HKSAR v. Chau Ka Chun

DCCC 931/2016

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 931 OF 2016

____________

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Trafficking in a dangerous drug". The dangerous drug involved is ketamine.

Summary of Facts

2.About 11:30 p.m. on 16 July 2016, PCs 12768 and 12722 stopped the defendant outside No.904A Canton Road, Mongkok for enquiry.  The defendant was then carrying a purple plastic bag and a black plastic bag in his left hand.

3.Upon search, the officers found in the purple plastic bag, 19 resealable plastic bags which contained a total of 93.4 grammes of a powder containing 61.8 grammes of ketamine; and in the black plastic bag, 25 resealable plastic bags which contained a total of 65.2 grammes of a powder containing 40.2 grammes of ketamine.

4.Under caution, the defendant admitted being a courier of the dangerous drugs.  He also admitted that he would receive a reward of $500 for the delivery.

5.At the time of his arrest, the defendant had 2 mobile phones with him.  About 7 photographs depicting suspected dangerous drugs placed inside small plastic bags and a scale were found in some WeChat and WhatsApp messages stored in his mobile phones.

Mitigation & Sentence

6.The defendant is 24and single.  He has a clear record.  In mitigation, defence counsel Ms. CHONG told me a sad story about the defendant and his family.  When the defendant was young, his father had to entertain clients by going to Macau and became addicted to gambling.  As expected, substantial debts were incurred.

7.Notwithstanding the divorce of the defendant's parents in 2014, creditors continued to harass the defendant's mother and younger sister (now aged 15) for repayments.  Soon after a successful negotiation of a repayment scheme with the creditors, the defendant's mother injured herself at work.  The financial burden then fell on the defendant.  He took up 2 jobs working as a clerk during the day and a cook at night.  He soon became exhausted and was fired by the restaurant.  Having lost his night job, the defendant was lured into delivering drugs for a reward of $500.

8.A bundle of mitigation letters was placed before me; their contents are duly noted.  The employer of the defendant's day job has favourable comments on his work performance.

9.Time after time, the court has expressed in very clear terms that being in financial difficulty (however serious) is no mitigating factor for committing a crime.  The defendant and his family have my sympathy.  I understand their frustration and sense of helplessness when having to face the so-called "creditors".  I know it is easier said than done, but there must be proper ways for the defendant to deal with the debts of his father.  Being desperate is not an excuse to resort to drug trafficking.

10.Drug abuse has always been a problem in our society, and the HKSAR is determined to fight the battle against drugs in all aspects (from education, crime detection to recovery of proceeds of drug trafficking).  A clear message must be conveyed to the general public that "drug trafficking" is a serious crime and that drug traffickers would most certainly be punished by long-term imprisonment even for fresh offenders, so that there is a deterrent effect.

11.As a judge, I see day in and day out persons in my court being charged with "drug trafficking". Many of them were just like the defendant – persons used by others as "couriers".  When people realize that the court would not treat drug traffickers lightly, there would be, hopefully, fewer willing "couriers"; thus making it difficult for criminals to exploit people with financial needs or other vulnerabilities.  Undoubtedly, most drug traffickers are "used" by bad persons (or so they claim).  That is the reason why we need to make people think twice before they agree to be "used".

12.Ms. CHONG has said all she could on behalf of the defendant.  The Court of Appeal has laid down clear sentencing guidelines for trafficking in ketamine (see  SJ v HII Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1).  For 50 to 300 grammes, the sentence ranges from 6 to 9 years' imprisonment.  The defendant trafficked in 102 grammes, the appropriate starting point is 6.5 years' imprisonment.  A one-third discount is given for the guilty plea, reducing the sentence to 52 months.  As an act of mercy, I further reduce the sentence to 50 months to reflect the defendant's family hardship.  Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further reduction.   I sentence the defendant to 50 months' imprisonment.