|
HCCC228/2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 228 OF 2011
-----------------
-----------------
|
Date:
|
25 August 2011 at 9.49 am
|
|
Present:
|
Mr P J Power, SADPP, of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Kevin Chan, instructed by Messrs Raymond Yu & Co, assigned by DLA, for the Accused
|
|
Offence:
|
Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)
|
--------------------------------------------
Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case
--------------------------------------------
COURT: This is a depressingly familiar case involving a young man found in possession, for the purposes of trafficking, of a large quantity of ketamine. The only difference is that this was a huge quantity of dangerous drugs, namely, 5.95 kilograms of a powder containing 3.36 kilograms of ketamine narcotic. The estimated retail value of the drugs at the time of seizure was $678,300.
The quantity of 3.36 kilograms of narcotic is so large that it places you in the last bracket of the guidelines in Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1, namely, that for quantities over 1 kilogram, a sentence, after trial, of 14 years upwards should be considered.
I have been helpfully provided by both counsel with some comparable cases in relation to starting points for quantities in this particular bracket. Whilst not binding upon me, they are relevant for the purposes of judges obtaining consistency of sentence for very large quantities of drugs.
Those of particular relevance are HCCC76/2010 and HCCC64/2011, where, for quantities of 3.79 kilograms and 3.09 kilograms of ketamine narcotic, the starting point taken by each judge at First Instance for the offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug was one of 18 years’ imprisonment. In my view, that is the appropriate starting point in the circumstances of your particular case.
Mr Chan has made a realistic plea in mitigation on your behalf. I must say I am impressed by the commonsense and good sense expressed by your father and mother and it seems that you have finally realised the anguish that you have caused to them. Your own letter is also a sensible assessment of your predicament and I can only hope that you will have inherited some of your parents’ good sense and responsibility.
You do not have the benefit of a clear record and the only real mitigation in your case is that you have pleaded guilty at the first available opportunity, which was at the Magistrates' Court, to this offence. For that you will get a full one-third discount.
In all the circumstances, the sentence of the court is that you go to prison for 12 years.
|