HKSAR v. LAU PUI YAN

HCCC 254/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 254 OF 2014

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

---------------------------------
Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case
---------------------------------

COURT: The defendant has been convicted on her own plea on one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug. The Particulars of Offence provide that the defendant, on 17 February 2014, outside Ning Wah House, Lok Wah North Estate, Ngau Tau Kok, Kowloon, Hong Kong, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 124.94 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 112.46 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, commonly known as the “Ice” drug.

The Summary of Facts admitted by the defendant provides that at around 22:15 hours on 17 February 2014, outside Ning Wah House, police officers intercepted the defendant.

Upon search of the handbag the defendant was carrying, the police found six packets of a suspected dangerous drug which were subsequently certified to be a total of 124.94 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 112.46 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride. The police also seized from the defendant one mobile phone and HK$960.90 cash.

The defendant was arrested. Under caution, she said, “Ah Sir, I had no money, so (I) towed (them) for someone for 1,000 dollars”.

Later, in a video-recorded interview, the defendant stated, inter alia, the following under caution:

(1) The substance found on her was “Ice”.

(2) At around 19:15 hours on 17 February 2014, a person named “Ah B” called her and asked her to go get an orange plastic bag from the bushes outside Tat Fung House at 20:00 hours and then bring it to “Leung Jai” later. She was promised HK$1,000 as remuneration.

(3) She was arrested by the police before she could find “Leung Jai”.

The street value as in February 2014 of all the dangerous drugsseized was HK$55,848.

By way of personal background, the defendant was born in Hong Kong in 1983. She is 31 years of age. She received education up to Secondary Form 5 level in Hong Kong. She was unemployed at the time of arrest. She had previously worked as a sales lady and a beer promoter. The defendant had been living with her mother, younger brother, younger sister and her son before her arrest.

The defendant has a total of three previous convictions, all of which were for the possession of dangerous drug.

By way of mitigation, Mr Phillip Ross submitted on behalf of the defendant, inter alia, that she is a single parent of a son born in March 2012. Unfortunately, the son was born with a mild hearing impairment. The defendant was unemployed at the time of the offence. As revealed in the Summary of Facts, she was promised a sum of $1,000 as remuneration for handling the drugs in question. She needed the money to buy provisions for her son and to pay his school fees. Mr Phillip Ross urged me to give her a one-third discount from the starting point for sentence, having regard to her personal circumstances and her guilty plea.

The defendant has been convicted on her own plea on one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug. The drug involved is 124.94 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 112.46 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, commonly known as “Ice”.

The Court of Appeal, in the case of Attorney General v Ching Kwok Hung [1991] 2 HKLR 125, has set out the tariffs for trafficking in the “Ice” drug. For trafficking in between 70 and 300 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, the proper sentence to be imposed after trial should be 10 to 14 years’ imprisonment.

In my view, following the guidelines in the Ching Kwok Hung case and based on the quantity of the narcotic involved, the proper starting point for sentence in the present case should be 10 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.

I shall give the defendant a full one-third discount for her guilty plea. Further, there are special circumstances on the papers which justify a lenient view to be taken of the facts. As a result, I shall give the defendant a total discount of 50% from the starting point of 10 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.

Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to 5 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.