HKSAR v. Tang Wai Shing

 DCCC1107/2008

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1107 OF 2008

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

HKSAR

v.

Tang Wai-shing

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

Before:   H H Judge Whaley

Date:     17 March 2009 at 9.51 am

Offence:  Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)

Reasons for Sentence

1.The defendant has been convicted on his plea of one charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs, namely on 25 September last year he trafficked in 13.19 grammes of a powder containing 10.92 grammes of ketamine in the Yuen Long area.

2.The defendant was caught in an anti-dangerous drug operation conducted by the police, what they called a controlled-buy operation.  A police officer posing as a customer contacted the defendant on his mobile phone, claiming to be a friend of a friend of the defendant.  The defendant asked him if he wanted K Chai, and when the undercover officer said yes and asked him how much that would cost, the defendant told him it would cost $700 and he appointed the place for the undercover officer to wait for him.  The defendant duly turned up and the undercover officer gave him $700, whereupon the defendant gave the officer the drugs in question, wrapped in white tissue paper.  At that point the defendant was arrested by some other police officers.

3.He is 19 years of age and he has a clear record.  The defendant should have known at the time he did this, what a very serious attitude the courts in Hong Kong take of this offence of trafficking in dangerous drugs.  Hard drugs of course like heroin and cocaine, but also drugs like ecstasy and ketamine, are considered a major problem in our society which cause a lot of people, including a lot of young people, to go off the rails and waste years of their lives.

4.People like the defendant who traffic in these drugs, albeit on a relatively small scale, are only making the drugs more easily available to others and therefore helping to spread the habit.  So the courts impose heavy sentences for this offence in the hope that it will deter people, like the defendant, from trafficking in these drugs knowing that if they are caught, they will pay a heavy price. 

5.The Court of Appeal has suggested guidelines for sentencing in cases of trafficking in ketamine in Secretary for Justice and Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1 and while these are not intended to be a straitjacket, I can see no reason to depart from the guidelines on the fact of this case.

6.The defendant, while he is a young man, is not young enough for his age to justify any discount in the sentence which it is otherwise proper to impose.  The courts have made it clear that a factor like having a clear record and a relatively young age do not justify any discount in the sentence which it is otherwise proper to impose for trafficking in dangerous drugs.  I accept that the defendant is remorseful and has seen the error of his ways. 

7.The guidelines suggest that for a quantity of between 10 to 50 grammes of ketamine, a starting point of 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment would normally be appropriate.  The quantity of ketamine in the present case being 10.92 grammes, I have adopted a starting point of 4 years’ imprisonment after trial, and in return for the defendant’s plea of guilty, his co-operation and all the other factors that I have mentioned, he is entitled to the full one-third discount which reduces the starting point to 32 months’ imprisonment. That is the sentence that I impose.

8.I note that the defendant’s family are all present today to support him, and with this supportive family and his remorse and his determination to reform himself, I think there is every hope that once he has served the sentence, he will become a law abiding member of the community again.