HKSAR V.Tsang King Nam

DCCC1297/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1297 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The Defendant pleads guilty to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug (Charge 1) and another count of possession of a dangerous drug (Charge 2).

2.On 2 September 2010, a team of police officers conducted an anti-dangerous drug operation in the area of Tai Lok House, Tai Yuen Estate, Tai Po.

3.At about 1830 hours, the police officers saw the Defendant on the ground floor of Tai Lok House.  The Defendant was looking around and placing his right hand over the right front pocket of his jeans. 

4.The police officers then intercepted the Defendant.  One of the police officers searched the Defendant and found the following in the right front pocket of the Defendant’s jeans:

(1) one plastic bag containing two plastic bags containing suspected dangerous drug (Exhibit 1), which was the subject matter of Charge 1;

(2) one plastic bag containing one plastic bag containing suspected dangerous drug (Exhibit 2), which was the subject matter of Charge 2.

5.The police officer arrested and cautioned the Defendant.

6.Under caution, the Defendant admitted that both exhibits contained ketamine and he was going to sell them to others.

7.In the subsequent video-recorded interview, the Defendant admitted:

(1) that he purchased the exhibits from an unknown person in the afternoon of 2 September 2010 for $1,500;

(2) that the Defendant was selling Exhibit 1 to others at $100 per gramme of powder containing ketamine. The Defendant would sell Exhibit 1 at Tai Lok House from about 1600 hours to about 2200 hours;

(3) that the Defendant claimed that Exhibit 2 was for self-consumption.

8.Government Chemist confirmed that Exhibit 1 contained a total of 26.87 grammes of powder containing 16.32 grammes of ketamine, and that Exhibit 2 contained 0.59 gramme of a powder containing 0.43 gramme of ketamine.

9.At the time of his arrest, the Defendant did not have any cash with him.

10.The police estimated that the street value of Exhibit 1 would be HK$3,198 and the street value of Exhibit 2 would be about $70.

11.The Defendant is aged 18 now and was 17 at the time of the commission of the offence.  He has a clear record in Hong Kong.  He was born in the Mainland in 1992 and came to Hong Kong in 1994.  He received education in Hong Kong up to Form 5 level.

12.His academic result from Form 1 to Form 3 was actually quite satisfactory.  However, his academic achievement worsened starting from Form 4, after failing in the Form 5, and his result in the HKCEE result was also not satisfactory.

13.By reason of the change of the education system, there is no school who is willing to take up the Defendant for the further of his study, and also because of this, his mother was angry and, as a result, he was asked to leave the home.

14.Prior to his arrest, he was working in a second-hand bookstore and he committed the offence because he wanted to earn some quick money.

15.According to Mr Ng, solicitor for the Defendant, the Defendant was remorseful for the commission of the offence and asked the court to treat him leniently.

16.Sentencing a young man with a clear record is always difficult for the court.  It is always sad to see a young man who actually has quite satisfactory academic results, at least from Form 1 to Form 3 level, now ended up in court. 

17.However, trafficking in a dangerous drug is always regarded as a very serious offence by the court and the options open to the court are quite limited, and it has also been repeatedly emphasised by the appellate court that mitigating factors such as age and the clear record of the Defendant had very little weight in such kind of serious offences, so sentencing the Defendant to immediate custodial sentence is the only option open to the court.

18.According to the sentencing guideline as laid down in the case of the Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1, trafficking in ketamine in the region of 10 to 50 grammes would attract a sentence in the region of 4 to 6 years’ imprisonment.

19.As 16.32 grammes of ketamine was involved in the 1st charge, I will adopt a starting point of 4 years and 3 months’ imprisonment.

20.Giving the Defendant one-third discount for his plea of guilty, the sentence is reduced to 34 months’ imprisonment.

21.For Charge 2, I would adopt a starting point of 12 months’ imprisonment.

22.Giving the Defendant one-third discount for his plea of guilty, the sentence is reduced to 8 months’ imprisonment.

23.Taking into account the totality principle, I would order 8 months’ imprisonment in Charge 2 to run concurrently with the sentence in Charge 1, and so the total sentence is still 34 months’ imprisonment, and this is the sentence I impose in the present case.