COURT: The defendant was charged with one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs, and the 2nd count was simple possession. Both counts involved ketamine. The amount was 3.28 grammes for the 1st count and 11-odd grammes for the 2nd count.
The defendant pleaded guilty and admitted to the Summary of Facts. To put it simply, the defendant was stopped by the Customs officers when he tried to enter Hong Kong from the Lok Ma Chau Control Point.
The 20 packets of ketamine in the 1st count were found in the defendant’s carry bag, and the packet in the 2nd count was found in his jeans’ pocket.
The defendant admitted right away to the officers that he was carrying the 20 packets for someone for $20,000, which he had not yet received, but the single packet in his jeans was for his own use. He then gave further details in a subsequent video interview.
The defendant is a Hong Kong resident and is now 46 years of age. He has a family in Hong Kong. He has a total of 12 previous convictions, and four are drug related. One is also a trafficking conviction in 2005.
Mr Chan, for the defendant, has submitted a number of letters written by the defendant’s family and a member of his church.
I consider, despite his involvement in drugs, the defendant has not abandoned his family and appeared to be a caring husband and father. Unfortunately, he has chosen this illegal way to solve his financial difficulties, and the amount of the drugs is indeed very large.
I have heard the mitigation, and having reviewed the authorities submitted by both sides, particularly the tariff case of Hii Siew Cheng and the Court of Appeal decision in Ng Siu Kam, I have decided to adopt 17 years as the starting point for the 1st count, and for this I have already included the aggravating factor of importation as referred to by the Court of Appeal.
I shall grant the one-third discount because of the plea. The sentence is therefore, for the 1st count, 11 years 4 months. For the 2nd count, I shall adopt 18 months as the starting point, and reduce it to 12 months for the plea.
However, given the principle of totality as referred to by Mr Chan, I accept his argument that I should order the two terms to run concurrently.
So the sentence is 11 years and 4 months.
But I want to add this as a reminder to the defendant. The defendant is no longer a young man. As I see it, he cannot afford to lose another 10 or 20 years in prison. I hope this is really his last criminal offence he will commit, and he could really turn a new leaf for the sake of his family and the church members who have supported him.