CRIMINAL CASE NO. 421 OF 2009
COURT: The defendant is convicted of one count of Trafficking in dangerous drugs involving 1,016.01 grammes of a mixture containing 420.39 grammes of heroin hydrochloride and 250.66 of monoacetylmorphine hydrochloride.
At about 1 pm on 22 July last year the defendant was intercepted by a Customs officer while entering Hong Kong through the airport. She was searched. Subsequently a Customs officer found 10 dresses in her suitcase. There were about 40 buttons sewn on each dress. Each button contained some dangerous drug wrapped in a plastic bag and a piece of tin foil. There were, in total, 671.05 grammes of heroin hydrochloride and monoacetylmorphine hydrochloride. The market price for this quantity of drug was about $670,000 as of July 2009.
The defendant is 58 years old. She has a clear record in Hong Kong. She is married with a grandson. She initially gave birth to five children, unfortunately only a daughter is now surviving. She has five grandsons which need her financial support. The defendant stopped schooling after form 2 due to financial problems. However, she took up various kinds of jobs and managed to finish form 4 by private study. She is not an addict.
The defendant claims that her daughter needs kidney transplant. She maintains her innocence claiming that it was Mark who used her to take dangerous drugs to Hong Kong. There is no remorse in her.
I notice that there was another drug, monoacetylmorphine hydrochloride present in the mixture. According to the admitted facts, both heroin hydrochloride and monoacetylmorphine hydrochloride are dangerous drugs with similar potency. Given this information I would add the weight of the two drugs together for the purpose of sentencing.
The sentencing tariff in HKSAR v Lau Tak Ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370 and HKSAR v Abdallah [2009] 2 HKLRD 437 are applicable. For the quantity of heroin hydrochloride and monoacetylmorphine hydrochloride in this case the sentence should be 20 to 23 years’ imprisonment.
I bear in mind that there is also an international element in the present case as the dangerous drugs were taken from New Delhi via Singapore to Hong Kong. The starting point should be enhanced to reflect this aggravating factor.
Having considered the amount of heroin hydrochloride and monoacetylmorphine hydrochloride, her background and the mitigation by defence counsel I take 20 years and 4 months as the starting point. I add 6 months to reflect the international element in this case.
I have considered the mitigation thoroughly by counsel and there is no strong mitigating circumstances. Sufferings of family members are not a valid reason to reduce the sentence.
I now sentence the defendant to 20 years and 10 months' imprisonment.