COURT: The defendant, Ms Wu Chun-mei, pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug during the committal proceedings. The offence is contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134.
The particulars of offence are that the defendant, on the 24th day of August 2012, at Ground Floor, Choi Yin House, Choi Tak Estate, Ngau Tau Kok in Hong Kong, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 0.24 kilogram of a powder containing 0.18 kilogram of ketamine.
The defendant is committed to this court for sentencing.
Facts Admitted
On 24 August 2012 at 1529 hours, the defendant was intercepted by the police at Ground Floor of Choi Yin House, Choi Tak Estate, Sau Mau Ping. Inside a paper bag carried by the defendant the police found a plastic bag containing the dangerous drugs in question, which was 0.24 kilogram of a powder containing 0.18 kilogram of ketamine.
On being arrested and cautioned by the police, the defendant said, “Ah Sir, I only brought it for ‘Ah Wing’. Please do not arrest me.” On being further cautioned, she said, “I did it for the first time. I just earned some money. I have not received the money yet.”
In a subsequent video-recorded interview, the defendant admitted inter alia that the bag was given to her by “Ah Wing”, who told her to go home to wait for his call to take the bag to someone. She knew that the bag contained ketamine and she was to be given a reward of $1,000, which she had not yet received.
The estimated retail value of the ketamine at the time of seizure was $30,240.
Criminal Record
The defendant has one previous conviction of possession of a dangerous drug which took place on 8 January 2009, for which she was fined $5,000.
Mitigation
The defendant is aged 33 years and received education up to Form 4. She had worked as a waitress and salesgirl until 2010, when she started to rely on CSSA.
According to the counsel for the defendant, the defendant married for the first time in 1999 and later gave birth to a son who is now aged 13. She divorced her husband in 2000 due to the extramarital affairs of the husband. She has the custody of the son. She remarried in 2006 and then gave birth to the second son, who is now aged 6. In 2009 the second husband decided to become a Buddhist monk, and the marriage ended up in divorce. The defendant also has the custody of the second son.
The defendant had to quit her job to look after the two sons, and she now relies on CSSA of $5,000 a month, which is barely enough for a family of three. Due to the emotional stress brought about by the failure of the marriages and the financial burden, the defendant sought comfort in dangerous drugs and became addicted to ketamine. As a result, she committed her first offence of possession of a dangerous drug in 2009 in which she was fined.
Counsel for the defence said that the defendant was induced and utilised by “Ah Wing” in the present case. Due to her desire for quick money for herself and her two sons, she foolishly committed the present offence. She knew she was wrong and is truly remorseful, reflected in her co‑operation with the police and her plea of guilty in court.
She has decided to abstain from dangerous drugs and will study English and psychology in prison so as to better equip herself for a new life after discharge from prison. She has volunteered to be a garment worker during her present incarceration.
The defendant has the support of her mother, sisters and friends, who are in court today. Counsel for the defence submits letters of mitigation written by the elder sister and mother to court. The elder sister expresses support for the defendant and opines that the defendant had been utilised by undesirable peers. The mother says in the letter that her husband had been hospitalised and the family is in a difficult position. Both the elder sister and mother ask the court for leniency.
Sentence
The Court of Appeal has laid down clear sentencing guidelines for trafficking in ketamine in the case of Secretary for Justice v Hii Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1. According to the case, trafficking in ketamine of 50 to 300 grammes, the starting point is 6 to 9 years’ imprisonment.
The amount of ketamine in the present case is 180 grammes. The starting point should therefore be about 7 years 6 months’ imprisonment.
The defendant committed the offence out of a desire to earn quick money to support herself and her two sons. The court has much sympathy for the defendant. She lives an unpleasant life because of the failure in her marriages and the burden of looking after two young sons as a single mother. The court must however point out that emotional stress and economic reasons can never be excuses to offend the law, and certainly do not constitute valid grounds of mitigation.
Counsel for the defendant has made a thorough and powerful mitigation on behalf of the defendant. The court accepts that the defendant is truly remorseful, has the support of the family, and has decided to turn a new leaf. The court must however point out that this cannot constitute reasons for the court to depart from the sentencing guidelines laid down by the Court of Appeal.
The court therefore adopts 7 years 6 months’ imprisonment as the starting point in the present case.
Giving credit to the defendant for her plea of guilty, the court sentences her to 5 years’ imprisonment.