HKSAR v. LAI TSZ KI AND ANOTHER

HCCC 570/2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 570 OF 2013

_______________

_______________

_______________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
_______________

1.  In the evening of 6 June 2013, the 1^st and 2^nd defendants were observed by customs officers in a vehicle with the registration number RC 9730. They went to a petrol station and parked the vehicle at one of the petrol pumps. The 2^nd defendant was the driver of the vehicle and the 1^st defendant was seated next to him in the front passenger seat. The 1^st defendant alighted from the vehicle and went to the toilet of the petrol station. As the 1^st defendant was coming out of the toilet, she was intercepted by customs officers. Upon a search of the 1^st defendant, customs officers found inside the pocket of her upper garment, one small zip lock bag containing ketamine and two folded banknotes each containing a small amount of ketamine. Upon her arrest and caution, she said that the substances were “K Chai” (ketamine) and that the drugs were hers.

2.  Upon a search of the vehicle, customs officers found inside a concealed compartment in the front of the gearstick a large transparent zip lock bag in which were two transparent zip lock bags, one containing a bundle of transparent zip lock bags and the other containing 16 transparent zip lock bags with a quantity of ketamine inside each of them, and inside the open sleeve of the driver’s door a plastic bag in which was an electronic scale.

3.  The 1^st defendant said she did not know to whom the items belonged and that her partner, the 2^nd defendant, had borrowed the vehicle from a friend.  She also said she did not know to whom the car belonged and that the drugs found on her she got from a friend for which she paid $100. 

4.  On 14 October 2014, the 1^st defendant entered a plea of guilty to Count 2 on the indictment with no plea on Count 1 which was left of the court’s file.  The prosecution advised the court that the 1^st defendant had made a non‑prejudicial statement and had indicated her preparedness to give evidence for the prosecution against the 2^nd defendant.  She had made full admissions that she and the 2^nd defendant had engaged in drug trafficking. 

5.  The 1^st defendant by the agreed summary of facts, admitted that she was involved in trafficking in the quantity of ketamine found in the vehicle together with the 2^nd defendant on the evening of 6 June 2013.  She made two statements to customs officers on 13 and 15 October 2014 in which she further explained the drug trafficking activities of her and the 2^nd defendant. She said that the vehicle RC9730 was used for trafficking and had been purchased by the 2^nd defendant in 2012 but registered in a friend’s name.  She explained that the drugs would be stored in the compartment near the gear stick and would be measured and packaged inside the vehicle using the electronic scale that was found there.  She said that the 2^nd defendant would usually buy 250 grammes of ketamine and then repackage the drugs into small packets of about 14 grammes each.  She said that they would be sold for $800 to $900 per packet.  She said that all the transactions would take place in the vehicle and that buyers would contact the 2^nd defendant by telephone, and if he was not available they would contact her as he had given her telephone numbers to them. 

6.  It is quite apparent to me that the 1^st defendant is an intelligent young woman who in the past had a bright future but seems to have been led astray.  It appears that in the course of this case she has come to realise this herself.  She has displayed genuine remorse and that is evidenced by her acknowledgment of guilt at an early opportunity and cooperation with the authorities.  The statements that she gave to the customs officers are full and frank and she has all along indicated her preparedness to give evidence for the prosecution against the 2^nd defendant.  He has now pleaded guilty but she is nevertheless deserving of a further reduction to her sentence in addition to the reduction for her plea of guilty. 

7.  I have been impressed by her change of attitude and I am of the view that she genuinely wishes to change her ways and make a better life for herself and her daughter.  She is now 23 years of age and with the 2^nd defendant has a young daughter who obviously needs parental care and attention.  In light of the submissions in mitigation, I accept she is determined to look after her daughter and stay out of trouble.  Her family have rallied behind her and have given her tremendous support.  I will bear this in mind when passing sentence. 

8.  The quantity of ketamine involved is 160.63 grammes. The sentencing regime for trafficking in ketamine is governed by guidelines laid down in S for J v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1 and the starting point for the quantity of ketamine involved is 7 years and 3 months’ imprisonment.  I am prepared to give her a 50 per cent discount which includes the one-third discount for her plea of guilty and her cooperation with the authorities and her preparedness to give evidence against the 2^nd defendant.  I have also taken into account her apparent resolve to change her ways and live a better life.  I should say that on the information before me, I have been impressed greatly by her change of attitude.  Accordingly, I sentence her to 3 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.