COURT: This defendant pleaded guilty at committal on 5 July 2013 to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug. The dangerous drug was 1.23 kilogrammes of a powder containing 0.94 kilogrammes of ketamine.
The defendant has confirmed his plea before this court and also confirmed the facts that he admitted at committal. The facts show that the defendant was stopped and searched on the street. Inside the bag he was carrying, police officers found five transparent resealable plastic bags of equal weight. The bags were later found to contain a total of 1.23 kilogrammes of a powder containing 0.94 kilogrammes of ketamine.
The defendant was arrested and under caution stated, “Someone gave me $1,500 for me to bring these things here.” In a subsequent video-recorded interview under caution the defendant stated that a man named Si Yeh had gone to his home in Fu Cheong Estate about an before his arrest. He asked the defendant to deliver the bag for him to another person in Siu Sai Wan. The defendant was then paid $1,500 for the delivery. The defendant claimed that he didn’t know what the items were inside the bag because he never checked. He took a taxi to Siu Sai Wan and was arrested after he alighted from the taxi.
He was charged and while in custody requested a further interview with the police. A post-charge cautioned interview was held and in that interview he claimed that a man named Chu Chai had called him on his mobile phone and requested him to go to Fu Cheong Estate. He said that when he arrived, Chu Chai had given him a bag of “K Chai” and asked him to deliver it to another person in Siu Sai Wan. The defendant said that the reason he agreed to help was because he wanted the reward of $1,500. He said that he didn’t tell the truth to the police earlier because he and Chu Chai were friends and the defendant did not want to put him on the street.
Subsequent analysis by the Government Chemist confirmed the quantity and the nature of the drug as in the particulars of the charge. The estimated street value of all the ketamine seized was $148,830.
The defendant, who is now 49, has a lengthy criminal record. It includes 34 convictions, seven of which were for possession of dangerous drugs and two for possession of apparatus. What is of significance is that there were no previous trafficking convictions and it is notable that all the recorded offences were dealt with in the magistracy.
The defendant was born in China in 1964 and came to Hong Kong in 1979. He was educated to secondary level in China. The defendant claimed he worked as a part-time transport worker before his arrest and he was unemployed at the time he was arrested. He had been released from prison on the last occasion on 8 July 2010.
In mitigation, I was informed that the defendant has for a number of years suffered from health problems, mainly mental health problems. His physical ailments concern poor blood circulation in his feet which meant that he required a crutch to move about. This meant that in the years before this incident, he was able to do casual work only. Latterly he has survived by being on CSSA. His health problems were so bad that on several occasions he has had suicidal tendencies. I was advised that he has been receiving psychiatric assistance while he is in prison.
His mother lives in the mainland and is supported by him. It was pointed out that the background to the incident shows that he was vulnerable and financially insecure at the time he committed this offence.
After his arrest, the defendant wrote to the police and offered to provide what assistance he could about drug trafficking. He provided information about the man who asked him to do the job of courier. Although nothing of substance has been achieved by the information provided, he remains ready to give information and assistance as a witness if he is required to do so.
In considering sentence, it is clear that the mitigatory factors in this case put forward by the defendant are his plea of guilty, which is the main mitigation, his remorse for his actions and the fact that he was prepared to provide assistance and cooperation to the authorities.
The relevant authority for ketamine sentencing tariffs is Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng[2009]1HKLRD1. The narcotic quantity is 0.94 kilogrammes. Under the tariff guidelines, that places him in the bracket of 600 to 1,000 grammes and 12 to 14 years imprisonment. In this case I take a starting point of 13 years, I give him the full one-third discount and sentence the defendant to 8 years 8 months imprisonment.