HKSAR v. Ng Pak Ling

HCCC 94/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 94 OF 2015

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

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

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

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

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

COURT: At 0145 hours on 26 August 2014, a team of police officers stopped a taxi at a roadblock at Hok Yuen Street. The defendant was sitting in the rear passenger seat holding a rucksack. The defendant was told to alight and his rucksack was searched. The officer found sundry items inside, including two glass tubes each with a bulb-shaped end containing traces of ‘Ice’, one electronic scale and 41 transparent resealable plastic bags. There were pliers, scissors and lighters in the rucksack. Upon a further search, eight transparent resealable plastic bags with ‘Ice’ and one bag of herbal cannabis were found from his front right trousers pocket.

Under caution at the scene the defendant admitted transporting the dangerous drug for someone. Later in the video interview, the defendant said he took the dangerous drug to the container terminal to share with his friends and colleagues.

The street value of the drug was $5,298.

The defendant is 31, married with a son aged 5. He has four previous convictions. He was sentenced to 10 months’ imprisonment for trafficking in a dangerous drug in 2013. There were two further convictions of possession of a dangerous drug. He worked in the container cargo terminal earning about 600 per day. In average, he could earn about 15,000 per month. He maintained that he did not sell the dangerous drug but just shared with others. He claimed that about one-third to one-half of the dangerous drug seized in this case was for his own consumption.

Mr Percy for the defence submitted that there were drug‑taking paraphernalia in his rucksack. His income was consistent with his drug consumption. He also disclosed sharing the ‘Ice’ with his friends during the video interview.

Mr McNamara for the prosecution pointed out that initially in the video interview the defendant refused to answer questions about the dangerous drug. It was only at a very late stage that the defendant said it was for sharing with friends. Mr McNamara also pointed out the large number of plastic bags and the electronic scale in the rucksack.

I have considered the authorities submitted by Mr Percy: Wong Suet Hau [2002] 1 HKLRD 69 and Tsang Chung Keung CACC 165/2014.

Whilst the defendant was inconsistent in explaining the use of the dangerous drug in question, the fact that there were paraphernalia with him is consistent with self-consumption.

Having considered the circumstances of this case, including the small amount of dangerous drug, I am prepared to accept that about one-third of the seized dangerous drug was for his own consumption.

Bearing in mind the principles set out in the authorities, I take 7 years and 1 month as the starting point for trafficking in 12 grammes of ‘Ice’ and 0.75 grammes of cannabis. I give the defendant a 15 per cent discount for the self-consumption factor. The starting point is adjusted to 72 months. I give a one-third discount for his plea. I sentence the defendant to 4 years’ imprisonment.