HKSAR v. Lai Ka Ming and Another

DCCC450/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 450 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Both defendants have pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 134.

2.The offence took place on 12 March this year. Both are jointly charged with trafficking 43.59 grammes of a powder containing 31.18 grammes of ketamine.

3.The facts of the case are very straightforward. This was a police sting operation where a police officer called a male to buy dangerous drugs and was offered ketamine. She offered $4,000 and it was agreed that she would receive a total of 16 packets of ketamine to be delivered to a meeting place in Central. There was a change of the meeting place, but at about 10.45 pm that night that officer and another PC were waiting at the designated meeting place.

4.Both defendants approached the officers on foot. It was the 2nd defendant who asked the officers to board a vehicle. The 2nd defendant got in and sat in the driver’s seat whilst the 1st defendant sat next to him. In the vehicle an officer handed over $4,000, that was marked money, to the 1st defendant. The 1st defendant gave this officer a bag of 16 packets of ketamine. This officer counted the packets and then revealed his identity. Both defendants were then arrested for this offence and asked for a chance.

5.The best mitigation put forward today by both defendants is their pleas of guilty. Both are young men and have clear records. There is no history of any involvement in drugs.

6.The 1st defendant has explained in mitigation that he did it due to his unemployment and would receive a monetary reward for delivering drugs. The 2nd defendant did not specifically explain why he got involved here but except for some part-time driving work he too was unemployed at this time. From letters of mitigation I have gleaned the fact that he had some debts from a failed business venture.

7.The 1st defendant has submitted two mitigation letters, one from himself and one from his mother, both asking for leniency. The 2nd defendant, I have received letters not only from the defendant but every member of his family, good friends, his previous head teacher as well as employer. They all support him. His family have forgiven him and are all surprised that he has got involved in trafficking drugs. The defendant’s own letter is quite heartfelt. He promises, in particular, his family that he will turn over a new leaf. I do hope he means every word.

8.I am sure nether defendants are masterminds here. They are but mules and couriers working for others who are smart enough to stay in the background. However, it has been said time and time again that the drug trade would not flourish without couriers and mules.

9.From the facts before me,I find there is no real difference in the defendants’ roles and I find them both equally culpable. Since June 2008 the Court of Appeal has set down guidelines for trafficking ketamine. I refer myself to the authority of the Secretary of Justice v Hii Siew Cheng CAAR7/2006. Now what is relevant here is the guideline for trafficking between 10 to 50 grammes of ketamine; this would attract a custodial sentence of between 4 to 6 years. The amount here would attract a starting point of about 5 years’ imprisonment.

10.It is sad to see the defendants are lured by what could not have been much of a financial reward which now results in lengthy terms of imprisonment. I have considered obviously their pleas, their previous clear records, their backgrounds, the mitigation put forward on their behalves, all the letters of mitigation I have received today as well as the guidelines.

11.Defendants, please stand up. For this offence, I will take, after considering all those matters, a starting point of 4 years and 6 months. You are both entitled to a discount of one-third for your pleas today. You are both sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment.