COURT: Stand up please, defendant.
The defendant, Ms Lam, pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, namely 57.87 grammes of “ice”. At the time of the offence, on 18 November 2013, she was just 19 years old. Now she is 20.
Ms Lam was arrested in an ante-dangerous drugs operation at a residential unit in Argyle Street, Mong Kok, where she was residing as a tenant. The “ice” was found inside her room, contained within four transparent resealable plastic bags. A notebook, an electronic scale, some other resealable plastic bags, straws, a plastic bottle containing one straw and one glass tube were also found in her room.
Under caution, Ms Lam told the police officer that the “ice” was for her own consumption and for selling to others as well. In the video-recorded interview, she said she obtained the “ice” from a friend and had last purchased 28 grammes of those at $3,800 from this friend 2 days ago.
She had been consuming “ice” for about a year, but did not need to consume it every day. People intending to purchase “ice” from her would give her a call and she would ask them to go to the flat to find her. She started living with another woman surnamed Wong in June 2013 at the subject unit and she paid Wong $7,000 per month as rent. Her boyfriend, Chan, who was also arrested together with her, had nothing to do with the drugs inside her room.
The Narcotics Bureau estimated the street value of the “ice” was $32,654 as at November 2013.
In mitigation, Ms Tsang, counsel appearing on behalf of Ms Lam, informed me of the background of Ms Lam. She started working as a sales person after completed Form 1 of her secondary education. She has no criminal record. After she met Chan, her boyfriend, she moved out from her parents’ place against her parents’ will. Her parents objected to this relationship with Chan, as Chan was over 40 years old, too much older than Ms Lam.
After moving out from her family, Ms Lam turned wayward and started to consume drugs. Ms Lam cannot tell what proportion she will take amongst the drugs found in her room.
Ms Lam and her father have written letters to the court, expressing that she is now very remorseful and wishes to turn a new leaf to her life.
Trafficking in dangerous drugs is an extremely serious offence. Persons committed this will inevitably face with an imprisonment sentence. The term of imprisonment imposed mainly depends on the quantity of dangerous drugs involved.
As rightly pointed out by Ms Tsang, in AG v Ching Kwok Hung [1991] 2 HKLR 125, the Court of Appeal held that for a case of trafficking in “ice” if a narcotic content was less than 10 grammes, the sentence would range from 3 to 7 years. Less than 10 grammes, the sentence would range from 3 to 7 years. And if the narcotic content was between 10 to 70 grammes, the sentence would range from 7 to 10 years.
Whilst I note the relatively young age of Ms Lam and the support from her family, these are not valid mitigating factors for this offence. The heavy sentence imposed for this kind of offence is for the deterrence purpose and to give a lighter sentence to young people, will only encourage the use of youngsters by the main culprits behind.
Young people like Ms Lam are too often being used as distributors to stupidly risk facing a long-term imprisonment for small profits. In this case, it would be against common sense to believe that Chan, who was double the age of Ms Lam, has no knowledge about her dealings in the drugs, in view of the apparatus found in her room which Chan has gained frequent entrance.
The only mitigating factor in this case is the guilty plea. However, in deciding the proper starting point, I would also take into account that Ms Lam would consume some “ice” herself.
In the circumstances, taking into account the background of Ms Lam and the mitigation advanced by her counsel, the appropriate starting point is 8½ years’ imprisonment. Giving credit to her guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to 5 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.