HKSAR v. Ng Yu Kiu

DCCC658/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 658 OF 2009

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The Dependant pleaded guilty to an offence of trafficking in dangerous drugs. The particulars of the offence are that on 9 May 2009 outside Nos. 39-55 Sai Yee Street, Mongkok in Kowloon, you unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 20.63 grammes of ketamine and 0.86 grammes of cocaine.

2.The facts admitted state that at 8.26 pm on 9 May 2009 police officers were on patrol in Sai Yee Street, Mongkok when they saw the defendant acting suspiciously outside Nos. 39-55 Sai Yee Street. The defendant was intercepted for enquiry but attempted to flee. The defendant tried to walk away, an officer grabbed hold of him and stopped him. On search of the defendant, a plastic bag containing the items, the subject of the charge, were found tucked between the defendant’s underpants and his jeans. He had $2,000 in his wallet. He admitted he had purchased the drugs for $6,000. He said that he had an unstable income and claimed that the money he used to purchase the drugs was given to him by an unknown person prior to his arrest.

3.The defendant has a clear record. He has a Superintendent’s Discretion Caution recorded against him for a matter of theft in 2008.

4.The defendant is 18 years of age and is born in Hong Kong. His mother left the family when he was young and his father spent much of his time in prison and he was brought up in various homes.

5.I adjourned the case for a Training Centre report. That report confirms what I was told in mitigation. The defendant was brought up in a problematic family and was the younger of two siblings. His father was sent to prison in 1994 when the defendant was four and the following year his mother deserted the family. For his formative years, the defendant was put under the supervision of several childcare homes, including Newcomers Ward, foster homes, Tsz Chun Small Group Homes, Holland Hostel, Un Chow Hostel between 1995 to 2007. He did not do well at school, got into trouble for not submitting assignments and fighting with his schoolmates and started to mingle with people who were involved in drugs and other undesirable interests.

6.The sentencing guideline for this quantity of ketamine is 4 to 6 years. I am mindful of the dicta in the case of The Secretary for Justice v Ko Fei-tat to the effect that a clear record and the young age of the offender are not weighty mitigating factors for dangerous drugs offences except where there are exceptional circumstances. If I were to adopt a starting point at the lower end of the sentencing bracket for this quantity of ketamine, the starting point would be a sentence of 4 years’ imprisonment. The defendant has pleaded guilty to the offence and would therefore be entitled to a full discount of one-third. That would reduce the period to a sentence of 32 months. If the defendant behaved himself in prison, he would get a third remission and that would mean he would serve a total of 22 months’ imprisonment.

7.A Training Centre order would impose a period of detention for a period not much shorter than a custodial sentence would be. According to the Correctional Services officer, he says that “In order to strengthen his law-abiding concept and for the interests of his rehabilitation, a period of disciplinary training coupled with statutory supervision is considered beneficial to him”.

8.Reading the report, it seems to me that this defendant has had very little structure in his life, he has had very little input from his parents and during his formative years he was moved around several homes. Looking at all the circumstances in this case, it seems that it is in the interests of justice both as regards to the defendant and society that he be given the opportunity of training in a Training Centre and I make that order.