HKSAR v. Wong Ka Ho and Another
|
DCCC482/2011 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO. 482 OF 2011 ----------------------
----------------------
-------------------------- Reasons for Sentence -------------------------- 1.The defendant, who is aged 25, pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs. 2.The offence was committed on 29 March 2011 at the lift lobby on the 6th floor of Hang Wo House. This is in Tai Po in the New Territories. The quantity involved was 44.94 grammes of ketamine. 3.The facts admitted by the defendant disclose that at 8.30 pm on 29 March, he and his girlfriend, who was charged jointly with an offence of trafficking with the defendant, were having a dispute at the lift lobby on the 6th floor of Hang Wo House and the case was reported by the security guard of the building. 4.The police arrived a short time later and conducted an investigation. They searched a black plastic bag from the sports bag which was carried by his girlfriend and in that they found the drugs the subject of the charge. From the bag, they found not only the seven packets of ketamine but an electronic scale and 75 empty transparent resealable plastic bags. 5.The defendant immediately told the police officers at the scene that the ketamine and the other items seized from his girlfriend’s bag were, in fact, his. He said that he placed them in his girlfriend’s bag because he was afraid that his family members might notice the ketamine. 6.When he was later taken to the police station, he was interviewed under caution and told the police that he purchased the drugs in Mong Kok from somebody he did not know. He said he bought the electronic scale and the empty transparent resealable plastic bags some time previously and stored them at his premises. 7.The estimated street value of the drugs is HK$6,378. The defendant admits and he confirms it through his counsel in court today that the majority of the drugs in his possession were in his possession for the purpose of trafficking. 8.The defendant has a clear record. He is single. I am told by his counsel that he comes from a humble family. He has a younger brother aged 15 and his parents are in their late 40s. I am told the defendant has close ties with his family and I have letters from them confirming that and they are in court today. The defendant has been working for a company, a cleaning service company, and has earned a salary of $6,500 per month and most of that he contributes to his family. 9.A number of letters of mitigation have been placed before the court, the first one of which was from the defendant himself who not only expressed his remorse but also is very regretful for the pain and suffering that he has caused his parents. The other letters placed before me are from his parents, his work supervisor and from a member of Legco. All these letters give testament to the fact that the defendant is hardworking and regarded as an honest member of society. 10.I have also had placed before me a psychiatric report from a Dr Nang Chung-ming with regard to the defendant’s mother. For some time she has been suffering from psychiatric problems for which she is being treated and I am told that the defendant is particularly remorseful because of the additional strain that this matter has placed on his mother. 11.In mitigation, counsel has stressed that not only is the defendant a person of clear record, but the offence itself was not carried out in a professional manner. It was not a large-scale operation and involved no importation or exportation of drugs. 12.As the defendant now knows, and he will obviously have been told by his counsel, the offence to which he has pleaded guilty is an extremely serious offence. The abuse of drugs in Hong Kong is a major social problem. It accounts for much of the criminal activity that takes place in Hong Kong, as well as causing huge social problems. 13.Ketamine, in particular, seems to be the drug of choice amongst the younger people in Hong Kong and it is for that reason that the Court of Appeal have said that those caught trafficking in ketamine must be dealt with severely. They have laid down certain guidelines for dealing with this particular offence and have stated that for trafficking of between 10 to 50 grammes of ketamine a sentence of 4 to 6 years is appropriate. 14.The quantity involved in this case is towards the higher end of that scale, the quantity being 44.94 grammes. I have taken into account the fact that the defendant has a clear record, the matters urged upon me in mitigation, and that some of the drugs seized were for his own consumption. 15.In taking all those factors into account, I have decided to take a starting point of 4½ years’ imprisonment and reduce that by one-third to reflect the guilty plea. 16.The defendant will, therefore, go to prison for 3 years.
|