HKSAR v. POON WAI-CHI

DCCC128/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONGSPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 128 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant has pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely 26.74 grammes of a powder container 22.69 grammes of ketamine. Though the facts are all too normal in this case, is that on the evening of 21 December 2009 at about 9.51 pm, the defendant was seen acting suspiciously outside an apartment block in Shau Kei Wan. She was intercepted and inside her handbag was found the drugs in the present case, an electronic scale and a number of empty, transparent resealable plastic bags. Under caution the defendant admitted that the ketamine was to be delivered to someone for a reward and that the electronic scale was for her own use.

2.  When she was subsequently video-recorded, in the video-recorded interview she admitted that her friend, someone called Man Chai, asked her to deliver the ketamine to a customer at that housing block for a reward of $200 and she was asked to weigh the ketamine in front of the customer by using the electronic scale and she claimed that she needed to money to help her boyfriend settle his gambling debt. She said she was not a drug addict.

3.  The defendant has a clear record and is aged 25. She, I am told by Ms Lee in mitigation, was obsessed with her boyfriend and therefore was helping out her boyfriend pay off his gambling debt. Ms Lee also submitted various letters from family members testifying to the fact that they loved and supported the defendant and that the defendant had all along been a good person until she fell in with some questionable company.

4.  Whatever it is as to the background of the defendant, it has been said time and again by the courts in Hong Kong that sentences for drug trafficking have to be deterrent. This is because drugs are the downfall of many young people in Hong Kong, particularly ketamine, and there is a unfortunate marked increase in use of ketamine by the young people in Hong Kong. Painful as it is for the defendant’s family, it is even more painful for the families of teenage drug users who easily come into possession of ketamine and the defendant is part of that process. Therefore, the Court of Appeal has laid down guidelines for trafficking in ketamine in the case, as is rightly pointed out by Ms Lee, in the case of Hii Siew Cheng HCCC121/2005 the Court of Appeal has said that for trafficking in between 10 to 50 grammes of ketamine, a sentence of 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment is recommended.

5.  In this case there is nothing unusual about the defendant’s background or anything unusual about this case that calls for any special method of dealing with the defendant. The amount in this case is 22.69 grammes of ketamine, so it would fall into the 4½ to 5 years bracket as a starting point. In view of the defendant’s clear record, I will adopt the lower of that range and adopt a starting point of 4½ years’ imprisonment. With one-third off for her plea, the defendant is therefore sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment.