HKSAR v. Lee Wan
|
DCCC1239/2009 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1239 OF 2009 ---------------------- HKSAR v. Lee Wan ---------------------- Before: H H Judge Browne Date: 14 December 2009 at 10.28 am
Offence: (1) & (2) Trafficking in dangerous drugs (販運危險藥物) ---------------------------------- Reasons for Sentence ----------------------------------
1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to two charges of trafficking in dangerous drugs. Both offences were committed on the same day, namely, 9 September 2009. The first offence was committed on the staircase on the 2nd Floor of Yiu Wah House, Yiu Tung Estate, Shau Kei Wan in Hong Kong when he trafficked in 17.45 grammes of heroin hydrochloride and 261 tablets of midazolam. The second offence was committed at the defendant’s residence at Room 226 on the 2nd Floor of Yiu Wah House. He trafficked in 22.19 grammes of heroin hydrochloride and 547 tablets of midazolam. 2. On 9 September 2009, an anti-dangerous-drugs operation was conducted by officers who laid ambush on the staircase of No. 2 Staircase on the 2nd Floor of Yiu Wah House. At a quarter past 8 in the evening, the defendant was seen to come out of Room 226 and walked towards the staircase. He was intercepted by the officers and searched. Inside his trouser pockets, they found two white envelopes which contained the drugs, the subject of the 1st charge. 3. The defendant was arrested, and after that, the officers found a key in his possession, and with that key, they gained entry to Room 226. And inside the room, they found the drugs, the subject of the 2nd charge. 4. The defendant immediately admitted that he was in possession in order to deliver the drugs to others in order to earn some money. He said he was old and suffered various kinds of illness. In a cautioned interview, he told the police that he had been given the flat by a male friend called Lam Chai. He was to be given $500 as remuneration for each delivery, and he was given $1,000 as remuneration for the two deliveries in advance. 5. Forensic examination of the drugs revealed that they were the drugs, the subject of the charge. 6. The defendant has previous convictions. He was convicted of armed robbery and aggravated robbery in 1970 and sent to prison for 10 years. In 1979, for manufacturing dangerous drugs, he was sent to prison for 9 years. In 2002, for trafficking in dangerous drugs, he was sent to prison for 6 years. 7. In mitigation, I am told that the defendant is 71 years of age. He was born in Singapore and came to Hong Kong in 1958. He was university educated at Chinese University and graduated with a Degree in Chinese and History. I am told that he worked in the tourist industry trade and he worked for large newspapers in Hong Kong. He has a wife in Shenzhen and there are no children. 8. Two letters have been placed before the court: one from the defendant and one from his niece, and the letter from the defendant refers to his illness. Apparently, in 2005 when he was serving his sentence in Hei Ling Chau, he suffered a sudden illness and was sent by helicopter to Hong Kong Island and transferred to Queen Elizabeth Hospital for treatment. The state of his health has been deteriorating since that incident. For the past three years, he has been depending on social comprehensive assistance. 9. He was diagnosed as having prostate cancer and received chemotherapy treatment at Eastern Hospital. He said he needed four endocrine injections. The first two were provided by the Hospital Authority for free, but the last two were going to cost three and a half thousand dollars each. He said he did not have the money to pay for them. His request for assistance from the Social Welfare Department was rejected, and the Hospital Authority are still considering the matter. He says that the burden of survival has struck him hard and his self-restraint was shattered completely and that is the reason why he went astray and committed offences. He says that he has never felt repentant previously for his transgressions, but he does on this occasion. He asks for a chance and for lenient treatment so he can turn over a new life. 10. The letter from his niece refers also to the cancer diagnosis. She also refers to his diagnosis for hypertension, cataract and anxiety disorder, and she asks for sympathetic treatment. She said that the family would keep a close eye on him and take care of him in his late years. 11. As the defendant knows, the offences to which he has entered guilty pleas are serious offences. With regard to the quantities of heroin found in his possession, both of them are in the range of imprisonment for 5 to 8 years. I have considered the question of totality. I have also taken into account his medical condition and his age. 12. In respect of Charge 1, I have decided to take a starting point at the lower end of the spectrum and impose a starting point of 5 years, and the sentence, allowing for the guilty plea, will therefore be 40 months’ imprisonment. 13. In respect of Charge 2, I have decided the appropriate sentence should be 5 and a half years. I allow him full credit for his guilty plea. The sentence will therefore be one of 44 months’ imprisonment. And taking into account the question of totality, I have decided that 12 months of that sentence should run consecutive to Charge 1. The total sentence that the defendant will serve therefore will be one of 52 months’ imprisonment.
|