CRIMINAL CASE NO. 373 OF 2010
COURT: I have to sentence you for three charges of trafficking in a dangerous drug and also for the possession of an offensive weapon, you having pleaded guilty to these charges in the magistrates’ court.
The facts reveal that you were a mobile drugs retailer. If one knew the right telephone number to ring, contact could be made with you and you would then sell, in this instance, “Ice”.
There was a controlled buy and that was the 8 grammes of “Ice” in Charge 1. You had gone to meet the undercover policeman, who had bought it off you on a motorcycle where you had hidden the registration number, placing a false plate over it.
Naturally, you were arrested. The motorbike was searched and the drugs in Charge 2 were found there: a further 10 grammes of “Ice”, 67 grammes of ketamine, a small amount of cocaine and some nimetazepam. Also, there were two knives which you admitted were carried for self-defence.
Your home was searched and a further amount of ketamine - 21 grammes - was found there along with a small amount of nimetazepam.
The knives in question, which I now hold in my hand, are fearsome weapons, the most fearsome-looking one being in effect a small beef knife.
You will know that sentencing for drugs is based upon guidelines which are in turn based upon the nature and quantity of the drug. In all, you had some 18 grammes of “Ice” and that puts you in the bracket of 7 to 10 years for a starting point after trial. You had 88 grammes of ketamine, albeit in two different places, which puts you in the 6 to 9 years’ imprisonment for a starting point after trial. The cocaine would have attracted a shorter custodial sentence by itself, as would have the nimetazepam.
It is possible to work out, therefore, in relation to each individual drug, a starting point and to apply the one-third discount you earned for your plea of guilty to it. But one cannot merely do that and add up all the sentences because that would give too great a total. You would get a bigger total than if all the drugs had been “Ice”, so whilst I can assign individual sentences to the actual charges, the real judgment in the case concerns how they overlap.
In effect, what I shall do is take overall a starting point of just over 7 years for the “Ice” and reduce that, in my mind, to 5 years for the plea of guilty. In effect, cocaine gets dropped out of the equation, save that I round up from 4 years 8 months to 5 years in my mind. The ketamine would attract a 6-year starting point and would be reduced to 4 years for the plea of guilty.
In relation to the offensive weapons, I look at a starting point of 6 months. I take on board the points your counsel makes that there was no immediate threat of their use.
I give you the one-third discount and I pass a sentence of 4 months on Charge 3. This is separate offending and the sentence there I will have in mind to make consecutive. The idea of someone driving around on a vehicle that cannot be traced by its registration number, in a trade like yours, carrying offensive weapons, is something that should attract a consecutive sentence, albeit short.
I have borne in mind that you pleaded guilty in the magistrates’ court and whilst you have a bad criminal record this is your first conviction for trafficking in dangerous drugs, although you have previous convictions for possession of them. You are an addict.
Accordingly, the sentences I impose are these. On Charge 1, 4 years’ imprisonment. On Charge 2, 5 years' imprisonment. Two years of that sentence will run consecutively to the sentence on Charge 1; three years will run concurrently to it. On Charge 3, there will be a sentence of 4 months which will run consecutively to the sentences on Charges 1 and 2. On Charge 4, there will be a sentence of 3 years’ imprisonment which will run concurrently to everything.
The total sentence is therefore one of 6 years and 4 months in prison, which would have given an overall starting point of 9½ years after trial. I judge that to be the right overall sentence in the circumstances. Its basis is taking sentencing for the “Ice” and then adding something for the other drugs.
It is the fact that you are currently serving a sentence of 16 months’ imprisonment. Six months of that relates to an entirely different matter for which you appeared before the court in May of 2010 concerning four cases which included criminal intimidation, common assault and two of criminal damage. Ten months of that 16 months’ sentence arise from driving whilst disqualified and using a motor vehicle without insurance; another driving matter for which you had a month concurrently; and using the vehicle in less than a proper condition, all of which resulted from the driving of the motorcycle in question in this case.
MR KUAN: My apologies, my Lord. In relation to the driving offences at item 21, they also arise from a wholly separate incident.
MR KUAN: It's a wholly separate incident. It's entirely my fault. I did not clarify immediately.
COURT: All right. When I correct the written record of my reasons, I could just say the driving matters were a wholly different matter.
MR KUAN: A wholly different one. He was not charged with any driving offences in relation to this incident. I am sorry.
MR LAU: I do apologise, my Lord. This is my instruction.
COURT: Don’t worry.