inspection, this parcel was found to contain two sets of toy cars in which white powder was concealed. Again, upon examination by way of rapid drug tests, the white powder tested positive for heroin.
Each of these two parcels were reinstated in its original form and seized by Customs in preparation for a controlled delivery operation. The controlled delivery operation in respect of the second parcel was eventually aborted as the address in Sham Shui Po could not be located. However, the Customs continued with the controlled delivery operation in respect of the first parcel.
Then, on 15 January 2022, a notification card was placed for the collection of the first parcel in the mailbox of the consignee address of the first parcel. Four days later, on 19 January 2022, a female known as Choi Ching-yi, who was 16 at the time, turned up at Shun Lee Post Office and presented the notification card to a postal officer. She was asked by the postal officer to return on the next day when the first parcel would be ready for collection.
The next day, on 20 January 2022, a team of Customs officers attended the post office with the first parcel for a controlled delivery operation. At about 2.19 in the afternoon on the same day, the girl, Choi, arrived at the post office, presented the notification card, and asked to collect the first parcel. The Customs officer, disguised as a postal officer, met the girl at the counter.
When enquired by the Customs officer, the girl said that she was “Angel Choi”, the name of the consignee on the first parcel, and that she would like to collect the parcel. The girl also produced her ID card for inspection and signed an acknowledgement receipt. The girl, then, collected the parcel and left the post office with the parcel.
Other Customs officer went out of the post office to monitor the movement of the girl. After she had left the post office, she walked towards the direction of Shun King Street and when she reached the junction of Shun King Street and Lee On Road, defendant, who had been waiting on the opposite of the road, waved at her. Defendant also signalled to her to board a taxi which was already parked there. As they were about to board a taxi, Customs officers went forward and intercepted them.
At about 2.24 in the afternoon on the same day, defendant and the girl were respectively arrested by Customs and Excise officers. When cautioned at the time of the arrest, defendant claimed that he did not know the girl and he was only there to get a taxi. On the other hand, the girl stated that she helped the defendant to collect the parcel for a reward and she was told by the defendant that the parcel contained some items of clothing. Officers also seized the mobile phone of the girl and also two mobile phones from the defendant for investigation.
At about 3.38 in the afternoon on the same day, defendant was taken back to his residence in Tsing Yi for a house search. In his presence, the Customs and Excise officers searched the room and found a photocopy of the girl’s, Angel Choi’s, ID card, which was written with the consignee address which is the same as the one on the parcel. Customs and Excise officers also seized four other mobile phones from the defendant’s flat.
Upon examination of the mobile phone seized from the girl, records of communications between the defendant and the girl via an instant message app known as ‘Signal’ was found. In particular, there are the following messages:
(i) On 9 December 2021, the girl sent a message to the defendant stating her residential address, namely, the address found on the first parcel;
(ii) On 18 January 2022, the girl sent an image of the notification card to the defendant; and
(iii) Finally, the next day, on 19 January 2022, defendant sent a message to the girl asking her to contact him.
Upon examination of the mobile phones seized from you, an image file, which was created in November 2021, depicting packets of suspected dangerous drugs was found in one of your phones. Records of ‘WhatsApp’ communications between the defendant and a person known as ‘Xx Man’ concerning the recruitment of youngsters to collect drug-laden parcels were found from a mobile phone seized from you. In particular, the messages:
(i) On 8 December 2021, Xx Man messaged defendant that Xx Man could introduce people to the defendant to take up the job of collecting parcels. Xx Man also asked the defendant when the job was to start, and defendant replied that the job would be arranged by his boss. Defendant offered a reward of HK$20,000 for collecting each parcel of 1,000 grammes. Defendant asked Xx Man to find more people for him.
(ii) On 8 and 9 December 2021, Xx Man sent messages to the defendant providing the phone number and address of Choi, the girl, and asking defendant to contact the girl direct. Defendant was told by Xx Man that Choi was only aged 16; and
(iii) Finally, on 20 December 2021, Xx Man sent an image of the Hong Kong ID Card of one Zhao Zhixin, aged 19 at the time, and the phone number of Zhao to the defendant. Defendant was told by Xx Man that Zhao was 18 years of age.
There were records of communications between the defendant and Zhao via the ‘Signal’ app. They were retrieved from a mobile phone seized from you. In particular, these messages are as follows:
(i) On 29 December 2021, defendant sent a message to Zhao asking Zhao to confirm her address. Zhao then sent a message to defendant stating her address in English, namely, the consignee address on the second parcel;
(ii) On 8 January 2022, defendant sent a message to Zhao repeating the address on the second parcel and the name “Zhao Jo” being the name of the consignee on the second parcel;
(iii) On 14 January 2022, defendant sent a message to Zhao reminding her to be prepared as the parcel would be ready for collection in a few days.
Later, you were interviewed by Customs and Excise under caution. Defendant denied that he was the user of the ‘Signal’ account found on his mobile phone. As regards the copy of Choi’s ID card found at this residence, he claimed that it was given to him by someone else.
Upon examination by the Government Chemist, Parcel 1 was found to contain 1,752 grammes of a mixture containing 1,460 grammes of heroin hydrochloride. The second parcel was found to contain 1,753 grammes of a mixture containing 1,468 grammes of heroin hydrochloride.
The total street value of the dangerous drugs as of January 2022 is estimated at over HK$3.8 million.
Defendant now accepts and admits that, between 1 November 2021 and 20 January 2022, both dates inclusive, defendant conspired together with Xx Man and other person or persons unknown to unlawfully traffic in a dangerous drug, namely, heroin, by recruiting youngsters to collect drug-laden parcels sent from overseas on their behalf. And pursuant to the conspiracy, Parcel 1 containing 1,460 grammes of heroin hydrochloride and Parcel 2 containing 1,468 grammes of heroin hydrochloride were respectively arranged to be sent from Malaysia to Choi and Zhao as the named consignees.
Defendant also admitted, on 20 January 2022, he attempted to unlawfully traffic in the 1,460 grammes of heroin hydrochloride contained in the first parcel, which was collected by the girl, Choi, during the controlled delivery operation.
Defendant is now aged 45. He is single. It is claimed that he worked in construction field and earned 15,000 per month prior to the arrest. It is claimed on his behalf that as a result of bad influence from peers and economy downturn causing him into committing the offences for earning some quick money. It was also claimed by him that he would only receive 5,000 for his involvement in the 1st count.
He has a long list of previous convictions starting from May 1993 when you were only 14 years of age. You started to run into trouble with the law. You committed theft from a vehicle on that occasion. Last conviction is in March 2016, which is trafficking in dangerous drugs and possession of dangerous drugs. In these 23 years, you were convicted of various offences on 13 occasions. You have nine previous convictions relating to dangerous drugs, and of these nine, four are for trafficking in dangerous drugs. You were sentenced to a total of 8 years in the High Court for the first two trafficking in dangerous drugs offences. For your third trafficking in dangerous drugs convictions, you were sentenced in the District Court to a term of imprisonment for 4 years and 6 months. And finally, the last conviction in March 2016, you were also sentenced in the District Court to a term of imprisonment for 42 months.
No doubt it seems to me you are making your living by way of trafficking in dangerous drugs rather than working in construction field. With your record, I have no hesitation in rejecting that you were under the influence of bad peers nor you were under any pressure financially in committing these two offences which you have pleaded guilty to.
For the 1st count, the drugs involved is 1,460 grammes of heroin. According to the sentencing guideline, you fall into the range of sentence between 23 to 26 years. In the recent Court of Appeal decision in HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho, the Court of Appeal had given guidelines, inter alia, in assessing the role and culpability of a defendant in accordance with step two in Yusuph.
You are not a mere courier, which is at the bottom end of the scale of culpability because you have adopted some managerial function. Not only you recruited other people in this evil trade, worse still you knowingly recruited a minor. You contacted a minor, recruited and arranged to meet her after picking up the drug-laden parcel. You joined her after collection with a taxi standby. You have obtained the ID card and copy of the address of the minor and you must have supplied the address and the name to facilitate the importation of the drug parcel into Hong Kong.
Knowingly importing drugs into Hong Kong is another matter which I need to consider in assessing your role and culpability. Although there is no evidence to establish that you are the big boss behind this operation, you are not very far away from him as you contacted Xx Man to recruit a courier and offered monetary reward to the person recruited and you asked Xx Man to recruit as many as he can.
The court needs to send a clear message to deter drug traffickers from using minors in this evil trade. The Court of Appeal in Yusuph has said in identifying where in the relevant band a defendant came:
“It might be necessary to go outside the band, whether above or below, given the circumstances of the offence and role of the defendant.”
I, having considered your role and culpability in the 1st count, adopt an initial starting point of 26 years. There is an aggravating factor in your case, ie, your record. As I have said before, I do not accept you were lured into trafficking in dangerous drugs because of bad peer influence. You had made your living by trafficking in dangerous drugs. You had not learned any lesson from your previous experience with the court. The stiff sentences for drug trafficking offences previously imposed on you did not deter you from committing this evil offence. You deserve no mercy from the court.
I also reject your claim of receiving only 5,000 as the monetary reward you offered to the minor is one of HK$20,000. A clear message needs to be sent out to deter not only you but also others who are minded to get into this evil trade. I enhance the starting point of 26 years by 2 years. So the final starting point is one of 28 years. I can see no mitigating factor in your case except your plea. I give a one-third discount for that.
Hence, for the 1st count, you are sentenced to a term of imprisonment for 18 years and 8 months.
As to the 2nd count, the Court of Appeal in HKSAR v Tsang Ka Wing said where a conspiracy to traffic in an unspecified quantity of dangerous drugs was concerned, the sentencing court must do its best to arrive at a starting point based on inferences and assumptions properly derived from the facts.
From the facts admitted by you, it is clear that you, together with others, arranged for parcels containing heroin to be sent to Hong Kong on consecutive days. The total quantity of heroin in these two parcels are 2,928 grammes. For this quantity of heroin, it falls within the same sentencing range of 23 to 26 years. The conspiracy lasted for about 3 months. It involved importation of drugs into Hong Kong and the parcels arrived in Hong Kong on two consecutive days.
At least five persons are involved in the conspiracy. In this conspiracy, you recruited young persons to help you to collect the drug-laden parcels. Although you were provided with two young persons, one is a minor at the end of the day, but you asked the middleman, Xx Man, to find you more. This is more serious than the 1st count. For those reasons, I adopt an initial starting point of 27 years. For the same reason, in view of your record, I enhance the initial starting point by 2 years. So the final starting point I have adopted is one of 29 years. Again, there is no mitigating factor except your plea. So the sentence on the 2nd count comes down to 19 years and 4 months.
In view of the fact that the 1st count is a partly execution of the conspiracy in the 2nd count, also I have to stand back to make sure the sentence I pass on you is a fair, just and balanced sentence in all the circumstances of the offence and your background, I come to the conclusion that the sentences on both counts should run concurrently.
You are therefore sent to a term of imprisonment for 19 years and 4 months for both offences.