HKSAR v. Shek Wai Lun

Case No.HCCC 362/2010
Court
High Court CFI
Date14 Apr 2011
Judge
Case Document
100%

HCCC362/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 362 OF 2010

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

  HKSAR  
  v.  
  Shek Wai-lun (石偉倫)  

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

Before:

The Honourable Madam Justice Beeson

Date:

14 April 2011 at 10.30 am

Present:

Mr Franco Kuan, SPP (Ag), of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Cheng Andy Lim-chi, instructed by Messrs Pang, Wan & Choi, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Accused

Offence:

(1) & (2) Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: This defendant pleaded guilty to two charges of trafficking in a dangerous drug, the dangerous drug being ketamine. Charge 1 related to 136.88 grammes of a mixture containing 115.13 grammes of ketamine and Charge 2 related to 232.67 grammes of a mixture containing 190.08 grammes of ketamine.

The facts admitted by the defendant show that he and another male were incepted by police who had laid an ambush as they left his home in the Fu Heng Estate. The defendant was searched and found to be carrying 10 plastic bags of suspected dangerous drug. This was later analysed as the quantity in Charge 1 and he was arrested.

The house premises were searched and in the defendant’s bedroom the police found a further 17 bags of suspected dangerous drugs in a wooden box, as well as an electronic scale and a bundle of resealable plastic bags. This was later analysed as the quantity in Charge 2 by the government chemist. When cautioned, the defendant admitted that the ketamine belonged to him and that it had nothing to do with his friend or his mother.

In a video interview recorded later the defendant said that the dangerous drugs had been given to him by a man known to him as “Ah Keung” whom he met at a disco in Shenzhen a couple of weeks before. The dangerous drugs had been placed at a stairwell near his home and he later collected them. After he delivered the 27 packets of ketamine he was to receive HK$2,000. He said this was the first time he had helped Ah Keung and he repeated that the dangerous drugs had nothing to do with his mother or his friend.

The defendant has a criminal record starting in November 2003 with various offences of theft, robbery and attempted theft. In 2006 he was convicted of possession of dangerous drugs and sent to DATC and he was convicted of two further charges of possession of dangerous drugs in 2008 and 2010. He has no previous convictions for trafficking.

Through his antecedents statement, I was advised that he was born on 12 December 1983 and he is now aged 28. He was born in Hong Kong and educated to Form 1 level. His counsel advises that he was working as a transport worker at the time of his arrest earning $350 to $400 a day.

A letter was produced from his mother who told the court that she thought that she should bear some responsibility for his breaches of the law. She said that his father had passed away when he was seven and that she had not supervised him properly thereafter. She said that he was a filial son who had been taking care of the family and his younger sister and she urged the court to deal with him leniently in respect of these offences. I am advised that the defendant was co-operative and that he indicated his plea at an early stage in about January of 2011.

In the guideline case for the drug ketamine, Sfor J and Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1 the sentencing range for this quantity 50 to 300 grammes, is 6 to 9 years and 300 to 600 grammes is 9 years to 12 years’ imprisonment. I adopt a starting point of 9 years in this case. I give the defendant full benefit for his plea of guilty. I sentence him to 6 years on each of the charges and they are ordered to run concurrently.

I do not propose to deal with any of the suspended sentences because I think they have already been dealt with sufficiently by the court below.