CRIMINAL CASE NO. 193 OF 2010
COURT: You have done everything in your power to wriggle out of these charges, both of which are for trafficking in ketamine. You did this because you have known all along the serious consequences in Hong Kong for those caught dealing in ketamine.
You tried to avoid the consequences by inventing an alibi in regard to Count 2, by getting two members of your family to come here with a false story about how you were at home with them when, in reality, you were collecting ketamine from a remote village in the New Territories.
Added to that, you made up a story, putting the blame on your young follower, Lai Ming-hing, who in fact you led into drug trafficking. Although he was only 15 years and 3 months old, you asked him to store your drugs for you. You also, on Count 1, made up false allegations against the police. All of those matters are clear from the verdicts from the jury.
I hasten to add that your concocted defence on both these charges does not add to your sentence, but it does mean that any credit you would have received if you had owned up is lost altogether. You receive no credit.
You have had your chances to reform already in your life, having twice been sent to the Drug Addiction Treatment Centre but you failed to heed the warning. It seems that you were arrested on no less than three occasions in the last three years, each time for the possession of dangerous drugs. You were dealt with in October 2008 for two separate offences. Then you were arrested for this offence on 3 December 2009. You got bail but you breached it by committing another offence of possession of drugs and, on 27 May last year, you were sent for the second time to a Drug Addiction Treatment Centre.
The evidence in this case reveals that you are a regular at karaoke bars. On 3 December, you had with you, for supply, no less than 16 packets of ketamine when you visited the Neway Karaoke in Kwai Chung. Every parent of teenage children dreads suppliers like you because it is people like you who mess up their children’s lives. You turn them into drug addicts just like you. You were feeding your habit by selling the drugs.
You are well aware of the penalties for trafficking in ketamine. They are intended as a deterrent but it is clear that it had no effect on you whatever. The guidelines issued by the Court of Appeal in Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD at page 1, was a judgment on 6 June 2008, well before your offence. In that judgment, the penalties are spelled out in clear terms. Sentence is determined by the weight of the drugs being trafficked.
The combined weight of the ketamine in this case, for both charges, is 244.05 grammes. As Mr Fung rightly pointed out, the guideline sentence for between 50 and 300 grammes is 6 to 9 years’ imprisonment. As the weight in this case is at the top end of that sentencing band, I consider that a sentence of 8½ years in total is appropriate.
Each count requires a separate sentence appropriate to the quantity of ketamine in each so that, on Count 1, where the weight of ketamine was 78.17 grammes, the sentence will be 6 years’ imprisonment and, on Count 2, involving 165.88 grammes of ketamine, the sentence will be 7½ years’ imprisonment, but of that last sentence, I shall order that only 2½ years of the sentence will run consecutively to the sentence of 6 years on Count 1.
Yes, Mr Ngai, would you stand up, please. The sentence on you, in total, is 8½ years’ imprisonment.
Having regard to your age - and it would have been very different if you were an adult of a greater age - I have decided not to enhance that sentence. In normal circumstances, under the provisions of section 56A of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, a person receives a greatly heavier sentence for introducing a minor to drug trafficking. You can regard yourself as lucky.