HKSAR v. Wong Chi To

DCCC 808/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 808 OF 2013

____________

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

____________

The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Trafficking in a dangerous drug". The dangerous drug involved is ketamine.

Summary of Facts

2.About 6:00 pm on 9 June 2013, in the corridor on 6/F, Block 21 Shek Kip Mei Estate, PC 11442 (PW1) stopped the defendant for enquiry.  The defendant was found holding in his left hand 7 resealable plastic bags (later found to contain a total of 13.40 grammes of a powder containing 10.34 grammes of ketamine).

3.The defendant told PW1 that he was helping his friend to get "K chai" from the fire hose reel on 6/F, Block 23 just now.  The defendant was residing in a unit on 6/F, Block 21.

4.In his video recorded interview, the defendant admitted that he was helping a friend named "Ah Man" to deliver the drugs.  Ah Man would phone him without disclosing the caller's number.  The defendant would get $400 for each delivery.  Upon Ah Man's instructions, he went to pick up the drugs from the fire hose reel on 6/F, Block 23.  Someone would then call and tell him to deliver the ketamine to others. The defendant knew that the drugs were ketamine and weighed about 14 grammes. He was unemployed at the time and was a ketamine addict.

Mitigation & Sentence

5.The defendant is now 28, single and unemployed. He has 1 conviction record involving 7 offences, one of which was "simple possession".  Defence lawyer Mr. LOU informed me that the defendant was previously a casual decoration worker earning $4,500 per month.

6.A letter written by the defendant was placed before me.  He claimed that he was in need of money owing to outstanding debts, unemployment and unpaid rent.  He also had to support a younger brother. Under financial hardship, he committed the present offence to earn some quick money.

7.Mr. LOU submitted that this is the defendant's first "trafficking" offence and that the defendant is remorseful.

8.Time after time, the court has expressed in very clear terms that being in financial difficulty (however serious) is no mitigating factor for committing a crime.  Furthermore, a clear message must be conveyed to the general public that "drug trafficking" is a serious crime and that drug traffickers would most certainly be punished by long-term imprisonment even for fresh offenders.  The Court of Appeal has laid down clear sentencing guidelines for trafficking in ketamine (see SJ v HII Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1).  For up to 10 grammes, the sentence ranges from 2 to 4 years' imprisonment.

9.In the present case, the defendant trafficked in 10.34 grammes of ketamine.  The appropriate starting point is 4 years' imprisonment.  A one-third discount is given for the guilty plea, reducing the sentence to 32 months.  Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further discount. The sentence I pass is 32 months' imprisonment.

10.I cannot stress enough the seriousness of "drug trafficking".  All sensible jurisdictions (not just Hong Kong but many other places around the world) are determined to combat against it by way of heavy punishment.  The purpose of doing so is abundantly clear – to deter all offenders (both fresh and repeated).  If there are no more willing "foot soldiers" like the defendant, the drug business of the "generals" behind the scene will not flourish.