CRIMINAL CASE NO. 89 OF 2011
COURT: The defendant, who is aged 33 and has no previous convictions, has pleaded guilty to trafficking in 64.02 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, I will call that ice, and also to a powder which contained 211.15 grammes of ketamine, together worth an estimated $85,396 on the street.
The defendant was living on her own in Kwun Tong and was in receipt of welfare benefits of $4,335 a month. Her explanation, following her arrest on 3 November 2010, that she had bought the “K chai” and ice, as she referred to these drugs, for her own consumption at a price of $50,000 because they were cheaper to buy in bulk, was plainly an invented excuse as she more or less accepts today by her guilty plea.
She was, as she has admitted through the very able address made on her behalf by Mr Hotten, plainly a courier, and I would add a trusted courier, to have been given such a large quantity of drugs. In short, she was found in possession of the drugs shortly before 2 o'clock in the morning in premises where she was not a resident. The ice was found in five separate bags and the powder containing the ketamine was inside another bag.
Now, there is a psychiatric report prepared by Dr K W Chow, dated 27 May 2011. This indicates that while the defendant has had very real psychiatric troubles in the past, she has, since her arrest, been stable, to quote the report, and she has had no psychotic experience. In 2007, however, she had been diagnosed with psychotic depression and she admitted to Dr Chow that she had regularly abused methamphetamine since the age of 25. The reference in the report to amphetamine is in error, as Mr Hotten has confirmed, because the defendant is an ice addict and has been for many years.
The tariffs for this offence are plainly set out and the defendant, from her replies to the police, seems to have known the gravity of trafficking in dangerous drugs by trying to make out that she was in simple possession of this very large quantity.
Now, I am asked to take into account, in mitigation, the letter from the defendant, in which she sets out her remorse, especially in the light of the close family bond she has with her mother, her brother and her cousins. I have also read the letter which the defendant’s mother wrote and also the letters from her brother and from Pastor Lee Fong Mui whose Christian Association arranges visits to inmates at correctional institutions.
It is plain from these letters that the defendant blames her problems on being let down by so-called friends who got her to carry drugs for them. Yet it is, of course, precisely because people like the defendant are prepared to traffic in drugs that others, who are not addicted, are caught up in drug abuse in the same way that the defendant, herself, was caught up in this terrible trade.
The danger to society caused by trafficking is incalculable and it is for that reason that the warning has gone out to all of those who engage in it that the sentences for those who are caught will be very severe.
Here, for the 64 grammes of ice alone, the appropriate sentence under the guidelines in Attorney General v Ching Kwok Hung [1991] 2 HKLR 125, is between 7 and 10 years’ imprisonment for 10 to 70 grammes. For the amount in this case, I will adopt a starting point of 9 years and 9 months.
For the 211 grammes of ketamine, if this had stood alone, the appropriate sentence under the guidelines in Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2008] 3 HKC 323, would have been between 6 to 9 years’ imprisonment for between 50 and 300 grammes. A starting point for this quantity would normally have been 8 years’ imprisonment.
However, that quantity of drugs does not stand alone so that, in my judgment, bearing in mind that this was a significant quantity of a highly prevalent dangerous drug and totality of the sentence as a whole, adopting the approach in HKSAR v Yip Wai Yin [2004] 3 HKC 367, the overall sentence on this count, following a trial, should be 12 years’ imprisonment. You have entered a timely plea and this will be fully reflected in your ultimate sentence, which must be one of 8 years’ imprisonment.