HKSAR v. NGIE HON MIU

HCCC100/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 100 OF 2010

—————-

HKSAR
v
Ngie Hon Miu

—————-

Before:

Hon Wright J

Date:

20 September 2010 at 3.57 pm

Present:

Ms Grace Chan, SPP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Freddy Woon and Ms Eunice Yung, instructed by George Chan & Co, for the Accused

Offence:

(1) and (2) Conspiracy to traffic in a dangerous drug (串謀販運危險藥物)

———————————

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

———————————

COURT: You have been found guilty by the jury after trial of a single charge of conspiracy to traffic in a dangerous drug.

Although the charge itself does not, for understandable reasons, reflect the quantity of dangerous drugs, we do know that on the dayof your arrest, the quantity of drugs that was found was 4.68 kilograms of “Ice”, and it is clear from the unanimous decisionof the jury that they accepted the evidence of Chan which shows that these were the drugs imported by the two of you over the threedays when you went to the mainland and returned to Hong Kong.

So whilst the conspiracy itself makes no reference to a quantity, it is clear that you in fact trafficked in that quantity of drugsin pursuance of the conspiracy.

Chan, who pleaded guilty to trafficking in that quantity of drugs, was sentenced to serve a period of 16 years and 6 months in gaol.I am told that in fixing that sentence, the judge took a starting point of 25 years and reduced it by a third, rounding it down veryslightly, by a matter of weeks, to 16½ years. With respect to the judge concerned, I would think that 25 years was absolutely theright starting point to have taken for the role that Chan played.

It is, however, clear from Chan’s evidence that you played a far more active role. You recruited him; you had the contacts in themainland; and it was you who arranged for the supply of the drugs from the mainland.

27 years’ imprisonment strikes me as being the appropriate sentence in those circumstances, which reflects your more active role.I see that that has been a figure upheld by the Court of Appeal in another matter which involved a very similar quantity of drugsand a similar role to that played by you.

There is no mitigation available to you which justifies reducing that sentence at all.

You will serve 27 years’ imprisonment.

Application for appeal against conviction allowed. See CACC357/2010 dated 10 November 2011