R v Wong

[2016] NZHC 2629

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE JUDGMENT AND ANY PART OF THE PROCEEDINGS (INCLUDING THE RESULT) IN NEWS MEDIA OR ON THE INTERNET OR OTHER PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DATABASE UNTIL FINAL DISPOSITION OF TRIAL. PUBLICATION IN LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2016-004-002124 [2016] NZHC 2629

THE QUEEN

v

KIT HING WONG

Hearing:	2 November 2016
Appearances:	B Northwood for Crown L C Ord for Mr Wong
Judgment:	2 November 2016

SECTION 147 JUDGMENT OF FOGARTY J

This judgment was delivered by Justice Fogarty

On 2 November 2016 at 3.00pm Pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Date:…………………………

Solicitors:

Crown Solicitor, Auckland

Ord Legal, Wellington

R v WONG [2016] NZHC 2629 [2 November 2016]

[1]      Mr Wong is one of four defendants in a methamphetamine drug dealing prosecution pending before the High Court in Auckland.   He is charged with one charge of conspiracy to possess of a class A controlled drug (methamphetamine) for supply.  He has applied for a s 147 discharge.

[2]      The Crown case is that Messrs Hung and Chen came to New Zealand to manage the importation of 42 kilograms of methamphetamine. After the drugs arrived, either Mr Hung or Mr Chen had communications with an unknown male, setting up a meeting in the afternoon or at night on the next day.  The earlier meeting was not possible because the unknown male said he needed to arrange for someone to go there (to the meeting) and that would take some time to arrange, so they proceeded to agree that the meeting would be later in the day, about 6 or 7pm in the evening.  The next day, the Crown intercepted telephone conversations, which are agreed to be between Mr Wong and one or other of Mr Hung or Mr Chen. These start at 6.27pm. A further two conversations took place at 7.12pm and then at about 7.30pm, as the parties to the meeting were sorting out where each other were, what cars they were driving.  This resulted in Messrs Hung and Chen meeting up with Mr Wong.   Mr Wong was subsequently apprehended and found to be in possession of a bag of placebo, being the placebo substituted by the Crown, after discovering the 42 kilograms.

[3]      The Crown case is that Messrs Hung and Chen were clearly responsible for the intended distribution of this very large amount of methamphetamine.   They were dealing with an unknown male who did not want to be at the first meeting and was going to send someone else to it, presumably an underling. The finding of the placebo on Mr Wong, confirming he was the unknown male’s go-between, and that the intent was that a sample of the product be examined by this unknown male.  In short, Mr Wong was the means of getting the sample from Messrs Hung and Chen to this unknown male and Mr Wong would have understood that he was part of a transaction intended to supply methamphetamine to the market.  The Crown therefore submits that there is a circumstantial case upon which a jury properly directed could find Mr Wong  guilty  of  the  charge  that  he  was  part  of  a  conspiracy  for  the  supply of methamphetamine.

[4]      In the course of oral argument, Ms Ord, for Mr Wong, properly accepted that the prior conversation with the unknown male, who refused to come to a meeting but intended to substitute another man, clearly Mr Wong, was strong evidence placing Mr Wong, given the indisputable meeting and possession of the placebo, as part of a conspiracy of a number of persons for the supply of methamphetamine.

[5]      For these reasons I am of the opinion that a jury properly directed on this evidence could find that proposition proved beyond reasonable doubt. The application for a s 147 discharge is dismissed.

[6]      In anticipation that that would be the decision, Ms Ord then asked for a sentence indication in respect of her client.  Counsel agreed it was desirable that I be the Judge, now being familiar with the elements of the charge against Mr Wong. I will hear that application at 9am on 15 November 2016, being a time suitable for counsel. I leave counsel to arrange between themselves an exchange of submissions and filing

of their submissions in advance of the hearing.

Fogarty J