|
HCCC294/2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 294 OF 2009
----------------------
----------------------
| Before: |
Mr Recorder L Lok, SC |
| Date: |
20 November 2009 at 9.47 am |
| Present: |
Ms Rosaline S Y Leung, SPP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Philip Chau Ka-chun, instructed by Yuen & Partners, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Accused |
| Offence: |
Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物) |
---------------------------------
Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case
---------------------------------
COURT: This case has an international dimension to it. You were arrested by Customs & Excise officers at the airport. You had joined a five-day tour to Sydney, Australia.
Found on you by the Customs & Excise officers were 10 plastic bags of dangerous drugs which were sewed on the inner side of your tight pants. Upon arrest, you made admissions to the authorities. You told them you would be rewarded with the amount of $60,000, and then, I think, further on, later in the day, a video-recorded interview was taken from you.
In it, you have made lengthy admissions to the effect that you were going to deliver the drugs to Sydney, Australia, and then, in order to avoid suspicion, you were instructed to enrol the tour with a female, but the female was not required to go to Sydney with you.
The drugs, as they have been examined by the Government Chemist, turned out to be 830.46 grammes of crystalline solid containing 810.95 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, commonly known as “Ice”.
From the facts that you admitted, this turned out to be a very expensive consignment. The street value in March of 2009 of this quantity would be in the region of $548,935.
As I said earlier on, this has an international element. As your counsel has very properly conceded, drugs offences are regarded very seriously in Hong Kong, and they carry very heavy sentences.
Practically, the Court of Appeal has been saying saving some plea of guilty, nothing else would really matter by way of mitigation. As you may have gathered during the course of the dialogue between the Bench and the Bar, I do not intend to take into consideration your previous convictions, since none of them are drugs related.
I know I am told this morning you are recently married, but then again, that in itself is not a mitigating factor. You are obviously in financial difficulty, which prompted you to join this unlawful enterprise.
I do take into account the very fact that you have made admissions right on the spot, and later on, very lengthy admissions were made by you in the course of the video‑recorded interview.
On the authorities, I refer to the case that has been referred to by your learned counsel, a case called Ching Kwok Hung. It was said there between the quantity of 300 to 600 grammes bracket, a sentence of 14 to 18 years would be appropriate. Here, the quantity of drugs far exceeds 600 grammes. We are talking about 810 grammes here.
But in the light of the matters that I have referred to - your co‑operation, basically - I am of the view that had you been found guilty by a jury after trial, a starting point of 19 years would be appropriate, and I adopt 19 years as a starting point.
You pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity on 18 September this year. You are therefore fully entitled to the usual discount of one-third. I will give you a one‑third discount.
Therefore, the sentence is reduced from 19 years to 12 years and 8 months.
|