CRIMINAL CASE NO. 397 OF 2011
COURT: It is always a sad thing to see somebody so young come before me for sentence in the High Court in connection with the trafficking of dangerous drugs.
This is the second time in two days that I have had to sentence a defendant for trafficking in ketamine who was 16 years old at the time of the commission of the offence and I have had several such cases over the course of the past few months. I remarked yesterday when sentencing another 16 year old defendant for the same offence that defendants are getting younger and younger and the trafficking of ketamine more and more common.
Twenty years ago, perhaps even 10 years ago, a 16 year old defendant facing sentence in the High Court for trafficking in dangerous drugs would have been exceptional. Sadly, today it is not so extraordinary.
That observation coupled with the particular facts of this case suggesting that you had a maturity beyond your years in knowing how to deal with drugs and with the police should serve to underscore the policy of the courts, which is that drug trafficking will be dealt with in a resolute and consistent fashion and that youth, unless extreme youth which this is not, cannot afford mitigation.
In this particular case, not only did you put up a struggle when you were intercepted but you were confident enough to shout to another person who was visiting the premises to run away and escape.
You initially claimed that the drugs were for your own consumption and you adopted an uncooperative attitude during police inquiries and under caution on video.
You had been seen by the police entering the flat, which was obviously a storage base for ketamine and cocaine, with keys that you had on your person. It is clear that you were familiar with those premises and their contents, which included electronic scales and multiple empty transparent plastic bags.
I do not accept, as I pointed out to your counsel in mitigation, that you were acting as a courier on a one off basis. That is not to say that you will be sentenced for anything beyond the particular charges you face, it is simply to point out that you cannot have been as innocent, unaware and manipulated as your age might otherwise have suggested.
Having said that, I do accept the thrust of Mr Wong’s mitigation on your behalf that you fell into the commission of this offence as a result of circumstance and bad peer pressure and that you had been making conscientious attempts since leaving school to learn a trade and better yourself. I express the hope that that is something you will now continue to do whilst you are in prison.
As Mr Wong recognises the relevant tariff band for trafficking in the total quantity of Ketamine in both charges, which is the most significant quantity of dangerous drugs concerned, would place you after trial in the 6 to 9 years’ imprisonment bracket under the guidelines in Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng.
As for the cocaine in the 2nd charge the quantity would put you in the 2 to 5 year imprisonment bracket, set out in R v Lau Tak Ming, as applied in Attorney General v Pedro Nel Rojas.
In my judgment an appropriate starting point in respect of the overall quantity of ketamine in the two charges in this case would have been 6 years and 9 months’ imprisonment. The appropriate starting point in respect of the cocaine in Charge 2 would be 2 years’ imprisonment.
Obviously, if I were simply to add these individual starting points together I would arrive at an excessively inflated overall starting point.
Accordingly, I consider that the overall starting point for the trafficking in the two types of drugs concerned in the total quantities set out in the two charges will therefore be 7½ years’ imprisonment. You will get a full one-third discount from that starting point.
I shall achieve that result by passing sentences on each charge in the following way. In respect of Charge 1 where the operative amount for sentencing purposes is 17.86 grammes of ketamine, I adopt a starting point of 4 years’ imprisonment which I will discount by a full one-third to 2 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.
In respect of the 2nd charge where the operative amounts for sentencing purposes are 118.61 grammes of ketamine and 3.71 grammes of cocaine, I shall adopt a starting point of 7½ years’ imprisonment which I will discount by a full one-third to 5 years’ imprisonment.
Given the global view I have taken of the quantities of drugs in both charges I shall make the sentences on both charges concurrent with each other.
Mr Wong has made a very full plea in mitigation on your behalf. But for his persuasion, aided by the letters on your behalf which I have read, I might have taken a slightly higher overall starting point given the particular circumstances and facts of this case.
However, I am satisfied that that sentence, whilst reflecting a greater knowledge and involvement in the flat and the drugs than you are prepared to concede, also recognises, as your aunt and uncle have pointed out, that you had been making serious attempts to improve yourself before this offence and given your young age it may still afford you a second chance to put your life in order.
You will go to prison for 5 years.