CRIMINAL CASE NO. 113 OF 2010
COURT: This accused pleaded guilty at committal on 1 April 2010 to one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs.
The drug was 806.25 grammes of a powder containing 234.90 grammes of Ketamine.
Today the defendant confirmed that plea and also the facts that he admitted at committal. Those facts showed that the defendant was intercepted by police as he left his family home. He was found to have in his possession suspected dangerous drugs contained in a black plastic bag that he was carrying.
He was arrested and cautioned, and said that the stuff was not his, but he was keeping it for someone; he said that he was not going to sell it himself. The flat was searched, but no contraband was found there.
Later, in a cautioned Video Interview, the defendant admitted that he was storing the dangerous drugs for a man known to him as “Ah Nam”. He had done so for two days, on the basis that he would be paid HK$2,000. He claimed he had been on the way to deliver the drugs to “Ah Nam” at the time he was stopped by police.
Subsequent analysis by the Government Chemist confirmed the quantity and type of the drugs as set out in the charge. Their estimated street value at the date of the arrest was $96,750.
The defendant has a clear record. His Antecedents Statement and his counsel in mitigation reveal that he is now aged 21 years. He was born in Hong Kong and educated to Form 3 level here. He lived with his parents, both of whom are in employment. He had one older and one younger brother living with him at the house premises. He had worked at various jobs. The job immediately prior to his arrest was that of a bartender. He had also worked as a waiter and a transportation worker.
Unfortunately, the bar he was working at in Tsim Sha Tsui closed down about two months before the date of his arrest. He was supported by his parents during that period. He was in arrears with his credit card bill and he made the acquaintance of “Ah Nam”, whom he had met some years before in his school days. When he told “Ah Nam” of his financial difficulties, “Ah Nam” suggested that he store the drug for him for a payment of HK$2,000.
He knew that the drug was Ketamine, and through his counsel he told the court that he was handed the drug two days before and told to deliver it to “Ah Nam” at 5.30 pm on the day of the arrest.
In mitigation, counsel pointed out, quite rightly, that the major mitigation was his plea of guilty. Counsel also pointed out the minor degree of involvement and that the facts indicated that the defendant was acting as a storeman and courier. The drug was packed in one bag. It was not in small packages for immediate retail purposes.
The quantity of narcotic in this case is 234.90 grammes, which, under the present guidelines for Ketamine, comes into the range of 50 to 300 grammes, which calls for a 6 to 9 years sentence of imprisonment.
Mr Chong, for the defendant, has referred me to the case of Secretary for Justice V Hii Siew-Cheng & Anor [2008] 3 HKC 325 HKSAR v Chong Heung Sang CACC221/2009 which is of some assistance, although that case involved an importation element which is not present in this case.
Taking all matters into account, I consider that a starting point of 8 years is appropriate in this case. The defendant is given a full one-third discount for his plea, and he is sentenced to 5 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
I note that the defendant is fortunate to have supportive parents, and I would suggest that he makes the best of opportunities that he has in prison for doing trade or professional training, so that when he comes out of prison he will not have to resort to crime again.