D1 was seen by custom officers to have alighted from a taxi and entered into the Kowloon Harbourfront Hotel with a suitcase with a grey cover. He met up with D3 at the lift lobby and they took the lift to go to the 5th floor of Tower D. Shortly thereafter, D1 left with empty hands and boarded a taxi. A few hours later, D2 arrived at Tower D and went up to the 5th floor.
Later that evening, D1 returned, went up the lift again, and shortly thereafter came out at the lift lobby, carrying a suitcase with a grey cover, boarded a taxi to Kwun Tong. Customs officers followed that taxi and when D1 alighted at Chun Yip Street carrying the suitcase, he was intercepted. A search revealed the drugs in Charge 1 amongst other paraphernalia, including an electronic scale, piles of empty transparent resealable plastic bags and a plastic-sealing machine.
D1 gave a description of the person who gave him the suitcase for onward delivery and stated that he was promised $1,000 as a reward. Shortly after D1 was arrested, customs officers intercepted D2 who took the lift from the 5th floor to the ground-floor lift lobby of the hotel. He was intercepted as he matched the description given by D1.
From the plastic bag that he was carrying, a total of 26 plastic bags of drugs as particularised in the 2nd charge was found. He admitted that the drugs were cocaine and that he was asked by someone to distribute the drugs. A confrontation was later arranged during which D1 identified D2 to be the person who gave him the suitcase.
Pursuant to information given by D1 and D2, D3 was arrested inside Room 507. D3’s fingerprint was found on the sealing machine inside the suitcase carried by D1. D1 confirmed that D3 was the person who asked him to deliver his suitcase. D2 said D3 was his elder brother.
The cocaine in respect of Charge 1 was of an estimated street value of HK$495,603, and in respect of Charge 2, $635,868.
D1 is now aged 25 with a clear record. D2 is aged 29 with 19 previous record and in 2014, for an offence of possession of apparatus, he was sentenced to 2 months’ imprisonment. D3, aged 23, has a clear record.
It was submitted on behalf of D1 that he had rendered assistance to the customs officers at the scene by giving a description of D2, leading to D2’s arrest at the lift lobby and discovery of further drugs to be trafficked by D2. D1 positively identified D2 at the scene in a confrontation. It was further submitted that D1 had contributed also to the arrest of D3 in Room 507 whose fingerprint was found on the sealing machine carried by D1. D1 also positively identified D3 inside Room 507. Counsel for D1 submitted that D1 should be entitled to additional discount on top of the usual one-third. Counsel asked for a greater than 40 per cent discount.
For D2, counsel submitted that he was a courier and not the mastermind of this case. He had taken customs officers to Room 507 which led to the arrest of D3. He has further unlocked mobile phones for the authorities so that the WhatsApp message between him and D3 could be revealed which led to the plea of D3 in the end. Counsel for D2 urged for a 40 per cent discount.
Counsel for D3 submitted that he has underestimated the serious consequence of the present offence, and during his incarceration, he has deeply reflected on his wrongdoing and is determined to turn over a new leaf. Whilst his plea could not be said to be timely, counsel urged me to deal with him as leniently as possible.
I have taken into account all that could have been said by counsel on their behalf and also the defendants’ guilty pleas. In sentencing drug-related offences, very little credit is given by the court to factors other than a defendant’s guilty plea. The tariff is one based on the weight of the narcotics. In relation to D1 and D3, for the 336 grammes of cocaine which falls within the tariff of between 200 and 400 grammes, that is 12 to 15 years’ imprisonment, I adopt a starting point of 13 years and 6 months’ imprisonment. For D2, for the aggregate amount of drugs in the two charges, ie 779.9 grammes, which falls within the “600 to 1,200 grammes” tariff, that is 20 to 23 years, I adopt a starting point of 20 years and 3 months.
Both D1 and D2 had rendered assistance to the authorities. D1’s assistance led to the arrest of D2 and D3. D2’s assistance led to the arrest and eventually to the plea of D3. None of D1 or D2 expressed any willingness to testify in the trial of D3. I also note that D2 has unlocked his mobile phone, revealing messages between him and D3. I am of the view that both of them are not entitled to anything higher than 40 per cent discount. Therefore I only give them 40 per cent discount.
So with the starting point as I have stated for D1, he is sentenced to 97 months’ imprisonment, so around 40 per cent discount. For D2, a total of 146 months’ imprisonment, which is also around 40. It is allotted as follows: Charge 1, 97 months; Charge 2, 9 years. I order 49 months out of the sentence in Charge 2 to run consecutively. For D3, I only give him, because he is not giving a timely plea, around 22 per cent discount. So his sentence is 126 months.