Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2003]JRC148

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

29^th August 2003

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

James Thomas Green

 

 

1 count of:

Being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 61(2)(b) of the Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law, 1999. Count 1: Cannabis.

 

 

Age:     43.

 

Plea:    Guilty.

 

Details of Offence:

The defendant and a friend, having just arrived from Portsmouth, were stopped by Customs officers at the Elizabeth Harbour Ferry Terminal.  Although both passengers stated that they had nothing to declare, the officers conducted a search of their luggage and of the vehicle in which they had arrived.  Subsequently, 19 brown resinous blocks, comprising of a little over 4.7 kilograms of cannabis, were found in a clear wrapping inside one of the vehicle's tyres.  The defendant and the friend were subsequently arrested and interviewed, but the friend was later released without charge.  At the time of his detention, the defendant had volunteered that it was probable that there was something of an illicit nature in the car, having only taken possession of the vehicle some two days beforehand.  At the time of the offence, the cannabis resin had a total local street value of £27,360 and a wholesale value of between £19,000 and £20,900.  During the course of a question and answer interview, the defendant admitted that he had brought the drugs to Jersey to pay off a £7000 drugs debt as his creditors had recently caught up with him and threatened him with violence if he did not do what they required.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Co-operative with police; guilty plea; remorse; no evidence Green was to be involved in the distribution of the drugs.

 

Previous Convictions

19 theft and kindred offences, 2 fraud and kindred offences, 2 offences, 2 offences against property, 3 offences relating to police / courts or prison and 31 miscellaneous offences.  Also one drugs-related offence for possession of a personal amount of cannabis in 1988.

 

Conclusions:

Count 1:

2½ years' (4 years' starting point).

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:

2 years' imprisonment.

 

3 years' imprisonment as a staring point.  The Court confirmed that it is necessary to consider the extent to which a defendant has been involved in drug trafficking that is material in sentencing and not the application of mathematical formulae.

 

 

C.M.M. Yates Esq., Crown Advocate

Advocate P de C. Mourant for the defendant.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

THE  BAILIFF:

1.        We will first of all, as requested by the Crown Advocate, and as the request is not contested by the defence, make a confiscation order in the nominal sum of one pound.

2.        Turning to sentencing this is a familiar story of a drug addict being threatened and coerced by dealers into undertaking to smuggle drugs into Jersey.  The amount involved is 4.7 kilograms and the street value is said to be about £27,000.00. We have considered carefully the suggestion in the background report that a probation order linked to a specific non-offending programme be imposed and enforced in England. Green is a mature man of 43, not un-intelligent and with a long history of offending.  He is well capable of understanding the consequences of his actions. 

3.        Drug trafficking is a serious offence and we see no reason in this case to depart from the Court's policy of imposing a custodial sentence.  Applying the guidelines in Campbell & Others -v- A.G. [1995] JLR 136 we have to assess the degree to which the defendant was involved in drug trafficking. This is not the mere application of a mathematical formula.  We have taken account of the fact that there is no evidence that the defendant was going to be involved in the distribution of the drug.  He is the classic mule. The Crown Advocate has suggested a starting point of 4 years with which defence counsel did not disagree but, in our judgement, the appropriate starting point in this case is one of 3 years' imprisonment.

4.        In mitigation Green admitted the offence, once the cannabis had been detected, and he has pleaded guilty to the indictment.  We propose to apply a deduction of one third to allow for all the mitigating factors.

5.        Green, you have brought all of this on your own head.  You have acted extremely foolishly and your actions have caused and, no doubt, will continue to cause pain to your family.  We have to sentence you for the offence which you have admitted and you are sentenced as I have indicated to two years' imprisonment.  We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs. 

Authorities

Campbell & Others -v- A.G. [1995} JLR 136