COURT: This defendant pleaded guilty at committal on 28 March 2013 to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug. The dangerous drug was 0.49 kilogrammes of a powder containing 0.39 kilogrammes of ketamine.
Today the defendant confirmed his plea before the court and also confirmed the facts that he admitted at committal. Those facts showed that police officers were on duty at the footbridge between the car park of a shopping arcade in the Tsui Lam Estate. They saw the defendant approaching from the direction of the estate. He was carrying a white plastic bag. They stopped him and searched the bag in which they found a yellow document envelope which the defendant told them was a company document. The package was examined, it appeared to contain tea, but when one of the two foil packets inside it was opened, they found it contained suspected dangerous drugs.
The defendant was arrested and cautioned and said:
“The stuff’s got nothing to do with me. I just took it to the rubbish bin at the podium outside On Lam House from the sports stadium at Tsui Lam Estate for people.”
The defendant was cautioned and asked what he meant by the stuff having nothing to do with him. He replied:
“This white plastic bag and the stuff in the paper bag are not mine. At about 7.30 earlier on, somebody called me and told me to give a hand by getting the white plastic bag and the paper bag from the floor behind the toilet bowl in the first cubicle of the men’s toilet at the sports stadium of Tsui Lam Estate.”
He continued to say that he was to take the packet to the podium outside On Lam House and drop it into the first rubbish bin. He said that he was told that the envelope contained documents and he said that he did not know drugs were inside. The defendant was arrested and, after further caution, repeated his claim earlier that he thought the contents were company documents.
Analysis by the Government Chemist confirmed the nature and quantity of the drugs as set out in the particulars of the charge. The seized drugs had an estimated retail value of $58,310.
Later, in a video-recorded interview, the defendant said that he had collected the white plastic bag from the first booth of the male toilet in the sports stadium, from under the water tank. He had done this after receiving a telephone call from a friend of his acquaintance, Ah Wai, who had called him earlier asking him to take the company documents from the toilet to a rubbish bin on the podium of On Lam House.
The defendant admitted and accepted that he was trafficking in the seized dangerous drugs.
The defendant had one brush with the law earlier for a possible offence of theft, but was dealt with by way of a Superintendent’s Discretion with caution on 6 July 2011. He has no criminal record.
His antecedents show that he was born on 9 November 1995. He was two days off his 17 birthday when he was arrested for this offence. He completed secondary education up to Form 3 level. After he left school he worked as a kitchen assistant for a time. At the time he was arrested, he was unemployed. He was living with his grandparents at Tsui Lam Estate.
In mitigation I was advised that the defendant was brought up by his grandparents from the age of five. His parents divorced when he was nine and he had extremely limited contact with them after that. He has a supportive family who came to court today. He left school at the age of 15 years. He said he was befriended when his friends wanted him to carry dangerous drugs. Eventually he became aware that he was carrying dangerous drugs for his friends. He was paid $1,000 a time and he took the money because he needed it and also because of his greed. It is quite clear that he is not a mastermind in this offence and he said that he was not aware of the nature and quantity of the drugs that he was carrying. He is not a drug addict.
Letters from the defendant were put before the court. One to the court from Defendant itself set out the background of his family and setout how he now realises that he should have treated his family more carefully. He appears to be aware of what damage he did to the family and the anxiety he caused his parents and grandparents by the offence. He is prepared to turn over a new leaf, which is to better himself by studying while he is in prison.
The letter from his grandparents set out his personal history. The grandparents consider that he is regretful for having committed such a serious offence and that he is remorseful. They seek leniency for him in terms of sentence.
The letter from a social worker, who is attached to the Hong Kong Federation of Youth Groups, says their outreach branch had contact with him from August 2011 up until the time of his arrest. Although he was considered to have behavioural problems due to the influence of bad peers, after counselling he was considered to have improved in his behaviour and his attitude. The social worker believes that the Defendant is aware of what he has done and that he is making efforts to rebuild his relationship with his family. Again, a request for leniency is made.
A letter from his younger sister also seeks leniency. Letters from the parents not only seek leniency, but point out that they realise that they themselves are at fault, in part, in terms of this offence and possibly the only good thing that was come out of this particular offence is that the family realises that they need to be more supportive of their son and that this offence has led the family to be more cohesive.
The guidelines for trafficking sentencing in this quantity of ketamine, refer to a sentence of between 9 and 12 years imprisonment. In this case, taking into account the defendant’s age, his record, the parental support, his early admission, I take a starting point of 9 years and give him the full discount of one-third. That makes a sentence of 6 years imprisonment.
It is to be hoped that the defendant continues to improve himself while he is in prison, in particular by finishing his education.