A A
HCCC 97/2017
B IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE B
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
C C
CRIMINAL CASE NO 97 OF 2017
D ----------------- D
HKSAR
E v E
F
LAU Kwai-yung F
------------------
G G
Before: Deputy High Court Judge Saw
Date: 16 June 2017 at 10.01 am
H Present: Mr Lenny Cheng, PP of the Department of Justice, H
for HKSAR
I Mr David Boyton, instructed by Y K Lau & Chu, I
for the accused
Offence: (1) Possession of a dangerous drug (管有危險藥物)
J (2) Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物) J
K K
---------------------------------
Transcript of the Audio Recording
L of the Sentence in the above Case L
---------------------------------
M M
COURT: The respondent, Lau Kwai-yung, who is aged 48 years,
N
pleaded guilty on 20 March 2017 at the Eastern Magistracy N
to two charges. Those charges were possession of dangerous
drugs, contrary to section 8(1)(a) and (2) of the Dangerous
O Drugs Ordinance, Chapter 134, the 1st count, and 2, O
trafficking in dangerous drugs, contrary to section 4(1)(a)
and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Chapter 134.
P P
The particulars of those offences were as follows.
Q Q
Count 1, it was alleged that on 18 June 2016, at the
junction of Tong Mi Road and Argyle Street, in Mong Kok, in
R Kowloon, at about 11.30 pm in the evening, the defendant R
was apprehended by the police and found to be in possession
of a dangerous drug, namely 2.42 grammes of a crystalline
S solid which subsequently was determined to be 2.37 grammes S
of methamphetamine hydrochloride.
T The 2nd count: on the same date, that is 13 June 2016, at T
Room H, 5th Floor, Cheung Fai Mansion, No 22 Tong Mi Road,
U in Mong Kok, Kowloon, she was alleged to have unlawfully U
CRT26/16.6.2017/TW/cc 1 HCCC 97/2017(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 1.56 kilogrammes of
a crystalline solid which was subsequently determined to
B contain 1.36 kilogrammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride. B
A Summary of Facts submitted by the prosecution was read in
C C
court and accepted by the defendant. Today, she has
confirmed both her pleas of guilty and the accuracy of that
D Summary of Facts. The Summary of Facts reveals, amongst D
other things, as follows.
E At about 11.30 pm or thereabouts on 12 June, the defendant E
was stopped by police officers in Tong Mi Road in Kowloon.
She was searched and the dangerous drugs which are referred
F to in the 1st count were found in the pocket of her F
trousers, in a plastic bag. Those drugs she claimed were
G for her own consumption. She was arrested and it was G
established that she was in possession of cash some
$18,582.50. She was taken from the street in Mong Kok to
H premises that she had indicated to the police is where she H
resided. Those are the premises referred to in Count 2,
namely Room H, 5th Floor, Cheung Fai Mansion, 22 Tong Mi
I I
Road.
J Police gained entry to those premises and subsequently J
found, after opening a locked bedroom door, amongst other
things, a plastic bag on a coffee table. That plastic bag
K contained a quantity of white crystalline solid which was K
subsequently established to be the 1.36 kilogrammes of
methamphetamine hydrochloride. The police also found two
L electronic scales and a quantity of empty transparent L
resealable bags.
M M
The defendant initially claimed that the dangerous drugs in
that room, or found in those rooms were not hers and that
N she was keeping them for one “Ah So” and that she was N
responsible for giving them out to purchasers as required.
In a subsequent video-recorded interview, she said that she
O herself had been addicted to ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine O
hydrochloride, for five to six years. Ah So had offered
P
her a job, selling dangerous drugs, and he had arranged for P
her to be accommodated in the Tong Mi Road address. When
customers wished to make a purchase, she would use the
Q electronic scales to weigh out 7 grammes or thereabouts of Q
the drug which was sold for $500. After the sales were
made, someone would come to collect the money from her.
R R
It was an admitted fact that the estimated street value of
this quantity of dangerous drugs was in excess of $530,000.
S S
It was accepted in the Summary of Facts by the defendant
that she was trafficking in those dangerous drugs.
T T
On 20 March, after accepting the defendant’s pleas of
guilty and the Admitted Facts, the magistrate committed the
U U
CRT26/16.6.2017/TW/cc 2 HCCC 97/2017(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
defendant to this court, pursuant to section 81(b)(2) of
the Magistrates Ordinance, for sentencing.
B B
The defendant has a long and unfortunate history of
involvement with dangerous drugs. She was first convicted
C C
of possession of dangerous drugs in 2003 and thereafter was
regularly convicted of that offence. She has never before
D been convicted of an offence of trafficking in dangerous D
drugs.
E There is little known about her background from the matters E
advanced in mitigation other than to confirm what I have
already said, that she does have and has had for some many
F years a long history of addiction to dangerous drugs. F
G
In the course of his mitigation on behalf of the applicant, G
Mr Boyton has urged upon me that she should be given credit
for having taken the police to the premises where the very
H large cache of drugs were found. With respect, and I have H
indicated to him, I could not accede to that proposition as
being a mitigating factor unless it was established that
I she clearly intended to take them there to find the cache I
of drugs.
J J
In the Summary of Facts, she admitted - and this is part of
the police case - that she resided at those premises. It
K was a matter of logic, as night follows day, that as she K
had told the police that she resided at those premises,
then that is where she would be taken after she had been
L apprehended in the street with a quantity of L
methamphetamine hydrochloride and, more particularly, with
M
a very large amount of cash. I have indicated to counsel M
that the representation does not afford her any mitigation
in the circumstances.
N N
Further matters advanced by and on behalf of the defendant
are to the effect that any sentence imposed for the simple
O possession charge, namely Count 1, should be made O
concurrent to the trafficking charge, Count 2. I have
indicated to counsel that I would readily accede to that
P P
request, bearing in mind the sentence which will be imposed
on Count 2 pursuant to the guidelines provided by the Court
Q of Appeal and also looking at it from the point of view of Q
totality.
R Sentencing for very large quantities of dangerous drugs are R
generally governed by the observations of the Court of
Appeal in HKSAR v Abdallah [2009] 2 HKLRD 437. Mr Boyton
S S
accepts that these are the guidelines which should be
applied in the instant case. It is accepted by the
T prosecutor and Mr Boyton that the defendant, having pleaded T
guilty at the first opportunity in the Magistrates Court,
is entitled to a full one-third discount from the head
U sentence which would be imposed. U
CRT26/16.6.2017/TW/cc 3 HCCC 97/2017(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
Taking the 1st count, in the circumstances, I believe that
a sentence after trial for possession of this quantity of
B methamphetamine hydrochloride would be one of 18 months’ B
imprisonment. Given her plea of guilty, she is entitled to
a full one-third discount from that so the sentence that
C C
would be imposed would be one of 12 months’ imprisonment.
D The quantity of methamphetamine hydrochloride in Count 2 is D
a very large amount, 1.36 kilogrammes. Looking again at
the guidance provided by the Court of Appeal in Abdallah,
E it comes within the parameters of the 1,200 to 4,000 E
grammes bracket where the court has indicated sentences,
without further aggravating factors, ranging between 23
F F
years to 26 years’ imprisonment.
G In the present circumstances, there are, to my mind, no G
significant aggravating factors which would require me to
impose additional sentence beyond the parameters indicated
H by the Court of Appeal. In those circumstances, looking at H
the matter in the round, I indicate that the starting point
for sentence should be one of 23 years’ imprisonment.
I I
Given a full one-third discount from that for her plea of
J guilty, I will impose the following sentence: one of 15 J
years and 4 months’ imprisonment. That is the sentence that
will be imposed on Count 2.
K K
As I have indicated, I think it is proper that the sentence
of 12 months on Count 1 be concurrent to the sentence on
L Count 2 and I will make an order to that effect. L
So the total sentence is 15 years and 4 months’
M M
imprisonment.
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
CRT26/16.6.2017/TW/cc 4 HCCC 97/2017(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
HCCC 97/2017
B IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE B
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
C C
CRIMINAL CASE NO 97 OF 2017
D ----------------- D
HKSAR
E v E
F
LAU Kwai-yung F
------------------
G G
Before: Deputy High Court Judge Saw
Date: 16 June 2017 at 10.01 am
H Present: Mr Lenny Cheng, PP of the Department of Justice, H
for HKSAR
I Mr David Boyton, instructed by Y K Lau & Chu, I
for the accused
Offence: (1) Possession of a dangerous drug (管有危險藥物)
J (2) Trafficking in a dangerous drug (販運危險藥物) J
K K
---------------------------------
Transcript of the Audio Recording
L of the Sentence in the above Case L
---------------------------------
M M
COURT: The respondent, Lau Kwai-yung, who is aged 48 years,
N
pleaded guilty on 20 March 2017 at the Eastern Magistracy N
to two charges. Those charges were possession of dangerous
drugs, contrary to section 8(1)(a) and (2) of the Dangerous
O Drugs Ordinance, Chapter 134, the 1st count, and 2, O
trafficking in dangerous drugs, contrary to section 4(1)(a)
and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Chapter 134.
P P
The particulars of those offences were as follows.
Q Q
Count 1, it was alleged that on 18 June 2016, at the
junction of Tong Mi Road and Argyle Street, in Mong Kok, in
R Kowloon, at about 11.30 pm in the evening, the defendant R
was apprehended by the police and found to be in possession
of a dangerous drug, namely 2.42 grammes of a crystalline
S solid which subsequently was determined to be 2.37 grammes S
of methamphetamine hydrochloride.
T The 2nd count: on the same date, that is 13 June 2016, at T
Room H, 5th Floor, Cheung Fai Mansion, No 22 Tong Mi Road,
U in Mong Kok, Kowloon, she was alleged to have unlawfully U
CRT26/16.6.2017/TW/cc 1 HCCC 97/2017(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 1.56 kilogrammes of
a crystalline solid which was subsequently determined to
B contain 1.36 kilogrammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride. B
A Summary of Facts submitted by the prosecution was read in
C C
court and accepted by the defendant. Today, she has
confirmed both her pleas of guilty and the accuracy of that
D Summary of Facts. The Summary of Facts reveals, amongst D
other things, as follows.
E At about 11.30 pm or thereabouts on 12 June, the defendant E
was stopped by police officers in Tong Mi Road in Kowloon.
She was searched and the dangerous drugs which are referred
F to in the 1st count were found in the pocket of her F
trousers, in a plastic bag. Those drugs she claimed were
G for her own consumption. She was arrested and it was G
established that she was in possession of cash some
$18,582.50. She was taken from the street in Mong Kok to
H premises that she had indicated to the police is where she H
resided. Those are the premises referred to in Count 2,
namely Room H, 5th Floor, Cheung Fai Mansion, 22 Tong Mi
I I
Road.
J Police gained entry to those premises and subsequently J
found, after opening a locked bedroom door, amongst other
things, a plastic bag on a coffee table. That plastic bag
K contained a quantity of white crystalline solid which was K
subsequently established to be the 1.36 kilogrammes of
methamphetamine hydrochloride. The police also found two
L electronic scales and a quantity of empty transparent L
resealable bags.
M M
The defendant initially claimed that the dangerous drugs in
that room, or found in those rooms were not hers and that
N she was keeping them for one “Ah So” and that she was N
responsible for giving them out to purchasers as required.
In a subsequent video-recorded interview, she said that she
O herself had been addicted to ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine O
hydrochloride, for five to six years. Ah So had offered
P
her a job, selling dangerous drugs, and he had arranged for P
her to be accommodated in the Tong Mi Road address. When
customers wished to make a purchase, she would use the
Q electronic scales to weigh out 7 grammes or thereabouts of Q
the drug which was sold for $500. After the sales were
made, someone would come to collect the money from her.
R R
It was an admitted fact that the estimated street value of
this quantity of dangerous drugs was in excess of $530,000.
S S
It was accepted in the Summary of Facts by the defendant
that she was trafficking in those dangerous drugs.
T T
On 20 March, after accepting the defendant’s pleas of
guilty and the Admitted Facts, the magistrate committed the
U U
CRT26/16.6.2017/TW/cc 2 HCCC 97/2017(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
defendant to this court, pursuant to section 81(b)(2) of
the Magistrates Ordinance, for sentencing.
B B
The defendant has a long and unfortunate history of
involvement with dangerous drugs. She was first convicted
C C
of possession of dangerous drugs in 2003 and thereafter was
regularly convicted of that offence. She has never before
D been convicted of an offence of trafficking in dangerous D
drugs.
E There is little known about her background from the matters E
advanced in mitigation other than to confirm what I have
already said, that she does have and has had for some many
F years a long history of addiction to dangerous drugs. F
G
In the course of his mitigation on behalf of the applicant, G
Mr Boyton has urged upon me that she should be given credit
for having taken the police to the premises where the very
H large cache of drugs were found. With respect, and I have H
indicated to him, I could not accede to that proposition as
being a mitigating factor unless it was established that
I she clearly intended to take them there to find the cache I
of drugs.
J J
In the Summary of Facts, she admitted - and this is part of
the police case - that she resided at those premises. It
K was a matter of logic, as night follows day, that as she K
had told the police that she resided at those premises,
then that is where she would be taken after she had been
L apprehended in the street with a quantity of L
methamphetamine hydrochloride and, more particularly, with
M
a very large amount of cash. I have indicated to counsel M
that the representation does not afford her any mitigation
in the circumstances.
N N
Further matters advanced by and on behalf of the defendant
are to the effect that any sentence imposed for the simple
O possession charge, namely Count 1, should be made O
concurrent to the trafficking charge, Count 2. I have
indicated to counsel that I would readily accede to that
P P
request, bearing in mind the sentence which will be imposed
on Count 2 pursuant to the guidelines provided by the Court
Q of Appeal and also looking at it from the point of view of Q
totality.
R Sentencing for very large quantities of dangerous drugs are R
generally governed by the observations of the Court of
Appeal in HKSAR v Abdallah [2009] 2 HKLRD 437. Mr Boyton
S S
accepts that these are the guidelines which should be
applied in the instant case. It is accepted by the
T prosecutor and Mr Boyton that the defendant, having pleaded T
guilty at the first opportunity in the Magistrates Court,
is entitled to a full one-third discount from the head
U sentence which would be imposed. U
CRT26/16.6.2017/TW/cc 3 HCCC 97/2017(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
Taking the 1st count, in the circumstances, I believe that
a sentence after trial for possession of this quantity of
B methamphetamine hydrochloride would be one of 18 months’ B
imprisonment. Given her plea of guilty, she is entitled to
a full one-third discount from that so the sentence that
C C
would be imposed would be one of 12 months’ imprisonment.
D The quantity of methamphetamine hydrochloride in Count 2 is D
a very large amount, 1.36 kilogrammes. Looking again at
the guidance provided by the Court of Appeal in Abdallah,
E it comes within the parameters of the 1,200 to 4,000 E
grammes bracket where the court has indicated sentences,
without further aggravating factors, ranging between 23
F F
years to 26 years’ imprisonment.
G In the present circumstances, there are, to my mind, no G
significant aggravating factors which would require me to
impose additional sentence beyond the parameters indicated
H by the Court of Appeal. In those circumstances, looking at H
the matter in the round, I indicate that the starting point
for sentence should be one of 23 years’ imprisonment.
I I
Given a full one-third discount from that for her plea of
J guilty, I will impose the following sentence: one of 15 J
years and 4 months’ imprisonment. That is the sentence that
will be imposed on Count 2.
K K
As I have indicated, I think it is proper that the sentence
of 12 months on Count 1 be concurrent to the sentence on
L Count 2 and I will make an order to that effect. L
So the total sentence is 15 years and 4 months’
M M
imprisonment.
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
CRT26/16.6.2017/TW/cc 4 HCCC 97/2017(1)/Sentence
V V