PP v Lee Zheng Da Eddie: Drug Trafficking - Misuse of Drugs Act
In Public Prosecutor v Eddie Lee Zheng Da and Yap Peng Keong Darren, the High Court of Singapore heard a case against Lee and Yap, who were charged with drug trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act. Lee was accused of possessing diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking, while Yap was accused of delivering the drugs to Lee. The court convicted both Lee and Yap of their respective charges.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Lee and Yap were convicted of their respective charges.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Lee and Yap were charged with drug trafficking. Lee was found guilty of possessing diamorphine for trafficking, and Yap was found guilty of delivering it.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Prosecution | Government Agency | Judgment for Prosecution | Won | April Phang, Kong Kuek Foo, Lim Woon Yee |
| Eddie Lee Zheng Da | Defendant | Individual | Conviction | Lost | Lee Yoon Tet Luke, Ng Wai Keong Timothy |
| Yap Peng Keong Darren | Defendant | Individual | Conviction | Lost | Tan Jeh Yaw, Wong Hong Weng Stephen |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Ang Cheng Hock | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| April Phang | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Kong Kuek Foo | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Lim Woon Yee | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Lee Yoon Tet Luke | Luke Lee & Co |
| Ng Wai Keong Timothy | Timothy Ng LLC |
| Tan Jeh Yaw | Tan Jeh Yaw LLC |
| Wong Hong Weng Stephen | Matthew Chiong Partnership |
4. Facts
- Lee ordered heroin and cannabis from a Malaysian supplier.
- Lee recruited Yap to transport drugs for him.
- Lee checked into the Pan Pacific Hotel with his girlfriend.
- Lee gave Yap $16,000 to pay for the drugs.
- Yap collected three bundles of heroin and two blocks of cannabis from an unidentified motorcyclist.
- Yap delivered the drugs to Lee at the hotel room.
- CNB officers forcibly entered the room and arrested Lee and Yap.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Lee Zheng Da Eddie and another, Criminal Case No 52 of 2021, [2022] SGHC 199
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Lee and Passara checked into Pan Pacific Singapore | |
| Lee instructed Yap to collect drugs at 28/30 Gul Avenue | |
| Yap collected cash from Lee at the hotel | |
| Yap collected drugs at 28/30 Gul Avenue | |
| Yap delivered drugs to Lee at the hotel | |
| Lee weighed the drugs | |
| Lee, Yap, and Passara were arrested by CNB officers | |
| Trial began | |
| Trial continued | |
| Trial continued | |
| Trial continued | |
| Trial continued | |
| Trial continued | |
| Trial continued | |
| Trial continued | |
| Judgment reserved | |
| Judgment reserved | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Drug Trafficking
- Outcome: The court found both accused guilty of drug trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Possession of controlled drugs for the purpose of trafficking
- Delivery of controlled drugs
- Rebuttal of Presumption of Trafficking
- Outcome: The court found that Lee failed to rebut the presumption that he possessed the drugs for the purpose of trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Evidential burden to show possession was not for trafficking
- Credibility of accused's evidence
- Rebuttal of Presumption of Knowledge
- Outcome: The court found that Yap failed to rebut the presumption that he knew the nature of the drugs he was delivering.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Accused's subjective state of mind
- Positive belief incompatible with knowledge of drugs
- Indifference to nature of item possessed
- Adverse Inferences from Silence
- Outcome: The court drew adverse inferences from Lee's failure to mention his exculpatory claim in his cautioned statement and his inconsistent accounts.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to mention material facts in cautioned statement
- Inconsistent accounts
8. Remedies Sought
- Conviction
- Sentencing
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
- Possession of Controlled Drugs
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Muhammad Ridzuan bin Md Ali v Public Prosecutor and other matters | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 721 | Singapore | Cited to establish the elements the Prosecution must prove to make out the charge of trafficking under s 5(1)(a) of the MDA. |
| Muhammad Abdul Hadi bin Haron v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | High Court | Yes | [2021] 1 SLR 537 | Singapore | Cited regarding the issue of possession. |
| Adili Chibuike Ejike v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 2 SLR 254 | Singapore | Cited to define 'knowing possession' in the context of drug offences. |
| Zainal bin Hamad v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 2 SLR 1119 | Singapore | Cited regarding the presumption of trafficking in s 17(c) of the MDA. |
| Kwek Seow Hock v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2011] 3 SLR 157 | Singapore | Cited regarding adverse inferences from an accused person’s failure to mention material facts in their cautioned statement. |
| Roshdi v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [1994] 3 SLR(R) 1 | Singapore | Cited regarding the requirement to state material facts in the cautioned statement. |
| Ilechukwu Uchechukwu Chukwudi v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2021] 1 SLR 67 | Singapore | Cited regarding lies as corroborative evidence of guilt. |
| Public Prosecutor v Ilechukwu Uchechukwu Chukwudi | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] SGCA 33 | Singapore | Cited regarding the court's ability to find an accused person not creditworthy based on lies. |
| Gobi a/l Avedian v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2021] 1 SLR 180 | Singapore | Cited regarding the burden on an accused person to rebut the presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the MDA. |
| Roshdi bin Abdullah Altway v Public Prosecutor and another matter | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2022] 1 SLR 535 | Singapore | Cited regarding the legal burden to rebut the presumption of trafficking under s 17(c) of the MDA. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 5(1)(a) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 5(2) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 33(1) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 17(c) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 18(1)(a) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 18(2) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 33B(2)(a) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 23 Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 261(1) Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Heroin
- Cannabis
- Drug Trafficking
- Possession
- Courier
- MDA
- Batu
- Buku
- Half-pound packets
- One-pound packets
15.2 Keywords
- Drug Trafficking
- Heroin
- Diamorphine
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking
- Statutory Interpretation
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Law
- Statutory Offences
- Misuse of Drugs Act