|
DCCC 639/2013
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO 639 OF 2013
----------------------
----------------------
| Date: |
20 August 2013 at 10.15 am |
| Present: |
Ms Clara Ma, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR |
| |
Mr Charles Chu, of Charles Chu & Kenneth Sit, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant |
| Offence: |
Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物) |
---------------------
Reasons for Sentence
---------------------
1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in 93.35 grammes of ketamine.
2. The facts are that on the early afternoon of 11 April 2013, police officers saw the defendant at the junction of Pei Ho Street and Fuk Wing Street in Sham Shui Po and he was behaving furtively. He was holding a brown paper bag and the officers who approached him had asked to inspect the bag.
3. The defendant turned and tried to escape but was detained by the officers and inside the bag they found the drugs the subject of the charge.
4. The defendant immediately admitted that he had been given these drugs to deliver to another person and was to receive $300.
5. At the time of his arrest, the defendant was in possession of $412 and two mobile phones.
6. In a video recorded interview he told the police that earlier on in Sham Shui Po he had met a man who asked him if he wanted to make some money. He was to deliver drugs to a person at an MTR station and the male gave him a mobile phone for contact purpose.
7. The drugs were valued at $14,726.
8. The defendant has appeared before the courts previously. In 2007 he appeared before the court on two occasions of theft and was given probation. He appeared before the court the following year and was given a further period of probation.
9. He failed to comply with the conditions of the probation orders imposed upon him and in 2009 it was ordered that he go to a reformatory school and the probation order should be discharged.
10. In respect of those offences, I note that he was very young at the time those offences were committed and he has managed to stay out of trouble since 2009.
11. The defendant is 18 years of age. He was born in Hong Kong and educated to Form 1 standard. He lives with his father and stepmother and they have a 2-year-old son. I am told that his natural mother deserted the family home when the defendant was only 10 years of age and, not surprisingly, this had a very negative effect on the defendant’s upbringing. I am told that his father works as a decoration worker and his stepmother is a housewife.
12. Until January of 2013, the defendant was working as a kitchen apprentice, earning $9,000 per month. I am told that he gave that job up because he could not get on with his co-employees. When he was working, he contributed $2,000 a month to the family finances.
13. I have had presented to me a letter written by the defendant. He says that since April of this year he has been residing at Pik Uk and has had time in those four months to reflect on his situation. He says that he feels guilty for his involvement in this offence and admits that it was because of his own greed that he agreed to go along with what was asked of him and he did not think about the consequences of his actions.
14. He says he is very sorry for having committed the offence and whilst he has been in custody he has realised that he has to change his attitude. He said that before his time in custody he used to blame everybody else for his problems but now realises that he has to sort these issues out himself; it is nobody else’s problem.
15. The defendant realises that he is going to be in prison for some time and he is determined to use the time constructively to pursue certain educational goals and he requests leniency.
16. As counsel for the defendant has acknowledged and as the defendant obviously now knows that the sentences for trafficking in ketamine are severe. The abuse of ketamine in Hong Kong is rampant and it causes huge problems to those who abuse it and it is for that reason that the Court of Appeal have said that significant deterrent sentences must be imposed where people are found trafficking in large amounts.
17. The quantity in this case is 93.35 grammes. The Court of Appeal have said that for those trafficking in between 50 and 300 grammes of ketamine, the starting point should be 6 years and that extends up to 9 years’ imprisonment.
18. Having considered all the circumstances and, in particular, having taken into account the age of the defendant, I have decided to impose a sentence with a starting point at the lowest end of that sentencing band.
19. The starting point will be 6 years’ imprisonment.
20. The defendant will be given credit for his guilty plea, so that sentence will be reduced to 4 years’ imprisonment.
|