Jersey Unreported Judgments

 2001/97

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

3rd May 2001

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Michaela Jayne Moss;

Steven Gavin Bade.

 

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 6th April, 2001, after entering guilty pleas to the following charges:

 

MICHAELA JAYNE MOSS.

 

1 count of:

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

 

Age:     18

 

Plea:    Guilty

 

Details of Offence (Both defendants):

Both accused apprehended by customs officers at Jersey Airport having flown from Southampton.  Each had packages containing heroin concealed internally.  In the case of Moss, she had a little over 82 grams of powder containing between 48% and 52% by weight of diamorphine, with a street value lying between approximately £24,600 and £37,000.  In the case of Bade he had nearly 86 grams of powder containing between 50% and 54% by weight of diamorphine with a street value of between approximately £27,500 and £38,600.  These amounts do not include small quantities of the drug imported for personal use.  As well as being allowed to retain the small quantity of drugs for personal use, each was to receive around £400 for the importation.  Both accused had travelled down from Hull and were part of a small group organised to import heroin into Jersey from Hull.  All arrangements were made by the supplier and the accused were mere couriers. 

 

 

Details of Mitigation:

Youth - being only 18 years of age.  Guilty plea entered at the earliest opportunity.  Co-operative.  Difficult family background where she was surrounded by heroin abuse from an early age.  Moss, however, had previous convictions including a sentence of 30 months at a young offenders institution  for seven counts of having supplied heroin to an undercover police officer. 

 

Conclusions (Both defendants):

Starting point for sentence of 12 years' youth detention (Moss) and 12 years' imprisonment (Bade).  No basis for distinguishing between the accused with regard to the appropriate starting  point as both imported similar quantities of heroin, were similarly motivated and neither one could be said to have taken the lead.  Taking into account all available mitigation, the Crown moved for a sentence of 6 years' youth detention in the case of Moss and 10 years' imprisonment in the case of Bade.

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Importers of commercial quantities of heroin can expect to receive long prison sentences.  The Court reduced the proposed starting point to one of 11 years in each case and sentenced Moss to a period of 6 years' youth detention and Bade to a period of 9 years' imprisonment.  Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered.

 

 STEVEN GAVIN BADE

 

1 count of:

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

 

Age:       25

 

Plea:    Guilty

 

Details of Offence:

See: Moss (above).

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

See: Moss (above).                   

 

A.D. Robinson, Esq, Crown Advocate.

Advocate N.J. Chapman for M. J. Moss.

Advocate J. Grace for S.G. Bade.

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

THE BAILIFF:

1.        As the Court has stated many times, those who traffic in class A drugs and who help to spread the misery caused by addiction to them, particularly to heroin, must expect long prison sentences.

2.        With regard to the amount of drugs involved and to the other surrounding circumstances, we think that the appropriate starting point in both cases is one of eleven years custody.

3.        Moss, we have read your letter and the letter from your father and we understand the difficulties which you have experienced at home, all of which we have taken into account. We have also taken account of your age which is a significant mitigating factor offset, on the other hand, partly by your previous conviction for drug trafficking.

4.        We think that the conclusions of the Crown Advocate are right. We take account of our duty under the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994, but we can see no alternative to a custodial penalty. Importing heroin into the island is so serious that a custodial sentence cannot be avoided and we have also to tell you that you may be subject to supervision by a probation officer on your release from custody. We hope that when you have served your sentence you will keep away from drugs and lead a more worthwhile existence.

5.        You are sentenced to six years youth detention. 

6.        Bade, we have listened to everything that your counsel has said. You have pleaded guilty to the indictment but there is not much else to be said in mitigation. We think that the Crown Advocate made the correct deductions of two years for such mitigation as there is.

7.        You are sentenced to nine years imprisonment and we order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

 

Authorities

Campbell & Ors (1995) JLR 136 CofA.

AG-v-Pitchley (25th November 1996) Jersey Unreported; [1996/222]

AG-v-Presumé  (1st November 2000) Jersey Unreported; [2000/213]

AG-v-Holding & Rimmer (12th April 2001) Jersey Unreported; [2001/85]