A group of young men and women organized a party and inhaled laughing gas at an apartment building in Vinh City.
(Baonghean.vn) - A group of young men and women invited each other to use drugs and inhale laughing gas at a mini apartment building. They turned on music and flashing lights to "fly and shake" at night.
On March 21, Nghe An Provincial People's Court opened an appeal trial of three defendants: Nguyen Thi Trang and Phan Thi Hong, both born in 1999, residing in Thanh Chi commune, Thanh Chuong district, and Tran Thien Hai (born in 1993), residing in Quan Bau ward, Vinh city, for the crime of "Organizing illegal use of narcotics".drug”.
Trang and Hong are from the same hometown, and moved to Vinh City to rent a mini apartment in Ha Huy Tap ward to live together. On the afternoon of July 5, 2022, Trang told Hong, "Tonight, I will call my friend to my room to use drugs and laughing gas." Hong agreed.
After that, Trang called Hai and invited him to her room to use drugs. Trang also told Hai to remember to bring ecstasy, ketamine, and laughing gas when he went.
 |
| Defendant Trang (middle) and two accomplices at the trial. Photo: Tran Vu |
At 8:00 p.m. the same day, Hai brought 1 ecstasy pill and 1 packet of ketamine that he had previously bought at a famous karaoke bar in Vinh City to Trang's room. In addition, Hai also ordered laughing gas and asked someone to deliver it.
In the mini apartment, Trang turned on the music, turned on the flashing lights, and the group used laughing gas. A moment later, Trang broke the ecstasy pill in half and gave it to Hong to use as well.
After that, Trang told Hong to go and “cook the ke” for the group to use. At around 10 p.m. the same day, the police raided the room and seized drug paraphernalia and 30 laughing gas balloons.
The court of first instance sentenced the three defendants Nguyen Thi Trang, Phan Thi Hong, and Tran Thien Hai to seven years in prison each for “organizing illegal use of narcotics.” The three defendants later appealed for a reduction in their sentences.
At the trial, all three gave reasons for appealing because “the first instance sentence was too high”. The two defendants Trang and Hong did not provide any new details to request a reduction in their sentences. Defendant Hai provided new details that his uncle was a martyr.
The Court of Appeal determined that the defendants’ criminal acts disturbed social order and security. In this case, defendant Trang was the homeowner and initiator; defendant Hong prepared the materials for drug use; and Hai brought the drugs.
Considering that at this trial the defendants did not present any new details. Therefore, the appellate court rejected the defendants' appeals, upholding the original sentence of 7 years in prison for each defendant.
