Director of Public Prosecutions v Lang
[2023] VCC 2152
•24 October 2023
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. CR-23-00611
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| JIMMY KWONG YEW LANG |
---
| JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE CARMODY |
| WHEREHELD: | Melbourne |
| DATEOFHEARING: | 16 October 2023 17 October 2023 |
| DATEOFSENTENCE: | 24 October 2023 |
| CASEMAYBECITEDAS: | DPP v Lang |
| MEDIUMNEUTRALCITATION: | [2023] VCC 2152 |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence
Catchwords: Traffick in a drug of dependence – commercial quantity – large commercial quantity – possession of drug of dependence – knowingly dealing with proceeds of crime – standard sentencing scheme – sophisticated drug syndicate – operation kingfisher
Legislation Cited: Sentencing Act 1991; s5(2), s5B(2)(b), s5B(3)(b), s89DI Cases Cited: Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169; Al Janabe v The
Queen [2021] VSCA 252; Dimovski v The Queen [2022] VSCA 6; Bruce v The Queen [2022] VSCA 100; DPP v Jabbour [2023] VSCA 204
Sentence:Convicted and sentence to 16 years and four months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 12 years imprisonment.
---
| APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
FortheDPP | Mr M. Wilson | The Director of the Office of Public Prosecution |
FortheAccused | Ms Z. Garde-Wilson | Garde-Wilson Barristers and Solicitors |
COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA
250 William Street, Melbourne
HIS HONOUR:
1Jimmy Kwong Yew Lang, on 16 October 2023 at the County Court of Victoria sitting at Melbourne you pleaded guilty to the following charges on Indictment No.C2215435:
Charge 4, trafficking in a large commercial quantity of a drug of dependence. That drug was heroin. This charge has a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
Charge 8, knowingly deal with the proceeds of crime, it was cash in the sum of $398,246.30. This charge has a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment.
Charge 9, knowingly deal with the proceeds of crime, which included jewellery, gold items, luxury watches, luxury handbags and shoes, the total value of which was $319,248. That charge has a maximum penalty of 15 years.
Charge 10, knowingly deal with the proceeds of crime, was $1,850 in cash. This charge has a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment.
2Charge 4 is a Category 1 offence. It is also a standard sentencing offence with a standard sentence of 16 years.
3You have no prior criminal history. On my calculations you have spent 508 days as pre-sentence detention.
Circumstances of your offending
4The prosecutor tendered an Amended Prosecution Opening for Plea Hearing dated 16 October 2023. It was Exhibit “A”. The opening is attached to these reasons for sentence to give the full picture of this drug trafficking operation and your part in it. The prosecutor read that opening into the record of the court.
5You were Teoh's trusted associate and co-principal in this drug distribution syndicate. Your offending was for the period of 26 April 2022 to 31 May 2022. In total you trafficked a total of 14 kilograms of heroin in that one-month period.
This 14 kilograms included the 4.1 kilograms of heroin seized at your safe house on 31 May 2022. You possessed that 4.1 kilograms of heroin for sale.
6Teoh and you had a syndicate predominantly of Malaysian nationals who were selling heroin in block form. Each block consisted of 350 grams of heroin compressed into a rectangular packet. The blocks were sold in pairs which were 700 grams. There was a corresponding purchase price for a pair. The heroin was referred to as “Lion” or “Globe”, which was referenced by the logo depicting either two lions or globes stamped on the packaging.
7In effect, the heroin was promoted and sold in two grades. The superior grade of “168” had minimal impurities. The inferior grade of “175” had that number stamped on the packaging. The 175 product was sold for a range of $115,000 to $130,000 dollars per pair. The 168 product was generally sold for between
$128,000 and $140,000 dollars per pair. There were price fluctuations when
the product was scarce.
8Teoh was acting as the main salesman and organiser of the delivery of heroin and the collection of payments for the heroin. You were effectively a production and warehouse manager. You had the responsibility of managing the safe house located at 3 Teague Crescent in Braybrook, which was referred to “safe house 1” in the summary. It was a modern townhouse with a single garage door. You lived with your partner, Ms Loh, who lived next door at 5 Teague Crescent in Braybrook in an identical property.
9You also had a second safe house which was approximately 300 metres away at 80 Royal Road in Braybrook which was referred to as “safe house 2” in the summary. It was also a modern townhouse with a single garage door.
10You and Teoh used safe house 1 as a receiving house where you arranged for large quantities of the sourced heroin to be refined, tested, pressed using a hydraulic press or a hand press, and repackaging into fresh blocks. This location was also used as an office where Teoh and you and others met and where the cash was counted. Safe house 2 was used to store the prepared product, including large quantities of heroin.
11The intercepted conversations between yourself and Teoh about passing the proceeds of the business to money remitters, as I said earlier you were part of a conversation on 11 May 2022 where Teoh phoned you and asked you to bring over $42,000 and stated to you that the person that does the exchange rate will come and get a few tens of thousands of dollars later.
12On 31 May 2022, the police executed a search warrant at both safe houses and your own home where you live with Ms Loh and your two children. One of those children is and was very ill. At 3 Teague Crescent in Braybrook, safe house 1, the following items were found:
(a)several mobile phones;
(b)a large industrial scale hydraulic press;
(c)12 metal press components and press plates;
(d)a commercial counting machine.
13At your home the police located the following items:
(a)luxury watches with an estimated value of $128,050, that is Charge 9 for you on the indictment;
(b)luxury handbags, clothing, and accessories with an estimated value of
$150,350, that is also part of Charge 9;
(c)jewellery and gold with an estimated value of $41,348. Again, also part of Charge 9;
(d)several mobile phones used by yourself and Ms Loh; and
(e)$398,246.30 in cash which was found in various locations throughout your house, that was Charge 8 for you on the indictment.
14At 80 Royal Road in Braybrook, which was safe house 2, the police found the following items in the search:
(a)numerous phones and electronic devices;
(b)4.2 kilograms of heroin, 2.1 kilograms of which was contained in six by 350 gram rectangular blocks, which had been wrapped in brown paper that had the double lion logo on it and was vacuum sealed. A further 2.1 kilograms was divided into six 350 gram bags that were yet to be compressed into blocks;
(c)“Double Uoglobe Brand” or “Double Lion” stickers consistent with the markings of the seized heroin, large rolls of brown paper bag and pre-cut sections of brown paper. Also found a heat sealer and sealing bags and blenders;
(d)there was a wallet containing $1,850 in Australian currency, your driver's licence, and bank cards, that was the basis for Charge 10.
15When police arrived at safe house 2 to execute the warrant you fled from the premises through a back door. However, you later contacted police through your legal representatives and attended at Melbourne West police station on 3 June 2022 where you were arrested and interviewed.
16In the course of your interview you told police the following:
· You admitted that you lived at 5 Teague Crescent, Braybrook with your wife, two children and a sister.
· You used to work on a farm, but now rarely worked, but occasionally helped your friends work at a restaurant for cash in hand, details of which you could not provide.
· Otherwise you exercised your right to make no comment.
17From the prosecution summary you were directly involved in the following transactions:
· Transaction 10, said to have occurred between 3 April and 26 April 2022, and note that is the commencement date of your offending, heroin of 2.8 kilograms;
· Transaction 22, between 3 May and 11 May, heroin of 2.1 kilograms;
· Transaction 27, between 13 May and 15 May 2022, 1.4 kilograms of heroin;
· Transaction 28, 13 May to 15 May 2022, heroin of 3.5 kilograms;
· Transaction 40, which was on 27 May 2022, heroin of 350 grams.
18And, as I said before, at safe house 2 on 31 May 2022, the day of the search, found 4.2 kilograms of heroin.
19The total of the heroin is 14.35 kilograms at 70 per cent purity. The amount is 19 times the large commercial quantity for heroin.
20In combination to the serious drug trafficking charge you have pleaded guilty to three separate charges of knowingly dealing with the proceeds of crime. One charge was for the cash found in your own home in the sum of $398,246. Also found in your home were luxury items, jewellery and the like, which were almost to the value of $320,000. At safe house 2 a small amount of cash in the sum of $1,850 was found.
21The clear motivation for your offending was financial gain.
22You have spent 508 days on remand awaiting your sentence.
Your personal circumstances
23At the time of the offending you were 27. You will turn 29 in December this year. You have no prior convictions. I note in the report of Mr Luke Armstrong, a forensic psychologist, which was Exhibit “L2” dated 10 October 2023, you gave him a history of low level dealing in 2018 because you had no regular income. Nevertheless, you are to be sentenced as a person with no prior criminal history.
24You have a partner Ms Loh. A relationship of some nine years. As you know I have previously sentenced your partner for other offending. You have two children with Ms Loh. Your daughter Grace, who is now nine years old, has multiple medical conditions which required no less than 11 hospital admissions in 2022. Exhibit “L4” sets out her medical risk in full, but notes that Grace is at risk of sudden and extreme life threatening health deterioration. Your youngest child is a three-year old and, as I understand it, enjoys good health.
25Ms Loh cannot visit you in prison because she is serving a community corrections order which I had imposed on her. Your children are taken to visit you by your sister.
26You are a Malaysian citizen. You have been on a bridging visa since 2013. You and Ms Loh are trying to stay in Australia, no doubt to obtain the best medical help and treatment for your daughter Grace. Your offending and imminent deportation have put an end to that chance for her.
27You are the second child of a sibship of five. Your parents are both alive and live in Malaysia. You reported to Mr Armstrong that your father was an alcoholic and violent towards all of the children, including you, and you state that you are estranged from your father. You have met your mother twice in the last 10 years. One of your sisters lives here with you, Ms Loh and your children.
28You are educated to the equivalent of Year 12. You then came to Australia in 2013. Initially you worked as a farm labourer. Your child Grace was then born in 2017 and due to the medical complications, you ceased your work as a farm labourer so your child could receive the medical treatment that she required at the Royal Children's Hospital here in Melbourne.
29You gave a history of being an ice user or methylamphetamine user since 2015. You have relied on gambling income to support your family. You reported to Mr Armstrong your reason for offending was escalation in your drug use and gambling. Mr Armstrong has assessed you for the purposes of this plea hearing. He has assessed you as having a:
· Borderline personality disorder.
· Stimulant use disorder.
· Opioid use disorder; and
· Gambling disorder.
30You have engaged in a number of courses on remand to assist in your rehabilitation. A bundle of those certificates, which were Exhibit “L3”, are evidence of those endeavours by you.
Sentencing considerations
31The basic purpose for which a court may impose a sentence are just punishment, deterrence, both specific and general, rehabilitation and denunciation of your actions, and the protection of the community. In sentencing you I must have regard to a range of factors such as the seriousness of your offending, your culpability for it and your personal circumstances.
32I am required to balance those interests of the community in denouncing your criminal conduct with the interests of the community in seeking to ensure that as far as possible you are rehabilitated and reintegrated into society.
33I am also required to take into account current sentencing practices. In fixing your sentence that enquiry is directed particularly, but not exhaustively, to the kinds of sentences imposed in comparable cases. I have considered the statistics and current sentencing practices, mindful that each case must be considered in light of its own particular circumstances and many of the cases would be distinguishable from your case as indeed they are from one another.
34The prosecution relied on a number of Court of Appeal decisions to assist with the current sentencing practices. Those cases included the authorities of Al Janabe, Dimovski, Bruce and Jabbour. Each of those cases are factually different from your case and your involvement in this offending in respect of the amount of the drug, the duration of the criminal offending itself and the role played by you as the offender.
35You have pleaded guilty at an early stage of the prosecution process. Your plea does have the utilitarian value of allowing for the orderly and effective administration of justice. There is a certainty of outcome and the resolution of the substantive issues raised by your offending. Your plea allows for the preservation of court and police resources to deal with other matters. Your plea vindicates the public confidence in the legal process set up to protect the community. As I said before, there has been no committal hearing and there is no trial.
36Your plea is also a clear acknowledgement by you that you accept responsibility for your criminal behaviour on this occasion. Your plea also recognises you are
willing to facilitate the course of justice in this community and I accept that your plea of guilty to these charges indicates and demonstrates some remorse on your behalf.
37Your plea of guilty has been entered when there was a delay in the criminal trial listings due to the COVID-19 pandemic. You are entitled to rely on the principles set out in Worboyes case which speaks of a discount in sentencing, amounting to a perceptible amelioration of sentence.
38Charge 4 on the indictment carries a maximum of life imprisonment. It also is subject to the standard sentencing regime. The standard sentence of this charge is 16 years. Again I say, the maximum sentence and the standard sentence are to be taken into account as guideposts in this sentencing process.
39In section 5B(3)(b), Parliament has enacted that stand and sentence provisions are not intended to affect the approach to sentencing known as the instinctiv e sentencing synthesis. Champion J in the case of R v Brown set out that the standard sentence is not to take the predominant role in sentencing and is just one of the factors to take into account.
40It follows that the standard sentence is not to assume a dominant role in the determination of the sentences for these charges or this charge in particular. The standard sentence prescribed by Parliament for the offences is simply one of the relevant sentencing factors to which a court must have regard, along with other sentencing factors identified which are required to be taken into account in s5(2) of the Sentencing Act. Further, so far as consideration of current sentencing practices are concerned, s5B(2)(b) requires a court when considering current sentencing practices for a standard sentence offence, which is Charge 4 here, to only consider sentences previously imposed where the relevant offence was subject to the standard sentencing scheme.
41You have no prior criminal history, and this has been your first time in custody.
42Your offending is serious as indicated by the following matters:
(a)You were directly involved in a drug trafficking syndicate from 26 April 2022 to 31 May 2022, a little over one month.
(b)You were in charge of the safe houses, that is, two of them, where the drugs were prepared, packaged, and stored.
(c)You were involved in five separate transactions in the period of trafficking heroin.
(d)You were in possession, for sale, of 4.2 kilograms of heroin on 31 May 2022 at safe house 2.
(e)The total of your drug involvement was 19 times a large commercial quantity.
(f)When your home and safe houses were searched you were in possession of approximately $400,000 in cash which was the proceeds of crime, which are Charges 8 and 10.
(g)In your home jewellery, watches, handbags and other luxury items, gold, et cetera, to the value of $391,000 which are the proceeds of crime were also located.
43You are clearly a principal, together with Teoh, in the drug trafficking syndicate. Your moral culpability is high for the overall offending to which you have pleaded.
44In terms of parity of sentence with your co-accused Teoh, your offending is over a shorter period, that is, one month, instead of the two months in his case, and you do not have any relevant prior criminal history that Teoh has admitted. Nevertheless, you were in this together and driven by the financial rewards which were apparent when your home and safe houses were raided by the police.
45You have been in Australia since 2013. You will deported at the completion of your sentence. Your deportation may impact on the ability of Ms Loh and your daughter Grace to remain in Australia. Your daughter clearly needs very comprehensive medical care now and into the future. However, that has been the case since she was born in 2017 and you have taken the course to offend in the manner before this court, knowing it would involve very serious
consequences for you and your family that are now occurring. I accept your deportation will cause you anxiety while serving your sentence.
46I assess your prospects of rehabilitation as fair. You have no prior criminal history. You have the responsibility of a partner, two children, one of whom is very ill and requires every assistance from family and medical experts. You have engaged in some rehabilitation courses whilst you are on remand.
47I have cumulated parts of the sentence in respect of Charges 8, 9 and 10 on the base sentence of Charge 4 to reflect the additional criminality relevant to the proceeds of crime offences. I have taken into account the sentencing principles of totality so as not to impose a crushing sentence upon you.
48The predominant sentencing principle is general deterrence. Sentencing principles of general and specific deterrence, just punishment, protection of the community, denunciation of your actions and your rehabilitation dictate that the only just sentence is a substantial term of imprisonment and a fixed non-parole period.
49Mr Lang, will you stand, please.
50On Charge 4 you are convicted and sentenced to 14 years and three months' imprisonment. That is a base sentence.
51On Charge 8, the proceeds of crime, you are convicted and sentenced to four years' imprisonment.
52On Charge 9, you are convicted and sentenced to four years' imprisonment.
53On Charge 10, you are convicted and sentenced to six months' imprisonment.
54Cumulation is as follows: one year of the sentence in Charge 8, one year of the sentence in Charge 9 and one month of the sentence in Charge 10 are to be served cumulatively upon one another and the base sentence of 14 years and three months. That is a total effective sentence of 16 years and four months. I fix your non-parole period as 12 years' imprisonment.
55You are also declared as a serious drug offender pursuant to s89DI of the
Sentencing Act.
56Pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act but for your plea of guilty I would have sentenced you to 19 years and six months, with a 16-year non-parole period.
57I declare you have served 508 days pre-sentence detention. I have signed the forfeiture and disposal orders in respect of you.
58Thank you. You can take a seat.
- - -
IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE
CRINIMAL JURISDICTION
Court Reference:
CR-23-00611
CR-23-00629
CR-23-00633
CR-23-00634
CR-23-00637 CR-23-00632
Indictment No. C2215435 and No. N11095497
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
v
KHAI MONG WEI CHUAN TEOH
JANET TRAN JIMMY KWONG YEW LANG
THANG NGUYEN YONG CHENG
AMENDED PROSECUTION OPENING FOR PLEA HEARING
Date of Document:
Filed on behalf of:
Prepared by:
Abbey Hogan
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions 565 Lonsdale Street
Melbourne Vic 3000
16 October 2023
Director of Public Prosecutions Solicitors code:
Reference: Telephone: Email:
Charges
1.Wei Teoh, Jimmy Lang, Khai Mong, Janet Tran, Thang Nguyen, and Yong Cheng are to plead guilty to the following offences:
Charge No. Offender Offence Provision Maximum penalty Indictment No. C2215435 1 Mong Traffick in a drug of Drugs, 25 years’ dependence Poisons and imprisonment (diacetylmorphine) in a Controlled and/or Fine of 3000 commercial quantity1 Substances Act Penalty Units2 1981, s (28 March 2022 to 71AA(1) Category 2 offence 20 May 2022) 2 Teoh Traffick in two drugs of dependence
(diacetylmorphine and methylamphetamine) in
a large commercial quantity3
Drugs,
Poisons and Controlled
Substances Act
1981, s 71(1)
Life imprisonment and/or Fine of 5000 Penalty Units
-Category 1 offence
(28 March 2022 to
30 May 2022)
-Standard sentence of 16 years 3 Tran Traffick in a drug of Drugs, 25 years’ dependence Poisons and imprisonment (diacetylmorphine) in a Controlled and/or Fine of 3000 commercial quantity Substances Act Penalty Units4 1981, s (3 April 2022 to 71AA(1) Category 2 offence 29 May 2022) 4 Lang Traffick in a drug of dependence
(diacetylmorphine) in a large commercial quantity
Drugs,
Poisons and Controlled
Substances Act
1981, s 71(1)
Life imprisonment and/or Fine of 5000 Penalty Units
-Category 1 offence
(26 April 2022 to
31 May 2022)
-Standard sentence of 16 years
1 A commercial quantity of heroin is not less than 50 grams (pure) or 250 grams (where mixed). DPCSA, Schedule 11, Part 3.
2 Pena lty Unit wa s $181.74 in 2021-2022 fina ncia l yea r.
3 A la rge commercialquantityof heroin is not less than 500 grams (pure) or 750 grams (where mixed). The same thresholds apply to methylamphetamine and, by extension, to a combination of heroin and
methylamphetamine; DPCSA, Schedule 11, Part 3.
4 Pena lty Unit wa s $181.74 in 2021-2022 fina ncia l yea r. $184.92 in
5 Nguyen Traffick in a drug of
dependence
(diacetylmorphine)
(11 May 2022)
Drugs,
Poisons and Controlled
Substances Act
1981, s
71AC(1)
15 years’
imprisonmentand/or Fine of 1800 Penalty Units
6 Teoh Possess a drug of
dependence
(methylamphetamine)
(31 May 2022)
Drugs,
Poisons and Controlled
Substances Act
1981, s 73(1)
5 years’
imprisonment5
and/or Fine of 400 Penalty Units
7 Teoh Possess a drug of
dependence (cannabis)
(31 May 2022)
Drugs,
Poisons and Controlled
Substances Act
1981, s 73(1)
5 years’
imprisonmentand/or Fine of 400 Penalty Units
(Because the amount is a “small quantity” (i.e. 50 grams or less), s 73(1)(a)
provides that the maximum penalty is a Fine of 5 Penalty Units if offender satisfies court on
balance of probabilities that offence not
committed for any purpose relating to trafficking in that cannabis.6
8 Lang Knowingly deal with proceeds of crime ($398,246.30 cash)
(31 May 2022)
Crimes Act
1958, s194(2)
15 years’
imprisonmentand/or Fine of 1800 Penalty Units
9
(Rolled up charge)
Lang Knowingly deal with proceeds of crime (jewellery and gold items valued at
$41,348, eight luxury
Crimes Act
1958, s194(2)
15 years’
imprisonmentand/or Fine of 1800 Penalty Units
5 Maximum pena lty is 1 yea r imprisonment and/or Fine of 30 Pena lty Units if offender satisfies court on ba lance of probabilities that offence not committed for any purpose rela ting to trafficking in that drug of dependence – DPCSA, s 73(1)(b).
6 The prosecution does not dispute Teoh’s cla im that this wa s cannabis for personaluse, hence it is open to the court to find that the lower maximum penalty applies.
watches valued at
$128,050, forty-nine
luxury handbags valued at $148,350 and three pairs of luxury shoes
valued at $1,500)
(31 May 2022)
10 Lang Knowingly deal with proceeds of crime ($1,850 cash)
(31 May 2022)
Crimes Act
1958, s194(2)
15 years’
imprisonmentand/or Fine of 1800 Penalty Units
11 Tran Knowingly deal with proceeds of crime ($19,500 cash)
(31 May 2022)
Crimes Act
1958, s194(2)
15 years’
imprisonmentand/or Fine of 1800 Penalty Units
12 Mong Possess a drug of dependence
(cannabis)
(27 July 2022)
Drugs,
Poisons and Controlled
Substances Act
1981, s 73(1)
5 years’
imprisonment7
and/or Fine of 400 Penalty Units8
13 Mong Possess a drug of dependence (MDMA)
(27 July 2022)
Drugs,
Poisons and Controlled
Substances Act
1981, s 73(1)
5 years’
imprisonment9
and/or Fine of 400 Penalty Units
14 Mong Possess a drug of dependence
(methylamphetamine) (27 July 2022)
Drugs,
Poisons and Controlled
Substances Act
1981, s 73(1)
5 years’
imprisonment10
and/or Fine of 400 Penalty Units
7 Maximum pena lty is 1 yea r imprisonment and/or Fine of 30 Pena lty Units if offender satisfies court on ba lance of probabilities that offence not committed for any purpose relating to trafficking in that drugof dependence – DPCSA, s 73(1)(b).
8 Pena lty Unit wa s $184.92 in 2022-2023 fina ncia l yea r.
9 Maximum pena lty is 1 yea r imprisonment and/or Fine of 30 Pena lty Units if offender satisfies court on ba lance of probabilities that offence not committed for any purpose relating to trafficking in that drug of dependence – DPCSA, s 73(1)(b).
Indictment No. N11095497 1 Cheng Traffick in a drug of dependence
(diacetylmorphine) in a large commercial quantity
(30 March 2022 to
31 May 2022)
Drugs,
Poisons and Controlled
Substances Act
1981, s 71(1)
Life imprisonment and/or Fine of 5000 Penalty Units
-Category 1 offence
-Standard sentence of 16 years
2 Cheng Possess a drug of
dependence
(methylamphetamine)
(31 May 2022)
Drugs,
Poisons and Controlled
Substances Act
1981, s 73(1)
5 years’
imprisonment11
and/or Fine of 400 Penalty Units
Background
2.In 2021, the Victoria Police Major Drug Squad commenced Operation Kingfisher, which was an investigation into large scale drug trafficking in the western suburbs of Melbourne.
3.Teoh was identified as a person of particular interest, and police ultimately obtained a telephone interception warrant for mobile service number 0410 089 553, subscribed in the name of Teoh’s girlfriend (Ms Yan), but used by Teoh at all relevant times. Unless otherwise noted, references to phone communications to/from Teoh relate to communications on the “553” number.
4.From 28 March 2022 to 31 May 2022 (when Teoh was arrested), interception of Teoh’s communications with his co-offenders, and others (together with related CCTV, surveillance and other evidence which places those communications in context) revealed that Teoh and Lang conducted a substantial ongoing business of drug trafficking. Teoh’s primary focus was heroin, and he trafficked at least 14
kilograms of heroin in this period. Teoh also trafficked 800 grams of methylamphetamine in the period.
5.Schedule A to the prosecution opening sets out a total of 43 separate drug transactions that are the subject of charges, based on relevant intercepted communications in the period from 28 March 2022 to 29 May 2022, and other evidence. The transactions mostly relate to heroin.
6.Lang was Teoh’s trusted associate and co-principal. In the period from 26 April to 31 May 2022, Lang trafficked at least 14 kilograms of heroin, which includes
4.1 kilograms of heroin (seized by police from a safehouse operated by Lang), which Lang possessed for the purpose of sale.
7.In essence, Teoh and Lang headed a syndicate of predominantly Malaysian nationals, who were selling heroin in “block” form. Each block consisted of 350 grams of heroin compressed into a rectangular packet. The blocks were generally sold in pairs (700 grams) with a corresponding purchase price for a pair, with the cost for a lesser amount extrapolated from the quoted "pair" pricing. They promoted the sale of heroin referred to as “Lion” or “Globe”, which was a reference to the logo depicting two lions and globes stamped on the packaging. The product was promoted and sold as two grades of heroin. The superior grade was “168”, with minimal impurities. An inferior grade, "175", was named after the number 175 stamped onto the packaging of the blocks. The “175” product generally sold for between $115,000 to $130,000 per pair; the “168” product was generally sold for between $128,000 and $140,000 per pair – with some fluctuations in pricing when product was scarce.
8.Teoh acted in the capacity of a sales manager, actively seeking out customers, dealing with complaints and promoting the product. Teoh had the ability to autonomously negotiate and set prices, arrange distribution, and facilitate the collection of payment.
9.Lang was effectively a production and warehouse manager. He had the responsibility of managing a “safehouse” located at 3 Teague Crescent, Braybrook (safehouse1), which was a modern townhouse with a single garage door. Lang (and his partner, Ms Loh) lived next door, at 5 Teague Crescent, Braybrook, in an almost identical property. Lang also had a second safehouse about 300 metres away at 80 Royal Road, Braybrook (safehouse2), which was another modern townhouse with a single garage door.
10.Lang and Teoh used safehouse1 as a receiving house where Lang arranged for large quantities of sourced heroin to be refined, tested, pressed (using a hydraulic press or hand press), and re-packaged into fresh blocks. This location was also used as an "office" where Teoh, Lang and their associates met, and where cash was counted. Safehouse2 was used to store prepared product, including large quantities of heroin.
11.The intercepted conversations included communications between Lang and Teoh about passing on the proceeds of their business to money remittance facilitators. For example, on 11 May 2022 at 9.04pm, Teoh phoned Lang and requested Lang bring over $42,000, and stated “the person that does exchange rate will come and get a few tens of thousands of dollars later.”12
12.Teoh, in his sales role, would utilise “brokers” who would identify potential customers and facilitate the sale of large quantities of heroin.
13.Tran was one such “broker” who used her contacts within the Vietnamese community to arrange for other drug syndicates/traffickers within Victoria and interstate to be supplied with large quantities of heroin by Teoh and Lang. Tran was also referred to as “sister”, “elder sister” and “ah jei”. Tran’s son, Jacky Ong, also
purchased single ounces (andsome half ounces) of heroin from Teoh on a regular basis.
14.Teoh also maintained relationships with several commercial level drug traffickers who would source large quantities of heroin from Teoh/Lang in order to supply their own customers. Mong was one such trafficker, who also acted as a mentor and advisor to Teoh regarding managing drug distribution and sourcing drugs. Mong was also referred to as Sen, Sen Gor, Older Brother or Uncle.
15.One example of Mong’s role is revealed in a phone call on 22 April 2022,13 where Teoh discussed with Mong general product supply issues Teoh was experiencing. Teoh asked Mong “do you still have any of those white ones? Is there any way to source just a little? Those 175 and 168.” Mong replied that “175” was currently expensive and that the price was currently “14.” Teoh asked Mong to enquire if “they” had any stock available and said, “ask if you can bring 20 back.” Teoh said if he went up to get it, it would be gone in one go. Mong mentioned Sydney and Teoh offered to send Cheng to collect it from “up there.” Mong advised Teoh that it was cheaper “up there.” Teoh suggested that even at an expensive price they would have no trouble selling it and making the money back quickly in Melbourne as there was not a lot of stock. Mong stated that he was unsure if the seller was willing to let Teoh take so much back to Melbourne. Teoh stated that if they (the suppliers in Sydney) didn’t trust them, they would take five first and then do it again. Mong and Teoh then discussed the other person’s business operations and how they (i.e. Teoh and Mong) would gain the trust of the other person in order to purchase product.
16.As detailed below, Mong and Tran were each involved in trafficking quantities of heroin that exceeded the large commercial quantity threshold. However, the prosecution has accepted pleas by each to between dates trafficking of a “commercial quantity” of heroin, in circumstances where the prosecution does
not allege knowledge of (and henceintention to traffick in) the specific weight of the product sold in certain transactions (identified in Schedule A).
17.Working under Teoh’s direct control was Yong Seng Cheng. Chen was also referred to as “Shen”, “Ah Sheng”, “Fat Boy” or “Younger Brother.” Cheng drove a black Lexus and acted as a dedicated driver/courier for Teoh and Lang. Cheng was regularly tasked by Teoh with delivering drugs, collecting money from customers, collecting drugs from the safehouses, and assisting Lang with the preparation of drugs for sale. Cheng on occasion would act as a personal driver for Teoh. Cheng would retain ounce quantities of heroin to supply customers who required it at short notice, which included Ong to whom he made numerous deliveries.
18.The prosecution has accepted a plea by Cheng to trafficking a “large commercial quantity” of heroin, based on an intention to traffick 6.3347 kilograms of heroin, in circumstances where the prosecution does not allege knowledge of (and hence intention to traffick in) the specific weight of the product sold in certain transactions (identified in Schedule A).
19.As described further below, on 11 May 2022 Nguyen was intercepted at Beveridge, whilst driving a car en route to Queensland. Police found approximately 2.1 kilograms of heroin (pressed into six 350-gram blocks) hidden inside the centre console, which had been dismantled to accommodate the drugs. The prosecution has accepted Nguyen’s plea to a charge of trafficking simpliciter, on the basis that Nguyen was not involved in the concealment of the drugs in the vehicle, and did not have actual knowledge of the drugs onboard. Nevertheless, he was aware of the likelihood that the car he was driving carried a drug that was being trafficked (i.e. an awareness that there was a significant or real chance that his conduct involved trafficking in a drug).
20.The transactions listed in Schedule A to the prosecution opening are described below.
Transaction 1 (28/3/22 – Teoh obtains 280 grams of methylamphetamine for the purpose of on-sale)
21.On 28 March:
a.at 2.29 pm an unknown male (UM1) phoned Teoh, and stated he had arrived at the carpark of the Dainty Sichuan Hot Pot Restaurant in Box Hill, and confirmed that it was “only 10 pieces”. Teoh said he would get his girlfriend (Yan) to collect it.14
b. At 2.32pm, Yan left the Teoh/Yan residence and went to the restaurant.15
c.At 2.36pm, Teoh phoned Yan16 and told her the person was at the door and had gone inside (the restaurant); Yan asked Teoh if she was to give the person the money and Teoh confirmed that was correct.
d. At 2.37pm, UM1 phoned Teoh and confirmed “it is done”.17
e. At 2.40pm, Yan returned to the Teoh/Yan residence.18
f.At 4.49pm, Teoh phoned Lang.19 Lang asked if Teoh could “arrange 10 cans of water” and asked if the price was the same if the customer took “10.” Teoh confirmed it was and that Lang could “take 5” if he wanted. Lang enquired if it was “$2500.” Teoh replied that was his (Teoh’s) “cost price.” Lang said he would offer it to his customer for $3,200 and that they (Teoh and Lang) could make money together. The customer could then on-sell it for “38 to 4”, which is why he (Lang) would offer it to the customer at “32.” Lang said “Take 10 first and see how it goes first”. Teoh said “okay”.
22.The prosecution alleges that Teoh purchased 10 ounces (i.e. 280 grams) of methylamphetamine from UM1 for the purpose of on-sale, which Teoh later discussed with Lang.
14 D05515-00 CSN 149.
15 Exhibit 49 CCTV Station Street address.
16 D05515-00 CSN 155.
17 D05515-00 CSN 157.
18 Exhibit 49 CCTV Station Street address Download.
19 D05515-00 CSN 168.
Transaction 2 – (29/3 to 2/4/22 - Teoh sells 1050 grams of heroin)
23.The prosecution alleges that Mong brokered a transaction in which Teoh supplied a “pair” (i.e. two blocks of heroin weighing a total of 700 grams) to Mong’s customer. The customer was dissatisfied with the yellow colour, which resulted in Teoh taking back the two blocks, one of which Teoh was able to sell to another customer on the same day. The following day, two blocks of white heroin were provided to Mong’s customer as replacement product. The circumstances of the transactions were as follows.
24.On 29 March at 8.53pm, Mong phoned Teoh and asked if Teoh he had “any 175.” Teoh confirmed he did and that he could provide it to Mong if he wanted it. Mong stated his customer wanted it the following day and would pay the day after if that was not an issue for Teoh.20
25.On 30 March at 2.59pm, Teoh phoned Cheng and advised that he (Teoh) would talk to him (Mong) about the “one pair” and obtain a delivery address from Mong for Cheng to deliver to. Teoh said Cheng did not need to collect money, as Teoh would do so.21
26.On 1 April:
a.At 4.44pm, Mong phoned Teoh. Teoh asked Mong “has it been ok? Is it all right?” Mong advised “he has just told me that the yellowish stuff was a bit damp because it was kept for too long.” Teoh stated “No it was like that originally. It came out like that.” Mong then said the customer didn’t want it. Mong stated, “the goods have not been inspected. He has only opened one bag to check. Original package. 175. I am worried that they have mixed it with something and it will be a problem. If it is the original, then I will let him/her know and see how it goes.”22
20 D05515-00 CSN 306
21 D05515-00 CSN 345
22 D05515-00 CSN 609
b.At 4.46pm, Mong phoned Teoh and advised that “the client do not fucking want the yellow ones” and asked Teoh to “use the white ones to exchange it with them. That should be fine as it is also 175. Exchange it to avoid the fucking trouble. Do you have it? Do you have two packs for exchange?” Mong also stated that the “clients” thought the product was fake and that it may have been mixed with something. Teoh told Mong that the person should use a knife to cut open the other pack and check it first, and if there was still a problem he would change over then.23
c.At 5.49pm, Mong phoned Teoh and advised that “Both packs are yellow. Is there a way to change it?” Teoh queried this, and Mong replied “they have just used a knife to open it and checked it. Yellow. Help him/her change it to white ones. It will be alright to give them the white ones.”24
d.At 6.06pm, Mong phoned Teoh and they discussed sending “Younger Brother” (i.e. Cheng) to “take it back now” and “exchange” the product the following day.25
e.At 6.18pm, Mong phoned Teoh. Teoh asked Mong if 9:30 will be ok and Mong agreed.26
f.At 6.26pm, Mong phoned Teoh and instructed Teoh to “wait at the front door at 9:30” 27
g. At 8.43pm, Teoh phoned Cheng. Cheng advised Teoh he had pressed the
bell on the gate, but no one had answered. Teoh told Cheng he would call “brother sen.”28
h.At 8.44pm, Teoh phoned Mong and advised that “younger brother” had arrived. Mong replied “has he arrived? You said 9.30”. Mong advised “I call him now.”29
i.At 8.46pm, Mong phoned Teoh and advised that the person had just left, nobody was home now, but the person will be back in 15 minutes.30
23 D05515-00 CSN 611
24 D05515-00 CSN 621
25 D05515-00 CSN 629
26 D05515-00 CSN 642
27 D05515-00 CSN 647
28 D05515-00 CSN 666
29 D05515-00 CSN 671
30 D05515-00 CSN 683
j.At 8.47pm, Teoh phoned Cheng and advised the person would be home in 15 minutes. Cheng said he would wait in the car. Teoh told Cheng to take a photo once he had seen the person and send it through to him.31
k.At 9.02pm, Cheng phoned Teoh and advised that he had already taken pictures and asked Teoh to review them. Teoh asked Cheng “still not yet open?” Cheng replied that the person said he had already cut a tiny bit and had packed it again. Teoh asked if it is similar? Cheng said yes, and then asked Teoh “now what to do next? Or bring it over and give him one piece?”
Teoh instructed Cheng “you take home, then go there. You call me”.32
l.At 9.40pm, Cheng phoned Teoh. Teoh provided Cheng with an apartment number, and instructed Cheng that once he had entered, he was to let the person see the item and if they were okay with it, he (Cheng) could leave.33
m.At 9.53pm, Cheng phoned Teoh and advised that the person only purchased “one piece” and that Cheng would bring home the other piece. Teoh agreed.34
27.On 2 April:
a.at 1.21pm, Teoh phoned Mong and proposed “how about some time after 4 o’clock elder brother? Mong agreed and asked Teoh “are there any white one?” Teoh confirmed this and advised Mong that he (Teoh) had cut open the corner to check. Mong stated, “as long as it is white.” Mong asked again for the arrival time and Teoh replied “5pm.”35
b.At 5.28pm, Mong phoned Teoh and asked “done?”. Teoh replied “done”, and further confirmed the product had been checked. Mong said “as long as it is white, it is fine.”36
Transaction 3 – (4/4/22 - Teoh sells 28 grams of heroin to Ong)
28.On 4 April 2022:
31 D05515-00 CSN 686
32 D05515-00 CSN 694
33 D05515-00 CSN 707
34 D05515-00 CSN 709
35 D05515-00 CSN 766
36 D05515-00 CSN 798
a.At 3.44pm, Ong phoned Teoh37 and asked “do you have one hot?” Teoh confirmed he did. Ong stated he was in Springvale. Teoh asked if it is Ok to let his “boy” go. Ong asked how long it would take and Teoh stated he would call him and then call back. Ong asked, “how much?” and Teoh replied “five three”. Ong agreed.
b.At 3.45pm, Teoh spoke to Cheng on the phone,38 and instructed Cheng to take “one piece” to Springvale for “Ah Jei’s” son. Cheng confirmed the order was for “one piece”, then told Teoh he could be there in seven to eight minutes. Teoh confirmed with Cheng that Cheng was to collect “five thousand three hundred”
c. At 3.57pm, Teoh phoned Ong and advised “yo brother, he has arrived.”39
29.The prosecution alleges that “hot” is a reference to heroin, and that Teoh charged Ong $5,300 for an ounce of heroin, which was delivered by Cheng, who collected payment on Teoh’s behalf.
Transaction 4 (8/4/22 - Teoh sells 28 grams of heroin to Tran’s friend in a deal brokered by Tran)
30.On 8 April 2022:
a.At 3.14pm, Teoh phoned Tran.40 Tran asked Teoh when he could come over to her place. Teoh said he would check with “him/her” and would call Tran back in five minutes.
b.At 3.16pm, Teoh phoned Cheng, who advised he was with “Lichon”. Teoh instructed Cheng to “borrow one piece of twenty eight from him (Lichon) and send it to Ah Jei and collect money from Ah Jei straight away” and to “wrap it nicely”.41
37 D05515-00 CSN 1072
38 D05515-00 CSN 1067
39 D05515-00 CSN 1078
40 D05515-00 CSN 2426.
41 D05515-00 CSN 2445.
c.At 3.17pm, Teoh phoned Tran, who said her friend was complaining. Teoh advised “in ten minutes.” Tran confirmed and said, “Yeah. Five, ten minutes. As soon as you can. Thank you.”42
31.The prosecution alleges that Teoh sold an ounce (28 grams) of heroin to Tran’s friend, which Cheng delivered to Tran’s address.
Transaction 5 (18/4/22 - Teoh agrees to sell 168 grams of heroin to Ong)
32.On 18 April, at 4.06pm, Ong phoned Teoh and asked if he had “hot.” Teoh confirmed he did. Ong told Teoh he had someone who “wants to buy six.” Ong told Teoh he had to deliver it but he (Ong) only had 12,000. Ong asked Teoh if he would accept that amount and payment for the rest after the drop off. Teoh agreed on the proviso the rest was paid later that night. Teoh then confirmed with Ong “six bags.” Teoh told Ong it would cost the same, being “Six times 5,300. 31,8.” Ong replied he thought it was “5.” Teoh said he could make it “five-two for you” and explained “outside is very dry.” Ong agreed and said he would need it soon and would ring back once he had spoken with the person.43
33.The prosecution alleges that in this conversation, Teoh agreed to sell Ong 168 grams (6 ounces) of heroin for $31,200 with an initial downpayment of $12,000.
Transaction 6 (18-19/4/22 - Teoh sells 28 grams of heroin)
34.The prosecution alleges that between 18 and 19 April 2022, Tran brokered a drug transaction between Teoh and a woman in Braybrook for the sale of 28 grams of heroin for $5,500. The heroin was supplied by Teoh and delivered by Cheng. The transaction occurred as follows.
35.On 18 April:
42 D05515-00 CSN 2450.
43 D05515-00 CSN 4158
a.At 3.05pm, Tran phoned Teoh and advised she had a friend near Braybrook who wanted to buy “1 hour” and asked Teoh how much. Teoh stated “6,000.” Tran replied that it was too expensive and that the woman “will go for an hour and take a look. If it is good, she will go for one day. Do you understand?” Tran asked for better price. Teoh said the price he offered her was the most special price he could do. Tran said she told the woman that it would cost $5,500 and that the woman was in her 60s. Teoh agreed to the lower price. Tran said she would call the women and callback if anything.44
b.At 3.12pm, Tran sent an SMS message to Teoh which read: “0435034225 Chi van”. At 3.14pm, Tran phoned Teoh to confirm she had sent him the contact details of “Sister Van”.45 [The prosecution refers to the “225” mobile number as the “Sister Van mobile number” hereafter]
36.On 19 April:
a.at 1.46pm, the Sister Van mobile number sent an SMS message to Teoh which read: “6 winjell ct braybrook vic 3019”46
b.At 2.45pm, Cheng phoned Teoh and asked “is that six? I didn’t see anyone coming out.” Teoh said he would call them.47
c. At 2.45pm, Teoh phoned the Sister Van mobile number and asked the
woman to open the door as his “boy” was outside.48
d.At 2.49pm, Cheng phoned Teoh and confirmed that he had just collected 5,500 from the woman.49
Transaction 7 (Teoh offered to sell 500 grams of methylamphetamine to an unknown person at Braybrook)
37.Between 17 and 20 April 2022, Teoh negotiated the sourcing of methylamphetamine (referred to as “green tea” because of the type of packaging)
44 D05515-00 CSN 4141
45 D05515-00 CSN 4147
46 D05515-00 CSN 4461 & Exhibit 359 TEOH MB1 download
47 D05515-00 CSN 4196
48 D05515-00 CSN 4474
49 D05515-00 CSN 4477
and ultimately obtained a different type of methylamphetamine, which Teoh offered to sell to a person at Braybrook for $95,000, but which was rejected.
38.On 17 April:
a.At 3.17am, Mong phoned Teoh and said “Just asking to see if you have any green tea?” Teoh said he didn’t have any. Mong advised that a person had just come to see him. Mong asked Teoh if he could try and find it. Teoh said he would try the next day.50
b.At 2.47pm, Mong phoned Teoh and asked if he had “found it.” Teoh said he hadn’t and advised there was something else but that it wasn’t “tea” and was “not good”. Mong advised the person needed “tea” and that they were willing to pay, “one eight zero.” Mong and Teoh discussed another product that was available but that it had been poorly mixed by an unknown party, and that the person who had contacted Mong specifically requested “tea leaves.” Mong advised Teoh to “let it be” and that it was too much of a headache and wasn’t worth the trouble.51
39.On 19 April:
a.At 10.09 pm Mong phoned Teoh and said “Disregard him/her. I said one nine, he/she did not want it.” Mong advised Teoh the person had said it was “high”. Mong told Teoh to give it to his (Teoh’s) friend or someone else.52
b.At 11.09pm, Mong phoned Teoh to advise that the person does want it now.53
c.At 11.12pm, Mong phoned Teoh and they discussed an address in Maidstone/Braybrook, “number 6”. Teoh asked Mong when “he/she” wanted “it” and Mong replied, “tomorrow.” Teoh said he would ask his younger brother. Teoh and Mong agreed on a time of 7 o’clock the following day at “Dai Dai’s house” at “Number 6 Braybrook”54
50 D05515-00 CSN 3919
51 D05515-00 CSN 3983
52 D05515-00 CSN 4531
53 D05515-00 CSN 4552
54 D05515-00 CSN 4555
d.At 11.17pm, Mong phoned Teoh and advised that 7 o’clock was okay. Teoh confirmed he (Teoh) had the address. Mong said “take the ice back” and “go in and have a look. Collect the water. Charge 95.”55
40.On 20 April:
a.At 4.53pm, Teoh phoned Cheng and asked if Cheng was ready to go and that he needed to be there at 7 o’clock. Cheng confirmed that he was on his way now.56
b.At 6.26pm, Teoh phoned Cheng. Cheng confirmed that he had arrived. Teoh asked Cheng to press the bell as the person was at home. Teoh told Cheng “must ask him/her to try on the spot instantly. You say to him/her that is what uncle told us. If he/she finds it ok, buy. If not, take back. If there is anything, inform me.” Cheng told Teoh that the “lady doesn’t smoke/use”.
Teoh said that it didn’t matter as they needed to decide straight away.57
c.At 6.37pm, Teoh phoned Cheng and asked “already done or not?” Cheng advised that the person didn’t want it due to the size being too small and that they wanted big size. Teoh requested Cheng to bring it back.58
d.At 7.30pm, Mong phoned Teoh. Teoh advised that the person didn’t want it, as it was too small. Mong said “Fuck it. Just fucking leave it.” Teoh replied, “Good. Okay.” 59
Transaction 8 (21/4/22 - Teoh sells 28 grams of heroin to “AhLiuh”)
41.On 21 April 2022 at 10.31am, Cheng phoned Teoh. Teoh’s phone was answered by Ms Kong. Cheng advised that “AhLiuh” wanted “one.” Teoh (in the background) instructed Cheng (via Kong) to get the money from him. Cheng asked how much and Teoh replied (via Kong) “5,300.”60
Transaction 9 (22-23/4/22 - Teoh sells 28 grams of heroin to Ong)
55 D05515-00 CSN 4557
56 D05515-00 CSN 4617
57 D05515-00 CSN 4642
58 D05515-00 CSN 4671
59 D05515-00 CSN 4679
60 D05515-00 CSN 4743
42.On 22 April at 5.35pm, Ong phoned Teoh and asked if there was any chance he could get any “hot.” Teoh stated he could get it from a friend but it was expensive. Ong asked how much, and Teoh replied “six-three.” Teoh said that everywhere was “dry.” Ong said he would call back.61
43.On 23 April:
a.at 6.32pm, Teoh phoned Ong. Ong asked Teoh if “the hot, is it still the same price?” Teoh replied “five-five.” Ong asked if it’s “the white one.” Teoh said “nuh.” Ong said he would call back.62
b.At 6.45pm, Ong phoned Teoh and asked “what time?”, to which Teoh replied “10:30”.63
c. At 8.35pm, Teoh phoned Ong and asked him to send the address.64
d. At 8.35pm, Ong texted Teoh “Burns Street Clayton South”65
e.Between 8.53pm and 9.06pm, Teoh had a series of phone conversations with Ong and Cheng respectively, about Ong and Cheng not being able to locate one another;66
f.At 9.16pm, Cheng phoned Teoh and confirmed that Ong had paid “short of ninety dollars” because he had no more money. Cheng said that he (Ong) transferred $500 by bank transfer and that Cheng was able to see there was no more money in his bank account. Cheng said “$90 short. I have counted on the spot.” Teoh said “Ok, fine.”67
Transactions 10 and 11 (Teoh, Lang and Cheng traffick multiple blocks of heroin in a deal brokered by Tran)
44.Between 3 April 2022 and 26 April 2022, Tran brokered the sale of eight blocks of heroin (weighing 2.8 kilograms) by Teoh to unknown Queensland entities. The
61 D05515-00 CSN 4928
62 D05515-00 CSN 5079
63 D05515-00 CSN 5081
64 D05515-00 CSN 5098
65 D05515-00 CSN 5100; 5103
66 D05515-00 CSN 5107; 5109; 5111; 5114; 5119; 5121; 5123; 5125.
67 D05515-00 CSN 5100; 5103
8 blocks were prepared and, on 26 April delivered to a house at Reservoir where the Queensland entities took 6 blocks.
45.On the same day, in a further dealbrokered by Tran, Teoh supplied a further block of heroin (350 grams) to a man called Long Hair. Tran received sales commission from these transactions.
46.The background to these transactions is as follows.
47.On 3 April 2022:
a.at 6.15pm, Tran phoned Teoh68 and told him that her friend from Brisbane would be “coming down next Tuesday.” Tran told Teoh that the friend “Does not want one seven five. You must make sure it is good/pretty. But don’t give him/her one seven five.” Tran asked “How much will you charge him/her?” Teoh told Tran that the price had gone up, but “I will give him/her one one five.” Tran said she would tell her friend and call back.
b.At 6.18pm, Tran phoned Teoh again and said her friend wanted Teoh to guarantee that it wasn’t going to be “One seven five” and that it had to be “pretty/good.” Teoh agreed. Tran said that her friend would call one or two days before coming down, and Tran would then call Teoh.69
48.The prosecution alleges that Tran had contacted Teoh to obtain pricing for blocks of heroin for a friend in Queensland, and that Teoh told Tran he could sell for
$115,000 for a pair.
49.On 10 April at 1.49pm, Tran advised Teoh that her friend from Queensland who was due to come down on the Tuesday was now sick with Covid. 70
50. On 17 April 2022:
68 D05515-00 CSN 899
69 D05515-00 CSN 901
70 D05515-00 CSN 2786
a.at 2.44pm, Tran phoned Teoh and advised that her friend in Queensland had recovered from illness and would be coming down within the week. Tran advised that her friend “does not want rent the property one seven five. He/she is happy with any property. You guarantee to him/her that it will be good.” Tran asked Teoh what he would charge if her friend purchased “five degree, five people.”, as Tran would let her friend know. Teoh stated he would have to ring his “older brother first” and would ring back in 5 minutes.71
b.at 3.45pm, Tran phoned Teoh and said she was waiting to hear from him. Teoh stated “five teams/pairs right? One one five?” Tran replied that she would let the other person know and “it must not be the house/unit number of one seven five” and guarantee that it is good. Teoh confirmed it was and Tran said she would let Teoh know their response.72
c.at 3.47pm, Tran phoned Teoh and advised him that her friends would be there that Sunday at the latest. Most likely within two-three days but they would give Teoh one day’s notice. Teoh agreed.73
51.On 20 April 2022, Tran phoned Teoh and advised that her friend from Queensland will arrive on Monday at 4:30 (i.e. 25 April). Tran clarified that her friend wanted four people as she (the friend) would be worried there may not be enough for five people. Teoh agreed. Tran then said “previously three people went, do you remember?” Teoh replied that he remembered, and Tran stated, “now four people are going.”74
52.On 22 April 2022:
a.At 4.03pm, Tran phoned Teoh and advised that the person was coming down on Monday and asked what would happen. Teoh told Tran that she needed to speak to the person and advise them that there was an issue with
71 D05515-00 CSN 3978
72 D05515-00 CSN 3991
73 D05515-00 CSN 3993
74 D05515-00 CSN 4606
the supply. Teoh then told Tran that he had previously kept “it” for the person for too long and Teoh’s “older brother” became unhappy about it and gave “it” to someone else. The call broke up.75
b.At 4.40pm, Tran phoned Teoh and asked “don’t even have a small amount? It needs to be cancelled?” Teoh replied “I am sourcing it at the moment. I’m sourcing it today….I will try to source it today and let you know tonight.”76
c.At 9.27pm, Teoh texted Tran “sister all good for your friend but please tell her 120, because I ask mine [sic] other friend help to take it. Outside is very dry”.77 Tran replied by text at 9.34pm stating “OK, I let her no [sic]”.
53.On 24 April 2022:
a.At 3.40pm, an unknown male using mobile 0470 519 533 (which is registered in the name of Hoang VU) phoned Teoh and asked if Teoh remembered him, the guy with the “long hair”. (The prosecution refers to the man using the “533” number as “Long Hair” hereafter). Long Hair asked Teoh if “any news about party coming up.” Teoh confirmed there was and further stated that the “number had risen” as was “too dry.” Long Hair said he knew, and was comparing Teoh’s number with others. Teoh stated “135.” Long Hair asked about colour, and Teoh said “white colour.” Long Hair asked if it was “175.” Teoh said, “No” and said “175 inside has a dot you know. Always.” Long Hair stated he didn’t like that one. Teoh said the best he could do was “135.” Long Hair asked for a better price, and Teoh said he would cut off “$2” for him.78
b.at 7.50pm, Tran phoned Teoh and advised him that her friend was sick and would rest halfway, she was driving and would arrive Tuesday (i.e. 26 April) around 10 o’clock. Tran then told Teoh that another friend, Long Hair, wanted “one person”, and that Long Hair wanted Teoh to charge him “120.” Teoh said he couldn’t do that as nothing could be sourced. Tran said
75 D05515-00 CSN 4916
76 D05515-00 CSN 4918
77 Exhibit 356, Teoh phone download.
78 D05515-00 CSN 5207
there was “lots of 175 available.” Teoh explained to Tran that her friend (i.e. Long Hair) didn’t want “175.”79
54.On 25 April:
a.at 2.45pm, Tran phoned Teoh and advised him that she had given her friend (from Queensland) the wrong price and they were due to arrive at 10. Tran said she quoted “115, instead of 120.” As a result, her friend was already half-way there and hadn’t brought enough money. Tran asked Teoh if it was okay for her friend to owe $20,000 for “four persons.” Teoh said he would give them “three persons instead.” Tran complained that she had recently lost $60,000 to $70,000 gambling, and said she would not “guarantee” to take on the debt of $20,000 as she was only making a small amount of money from the deal. Teoh and Tran had a further conversation surrounding the sourcing of heroin and that Teoh had to ask friends to get it as it was ‘quite dry’ at the time.80
b.at 6.01pm, Teoh phoned Lang and asked if Lang was working on “the four from yesterday”. Teoh said he would come over a bit later as he “need to use them tomorrow morning” and that the person would arrive “tomorrow morning.”81
55.On 26 April:
a.At 6.50am, Tran texted Teoh “9 stean St reservoir 3073.”82 In a series of phone conversations up to 7.32am, Tran and Teoh confirmed the meeting would be at Reservoir, and Tran confirmed her friend could not arrive until 12 o’clock due to traffic.83
b.At 9.01am, Victoria Police surveillance operatives observed Cheng’s Lexus on Royal Road, Braybrook a short distance from safehouse2.
79 D05515-00 CSN 5244
80 D05515-00 CSN 5330
81 D05515-00 CSN 5344
82 Exhibit 359, Teoh phone download.
83 D05515-00 CSN 5451
c.At 9.05am, surveillance operatives observed Lang talking on a mobile phone standing outside of safehouse1.
d.At 10.45 am, surveillance operatives observed Cheng exit Lang’s residence
and walk back to Cheng’s Lexus near safehouse 2. A short time later, a vehicle stopped next to Cheng, and a male passenger got out and handed Cheng a black bag. Cheng then drove his Lexus away, and at 10.48am was observed parking in the driveway of safehouse1 and entering safehouse1 carrying the same black bag.
e.At 10.55 am, surveillance operatives observed Cheng and Lang exit safehouse1, both got into Cheng’s Lexus, and Cheng drove away.
f. At 11.10am Teoh phoned Tran and advised “right now they are on the way
driving there.”84
g.At 11.36am, a car with (Queensland registration 119EA9) entered the driveway at 7 Steane Street, Reservoir.85
h.At 11.55am, Cheng parked his Lexus outside 7 Steane Street, Reservoir
i.At 11.57 am, Cheng and Lang walked into the driveway of 9 Steane Street, with Lang carrying a black bag over his shoulder.
j.At 11.58am, Cheng phoned Teoh. Teoh instructed Cheng that “Ah Mai” (Lang) was to join in the negotiation just in case Cheng didn’t know how to negotiate.86
k.At 12.04pm, Lang phoned Teoh and said he was negotiating with the Vietnamese lady (two Vietnamese speaking females can be heard in the background – complaining that the product wasn’t the same as previously supplied). Teoh asked Lang if they agreed with the purchase of “three pairs and a half?” A Vietnamese female in background said in English “You just give me three.” Lang then said “I will give you three. I will prepare another 40 grand for you.” The unknown females agreed.87 At about the time of this conversation, one of the Vietnamese women handed Cheng a green enviro bag. Cheng and the woman then got into the back seat of the Queensland
84 D05515-00 CSN 5479
85 Exhibit 55, Reservoir CCTV.
86 D05515-00 CSN 5501
87 D05515-00 CSN 5505
car whilst Lang stood at the open-door looking in. The other female stood in the front driveway keeping watch. A short time later the green bag was handed out of the car to Lang. Lang then handed Cheng the black bag. At
12.07pm, Cheng and Lang left 9 Steane Street, and walked back to Cheng’s Lexus, with Lang carrying the green enviro bag. They drove away. Meanwhile, one of the women opened the boot of the Queensland car, and put gloves on, whilst the other woman took the black bag out of the car and disposed of it in a wheelie bin.
l.At 12.39pm, Cheng parked his Lexus in Station Street, Box Hill. Lang and Cheng exited the vehicle with Cheng carrying the green enviro bag. At 12:48 pm, Cheng (followed by Lang) carried the green enviro bag to Teoh’s residence. At 12.59pm, Cheng emerged from Teoh’s residence without the green bag.
56.The prosecution alleges that in the above transaction at Reservoir, Lang and Cheng provided 3 pairs of heroin (i.e. 6 blocks) to the Vietnamese woman that had arrived in the Queensland registered car. Lang and Cheng then went to Teoh’s residence to deliver the proceeds of sale.
57.In addition to the Reservoir transaction, on 26 April Tran also assisted Teoh to complete a sale of heroin to Long Hair, in the following circumstances:
a.at 11.11am, Tran phoned Teoh and discussed “Long hair”, with Teoh agreeing to give Tran “thirty cents” (which he clarified was $3000) for the deal with “Long hair”.88
b. At 11.17am, Tran phoned Teoh and advised that Long Hair had called her
and asked if Teoh could go to his home in Fountain Gate. Teoh said no, and agreed with Tran that the meeting would take place at Tran’s address.89
c.At 11.25am, Tran phoned Teoh and advised that “he/she” (i.e. Long Hair) has concerns in relation to her home. Tran said he “will go for one vehicle, and not of the two people. Send one person first, and then when everything
88 D05515-00 CSN 5481
89 D05515-00 CSN 5483
is okay, send the other person.” Teoh agreed, and Tran said she would let “him/her” (i.e. Long Hair) know.90
d.At 7.30pm, Cheng arrived at Tran’s address in his Lexus.
e.At 7.31pm, Cheng phoned Teoh and asked him to call Tran to let her know Cheng had arrived.
f.At 7.32pm, Tran phoned Teoh and advised that Cheng had arrived.
g.At 7.34pm, Tran phoned Teoh again, and Teoh asked if “that person” had paid the “sixty-six and a half.” Tran said the person was on the way.91
h.At 7.37pm, Cheng phoned Teoh and advised that the person had only given him “61.5” and that was not correct. Teoh confirmed to Cheng that it was not correct. The person (i.e. Long Hair) then took Cheng’s phone and spoke to Teoh directly and suggested the “number was 123.” Teoh said “133. How come 123? 133.” Teoh reiterated that he had said “135” and then reduced it to “133.” Long Hair then asked Teoh “if I do the three, four pairs together, can do 120? the cheaper price.” Teoh said “No.”92
i.At 7.44pm, Tran phoned Teoh and advised “your younger brother is here.” (i.e. Cheng). Tran advised Teoh that the person is taking it with him, and that she will cover the shortfall and pay Teoh back. Teoh was not happy with this but ultimately agreed. They then discussed the money she owed to Teoh and the final amount she owed to Teoh came to $11,500. Teoh confirmed that Tran would receive $1500 commission for the transaction with Long Hair.93
j.At 8.18pm, Cheng parked his Lexus near Teoh’s residence in Box Hill. At 8.24pm, Cheng entered the apartment with a white paper bag, and was seen leaving empty handed at 8.31pm.
58.The prosecution alleges that Cheng had delivered to Teoh the proceeds of sale of the first block of heroin (350 grams) sold to Long Hair, namely $61,500 (with Tran to make up the shortfall of $5000). This was the first of the two blocks
90 D05515-00 CSN 5486
91 D05515-00 CSN 5579
92 D05515-00 CSN 5581
93 D05515-00 CSN 5584
(totalling 700 grams) which Teoh had earlier agreed to sell to Long Hair for
$133,000.
Transaction 12 (28/4/22 - Teoh sells 175 grams of heroin to Mong)
59.The prosecution alleges that Teoh sold 175 grams of heroin to Mong, delivered by Cheng, in the following circumstances.
60.On 28 April 2022:
a.at 3.35am, Mong phoned Teoh and asked if he could get “half a piece” for the following day. Teoh confirmed that Mong wanted “half a piece” to which Mong replied, “One and a half piece.” Mong asked to meet at 4 pm and Teoh agreed. Mong confirmed the price was “135.” Teoh said he had nothing on hand at that time but would make contact early the next day. Mong said he would contact the person and if it was a bit later that would be fine.94
b.At 3.45am, Mong phoned Teoh again, and said “tell him 4.30 tomorrow”. Mong said “The white one. That person wants it too.” Teoh stated he would “open and check it once I have got it from him/her tomorrow.” Mong then confirmed that the meeting would be “where I had a meal with a friend”.95
c. At 2.20pm, Lang phoned Teoh. Teoh asked Lang if an associate wanted
“shoes?” Teoh said he had saved some for Lang. Lang enquired how many. Teoh said, “I now have two-pairs, but I should be keeping a pair for myself”. Teoh also mentioned that “brother Ang” (Mong) wanted to take a “quarter.”96
d.At 2.44pm, Teoh phoned Mong and advised it will be delivered to him (Teoh) at 4 o’clock and that he would cut it and take it over there. Mong asked Teoh to call him when they were almost there.97
e. At 3pm, Cheng arrived at Teoh’s apartment empty handed, and left at
3.42pm carrying a plastic bag.98
f.At 4.02pm, Teoh phoned Mong and asked where he was as “he would be there in more than 10 minutes.” Mong said he would be at the location in 5 minutes.99
g.At 4.12pm, Cheng’s Lexus was seen driving on Lonsdale Street, Melbourne near Mong’s address and the Lin NAN family restaurant.100
h.At 4.18pm, Cheng’s Lexus was seen driving away from the above location travelling west on Lonsdale Street, Melbourne.101
i.At 7.38pm, Mong phoned Teoh and asked if he was coming out that night. Teoh said “No.” Mong said he needed to keep his wife company but if Teoh was going to come out, he (Mong) would “give him some paper.”102
Transaction 13 (29/4/22 - Teoh sells 28 grams of heroin to Ong)
61.The prosecution alleges that on 29 April, Teoh sold 28 grams of heroin to Ong for $5,500. The heroin was physically delivered to Ong in Clayton by Cheng. Ong paid for the heroin by transferring the payment into Cheng’s bank account.
62.On 29 April 2022:
a.at 6.45pm, Ong phoned Teoh and asked about “hot” and how much for “one.” Teoh said, “five and a half.” Ong asked to get “one.” Teoh agreed but said later as his “boy” was in the city.103
b.At 10.12pm, Teoh phoned Ong and asked “can I see you at 11?” Ong agreed, and said Clayton at “the same place”. Teoh advised Ong he (Teoh) would call when he arrived.104
c.At 10.16pm, Teoh sent two texts to Cheng, advising “In the car” and “I am coming now”.105
98 Exhibit 49 CCTV Station Street address Download.
99 D05515-00 CSN 5743
100 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.8110655, 144.9664795
101 Exhibit 51 Sa fe City CCTV
d.At 10.54pm, CCTV at Teoh’s address showed Teoh arrive carrying a white plastic bag.106
e. At 11.17pm, Teoh texted Ong: “Bro, 3 mins”.107
f.At 11.21pm, Teoh phoned Ong and asked if Ong was in the same place and Ong replied that he was. Teoh asked Ong “you coming?” and Ong replied that he was.108
g.At 11.37pm, Cheng phoned Teoh and advised that the person (i.e. Ong) had transferred $5,500 into Cheng’s bank account and the money was already in.109
Transaction 14 (29-30/4/22 – Mong brokers Teoh’s sale of 350 grams of heroin)
63.The prosecution alleges that between 29 April 2022 and 30 April 2022, Mong brokered the sale by Teoh of 350 grams (one block) of heroin to an unknown entity for $65,000. The heroin was supplied by Teoh and delivered by Cheng. Part payment of $31,000 was collected by Mong and given to Teoh via Cheng. The relevant circumstances were as follows:
64.On 29 April 2022:
a.At 8.50pm, Teoh phoned Mong. Mong stated he still had “half” left and it would be difficult to deliver it that night. Mong asked Teoh if he could give it to another person the following day and count it as “65”. Teoh replied, “if you like.” Mong asked Teoh to arrange it for 12.30 the following day. Mong offered to give the address to Teoh, but Teoh told Mong to give the address to his “younger brother” (i.e. Cheng).110
b.At 9.04pm, Teoh phoned Cheng and instructed Cheng to get an address from that person (i.e. Mong) to deliver “one piece” at 12.30 the following day.111
106 Exhibit 49 CCTV Station Street address Download
107 D05515-00 CSN 5900.
108 D05515-00 CSN 5902.
109 D05515-00 CSN 5918.
110 D05515-00 CSN 5876.
111 D05515-00 CSN 5882.
c.At 9.50pm, Mong phoned Teoh, and Teoh confirmed it was for 12.30 the following day.112
65.On 30 April:
a.at 12.14pm, Teoh phoned Cheng and advised that after delivering the “goods” to that person, there was no need to collect money as the person would pay “Sengor” (i.e. Mong);113
b.at 3.11pm, Mong phoned Teoh and asked Teoh to “come out tonight to get the paper.”114
c.At 4.30pm, Teoh phoned Cheng and asked Cheng to get the money from “Sengor” (i.e. Mong).115
d. At 6.45pm, Cheng arrived at safehouse1.116
e.At 8.00pm, Cheng parked his Lexus on Lonsdale Street, Melbourne near Mong’s address and the Lin NAN family restaurant.117
f.At 8.05pm, Teoh phoned Cheng, who advised Teoh that he had collected the money and that “the person said thirty-one only”.118
g.At 9.04pm, Mong phoned Teoh and advised that someone (i.e. Cheng) had come and left already. Teoh said he knew and that they took “31.”119
Transaction 15 (30/4/22 – 1/5/22 – Teoh sells 175 grams of heroin to Thai)
66.The prosecution alleges that between 30 April and 1 May 2022, Teoh negotiated and sold 175 grams (half-block) of heroin to Thai for $33,000. The heroin was delivered, and payment collected, by Cheng at 4 Andrew St, Sunshine on 1 May 2022. The relevant circumstances were as follows:
67.On 30 April 2022:
112 D05515-00 CSN 5886.
113 D05515-00 CSN 5942.
114 D05515-00 CSN 5976.
115 D05515-00 CSN 5985.
116 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.7945068, 144.8503824
117 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.810991, 144.9664616
118 D05515-00 CSN 6008.
119 D05515-00 CSN 6026.
a.At 2.27pm and 2.28pm, a woman known as Uyen Thai of 4 Andrew Street, Sunshine (using mobile number 0484 362 999) sent texts to Teoh which read: “how are you brother?” and “can you come lunch time tomorrow”.120
b.At 2.30pm, Teoh phoned Thai and asked what time and if she required the “same, huh, half?” Thai said “yes.” Teoh stated that “but now up a little bit”.
Thai asked Teoh to message how much it would cost.121
c. At 2.30pm, Teoh texted “33” to Thai.122
d. At 2.31pm and 2.23pm, Thai texted Teoh “ok brother” and “3.30pm ok”.123
68.On 1 May 2022:
a.At 1.52pm, Teoh phoned Thai to confirm she was at home, and said “my boy, 20 minute”.124
b.At 1.52pm, Teoh phoned Cheng and advised “the girl said Ok.” Cheng told Teoh he would be there in 7 minutes.125
c.At 1.59pm, Cheng arrived in his Lexus at Thai’s house at 4 Andrew Street,
Sunshine.126
d.At 2.50pm, Cheng’s Lexus parked near Teoh’s residence in Box Hill,127 and CCTV at the apartment complex showed that at 2.54pm Teoh arrived with a small gift bag.128
Transaction 16 (3/5/22 – Teoh sells 28 grams of heroin and 14 grams of methylamphetamine to Ong)
69.The prosecution alleges that on 3 May 2022, Teoh sold 28 grams (one ounce) of heroin and 14 grams (half-ounce) of methylamphetamine to Ong for $5000 and
$3500 respectively. The drugs were delivered that night by Cheng to Ong in Burns Street, Clayton. The relevant circumstances were as follows:
120 D05515-00 CSN 5947; 5950
121 D05515-00 CSN 5953
122 D05515-00 CSN 5955
123 D05515-00 CSN 5957; 5960
124 D05515-00 CSN 6090
125 D05515-00 CSN 6092
126 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.7815845, 144.8411163
127 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.8208569, 145.1224632
128 Exhibit 49 CCTV Station Street address Download
a.At 5.49pm, Ong phoned Teoh and asked if he could see Teoh that night for “one” and maybe another “one” a bit later. They agreed on “the same place” in Clayton, and Teoh said he would call ‘his boy and maybe he go in, uh, 10 minutes.”129
b.At 5.49pm, Ong phoned Teoh again and asked if there was “any cold.” Teoh said there was, but it was ‘very expensive.’ Ong asked for the price, and Teoh said “seven.” They discussed quality, Teoh said it was good, and Ong said he would call back.130
c.At 5.50pm, Teoh phoned Cheng and told him to “go to Clayton for one.” Teoh told Cheng that he must collect the money, and “count one finger”.
Cheng said “fine”.131
d.At 6.01pm, Ong phoned Teoh and asked for “half a cold.” Teoh replied “tomorrow” and Ong agreed. Ong asked Teoh to let him know when “his boy’ arrived and Teoh replied “I think he in, eight minutes.”132
e. At 6.05pm, Teoh phoned Ong and advised that Cheng had arrived.133
f.At 6.09pm, Teoh phoned Ong, and Ong advised that he (Ong) was coming out.134
g.At 6.14pm, Cheng phoned Teoh and advised “5,000 by transfer, 3500 by cash.”135
Transaction 17 (4/5/22 – Teoh sells 28 grams of heroin and 14 grams of methylamphetamine to Ong)
70.The prosecution alleges that on 4 May 2022, Teoh sold 28 grams (one ounce) of heroin and 14 grams (half-ounce) of methylamphetamine to Ong for $9000 total. The drugs were delivered that evening by Cheng to Ong in Burns Street, Clayton. The relevant circumstances were as follows:
129 D05515-00 CSN 6350
130 D05515-00 CSN 6353
131 D05515-00 CSN 6355
132 D05515-00 CSN 6357
133 D05515-00 CSN 6359
134 D05515-00 CSN 6365
135 D05515-00 CSN 6367
a.At 4.16pm, Teoh phoned Ong and asked Ong if he “wanted to get both today.” Ong confirmed this, and asked Teoh the price of “cold.” Teoh told Ong it was “3.5 for half.” Ong then enquired “seven for a full one”, which Teoh confirmed. Teoh said he had only prepared a “half” for Ong. Ong asked if it was “Mexican or tea.” Teoh confirmed it was “tea” and they arranged to meet at the same place as last time.136
b.At 6.14pm, Teoh phoned Ong. Ong said he would be there in 10 minutes. Teoh confirmed Ong was to get “one and a half.” Ong replied, “one hot and half cold.” Teoh confirmed total owing was “9.”137
c.At 6.28pm, Teoh phoned Ong. Ong told Teoh he could see the Lexus, and was behind it.138
d. At 6.32pm, Cheng’s Lexus drove away from the vicinity of 23 Burns
Avenue, Clayton.139
e.At 6.32pm, Cheng phoned Teoh and advised that he had received “$4,000 cash” and “$5,000” by bank transfer.140
Transaction 18 (7/5/22 – Teoh sells 28 grams of heroin to Ong)
71.The prosecution alleges that on 7 May 2022, Teoh sold 28 grams (one ounce) of heroin to Ong for $5500 total. The price was reduced by $2000 because Ong returned 8 grams of methylamphetamine (valued by Teoh at $2000), resulting in a total payment by Ong of $3500. The heroin was delivered that evening by Cheng to Ong in Burns Street, Clayton.
72.The relevant circumstances were as follows:
a.At 12.13pm, Ong phoned Teoh and asked “can I see you for hot?” to which Teoh replied that he was still sleeping.141
136 D05515-00 CSN 6446
137 D05515-00 CSN 6497
138 D05515-00 CSN 6511
139 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.9382898, 145.1340795
140 D05515-00 CSN 6514
141 D05515-00 CSN 6749
b.At 2.31pm, Teoh phoned Ong. Ong asked Teoh if “his boy” would be able to drop off to him. Teoh replied that he (Cheng) was at work but would finish at six or seven.142
c.At 6.38pm, Teoh phoned Ong and said that his boy (Cheng) had arrived, and Ong replied that he would be there in fifteen minutes. Teoh requested that Ong pay $2900, stating that he (Teoh) would “take away the cold and I just, uh, deduct the money.”143
d.From 6.53pm to 7.07pm, Teoh and Ong exchanged a series of texts as to how the deduction was arrived at, culminating in Teoh texting “14 = 3500 you give me back 8 so I give you back 2000”; “you coming?”; and “mine boy waiting bro”.144
e. At 9.34pm, Cheng phoned Teoh and asked if he (Cheng) is required to give
the three thousand five hundred to “Ah Qing?” Teoh stated “ok” and Cheng replied “I will pass the three thousand five hundred dollars to Ah Qing”.145
Transaction 19 (8-9 May 2022 – Teoh sells 84 grams of heroin to Thai)
73.The prosecution alleges that on 8-9 May 2022, Teoh sold 84 grams (three ounces) of heroin to Thai for $13,000, in the following circumstances.
74.On 8 May:
a.At 5.31pm, Teoh phoned Thai. Thai asked Teoh if she could get half of what she got “last time” as she didn’t have enough money. Teoh said “only three bag?” and Thai replied “Yeah”. Teoh asked Thai to clarify if she wanted two pieces or three pieces, and Thai confirmed she wanted “three pieces”. Teoh said he would have to ask his “brother” how much it would be and let her know.146
116.The prosecution alleges that on 26 May 2022, Teoh sold 28 grams of heroin to Tran’s friend, in the following circumstances:
a.At 6.53pm, Tran phoned Teoh. Teoh advised that Cheng was stuck on the M1 freeway and would be 20 minutes. Tran asked “so how much are you charging - 5700 or 5800?” Teoh replied, “whatever you like.” Tran said, “of course I will love 5700. Am I silly? Do you think I’m silly?” Tran said her friend had been waiting. Tran said she would let her friend know there is a delay due to traffic.271
b.At 7.06pm, Teoh sent a WeChat message asking Cheng to go to “old auntie’s home first” and collect $5,700. Cheng replied that he was on his way, and shortly after advised Teoh “It’s done for sis.”272
c. At 7.23pm, Cheng’s Lexus departed from Tran’s address.273
Transaction 39 (26 May 2022 – Teoh sells 14 grams of heroin to Ong)
267 Exhibit 359, Teoh phone download
268 D05515-00 CSN 9539
269 D05515-00 CSN 9548
270 Exhibit 359, Teoh phone download
271 D05515-00 CSN 9695
272 Exhibit 359, Teoh phone download
273 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.9784404, 145.1340038
117.The prosecution alleges that on 26 May 2022, Teoh sold 14 grams of heroin to Ong, in the following circumstances:
a. At 9.22pm, Ong phoned Teoh and asked for “half.” Teoh agreed. Ong said
he would ring his friend and let him know.274
b.At 9.50pm, Teoh phoned Cheng and said that once he arrived home, he was to “divide one in half.” Teoh reiterated that the person wanted “14” and explained there was a new location for the meeting, a car park.275
c.At 10.10pm, Cheng’s Lexus arrived at Garnsworthy Street Shopping Centre Carpark, Springvale.276
d.At 10.23pm, Teoh phoned Ong, and Ong advised Teoh that he (Ong) was there.277
e. At 10.27pm, Cheng sent a WeChat message to Teoh stating “Done” and
“2.9k”.278
Transaction 40 (27 May 2022 – Teoh sells 350 grams of heroin)
118.The prosecution alleges that on 27 May 2022 Tran brokered a sale by Teoh of 350 grams (one block) of heroin to an unidentified person at 107 Phyllis Street, Deer Park for $65,000. The heroin was prepared by Lang and stored at safehouse2, where it was collected by Cheng and delivered to Deer Park. Tran was to receive $2000 commission on the sale. The transaction occurred in the following circumstances:
a.At 11.52am, an unknown woman using mobile 0415 873 773 phoned Teoh and asked if he had “175.” Teoh said he did. The woman asked how much for a “piece” and Teoh replied “70.” The woman said she would check and arranged to meet at 7 pm.279
b.At 12.24pm, Tran phoned Teoh and advised that her Mandarin speaking friend in St Albans wanted to buy “175” for “65” for “one bu” [“Bu” is an article word for some nouns including vehicles]. Tran asked Teoh if he
274 D05515-00 CSN 9707
275 D05515-00 CSN 9720
276 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.9416495, 145.1623358
277 D05515-00 CSN 9720
278 Exhibit 359 Teoh phone download
279 D05515-00 CSN 9748
could meet the friend at 7 pm. Tran stated she had quoted “65” to her friend and asked Teoh how much commission he would give her. Teoh told Tran that her friend had called earlier, and he had quoted “70.” Tran replied “Idiot. How would I know? You have told me sixty five so I have fucking told her sixty five”. Teoh said he would call Tran’s friend back but that he had already quoted her “70”.280
c. At 2.13pm, Teoh texted the “773” number, stating “What time see you?”281
d. At 3.07pm, the 773 number texted Teoh, stating “No”.282
e. At 3.07pm, Teoh texted the 773 number, stating “65”.283
f. At 3.20pm, the 773 number texted Teoh, stating “Ok”.284
g.At 4.42pm, the woman on the 773 number phoned Teoh and asked “can you do it for me – six five, 65.” Teoh confirmed that would be the price. She asked if Teoh could come to her location at “7.” Teoh asked her to send the address.285
h.At 4.43pm, Lang phoned Teoh. Teoh asked Lang if he still had “shoes” and Lang confirmed he did. Teoh said “I will come to get one later” and that it would be around 7 or 8 pm. Teoh explained that “Ah Sheng” (Cheng) would attend and give him (Lang) “1.” Teoh said that the delivery area was near Lang’s address.286
i.At 4.49pm, the 773 number text Teoh, stating: “107 Phyllis Pde, deer park”.287
j.At 4.50pm, Teoh sent WeChat message to Cheng, advising him to go to “mike’s home” (Lang’s), pick up “one piece” and deliver it to “107 Phyllis pde deer park”.288
k.At 7.15pm, Cheng’s Lexus arrived at safehouse1 and parked in the driveway. Cheng got out, and entered safehouse1.289
280 D05515-00 CSN 9752
281 D05515-00 CSN 9756
282 D05515-00 CSN 9758
283 D05515-00 CSN 9760
284 D05515-00 CSN 9764
285 D05515-00 CSN 9772
286 D05515-00 CSN 9777
287 D05515-00 CSN 9789
288 Exhibit 119 Cheng phone download and Exhibit 359 Teoh phone download
289 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.7944859, 144.8503225 & Exhibit 53 CCTV Braybrook
l. At 7.18pm, Cheng drove the Lexus to safehouse2.290
m.At 7.20pm, Teoh and Cheng exchanged WeChat messages, where Cheng advised he was 20 minutes away and asked if he was to collect money from the person or not. Teoh replied he was to “collect 65k”.291
n.At 7.39pm, Cheng’s Lexus arrived outside of 107 Phyllis Parade, Deer Park.292
o.From 7.39pm to 7.56pm, Teoh and Cheng exchanged WeChat messages, where Cheng advised the deal had been done. Teoh instructed Cheng to take the money and bring it to him (Teoh) in the city.293
p.At 8.40pm, Teoh phoned Tran and asked to let him know if she was going on holiday, because if not, he (Teoh) would ask “his boy” to bring her
$2,000. Tran asked Teoh if he had already “dispatched” for her. Teoh
confirmed he had and Tran asked how much Teoh had charged the person. Teoh replied, “65” and stated that he owed Tran $2,000. Teoh asked Tran to fix a time and he would get his “younger brother” (Cheng) to drop off the money to her.294
Transactions 41 and 42 (27 May 2022 – Teoh sells 28 grams of heroin, and a further 14 grams of heroin to Ong)
119.The prosecution alleges that on 27 May 2022, Teoh sold 28 grams of heroin,
and a further 14 grams of heroin, each of which Cheng delivered to Ong at 20 Fairbairn Street, in Springvale.
120.The one ounce deal occurred in the following circumstances:
a.At 3.26pm, Ong phoned Teoh and asked if he could get “one.” Teoh said “6 o’clock.”295
290 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.7941645, 144.8470555
291 Exhibit 359 Teoh phone download
292 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.7537461, 144.7642246
293 Exhibit 359 Teoh phone download
294 D05515-00 CSN 9834
295 D05515-00 CSN 9766
b.At 4.47pm, Teoh phoned Cheng and asked him to “take one piece” which was for Tran’s son. Cheng asked the price. Teoh said he wasn’t sure, but to let him know what had been paid when he had collected the money.296
c. At 5.10pm, Ong texted Teoh “20 Fairbairn St, Springvale VIC 3171”.297
d. At 5.26pm, Cheng’s Lexus arrived at 20 Fairbairn St, Springvale.298
e. At 5.33pm, Cheng sent a WeChat message to Teoh, stating “5.8”.299
121.The half ounce deal occurred in the following circumstances:
a.At 8.24pm, Ong phoned Teoh and asked to see Teoh again for a “half”.
Teoh suggested 11pm.300
b. At 11.34pm, Teoh texted Ong “bro 5 mins”.301
c. At 11.45pm, Cheng’s Lexus arrived at 20 Fairbairn St, Springvale.302
d.At 11.55pm, Teoh and Cheng exchanged WeChat messages, where Teoh asked if Cheng had collected the money and Cheng responded that it was done.303
Transaction 43 (28 May 2022 – Teoh sells 14 grams of heroin to Ong)
122.The prosecution alleges that on 28 May 2022, Teoh sold 14 grams of heroin, delivered by Cheng to Ong at 20 Fairbairn Street Springvale, as follows:
a. At 1.19am, Ong phoned Teoh and asked for a “half”. Teoh advised that
Cheng was sleeping, and they could sort it out tomorrow.304
b.At 2.38pm, Ongphoned Teoh andasked if Teoh could “send his boy.” Teoh confirmed with Ong that it was “half.”305
c.At 2.38pm, Teoh phoned Cheng and advised that Ong wanted “half only” and that it would be $2,900.306
296 D05515-00 CSN 9784
297 D05515-00 CSN 9803
298 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.9422368, 145.1613418
299 Exhibit 119 Cheng phone download and Exhibit 359 Teoh phone download
300 D05515-00 CSN 9830
301 D05515-00 CSN 9852
302 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.9424025, 145.1612887
303 Exhibit 119 Cheng phone download and Exhibit 359 Teoh phone download
304 D05515-00 CSN 9894
305 D05515-00 CSN 9976
306 D05515-00 CSN 9978
d. At 2.54pm, Cheng’s Lexus arrived at 20 Fairbairn St, Springvale.307
Transaction 44 (28-29 May 2022 – Teoh agrees to sell 350 grams of heroin, in a deal which is later cancelled)
123.The prosecution alleges that on 28-29 May 2022, Teoh agreed to sell 350 grams (one block) of heroin to a woman in Braybrook for $65,000, where the deal was ultimately cancelled, in the following circumstances.
124.On 28 May, between 11.42pm and 11.57pm, Teoh and a person using the Sister Van mobile number exchanged a series of text messages negotiating Teoh’s supply of a “big one” consisting of “168” for “65.” A meeting time of 12 pm the following day was agreed.308
125.On 29 May:
a.From 9.13am to 9.23am, Teoh and a person using the Sister Van mobile number exchanged a series of text messages and a conversation referring to meeting that afternoon or tonight.309
b.at 9.24am, an unknown woman using the Sister Van mobile number phoned Teoh. Teoh asked what time the meeting would occur, and the woman said she would ask her customer and let Teoh know.310
c.At 3.26pm, the Sister Van mobile sent a text to Teoh, stating: “We think go another call them can’t sorry”.311
Transaction 45 (29 May 2022 – Teoh sells 28 grams of heroin in a deal brokered by
toTran)
126.The prosecution alleges that on 29 May 2022, Teoh sold 28 grams of heroin, delivered by Cheng to Tran, as follows:
307 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.9423566, 145.1613226
308 D05515-00 CSN 10033, 10036, 10039, 10040, 10043, 10046, 10048, 10051, 10055 and 10056
309 D05515-00 CSN 10071, 10074 and 10077.
310 D05515-00 CSN 10081
311 D05515-00 CSN 10105
a.At 1.24pm, Tran phoned Teoh and advised that she had returned home.
Teoh said he would ask “him” to go now.312
b.At 1.24pm, Teoh phoned Cheng. After confirming that Cheng was in Springvale, Teoh told Cheng that “Ah Jei” (Tran) wanted “one piece.” Cheng asked if it was $5,800. Teoh said he would deduct $2,000 because of the “day we didn’t give her 2000.” Cheng then confirmed it was $3,800, and Teoh stated “$3,700”.313
c. At 1.38pm, Cheng’s Lexus arrived at Tran’s address.314
d.At 1.40pm, Teoh phoned Tran and asked if she was home. Tran confirmed she was and that she would open the door to “him”. Tran told Teoh she did not need to owe him and would pay in full the amount of $3,700.315
Resolution phase
127.On 31 May 2022, at 3.31am Teoh exited safehouse1 andentered the driver’s seat of Teoh’s car, followed by Lang who entered the front passenger seat, and
312 D05515-00 CSN 10092
313 D05515-00 CSN 10093
314 Exhibit 45 VP-2228 -37.9783114, 145.1341021
315 D05515-00 CSN 10102
they then drove away.316 At 5.23am, Teoh dropped Lang off outside safehouse2, and then returned home to Box Hill, arriving at about 6am.317
128.From about 6.30am onwards, police simultaneously executed search warrants at six properties, as described below.
Apartment 1412/545 Station Street, Box Hill (Teoh/Yan address)
129.During the search investigators located and seized the following items under warrant:
a.Luxury watches including Rolex and Patek Phillipe brand with the
estimated value of approximately $196,900.
b.Jewellery, and accessories with the estimated value of approximately
$14,764
c.Luxury handbags valued at a $13,150
d.Several mobile phones belonging to Teoh and Yan
e.$106,350 in cash
f.Commercial cash counting machine
g.7.9 grams of methylamphetamine (Charge 6 – Teoh)
h.4.8 grams of cannabis (Charge 7 – Teoh)
i.Teoh’s 2018 Audi A4 registration AVM318 (purchased by Teoh in August 2021 for $28,000)
130.Teoh and Yan were present at the address, arrested and interviewed.
Teoh Record of interview
131.Teoh stated as follows:
a.The phone using the “553” mobile number was his mobile phone and number (Q/A 107-109)
b.He does not work, but supports himself by gambling and organising lotto and on-line gambling – he makes about $100,000 a year (Q/A178-183, 331- 336)
c.Apartfrom $1200 which he won at the pokies, none of the money, jewellery or watches located at his address belonged to him – they belonged to Yan
d.The cannabis and methylamphetamine at the apartment belonged to him –
a friend gave him these drugs and he smokes them sometimes (Q/A300- 328);
e.He knows Janet Tran as “the old lady” and met her through her son Jacky (Q/A418-424)
f.He initially answered “no comment” and denied involvement in any drug transactions (Q/A453-456)
g.As to the 11 May delivery at Reservoir, he then stated that he did not sell any drugs, but that he, Lang and Cheng had organised the transaction on behalf of Tran, for a combined total commission of $20,000 commission. Lang would collect the drugs from an unknown Vietnamese man, and they would take them to Tran’s customers. (Q/A458-486)
h.Teoh did the same thing with Jacky Ong, arranging for Cheng to deliver heroin to Ong 3 or 4 times over a one year period. Ong would phone Teoh and ask for drugs. Teoh would buy the heroin in ounces or half ounces from an unknown Vietnamese man (Q/A482-509)
i.He later stated the Vietnamese man was Lang’s friend, and that Teoh only contacts the Vietnamese man through Lang (Q/A537-544)
j.He clarified that he (Teoh) did not go to the Reservoir house for any transactions, but the money was later brought to his apartment – he referred
316 Exhibit 53 CCTV Braybrook CCTV
317 Exhibit 47 VP-2227 -37.7941109, 144.8474915; Exhibits 49 CCTV Station Street address.
to $420,000 on 26 April, which he thought would buy 2.5 or 2.6 kilograms of heroin (Q/A555-567)
k.He stated that they took $20,000 commission (to be shared between the 3 of
them – i.e. Teoh, Lang and Chen) from the 26 April transaction, and that Lang passed on the rest to the Vietnamese man (Q/A 581-584)
l.He stated they got $13000 or $15000 commission (split 3 ways) from the 11 May Reservoir transaction (Q/A642-649)
m.He admitted arrangingfor Cheng to take drugs to Tran’s friend in Braybrook (Q/A757-768)
n.He denied arranging for Cheng to take drugs to Tran’s friend in Sunshine (Q/A771-773)
o.He admitted going to Lang’s house, but denied knowledge of any drug
preparation or storage at safehouse1 or safehouse2. He just dropped Lang off at 80 Royal Road, Braybrook but never went in.
Unit 2 / 21 Princess Avenue, Springvale (Cheng’s address)
132.During the search investigators located and seized the following items under warrant:
a.$12,950 in cash
b.Several mobile phones belonging to Cheng
c.167.7 grams of heroin (of 78% purity)
d.6.8 grams of methylamphetamine (Charge 2 – Cheng)
e.Commercial cash counting machine
f.Lexus motor vehicle
133.Police found Cheng at Bayswater on 31 May, where he was arrested and his mobile phone seized.
Cheng record of interview
In his police interview, Cheng:
a.Admitted the mobile found on him was his mobile phone;
b.Denied any involvement in drug trafficking;
c. Denied knowing Lang or Tran;
d.Admitted he knew Teoh as “Tim” but never attended Teoh’s address.
3 Teague Crescent, Braybrook (Safehouse1)
135.During the search investigators located and seized the following items under warrant:
a.Several mobile phones;
b.Large industrial scale hydraulic press;
c.12 metal press components and press plates;
d.Commercial cash counting machine.
5 Teague Crescent, Braybrook (Lang/Loh residence)
136.During the search investigators located and seized the following items under warrant:
a.Luxury watches with the estimated value of $128,050 (Charge 9 - Lang)
b.Luxury handbags, clothing and accessories with the estimated value of
$150,350 (Charge 9 - Lang)
c.Jewellery and gold with the estimated value of $41,348 (Charge 9 - Lang)
d.Several mobile phones used by Lang and Loh
e.$398,246.30 in cash, in various locations throughout the house, including wooden floating shelf, safes, plastic shopping bags and pockets of clothing (Charge 8 - Lang)
80 Royal Road, Braybrook (Safehouse2)
137.During the search investigators located and seized the following items under warrant:
a.Numerous phones and electronic devices
b.4.2 kilograms of heroin, 2.1 kilograms of which was contained in six x 350- gram rectangular packets (blocks) that had been wrapped in brown paper, embossed with the “Double Uoglobe Brand” (Double-Lion) logo and vacuumed sealed. A further 2.1 kilograms was divided into six x 350-gram bags that were yet to be compressed into blocks.
c.“Double Uoglobe Brand” (Double-Lion) stickers consistent with the markings on the seized heroin; large roll of brown paper and pre-cut sections of brown paper (similar to that used to wrap the heroin in the seized blocks); heat sealer, sealing bags and blenders.
d.Wallet containing $1,850 in Australian currency, driver licence and bank cards in the name of Jimmy Lang. (Charge 10 – Lang)
138.When police arrived at safehouse2 to execute the search warrant, Lang fled the premises through the back door. However, Lang later contacted the
investigators through his legal representative and attended Melbourne West Police Station on the 3 June 2022 where he was arrested and interviewed.
Lang record of interview
139.In his police interview, Lang:
a.Admitted he resided at 5 Teague Crescent, Braybrook with his wife, two children and his sister;
b.Said he used to work on a farm but now rarely worked, but occasionally helped his friends work at a restaurant for cash in hand, details of which he would not provide;
c.Otherwise exercised his right to make no comment.
7 Minjah Court, Dingley Village (Tran’s address)
140.Police executed a search warrant and Tran’s address and arrested Tran. During the search, investigators located and seized the following items under warrant:
a.Several mobile phones
b.$19,500 cash (Charge 11 – Tran)
Tran record of interview
141.In her police interview, Tran:
a.Admitted she used mobile number 0423 178 789 (Q/A81)
b.Denied knowing Cheng (Q/A96-104)
c.Denied knowing Teoh, and later said she knew “Tim”, but she was no sure if that was who they were asking about, and he was just a friend (Q/A105- 115)
d.Said that $20,000 in the house belonged to her 86 year old mother, for whom she was a carer. Tran said she had periodically withdrawn the cash from her
mother’s bank account, where the mother had saved from her government benefits (Q/A160-179, 239-258)
e.Exercised her right to make no comment when specific transactions and
intercepted phone conversations were put to her.
142.On 27 July 2022, police executed a search warrant at 3405/22 Jane Bell Lane, Melbourne (Mong’s apartment), and arrested Mong.
143.Police seized the following from Mong’s apartment:
a.3 x Mobile phones
b.84.2g of Cannabis (Charge 12 - Mong)
c.A tablet (MDMA – 0.2 grams of 15% purity) (Charge 13 - Mong)
d.Two small bags of crystal substance (methylamphetamine – 0.13g of 86% purity) (Charge 14 - Mong)
e.4 tablets (methylamphetamine – 1.2g of 2-3% purity) (Charge 14 - Mong)
f.$3400 cash
g.1 x iPad 1005
Mong record of interview
144.In his police interview, Mong said:
a.He resides in the apartment at Jane Bell Lane by himself (Q/A 24-29)
b.He goes to the restaurant at 207 Lonsdale Street 4-5 times a week to help his daughter in the kitchen (Q/A61-65)
c.His mobile number is 0481 229 339 (Q/A47-48, 90-97)
d.He has two other phones, but is not sure about the phone numbers. He uses these phones to communicate with girlfriends (Q/A49-55, 495)
e.He could not remember phone number 0466 247 543 (subscribed in the name of Darryl MANEA of 32 West Parade, Buxton NSW) and does not know Manea (Q/A192)
f.Some people refer to him as “Sin-Gaw” (Q/A181-189)
g.When shown an image of Teoh, he said he didn't know his name, but knew him from when they met at Karaoke (Q/A 252-267).
h.When shown an image of Cheng, he said “I think they call him ‘Fat Boy’
(Q/A 248) and said he had met him at Karaoke, 9 point (Q/A286-294)
i.Said the tablets found in his apartment were ecstasy, that a friend had given him a long time ago and he had forgotten to use them (Q/A464-469)
j.As to the two bags of crystal substance, he can’t remember and doesn’t know (Q/A471-472)
k.The green vegetable matter in the kitchen was marijuana, and sometimes he smokes marijuana (Q/A476-477)
l.He sometimes uses methylamphetamine by swallowing it, or using a pipe
(Q/A479-482)
m.When specific allegations about phone conversations and relevant deliveries were put to him, he answered “I don’t remember” or “I don’t know”, and denied involvement in any drug trafficking.
OTHER MATTERS
Pre-sentence detention
145.By the plea hearing date (16 October 2023) the offenders will have accrued the following amounts of pre-sentence detention (not including the day of the plea):
a.Mong – 446 days
b.Teoh – 503 days
c.Tran – 22 days
d.Lang – 500 days
e.Nguyen – 29 days
f.Cheng – 503 days
Criminal History
146.Mong has a relevant criminal history, which includes:
a. 13/12/02 Court of Appeal318
i.Traffick heroin (x2) – sentenced to 7 years on each charge, with total effective sentence of 9 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 6 years and 6 months.
[The Court of Appeal described the offending (at [8]): “In February 1999 the applicant supplied a 12½ ounce block of heroin to Y for
$47,000. It weighed 350.6 grams with a purity of 71.1%, equating to 249.2 grams of pure heroin (Count 2). In May 1999 the applicant agreed to sell another 12½ ounce block to Y for $46,000, but the sale did not eventuate as the applicant suspected that he was under surveillance (Count 3).]
b.22/11/13 Melbourne County Court
i.Traffick large commercial quantity of heroin (1 December 2009 to 12 August 2010) - sentenced to 11 years and 6 months’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 8 years and 6 months.
[Sentence affirmed on appeal,319 where the Court of Appeal stated (at [4]) that Mong “was a senior member of the heroin trafficking enterprise managed by Chi Tu and Chi Ba. He was in a de facto relationship with Chi Tu. His primary role was sourcing and arranging the purchase of heroin from suppliers. A conservative calculation of the quantity of heroin sold by the enterprise is 11.1 kilograms.”]
147.Teoh has a relevant criminal history as follows:
a.3/12/19 Dandenong Magistrates’ Court
i.Traffick heroin – 8 months imprisonment
ii.Possess methylamphetamine - convicted and fined $500
318 R v Mong [2002] VSCA 203 (Winneke P, Callaway and Batt JJA)
319 Mong v The Queen [2015] VSCA 33 (Osborn, Priest and Beach JJA).
148.Tran has a criminal history, of limited relevance for present purposes, as follows:
a.19/9/14 Dandenong Magistrates’ Court
i.Deal with suspected proceeds of crime (adjourned undertaking)
b.24/3/16 Melbourne Magistrates’ Court
i.Recklessly cause injury (without conviction, 12 month CCO with 150 hours work plus positive lifestyle program)
c.10/7/17 Dandenong Magistrates’ Court
i.Breach CCO (fined $250 with conviction)
ii.Recklessly cause injury (resentenced - fined $750 with conviction)
d.14/1/19 Moorabbin Magistrates’ Court
i.Drive whilst suspended (adjourned undertaking)
149.Lang has no criminal history.
150.Nguyen has no criminal history.
151.Cheng has no criminal history.
Serious Offender Provisions of the Sentencing Act 1991
152.Mong has a prior conviction for Trafficking a Large Commercial Quantity of Heroin. Accordingly, he falls to be sentenced as a serious drug offender within the meaning of s 6B of the Sentencing Act 1991.
Section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991
153.Section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991 requires the Court to state and record the sentence/s which would have been imposed but for the pleas of guilty.
Ancillary orders
154.Disposal and forfeiture orders will be sought in relation to drugs, money and other items seized by police. The Crown will file and serve the forms of order prior to the plea hearing.
Michael Wilson Plea prosecutor
SCHEDULE A
Table of transactions by drug type and weight
| # | Date | Offenders involved320 | Drug type | Weight (Grams) |
| 1 | 28 Mar 2022 | Teoh | Methylamphetamine | 280 grams |
| 2 | 29 Mar 2022 - 2 Apr 2022 | Teoh Cheng (28 grams) Mong (unspecified) | Heroin | 1050 grams (1.05kg) |
| 3 | 4 Apr 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 4 | 8 Apr 2022 | Teoh Cheng Tran | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 5 | 18 Apr 2022 | Teoh | Heroin | 168 grams |
| 6 | 18 Apr 2022 - 19 Apr 2022 | Teoh Tran Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 7 | 17 April 2022 – 20 April 2022 | Teoh | Methylamphetamine | 500 grams |
| 8 | 21 Apr 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
320 Where a given offender has resolved on the basis of an intentionto traffick less than the full amount of the drugactually tra fficked, theamount intentionally trafficked by that offender is sta ted in brackets next to their name.
| 9 | 22 Apr 2022 – 23 Apr 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 10 | 3 Apr 2022 – 26 Apr 2022 | Teoh Lang Tran (unspecified) Cheng | Heroin | 2800 grams (2.8 kg) |
| 11 | 24 Apr 2022 – 26 Apr 2022 | Teoh Tran (unspecified) Cheng (28 grams) | Heroin | 350 grams |
| 12 | 28 Apr 2022 | Teoh Mong Cheng | Heroin | 175 grams |
| 13 | 29 Apr 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 14 | 29 Apr 2022 – 30 Apr 2022 | Teoh Mong Cheng (28 grams) | Heroin | 350 grams |
| 15 | 30 Apr 2022 – 1 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng (28 grams) | Heroin | 175 grams |
| 16 | 3 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng (heroin only) | Heroin Methylamphetamine | 28 grams 14 grams |
| 17 | 4 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng (heroin only) | Heroin Methylamphetamine | 28 grams 14 grams |
| 18 | 7 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 19 | 8 May 2022 – 9 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng (28 grams) | Heroin | 84 grams |
| 20 | 8 May 2022 – 9 May 2022 | Teoh Mong Cheng (28 grams) | Heroin | 175 grams |
| 21 | 10 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 22 | 3 May 2022 – 11 May 2022 | Teoh Lang Tran (unspecified) Cheng Nguyen (simpliciter) | Heroin | 2100 grams (70% purity) (2.1 kg) |
| 23 | 11 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 24 | 12 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng Tran | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 25 | 12-13 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng (28 grams) | Heroin | 84 grams |
| 26 | 13 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 27 | 13 May 2022 – 15 May 2022 | Teoh Lang Tran (unspecified) Cheng (28 grams) | Heroin | 1400 grams (1.4 kg) |
| 28 | 13 May 2022 – 15 May 2022 | Teoh Lang Mong (unspecified) | Heroin | 3500 grams (3.5 kg) |
| 29 | 16 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 30 | 17 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng (28 grams) | Heroin | 84 grams |
| 31 | 18 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 32 | 19 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 168 grams |
| 33 | 19 May 2022 – 20 May 2022 | Teoh Mong (unspecified) Cheng (28 grams) | Heroin | 350 grams |
| 34 | 22 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 35 | 22 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 14 grams |
| 36 | 24 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 14 grams |
| 37 | 25 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 14 grams |
| 38 | 26 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng Tran | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 39 | 26 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 14 grams |
| 40 | 27 May 2022 | Teoh Lang Tran (unspecified) Cheng (28 grams) | Heroin | 350 grams |
| 41 | 27 May 20022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| 42 | 27 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 14 grams |
| 43 | 28 May 2022 | Teoh Cheng | Heroin | 14 grams |
| 44 | 28-29 May 2022 | Teoh | Heroin | 350 grams |
| 45 | 29 May 2022 | Teoh Tran Cheng | Heroin | 28 grams |
| TOTAL TRAFFICKED IN ABOVE TRANSACTIONS | TOTAL321 | ||
| 28 Mar 2022 – 29 May 2022 | Teoh Lang Cheng Tran Mong | Heroin | 14.329 kg 10.150 kg 10.661 kg (6.167kg) 7.140 kg (unspecified CQ) 5.600 kg (unspecified CQ) |
| 28 Mar 2022 – 29 May 2022 | Teoh | Methylamphetamine | 808 grams |
| SEIZURES NOT INCLUDED IN ABOVE TRANSACTIONS BUT TRAFFICKED (BASED ON POSSESSION FOR PURPOSE OF SALE) | |||
| 31 May 2022 | Lang Cheng | Heroin Heroin | 4200 grams (4.2 kg) (2.1kg blocks of 78% purity) (2.1kg powder of 63% purity) 167.7 grams (78% purity) |
321 Where a given offender has resolved on the basis of an intentionto traffick less than the full amount of the drugactually trafficked, the amount intentionally trafficked bythat offender is stated in brackets next to their name.
0
1