HKSAR v. WONG SUET YEE

DCCC1171/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO.1171 OF 2010

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

1.  The defendant faces one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs. It is alleged that she on 26^th August 2010 at Heng On Estate Bus Terminus, Ma On Shan, New Territories unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 25.94g of a powder containing 21.74g of ketamine.

2.  The defendant pleaded guilty, admitted to the summary of facts and was duly convicted.

Facts

3.  Police officers spotted the defendant together with 2 other people walking back and forth and looking around at the bus terminus. One Police officer went up to intercept them and revealed his police identity. The 3 of them fled. The defendant took a box out from her bag and threw it onto the ground. PW1 managed to intercept and stopped the defendant, while other Police officers stopped the other two.

4.  Suspected dangerous drugs were found inside the box. The defendant was arrested and cautioned. Under caution, the defendant admitted that they were ketamine and she was delivering it to someone else to earn some money. The other two people denied any knowledge of the dangerous drugs.

5.  In the subsequent interview, the defendant further admitted that she got the dangerous drugs from one Ah Yan at about 10pm that night in Tai Po. The defendant was to deliver the dangerous drugs for Ah Yan to Chung On Estate Bus Terminus at about 1am on 27^th August. A man was to receive the dangerous drugs and pay HKD3,000 to the defendant. The defendant was to return HKD2,500 to Ah Yan and keep HKD500 for herself as a reward.

6.  The defendant did not have any cash on her at the time of arrest. The estimated street value of the dangerous drugs would be about HKD2,587.

Previous

7.  The defendant was of previously good record.

Mitigation

8.  The defendant is 18, born in Hong Kong and educated up to F.5 level. The defendant has not worked before. She claims that she has been addicted to the drug “Ice” for about 2 years.

9.  She is the eldest child in the family and lives with her parents. Her father is 51 and mother 50. She has 2 younger sisters aged 14 and 16. The defendant’s father is the sole breadwinner of the family earning around $14,000 per month. Of that, $5,000 goes to paying the mortgage with not much left to be spent on the children. Since completing F.5, the defendant had enrolled herself in the YiJin program.

10.  It was submitted that the defendant frankly admitted her guilt at time of arrest and fully cooperated with Police. She pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, saving the court’s time. The defendant had reflected upon her wrongdoing and expressed deep remorse.

11.  The defendant is a teenage girl, she is not a drop out from school, she participated actively in school life, in extra-curricular activities. Parents and school can confirm that she is a good person with a kind heart. What the defendant did took them by surprise and was entirely out of character. The defendant committed the offence out of stupidity and under the influence of bad friends. It was also submitted that the only reason the defendant agreed to make the delivery was to earn some pocket money to spend.

12.  Letters by her parent three of her teachers and a social worker were submitted. They each confirms that she is a person of good character and had only committed the offence out of stupidity.

13.  3 Letters of Compliment issued to the defendant were also submitted. They show the defendant actively taking part in extra-curricular activities.

14.  The defendant said that she will not give up and planned to continue her studies after serving her sentence.

15.  I was told that the defendant had been given free “Ice” by her friends. She accepted it in order to gain acceptance among her friends.

Sentencing guidelines

16.  According to Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng (許守城) [2009] 1 HKLRD 1, CAAR7/2006, the tariff sentence for traffickers in ketamine of between 10 to 50g is 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment.

Sentence

17.  The defendant is young but her age does not fall into the extreme youth category and as such in offences as serious as trafficking the age factor will not allow this court to depart from the guideline sentence.

18.  I have heard and considered the mitigation put forward on the defendant’s behalf and find that there is nothing to cause me to consider deviating from the Court of Appeal tariff. The defendant is obviously a bright and clever girl as evidenced by the letters of compliment produced. Yet she had chosen to keep company with people who gave her free drugs. Although she is only 18 and was even younger when she started taking Ice, she knows exactly what she is doing and there is no point trying to blame her plight on her so called friends. Not only did she decide to use drugs, she progressed into being a courier for the drug dealers to earn some quick money. I have very little sympathy for her and I think she must own up to her action and face the full consequences.

19.  I will adopt a starting point of 54 months’ imprisonment, reducing it by one third in recognition of the defendant’s plea of guilty and sentence her to 36 months’ imprisonment. I will reduce this sentence by a further 6 months to reflect her full cooperation with the Police throughout. The defendant is therefore sentenced to 30 months’ imprisonment.