CRIMINAL CASE NO. 334 OF 2011
COURT: The defendant has pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely 980 grammes of a powder containing 630 grammes of ketamine.
The defendant was arrested at the Arrival Hall of the Lok Ma Chau Control Point upon returning to Hong Kong from mainland China.
The ketamine was found wrapped around her waist underneath a girdle, and she admitted that she was asked to carry the drugs back to Hong Kong for a reward of $2,000.
The seized drugs had a retail value in March 2011 of $110,746.
The defendant is aged 36 and has a clear record. She came from China to Hong Kong two years ago because her daughter had started primary school in Hong Kong. Mr Yuen, mitigating on her behalf, also disclosed to the court that her husband is aged 60 and is a Chinese herbalist, and the reason the defendant committed the present offence was because she wanted to earn extra money for her family to visit Hong Kong.
The defendant also wrote a letter explaining her remorse and her hope that she could be reunited with her family as soon as possible.
As Mr Yuen correctly pointed out, the only substantial mitigation in this case is that the defendant had pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.
Trafficking in dangerous drugs and, in recent years, particularly ketamine, is a very serious offence. It causes very tragic circumstances to the young people in Hong Kong and their families. In recognition of this fact, the Court of Appeal had, in the case of Hii Siew Cheng[1] 2008 3 HKL 323 in 2006, given guidelines as to trafficking in ketamine and the recommended sentence. It is recommended that for trafficking of between 600 to 1,000 grammes of ketamine, a sentence of between 12 to 14 years is recommended.
In this case, the ketamine is 630 grammes, so the starting point sentence of 12 years’ imprisonment is recommended. I see no reason to depart from that recommendation, and I adopt it as my starting point here.
The defendant has a clear record and has pleaded guilty, so she is entitled to the full one-third discount, so the sentence is reduced to 8 years’ imprisonment.
I see no other special circumstances to take into account, so the defendant is sentenced to 8 years’ imprisonment.