HKSAR v. Choi Sau Ling

HCCC19/2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 19 OF 2009

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

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

Transcript of the audio recording
of the Sentence in the above case

COURT:  The defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of trafficking in dangerous drugs.  Count 1 related to 500.23 grammes of a mixture containing 422.51 grammes of ketamine, and also 149.12 grammes of cocaine. 

Count 2 related to

1) 15.93 grammes of Nimetazepam in the form of 2,162 tablets,

2) 45.94 grammes of Midazolam in the form of 3,150 tablets,

3)    5.6 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 5.46 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, which is “Ice”,

4) 21.97 grammes of 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine, which is “Ecstasy”, and took the form of 188 tablets,

5) 54.68 grammes of a mixture containing 45.20 grammes of Ketamine, and

6) 133.97 grammes of a solid containing 109.52 grammes of cocaine.

The facts put before the court and admitted by the defendant revealed that the defendant was arrested in consequence of a police ambush as she and a male friend returned to the flat where she was living, although she was not the tenant.  Two keys to the flat were seized from the defendant as she was about to open the door and the drugs the subject of Charge 1 were found when police searched her handbag.

After her arrest for trafficking, the defendant told police that she carried the dangerous drugs for somebody because she had no money. 

A search warrant was executed and the flat was searched.  This led to the discovery of the drugs, the subject of the 2nd charge, which were on a side-table in the sitting room.  When arrested and cautioned for trafficking in respect of those drugs, the defendant said that she was the owner of the drugs and that they had nothing to do with her friend. 

Later, in the video interview, she told the interviewing officer how she had become involved in this trafficking and how she was carrying drugs to and from, at the instructions of somebody else.

The defendant is aged 25 years old.  She was single at the time of her arrest.  She was unemployed.  She has two previous convictions.  In March 1993, she was convicted in the Magistracy of trafficking and ordered to serve a term in the Drug Addiction Treatment Centre.  In November of 2004, she was convicted of making a false statement to an Immigration officer and ordered to perform 100 hours of community service.

In mitigation, I was advised that she was separated from her husband, that she has a 3-year-old daughter who is being cared for by the husband’s parents, and that she was in the process of a divorce. 

A letter expressing the defendant’s remorse was put before the court, and letters from her parents and her sister-in-law were also put before the court, requesting leniency in terms of sentence.

The estimated value of the drugs was HK$527,690.  The basic reason the defendant became involved in these offences was that she wanted to get quick money so that she could retrieve her daughter from her husband’s parents in China and rear her daughter herself.  From her record, it appears that she herself was taking drugs.

These were very serious offences involving substantial quantities of drugs.  The major drugs are the cocaine and the Ketamine and the combined ranges, probably, of the Ketamine and the cocaine would amount to 15 years as a starting point for sentence.  However, I note that these offences were committed almost at the same time and I note that the combined quantities of the Ketamine and the cocaine are substantial, spread over the two charges.

I consider that the best way to deal with the charges is to combine the quantities of the cocaine and the Ketamine.  In respect of Charge 2, the most serious component is the 109.52 grammes of cocaine which, if charged separately, would require a starting point of between 8 and 12 years.  Item (5), 45.20 grammes of ketamine, if charged alone, would justify a starting point of 4 to 6 years.  Item (4), the 21.97 grammes of Ecstasy, if charged alone would justify a starting point of 5 years based on the new guidelines for Ketamine and Ecstasy/MDMA,[see Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng CAAR7/2006] where 10 to 50 grammes has a range of 4 to 6 years imprisonment.  5.46 grammes of Ice, which is item (3), would require a starting point of roughly 4 years as up to 10 grammes of Ice has a range of 3 to 7 years on sentence. 

The Midazolam charge alone would be at the discretion of the sentencer and would be based on the guidelines for methaqualone.  The 15.93 grammes of Nimetazepam would also be in the discretion of the sentencer and possibly in the range of two-thirds of methaqualone guidelines.

I take a starting point in respect of each charge of 12 years’ imprisonment.  I give the defendant the full discount of one-third for her pleas.  She is sentenced to 8 years’ imprisonment on each of the two charges.  I order that the sentences run concurrently.