HKSAR v. Wong Siu Tung

DCCC1219/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1219 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134.

2.You have admitted that on 9 August 2010 at the lift lobby on the 22nd floor of Wu Pik House, Wu King Estate, Tuen Mun, New Territories, you unlawfully trafficked in 13.29 grammes of a powder containing 5.67 grammes of ketamine.

3.On that day police officers were conducting an anti-dangerous drugs operation in the area of the lift lobby of the 22nd floor of Wu Pik House.  At about half-past midnight, officers saw you at the lift lobby.  They intercepted and made enquiries of you as you looked nervous and were trembling.  Upon search, they found the dangerous drugs as per the charge in one plastic bag in the right front pocket of your trousers.  They arrested and cautioned you. 

4.Under caution, you admitted that the drugs contained ketamine.  You further admitted you would consume a little only and sell the remaining to others for profit.  You told the police officers that you were living at premises on the 22nd floor.  The officers then took you back to your premises and entered the premises with your key. 

5.Upon search, they found an electronic scale and one plastic bag containing 10 plastic bags. 

6.In a subsequent recorded interview, you further admitted that you lived alone in the premises and the electronic scale and plastic bags belonged to you.  Scales and the plastic bags would be used to repackage the drugs for sale.  You had in fact purchased the drugs found upon you from an unknown person for $900.  You had planned to repackage those drugs into about 1 gramme per bag and sell each bag at $100.  You would then get back a total of $1,400 and earn a profit of $500. 

7.It was an admitted fact that the police estimated the street value of the drugs would be about $1,582.

8.Defendant, your counsel, Mr Kong Kok-lung, has mitigated fully and thoroughly on your behalf and I have taken into account all that he has had to say.

9.I have also taken into consideration the letters to which you have written your father and sister and the Christian association drug centres.

10.You are 26 years of age and are of clear record.  This is your first offence.  You have attained education up to Form 3 in Hong Kong and worked as a container worker and earned some $14,000 a month. You had been gainfully employed for about 4 years prior to the commission of this offence. 

11.In respect of your background, I am informed that sadly your parents divorced when you were only 12 years old and since then had to fend for a living almost on your own save for the assistance of your elder siblings.  As a result of which you had to quit school earlier at the age of 15 and earn a living.  As a result of work pressure, you became drug dependent to reduce the pressure and kill your sense of loneliness. 

12.In short, as a result of your drug dependency, you sold drugs to earn quick money to feed your own consumption of drugs.  It seems that you had realized your dependency to drugs and sought help.  But I can see that some of these letters are dated as late as 4 March and 15 March and that is only within the last month.  Nevertheless, it is good to see that you have accepted your drug dependency and are seeking assistance.  But as Mr Kong rightly sets out, this offence of trafficking is a very serious offence and despite your drug dependency, a sentence of immediate imprisonment is warranted. 

13.As your counsel, Mr Kong, has correctly set out, the guidelines are set out by the Court of Appeal in the case of Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng for traffickers in ketamine;  Although Mr Kong has said that some of the drugs were for your own consumption, in this case particularly, Defendant, as you admitted, very little was for your own consumption and in your record of interview you admitted in fact that almost all of the drugs would be for sale and packaged in 1 gramme per bag.

14.In those circumstances and following the case of Wong Suet Hau, CACC366/2000, very little drugs were for your own consumption and therefore it does not affect or accept or disturb the quantity of drugs that you had for trafficking.  In those circumstances, Defendant, you had in your possession 5.67 grammes of ketamine for trafficking.

15.Following the guidelines.  Defendant, had I convicted you after trial, I would have taken a starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment.  However, giving you full credit for your plea of guilty, I will reduce that term to one of 2 years’ imprisonment to which you are so sentenced.