HKSAR v. Tang Wai Sum

HCCC 167/2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 167 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 dangerous drugs, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134. He pleaded guilty in the Magistracy and is committed to the Court of First Instance for sentence.

He was observed to be standing by the right passenger seat of a private car, looking at the driver through the window. In fact, he had been observed earlier to be on board that vehicle. When he saw the police officer, he walked away quickly. He was intercepted and, by then, the private car had driven away. Various transparent plastic bags containing drugs and tissue paper containing drugs were found inside his sling bag.

He was arrested and cautioned. He admitted helping someone to deliver drugs for a reward of $100. Back at the police station, a further search revealed another bag of drugs inside the defendant’s right shoe. He further admitted delivering that bag of ‘Ice’ for someone.

Upon analysis, the drugs were found to be a total of 19.38 grammes of a powder containing 2.98 grammes of ketamine and 64.89 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 46.45 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride. At the material time, the ketamine and the ‘Ice’ had estimated retail values of $5,330 and $22,322 respectively.

The defendant is now aged 36. He has two previous convictions, the last on 7 January 2013, for possession of dangerous drugs. He was sentenced to 4 months’ imprisonment, suspended for 2 years.

I am told that he is married with a son now 7 years old. By way of mitigation, I was told that he used to be an Uber driver until a month before his arrest. His own drug addiction has caused him to be in great debt which led him to commit this out-of-character offence. His wife, his younger stepdaughter, his aunt, his wife’s employer, his son’s Chinese teacher and his friend all spoke well of him, saying that he was a kind-natured person and asked the court to exercise leniency in sentencing.

In sentencing the defendant, I have taken into account his guilty plea, the nature of the drugs, the relevant sentencing tariff and the mitigation forwarded by counsel on his behalf. In drug trafficking cases, the most important consideration for the court is the weight of the narcotics and the greatest mitigation is a timely plea.

The present case involved two types of drugs, namely 2.89 grammes of ketamine and 46.45 grammes of ‘Ice’. Individually speaking, the ketamine will fall within a 2 to 4 years starting point bracket whilst the ‘Ice’ will fall within the 7 to 11 years bracket.

Using the three tests as laid down by the Court of Appeal to check the starting point against one another, I got the following numbers: using the absurdity test, 115 months’ starting point; using the conversion test, 114 months; using the ratio test, 112.3 months.

In respect of this case, I adopt a starting point of 114 months. I shall give him the full one-third discount for his guilty plea and he is sentenced to 76 months, which is 6 years and 4 months.