HKSAR v. WU SHIU CHEUNG, PETER

HCCC 270/2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 270 OF 2017

-----------------

-----------------

---------------------------------------------

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

---------------------------------------------

COURT:

You must have been well aware of the risks you took when you engaged in trafficking in dangerous drugs. And as you are an “Ice” addict yourself, you must be very well aware of the dangers that “Ice”, and in fact, all dangerous drugs present to society.

I have heard about your family circumstances. I am told that your wife has a heart condition, and obviously, I have sympathy with both your wife and yourself because of that. But quite frankly, that cannot be considered to be a mitigating factor.

You have a criminal record which includes two previous convictions for trafficking in dangerous drugs. So I certainly cannot regard you as a first-time offender. Then again, I am not going to increase your sentence just because of your criminal record.

Your most powerful mitigation is your very early plea of guilty to the two offences you face. You entered them, before the magistrate, when first called upon to enter a plea. And that indicates realism on your part, and realism is an indication of remorse. And I also accept that ever since your arrest, you have been co-operative with the police and that throughout the investigation, you never sought to deny your guilt.

From what your counsel Mr Wong has told me, I know that he has informed you that there are clear guidelines set out for all judges by the Court of Appeal, as to how we should sentence those people who choose to traffic in “Ice”. Mr Wong will have told you that we are expected to stick to those guidelines, unless there are exceptional reasons for us not to do so and there are no exceptional reasons in your case.

You faced and you pleaded guilty to two separate counts of trafficking in “Ice”. One relating to the amount -- quantity of “Ice” found on you in the street, when you were stopped, and the second relating to the larger quantity of “Ice” found possibly a quarter of an hour later or so in your home.

It is well-established that when judges come to sentence “Ice” traffickers, that the sentence should be based on the total active weight of the drugs involved, and in your case, that is 864 grammes of active content of “Ice”, in a mixture which weighed 902 grammes.

It is also well-established that where, as in your case, the total quantity was found in two places, the same sentence should be passed in respect of each charge, and that the judge should order that the sentences run concurrently – at the same time.

I have to tell you, Wu Shiu-cheung, that had you not been realistic and had you not been co-operative, and had you fought this case, and had you pleaded not guilty, and had the jury convicted you, then you would have been looking at a sentence of 21 years’ imprisonment in respect of each charge.

Because of your realism, because of your co-operation, I can reduce that sentence very considerably, in fact, by as much as one-third, and that is what I am going to do.

For each of your two offences, you are sentenced to 14 years’ imprisonment. Those sentences of imprisonment will run concurrently, which means at the same time.

So that means for your two offences, you are going to be imprisoned for 14 years.