HKSAR v. Sae Ngow Chai

HCCC 203/2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 203 OF 2016

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

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

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

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

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

COURT:

Sae Ngow-chai. I am not going to preach a sermon to you. You will be well aware of the dangers that all dangerous drugs, including ketamine, pose to society, and you must be well aware of the risks you were taking when you agreed to bring over 4 kilogrammes of ketamine into Hong Kong from the mainland on 3 September 2015. The fact that you imported dangerous drugs into Hong Kong aggravates your offence.

I am aware that you have a criminal record, and I note that it is not for similar offences, and I am not going to regard your criminal record as an aggravating factor in your case.

From what she has said in her mitigation this morning, I know that your counsel, Ms Monica Chow, has told you there are clear guidelines as to how all judges should take when sentencing people who traffic in ketamine. And I know that she will have told you that judges are expected to stick to those guidelines, unless there are very good reasons not to do so and there are no very good reasons in your case.

I can tell you that had you taken this matter to trial, and had the jury found you guilty of the offence, for a quantity as high as 4.045 kilogrammes of ketamine, which was worth, at street level, $1,332,230, I would have taken a starting point sentence in respect of your offence, of 20 and a half years, and I would have increased your sentence by a further 18 months to reflect the fact that you were importing the ketamine into Hong Kong, making a total starting point sentence after trial of 22 years.

Your only mitigation lies in the fact you have pleaded guilty, albeit very late in the day. The trial dates had already been set, and your trial was due to start before me on 17 September of this year.

However, your plea of guilty indicates realism on your part, and to some extent, it indicates a degree of remorse. And while I am talking about remorse, I note that whilst on remand, you have converted to the Christian faith. It is well-accepted, those who plead guilty to their offences can expect recognition for that in a reduction of the sentence they would otherwise have received. And here, you are lucky, for the Court of Appeal in September of last year revised the sentencing discounts that can be given to those who plead guilty, and they made it very clear that those who plead guilty after trial dates have been set can expect a far less discount than those who plead guilty at the earliest opportunity. However, as your trial dates were set in June of 2016 before the Court of Appeal revised the permitted discounts, you benefit from the former dispensation, meaning that you are entitled to a one-third reduction in the sentence you would have received had you been found guilty after trial.

As I said, your plea of guilty is your only mitigation, there is nothing in your personal circumstances that I find to be of mitigating effect. After giving you that one-third reduction it means that your sentence for your offence is 14 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.