HKSAR v. Lai Chi Wa, Angel

HCCC 448/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 448 OF 2015

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

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

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

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

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

COURT: Angel Lai, I am sure that Mr Dick Lee, your counsel, will have told you that severe penalties are always imposed on persons who traffic in dangerous drugs.

I have listened to what Mr Lee has said on your behalf. I have read your letters, and I accept that you have had a hard life, and I accept that certainly until your arrest, you have for many years been a habitual drug-abuser. I have to say, however, that I find nothing in your personal circumstances or in the circumstances of your commission of this offence to be of mitigating value.

You do have mitigation. It lies in the fact that you have, hitherto been of a clear record, you have no previous convictions. And most importantly, it lies in your plea of guilty to the alternate charge of trafficking.

A plea of guilty shows realism on the part of the defendant, it saves the police time, it saves the court time, and it is most importantly, it is indicative of remorse. A plea of guilty will always receive recognition when the court comes to sentence an offender.

In this case, you trafficked in two types of dangerous drugs. There is ketamine, that is a compound that you had for the purposes of trafficking, weighing 1,047 grammes. It had an active ketamine content of 872 grammes, 872.2 grammes, to be exact. And you also had a compound, a much smaller quantity of compound weighing 18.88 grammes, which had an active cocaine content of 14.67 grammes. Now, it is accepted by the courts in Hong Kong that cocaine is a far more potent drug than ketamine is.

Mr Lee will have made it clear to you when discussing this case with you, and when giving you advice, that in Hong Kong, the Court of Appeal has laid down very clear guidelines to all trial judges as to how we should sentence people who traffick in dangerous drugs of all kinds. And Mr Lee will have told you that judges are expected to stick to those guidelines, unless there are powerful and compelling reasons for them not to do so, and there are no such powerful and compelling reasons in your case. I am going to follow those guidelines. Mr Lee has taken me to various of them to remind me of what they are.

In arriving at your sentence, the length of your sentence, I have taken into account what is known as a conversion approach, in relation to the fact that you trafficked in two entirely different types of dangerous drugs. Following those guidelines, I have to tell you that had you pleaded not guilty to this charge, had you taken the matter to trial and a jury found you guilty of that offence, you would have been looking at a sentence of 14 years’ imprisonment. Because of your plea of guilty and because of your clear record, I am reducing that sentence quite substantially. I am reducing it by 5 years, which is just over a one-third discount. That means the sentence I am passing on your in respect of your offence is one of 9 years’ imprisonment.