HKSAR v. Ko Ka Chun
|
DCCC 258/2013 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO. 258 OF 2013 ----------------------
----------------------
--------------------- Reasons for Sentence --------------------- 1.The defendant pleaded guilty on the last occasion to an amended charge of possession of a dangerous drug. He was arrested with 14.25 grammes of a powder containing 12.05 grammes of ketamine. 2.This was a stop-and-search case and the drugs were found on the defendant’s person. 3.Under caution, he told the police that the drugs belonged to him, they were ketamine and he had bought them that evening and they were for his own consumption. 4.He pleaded guilty to that charge and I was told he had one previous conviction, a similar conviction, and in September 2011 was sentenced to a probation of 12 months. 5.On the last occasion I adjourned to today for two reports. I will not repeat the details of the report. 6.The defendant is 21 years old and single, living with his family. After leaving school at quite an early age, he has worked several types of jobs. Sadly, because of loose parental control at a young age he got involved with peers who were a bad influence. 7.I will say it is not because his mother did not want to exercise any supervision or discipline. It is because she was a single mother and working for most of the time and, therefore, the defendant was free to roam. 8.He inevitably got involved with dangerous drugs and has tried on several occasions drug treatment programmes. Sadly, they were unsuccessful and he relapsed into drugs. 9.Despite this, his mother is still supportive of him and has tried to help him, but I think it is going to take more than a mother’s love to help him quit dangerous drugs. 10.The probation officer is of the view the defendant is not suitable for probation. The probation officer is of the view the defendant needs some long-term residential withdrawal treatment and, in any event, he declined the idea of a residential drug withdrawal programme under the supervision of the probation officer. 11.The Drug Addiction Treatment Centre report confirms the defendant is a drug dependent and is suitable for admission and there is a place available for him. 12.Having considered the background of the defendant, the one previous similar conviction where probation was imposed but did not work, the quantity of drugs involved, the defendant’s plea and the fact that there is a place at the Drug Addiction Treatment Centre for him, having considered all of these factors, I find a Drug Addiction Treatment Centre order appropriate. 13.I order a DATC order with a conviction recorded.
|