HKSAR v. Lee Ming Yin
|
HCCC190/2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE CRIMINAL CASE NO. 190 OF 2009 ----------------------
----------------------
--------------------------------------------------- Transcript of the Audio Recording --------------------------------------------------- COURT: Lee Ming-yin, you have been committed to this court for sentence following your plea of guilty in the Magistrates' Court to a charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs. A very substantial quantity of ketamine was involved; 2728.38 grammes of a powder containing 2200.69 grammes of ketamine. The retail value of those drugs in Hong Kong was estimated to be just over $340,000. On 12 February this year you were stopped by Customs Officers outside the shuttle bus terminus at the Lok Ma Chau crossing point. The drugs were found by the Customs Officers concealed in the underpants you were wearing at the time. You admitted that the drugs were yours and that you were bringing them into Hong Kong from the Mainland and would give them to a man in the Ho Man Tin Shopping Arcade in return for reward. Being someone who has been repeatedly before the courts for drug offences, including, on one occasion, trafficking in dangerous drugs, you can have been in no doubt that very serious consequences would follow if you were caught. As you have no doubt been told by your lawyers, the Court of Appeal has indicated that those who traffic in between 600 and 1000 grammes of ketamine should expect sentences of between 12 and 14 years and that those who traffic in amounts greater than 1000 grammes should expect to receive sentences higher than 14 years. In your case, the amount of ketamine that was found was double the quantity that would have warranted a starting point of 14 years. In your case, what makes it all the more serious is that you have brought the drugs into Hong Kong from the Mainland. In my view, a starting point of 16 years' imprisonment is warranted in your case. I have listened carefully to everything that Mr Pang said on your behalf. As I have said, you cannot claim in mitigation to be a person of previous good character. You have a large number of previous convictions, nine of them drug related including one for trafficking, but I do take into account that you did not have the benefit of being brought up by parents who could have guided you in your formative years. It is very sad that you should have prejudiced the chance of having a family of your own by committing this offence. Although you have given the police the name of a person who you say was behind you committing this offence, that person has not been located. Therefore, the information has not yet proved itself to be useful to the prosecuting authorities. Although I cannot now give you any credit for what you have told the authorities, it does not preclude you giving further assistance to them in the future and receiving credit from the Executive for such assistance. The fact remains that trafficking in dangerous drugs is a very serious offence indeed. The only real mitigation at present is your plea of guilty, for which you are entitled to receive the usual discount of one third. I therefore sentence you to 10 years 8 months' imprisonment. |