A HCCC246/2009 A
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
B HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION B
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 246 OF 2009
C C
-----------------
D HKSAR D
v.
E E
An unknown person alias
Stojanovic Milka and
F F
Skopljak Sara
-----------------
G G
Before: Hon McMahon J
Date: 12 March 2010 at 3.16 pm
H Present: Ms Peggy Lo, SPP, of the Department of Justice, H
for HKSAR
I
Mr Robert Andrews, instructed by Messrs I
Hoosenally & Neo, for the Accused
Offence: (1) Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物)
J (2) Making a false representation to an immigration J
assistant (向入境事務助理員作出虛假陳述)
K (3) Using a forged travel document (使用偽造的旅行證件) K
---------------------------------
L Transcript of the Audio Recording L
of the Sentence in the above Case
---------------------------------
M M
COURT: The 22-year-old defendant pleaded guilty before me to an
N offence of trafficking in 1,484.01 grammes of ice, contrary N
to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance,
to making a false representation to an immigration officer,
O contrary to section 42(1)(a) of the Immigration Ordinance, O
and to using a forged travel document, contrary to section
42(2)(b) of the same Ordinance.
P P
The facts of the case were that on 4 February 2009 the
Q defendant arrived at Hong Kong International Airport on a Q
flight from Malaysia and presented a forged document and
passport to an immigration officer in order to gain
R admittance to Hong Kong. She was admitted as a visitor on R
the basis of the forged passport representing she was a
person of the name Skopljak Sara. Those facts support the
S S
two immigration offences.
T As the defendant walked towards the exit of the airport T
through the Customs section she was stopped by a Customs
officer and subjected to a baggage search. In her baggage
U were found four bars of chocolate. Secreted inside the U
CRT35/12.3.2010/DB 1 HCCC246/2009/Sentence
V V
A chocolate bars were found the drugs, the subject of the A
trafficking offence.
B So far as the trafficking offence is concerned I take a B
starting point of sentence of 22 years’ imprisonment. Given
the international dimension of the offence, that is enhanced
C C
to a sentence of 24 years’ imprisonment.
D Mr Andrews argued that because the defendant intended to D
stay in Hong Kong for two days only and then go to Japan
with the drugs, a bare proposition for which unsurprisingly
E he had no proof, the aggravating aspect of the international E
dimension in this case was lessened. In my view, that is
not so. The bringing of drugs into Hong Kong is, of itself,
F F
an aggravating factor.
G Allowing for the only substantial mitigation advanced on G
behalf of the defendant, namely, her plea of guilty, that
starting point of sentence is reduced to a sentence of
H 16 years’ imprisonment. H
I
So far as the two immigration sentences are concerned, I I
take a starting point of 12 months’ imprisonment for each.
The same mitigating factor reduces the sentence in respect
J of each to 8 months’ imprisonment. I order that all J
sentences be served concurrently except that 6 months of the
sentence imposed in respect of the forged travel document
K offence, that is the 3rd count on the indictment, be served K
consecutively to the sentence imposed in respect of the
L trafficking offence; that is, the 1st count on the L
indictment. That is a total sentence of 16 years 6 months’
imprisonment.
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
CRT35/12.3.2010/DB 2 HCCC246/2009/Sentence
V V