HKSAR v. Chang Wai Man

DCCC 192/2014

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 192 OF 2014

----------------------

----------------------

---------------------

Reasons for Sentence

---------------------

1.Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134. The drugs in question is ketamine and the quantity is 25.47 grammes of a powder containing 16.12 grammes of ketamine.

2.The facts of the case are that on 13 January this year two police officers at about 8.45 pm saw you walking hurriedly along Marble Road in North Point.  They thought you were suspicious and approached you.  You were stopped and searched.  Their suspicions were very accurate and they found in your pocket two transparent resealable plastic bags containing ketamine. 

3.Under caution at the scene you admitted that you had possession of the drugs for your own consumption.  The police also after that search found two mobile phones and some cash on your person. 

4.Later at the police station in a video-recorded interview you elaborated on your admission.  You admitted that you had bought the two bags of ketamine from somebody called “Sai B” in Cheung Sha Wan the day before your arrest.  You had paid $1,500 for the drugs.  You were planning to consume about $500 worth yourself and sell the rest to others who asked you for drugs in arcade game centres.  You told the police that you yourself have been taking ketamine for 4 to 5 years.

5.The police also searched your home but found nothing suspicious.  They found nothing; no paraphernalia that is normally associated with consuming or trafficking drugs. 

6.Your best mitigation today is your plea of guilty.  You have one previous conviction.  It is related to drugs but not to trafficking drugs.  In 2007 you were sentenced to a drug addiction treatment order for possession of dangerous drugs. 

7.You are 28 years old and single.  Prior to your arrest, you were working as a decoration worker earning eight to ten thousand dollars a month.  From your income you would give about half of it to your parents.  Your parents are separated.  You do have older siblings. 

8.I from your antecedent can see you told the police that you are a ketamine addict and have had urological issues that are common to ketamine addicts since June last year.

9.I have before me a letter from the Hong Kong Christian Service and it tells me that in as far back as August 2012 you approached their service for help.  They deal with substance abusers.  The social worker who wrote this letter is here in court today to support you.  The letter also confirms that they helped you seek medical treatment at Prince of Wales Hospital for urological problems.

10.I have been told today that last year your problems were so bad you needed to urinate every 15 minutes.  You are slowly recovering.  If you are recovering, that means your kidneys are not so damaged that they are irreparable.  Some ketamine abusers’ kidneys are so damaged that they will never recover.

11.It is sad to see 20-year-olds wearing adult diapers knowing that they will have to wear them for the rest of their lives. So you should realise that your kidneys are already affected by ketamine, if you continue to use ketamine, your kidneys will break down. 

12.I have had letters of mitigation not only from the Hong Kong Christian Service but from yourself, your elder sister and your brother-in-law, her husband.  I have taken into account the contents of these letters.  Your family obviously is still very supportive.  Your sister is here today.  You are lucky.  If you continue to abuse their support, you may lose it.

13.There are guidelines for trafficking ketamine. I have referred myself to HKSAR v Hii Siew Cheng [2008]3 HKC 323.  The appropriate starting point here would be where there is between 10 to 50 grammes of ketamine trafficked, an appropriate term of imprisonment would be between 4 to 6 years. 

14.Now, part of the mitigation relied upon is that you are a drug addict and therefore part of the drugs that you bought were for your own consumption.  I accept you were a drug addict.  You must be a heavy ketamine user if your kidneys were affected.  I still bear in mind that even if part was for self-consumption, there is still a latent risk that exists.  You may share some of that with others.  Prosecution’s stance is that they are neutral on this mitigation. 

15.You told the police that about a third of the dangerous drugs would be for your own consumption.  That would mean about 10 grammes of it would be for sale which would, according to the authority, be about a 4-year starting point.  I have been referred to the authority of HKSAR v Wong Suet Hau CACC366/2000.  I have also referred myself to the authority of HKSAR v Chow Chun Sang CACC135/2011.  There the Court of Appeal is of the view that if part of the dangerous drugs was for self-consumption, then there should be a discount to the sentence.  Depending on the circumstances, that discount would fall somewhere between 10 to 25 per cent of the basic starting point. 

16.Now, I repeat, I accept that part was for your own consumption and I take on board this authority Chow Chun Sang.  I will - Defendant, please stand up - I will after considering that authority, the guidelines for trafficking ketamine, the mitigation put forward on your behalf today and the fact that it is your first offence of this nature as well as your plea of guilty today, I will take after considering all those factors a starting point of 4 years.

17.I will, according to Chow Chun Sang, discount that starting point by about 20 per cent, to take into account that part of the drugs was for your self-consumption.  That would reduce the 4-year starting point by 9 months.  That takes the starting point for this offence to 3 years and 3 months.  Because of your plea, you are entitled to a further discount of one-third.  After that discount, you are, for this offence, sentenced to 2 years and 2 months.   Do you understand that sentence?

DEFENDANT: Understood.