HKSAR v. Ngereza Julieth Charles

Read the full judgment text of HCCC 25/2021 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 14 July 2022.

Cites 3 cases

Case No.HCCC 25/2021[2022] HKCFI 2153
Court
High Court CFI
Date14 Jul 2022
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCCC 25/2021

[2022] HKCFI 2153

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 25 OF 2021

________________________

  HKSAR  
  v  
  Ngereza Julieth Charles  

________________________

Before:  Hon Yau J
Date:  14 July 2022 at 10.14 am
Present:  Mr Dominic Ngai, SPP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
  Mr Phillip Ross, instructed by Fan Wong & Tso, assigned by DLA, for the accused
Offence:   Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)

________________________

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

________________________


COURT: The defendant Ms Ngereza Julieth Charles pleaded guilty to 1 count of trafficking in a dangerous drug at the committal proceedings. The offence is contrary to section 4(1)(a)  and (3)  of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134.

The particulars of offence are that the defendant on or about the 1st day of November 2019, at Customs Arrival Hall B, Passenger Terminal Building 1, Hong Kong International Airport, Chek Lap Kok, Lantau Island in Hong Kong, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely, 567.6 grammes of a solid containing 460.4 grammes of cocaine.

She is committed to this court for sentence.

Facts Admitted

At about 1940 hours on 1 November 2019, the defendant was refused landing on arrival in Hong Kong from Lusaka, Zambia on grounds of doubtful purpose of visit and unconvincing trip arrangements.

Body search and search of the luggage of the defendant by the Customs and Excise officer revealed nothing illegal. Suspecting that the defendant might have internal concealment in her body cavity of dangerous drugs, Customs and Excise officers took her to North Lantau Hospital for examination, where she was confirmed to be pregnant. Internal concealment was observed inside her body cavity as a result of ultrasound examination.

Under arrest and caution, the defendant confessed that she had swallowed around 30 pellets of something mixed with rice in Zambia to take them to Macau as she was asked to do so by a person named “Luis”. Luis would call her to tell her what to do after she had arrived in Macau.

On 2 November 2019, the defendant discharged 3 pellets of object in Queen Elizabeth Hospital, which showed positive reaction to cocaine in a narcotics test.

Under caution, the defendant said she did not know what the pellets were and that she had swallowed the 2 smaller pellets while Luis put the larger one into her anus.

From 2 November 2019 to 5 November 2019, the defendant further discharged 32 pellets of cocaine.

In the video-recorded interview subsequently conducted, the defendant claimed under caution that in October 2019 when she was in Lusaka, Zambia selling hair extensions, she came to know Luis in a bar and agreed to carry a bag of pellets to Macau for him.

Luis made travel arrangements for her to go to Macau. She later swallowed about 30 pellets, and while she was asleep, Luis put the bigger pellet up her anus. Luis did not tell her what the pellets were but said they were not dangerous. The defendant believed him. They also agreed to talk about reward later. The defendant knew that she would stay in Macau for 9 days. Luis gave her US$2,000 as travel expenses. She started her journey in Addis Ababa and eventually arrived in Hong Kong. She contacted Luis by means of WhatsApp only.

On 17 November 2019, the defendant discharged 1 more pellet of cocaine in Tai Lam Centre for Women. The defendant said she did not know what it was under caution.

The defendant discharged a total of 36 pellets of a total weight of 567.6 grammes of a solid containing 460.4 grammes of cocaine, having a street value of approximately $716,311.2.

At the time of arrest, the defendant had 4 mobile telephones, 2 SIM cards, US$2,000 and $210 Ethiopian currency.

Criminal Records

The defendant has a clear criminal record in Hong Kong.

Mitigation

Counsel for the defendant, Mr Ross, helpfully sets out the calculation of sentence in the present case according to the sentencing guidelines of trafficking in cocaine, taking into account also the international element involved.

He points out that the role of the defendant is more than a courier collecting a parcel in Hong Kong but less than that of a person who took active part in procuring or in directing a network in the procuring of the cocaine.

Mr Ross asks for the enhancement of sentence, because of the international element, of less than 1 year.

According to Mr Ross, the defendant is now aged 37. She married at the age of 16 and divorced in 2002 when she was aged 18. She remarried in 2004 and divorced again in 2014. The son, aged 24, and the 2 daughters, aged 22 and 18, from the first marriage lived with the defendant while the 4 children, aged from 12 to 18 from the second marriage, lived with the father.

Mr Ross says that the defendant committed the offence because she was in need of money to treat her elderly father who was paralysed on the left side, to pay for the tuition of her 2 daughters of whom one wanted to study hotel management and the other was in secondary school. She was also unable to pay her rent and was desperate for money.

The defendant was pregnant with twins when she arrived in Hong Kong. She underwent an abortion as the twins did not develop well, resulting in stillbirth. The defendant is still, as a result, grieving. Mr Ross asks the court to be lenient to the defendant.

Sentence

According to AG v Pedro Nel Rojas [1994] 1 HKC 342 and R v Lau Tak Ming & Ors [1990] 2 HKLR 370, the starting point of trafficking in 400 to 600 grammes of cocaine is 15 to 20 years imprisonment. The amount of cocaine involved in this case is 460.4 grammes, and this will give rise to a basic starting point of about 16 years 6 months imprisonment.

As rightly pointed out by Mr Ross, the role of the defendant is a little bit more than a courier in that she brought the dangerous drug into Hong Kong by concealing them in her body cavity. As the eventual sentence of this case will have to be enhanced because of the international element involved, the court is of the view that, in all fairness to the defendant, she should be treated as an ordinary courier of the dangerous drugs when the court considers the starting point to be adopted.

The defendant committed the offence for economic reasons. This of course cannot be an excuse to offend the law and certainly does not constitute a valid ground for mitigation.

The court adopts 16 years 6 months imprisonment as the starting point in this case.

Having considered the case of HKSAR v Chung Ping Kun [2014] HKCU 1568, the court enhances the starting point by 9 months to 17 years 3 months imprisonment.

Giving credit to the defendant for her timely plea of guilty, the court sentences her to 11 years 6 months imprisonment.