HKSAR v. LIU JINZHAN

HCCC 225/2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 225 OF 2017

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

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

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

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

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

COURT:

The defendant pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134. He was stopped by customs officers whilst carrying a plastic bag containing a packet of drugs.

The drugs, upon analysis, were 1 kilogramme of a powder containing 852 grammes of cocaine. The market value was around HK$1.1 million.

He claimed that he did not know what the white powder was but was willing to take part in a controlled delivery operation at the hotel room which he had earlier on checked in. Customs officers found inside the room various items capable to be used in mixing drugs. The defendant admitted that such would be used when ‘the master’ came later to teach him how to mix stuff.

During the controlled delivery operation, there were a few telephone calls from his boss and he was told that someone would go to the room to collect the stuff back. It was afterwards that he had two phone calls from Chung, the defendant in HCCC 224/2017, and Chung was arrested when he went up and into the hotel room.

The defendant is now aged 23, of a clear record. He has, since pleading guilty in the magistracy, given a non-prejudicial statement to customs and testified in the trial of HCCC 224/2017. Chung was convicted and sentenced to 21 years’ imprisonment.

Counsel urged me to adopt a lower starting point than 21 years, taking into account his clear record. Counsel also urges for a discount up to 50 per cent for the defendant’s taking part in the controlled delivery and giving evidence in Chung’s trial.

Whilst it is urged that he has a clear record, it is clear the role played by this defendant was vital and pivotal in this drug trafficking trade, having taken the mixing utensils to check into a hotel room, and then went off to collect drugs to bring them into the room to await others to come and further deal with them.

The 21-year starting point in relation to 852 grammes of cocaine is already a lenient one. In relation to the discount to be given to this defendant, first of all, I have taken into account his guilty plea, then I consider the part played by him in a controlled delivery. Normally, a defendant who took part in a controlled delivery resulting in an arrest but without testifying against an accomplice, earned a 40 per cent discount.

The 50 per cent discount urged for by Mr Hui is unrealistic in that, having heard this defendant give evidence, I cannot in any way come to the conclusion that he gave truthful and material evidence in the trial of Chung. He resiled from the facts which he had admitted before he was formally convicted on his plea, in particular the part about his knowledge that the boss would arrange a master to attend the hotel room to teach him how to mix stuff.

When he was drawn to the attention of those contents, his answer in the trial, or the evidence that he gave, was “Not the case. He said someone would come and look for me. It was only mentioned that someone would be coming to teach me something but not anything else. To teach me what, he did not specify”. This was directly contrary to the facts which he had admitted.

His counsel tried to attribute that to the defendant’s memory lapse, but nowhere in this defendant’s evidence could I discern any uncertainty. He was certain that what happened was not the case as evident in the facts which he himself had admitted to.

Whilst I find this defendant not forthcoming in his evidence, I would not say that his evidence made no contribution towards the conviction of Chung. I shall give him 45 per cent discount.

He is sentenced to 11 years and 6 months.