HKSAR v. Jambia Mohamed Omar

HCCC 72/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 72 OF 2014

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

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

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

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

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

COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty at committal in February of this year to one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs. The dangerous drug was 0.94 of a kilogram of a mixture containing 0.51 of a kilogram of heroin hydrochloride, and 0.17 of a kilogram of 6-monoacetylmorphine hydrochloride.

In this court he confirmed his plea of guilty and confirmed also the facts on the basis of which he had entered that plea.

The defendant arrived in Hong Kong by air and was intercepted for Customs clearance. A search of his person and his baggage revealed nothing but internal concealment was suspected and he was taken to QEH where foreign objects were discovered in his body cavity. The defendant was arrested and cautioned. He claimed to have swallowed 20 pellets without knowing what was in them. His reward was to be US$2,000. Subsequently, he discharged 66 packets of suspected dangerous drug.

Analysis by the Government Chemist confirmed the nature and quantity of the drugs as set out in the particulars of the charge. The dangerous drugs had an estimated retail value of HK$764,460.

The defendant admitted and accepted that he was trafficking in the dangerous drug.

The defendant has a clear record in Hong Kong . The antecedents statement shows that he was born in Tanzania on 22 August 1972 and graduated in 1993 from secondary school. It was recorded that he had two sons aged 14 and 8 years. It also confirmed that he was not a drug user but that proved to be wrong.

The defendant is now aged 41. I was advised in mitigation that he was married but due to his heroin addiction, his wife left him. He was spending up to half his month’s salary on drugs and therefore he was an easy target to accept this risk and ingest these pellets.

On admission to Lai Chi Kok, a specimen of the defendant’s urine tested positive for opiate drugs and the next day he required treatment at Princess Margaret Hospital for drug withdrawal symptoms which tended to confirm his account of his addiction.

The defendant has put before the court a letter apologising for his crime and saying that he now appreciates, from a drug-free point of view, just what he has sacrificed in taking on this courier work.

The only real mitigation in this case is the defendant’s plea of guilty which I accept was an early plea and for which he is entitled to the full one-third discount.

The Lau Tak Ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370 guidelines for sentence were modified in the case of HKSAE v Abdallah [2009] 2 HKLRD 437. They provide that for a quantity of dangerous drug between 600 grammes and 1,200 grammes, the sentencing range is 20 to 23 years’ imprisonment. That starting point should be enhanced if an international element was involved and for quantities of narcotic over 1 kilogram, the enhancement of the starting point should be not less than 2 years.

In this case, the modified guideline is 20 to 23 years’ imprisonment. There is an international element in this case so the starting point should be enhanced, although it need not be as much as by 2 years.

In this case, I take a starting point of 20 years; I enhance it by 6 months; I give a full discount for the plea and sentence the defendant to 13 years 8 months’ imprisonment.