HKSAR v. TSANG SIN YI

HCCC 100/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 100 OF 2014

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

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

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

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

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

COURT:

There are two related cases before this court, one is HCCC 100/2014, the other is HCCC 238/2015. The defendant in HCCC 100 is Tsang Sin-yi, she was charged with one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs. The particulars stated that on 8 August 2013, at Flat A, 13th Floor, Kwok Hong Building, 94-98 Lai Chi Kok Road, she had unlawfully trafficked in dangerous drugs. The principal amount was about 150 grammes of ‘Ice’ and there were also smaller amounts of cocaine and ketamine.

To this charge, Tsang Sin-yi pleaded guilty. She also admitted the summary of facts. What had transpired was that the police on the material day had stopped Tsang Sin yi outside the flat named in the charge. She was then taken inside and then a search was conducted on her person and the flat. Inside the backpack carried by Tsang Sin-yi, five packets of ‘Ice’ was found. The police also found many other packets of ‘Ice’ and cocaine and tablets of ‘Ice’ and ketamine inside the flat. There were also an electronic scale and empty plastic bags found and seized from the flat.

In a subsequent video interview, Tsang Sin-yi told the police that she was working for her boss “Ah Shui” to deliver drugs. Obviously, at that stage, Tsang was not prepared to disclose the extent of her involvement and the role played by Ah Shui, but Tsang Sin-yi later, undoubtedly, after consideration and legal advice, had decided to give witness statements and asked to be a prosecution witness.

Police then undertook investigation which led to the arrest, charge and prosecution of the defendant, Chu Shun-hang (that is Ah Shui) in the case of HCCC 238/2015. In that case, Chu Shun-hang was charged with one count of conspiracy in trafficking of drugs. The particulars stated that he and Tsang Sin-yi had conspired to traffic in dangerous drugs, namely, ‘Ice’, cocaine and ketamine between 1 December 2012 and 8 August 2013.

To this charge, Chu Shun-hang pleaded not guilty and the case proceeded to trial. In that trial, Tsang Sin-yi was called to testify against the defendant. The defendant had also elected to give evidence telling the jury that he had nothing to do with any trafficking of drugs with Tsang in connection with any premises. He said he was just a drug user.

The jury returned a verdict of guilty on the charge. The sentencing was first scheduled on 18 July, but it had to be postponed to today due to Chu’s hospitalisation on that morning.

Mr Lau, counsel for Tsang Sin-yi, had helpfully prepared a written submission for the mitigation. He had given the personal background of Tsang and there was a letter written by Tsang asking for the court’s leniency. I read the relevant documents already.

Mr Lau had also dealt with the issue of assessment of the starting point. He analysed the different approaches, and I believe it would be fair to adopt the so-called combined approach. First, I accept that according to the authority, especially Tam Yi Chun CACC 524/2011, this amount of drugs would fall into the category of 11 to 15 years.

In this particular case, I am prepared to adopt 12 years, which is already at the lower end of the this bracket, and to reflect the presence of other kinds of drugs, I would enhance the starting point by 1 year. Therefore, the starting point for the trafficking charge in HCCC 100/2014, against Tsang Sin-yi, would be 13 years.

I accept that Tsang had pleaded guilty, given statements and testified in court. I believe she had tried her best to testify according to what she could recollect about the event. The reduction of sentence should be around 50 per cent.

Further, however, in my view, it would take serious courage to stand up to expose and testify against someone like the defendant who was the operator behind the scene. In the circumstances, I would reduce her sentence to 6 years and 2 months, that is really more than a 50 per cent discount.