HKSAR v. Tse Chak Sum
|
DCCC 241/2013 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO 241 OF 2013 ----------------------
----------------------
--------------------- Reasons for Sentence --------------------- 1.The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in 11.44 grammes of ketamine. 2.The facts admitted that are on 21 December 2012, police officers were on duty in the vicinity of the Hoi Lai Estate in Lai Chi Kok. At about 7.55 pm, the defendant was spotted walking hurriedly outside the ground floor of Hoi Fai House, Hoi Lai Estate in Lai Chi Kok. 3.Upon search, in the right front trouser pocket of the defendant, the police officers found one transparent re-sealable plastic bag containing the drugs the subject of the charge. 4.The defendant frankly admitted that he sold the ketamine because he did not have enough money for Christmas and asked for a chance. 5.In a subsequent video recorded interview conducted with the defendant in the presence of his father, the defendant acknowledged his admissions at the scene and said that a man called “Fung King” passed him the drugs for trafficking. He said that Fung King would give him 56 grammes of ketamine each time and the drugs found on him were the leftover. He had been waiting for a buyer before he was arrested. 6.At the time of his arrest, the defendant was in possession of just over $1,100 in cash and RMB305. 7.The defendant has a clear record. He is 16 years of age and on the last occasion I adjourned the case because I wanted to consider possibly detaining the defendant in training centre. 8.That report states that the defendant was brought up in a working-class family, being the second of three siblings to his parents. The defendant’s father was a newspaper deliverer whereas the defendant’s mother was a housewife. The defendant’s parents were lenient in their parenting style and failed to render effective and sufficient supervision under the defendant during his upbringing. 9.He became involved in a case of theft in May 2008, for which he was given a police caution. 10.He lost interest in his study in Form 3. Thereafter, the defendant became streetwise and joined triad societies. He started peddling drugs in October 2012 to make easy money. 11.The officer who prepared the report took the view that, in view of the weak law-abiding concept of the defendant, a disciplinary training period coupled with statutory supervision was considered beneficial. 12.Counsel representing the defendant has placed before the court a number of documents. There are three letters and also a name card from the St Stephen’s Society. 13.One of the letters is from a social worker and the second is from the Hong Kong Teachers’ Association of the Lee Heng Kwei Secondary School. These letters are very supportive and ask for me to deal with the defendant leniently. 14.The letter from the defendant states that he deeply regrets his involvement in these matters and promises to reform. 15.Now, the offence which the defendant has committed is a serious offence. According to the Court of Appeal, the appropriate sentence for trafficking in this quantity of drugs is between 4 and 6 years’ imprisonment and, with offences of this severity, young age is not considered to be a particularly telling mitigating factor. 16.The object of the sentencing regime in Hong Kong is to deter traffickers and it is well known that those engaged in arranging for drug trafficking use young traffickers. 17.Drug abuses causes enormous social damage in Hong Kong. It causes damage to the users and undermines the fabric of Hong Kong society. 18.I have the greatest sympathy for the defendant’s parents. I am told that they are very anxious about the defendant’s situation and they have turned up in court today to show their support. Counsel has told me the very deep feelings they have and the concern they have about this matter. 19.Having taken into account all the circumstances, however, I am prepared not to send the defendant to prison. 20.What I propose to do is follow the recommendation and order that the defendant goes to training centre.
|