On 28 September 2018, a suitcase containing a transformer was transported from Shenzhen to Hong Kong on board of a van. Inside the transformer, 5.68 kilogrammes of cocaine was concealed. The suitcase was intercepted by customs officers at the Lok Ma Chau Control Point. The passenger, namely, the 1st defendant (D1) who was in possession of the suitcase, was arrested.
A controlled delivery operation was mounted by the Customs. D1, under the supervision of customs officers, took the suitcase to Holiday Inn Golden Mile Hotel, Tsim Sha Tsui. Shortly after midnight, the 2nd defendant checked into the hotel and went to D1’s room to collect the suitcase which by then had been replaced by Customs with sandbags.
D1 then took the suitcase to D2’s room. Shortly after D2 took possession of the suitcase, customs officers went in and, as a result, D2 was arrested. Inside her hotel room, customs officers, in addition, also found 5.68 grammes of herbal cannabis. D2 was also charged with its possession which she had pleaded guilty in the Magistrate Court much earlier.
D2 is 43, a Russian national, claims to be running a clothing shop and trading business prior to her arrival in Hong Kong. She has a clear record.
Although she was charged for the conspiracy offence, in reality, the substantive offence had been committed. As such, she would be sentenced on that basis.
The guideline for trafficking in 4 to 15 kilogrammes of cocaine is one of 26 to 30 years’ imprisonment. Based on the quantity, the starting point would be around 26 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.
On the last occasion, I adjourned the case for my consideration if the issue of international element is applicable or might be applicable in the present case. Having considered submission from both parties, well, from Mr Davies essentially, I am of the view that since D2 was not charged together with D1 in the first count, by implication, the prosecution’s case was confined to her subsequent collection only. International element therefore should not come into play in D2’s case.
D2, after her arrest, participated in one controlled delivery operation. As a result of her cooperation, another Nigerian male was apprehended. Although this Nigerian male was found not guilty after the first trial, that, in my view, should not disentitle D2 from a discount for providing assistance to law enforcement agency.
Having said that, her assistance, however, in my view, did not yield any significant or fruitful result for the prosecution or for the law enforcement agency. For that she will be given a discount of 4 months. A further 2 months will be given to her for her participation in Father Wotherspoon’s anti-narcotic programme.
For the offence of conspiracy to traffic in a dangerous drug, the defendant will be sentenced to 26 years’ imprisonment.
Insofar as the possession of the herbal cannabis charge is concerned, the amount of herbal cannabis is small and no doubt for her own consumption. A 2 days’ imprisonment term, that is, adopting a starting point of 3-day, will be imposed, which will run concurrently with the 26 years’ imprisonment imposed above.
In conclusion, for the two offences that the 2nd defendant stands convicted, she is sentenced to 26 years’ imprisonment.