Jersey Unreported Judgments

2002/211

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

4^th November, 2002.

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Robert Anthony Simpson

 

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the Defendant was remanded by the Inferior Number on 20^th September, 2002, following guilty pleas to:

 

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 (General Provisions) (Jersey) Law 1999:
	Count 1: Cannabis.

 

Age:     60.

 

Plea:    Guilty.

 

Details of Offence:

The Defendant arrived in Jersey on the Solidor 5 from St. Malo.  Following a search of the Defendant's car 71.61 kilograms of cannabis resin were found in tape wrapped packages hidden in the interior panels of the car.  The cannabis resin had a Jersey street value of £413,280.00.  This constituted the largest importation of cannabis resin to have been intercepted by the Customs and Police to date.  The cannabis was sufficient to supply 20,664 people with a 'deal'.  The Defendant had, six weeks before, visited Jersey with the same car on a 'dummy run'.

The Defendant was to be paid £4,000 for the importation and had been paid £800 for the 'dummy run'.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Plea of guilty at committal stage.  Defendant found himself in financial difficulty after being taken ill and no longer able to work.  Was approached by drugs syndicate to import the drugs.  Co-operation: Defendant's admissions during interview enabled Customs Officer to trace route of drugs.  Guilty plea not inevitable although drugs found in Defendant's car.  No forensic evidence to link Defendant to drugs.  Of the Defendant's previous convictions none were for drugs.  Defendant aged 60 and this combined with his ill health meant that it was possible that he would die in prison before release.  Court should exercise 'act of mercy' because of Defendant's age and ill health.

 

Previous Convictions:

Numerous, but no previous for drugs.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:

11 years' imprisonment.  (Starting point: 13 years)

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

 

Count 1:

9 years, imprisonment.

 

This was a sophisticated operation.  The largest amount of cannabis intercepted to date.  Court had to take account of fact that the maximum sentence for the offence is 14 years.  Because of Defendant's role in the importation correct starting point should be 12 years.  The Defendant's guilty plea was of more value than if the drugs had been found on his person.  The Court took account of the Defendant's age, the fact that he had no previous drug offences and the circumstances leading up to the offence.  The Court made no deduction for the Defendant's state of health.  From the starting point of 12 years the Court would make a deduction of 3 years.  Court ordered that the drugs be confiscated and destroyed.

D.E. Le Cornu, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate R. Juste, for the Defendant.

 

JUDGMENT

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        This was a sophisticated operation to import 71.5 kilos of cannabis resin with a street value of over £400,000.  It is the largest-ever amount intercepted by Customs.  It involved a dummy run a few weeks earlier.  The drugs were hidden in your car, but the Crown accepts that your part was that of a courier.  You were to receive £4,000 for your involvement.  The drugs were hidden in the car by others, but you knew they were there.

2.        The Crown has suggested a starting point of 13 years.  We have been referred to Campbell & Ors -v- A.G. (1995) JLR 136 CofA; to the case of A.G. -v- Dicker, Driscoll & Wakeham (28^th October 1998) Jersey Unreported; [1998/216] where for 55 kilos, a starting point of 12 years was taken and the case of O'Brien & others -v- A.G. (6^th June, 2002); [2002/112], where for 60 kilos a starting point of 12 years was also taken.  Both of those involved speed boats bringing in cannabis to the bays of the Island at night.

3.        We have to take into account that the maximum sentence for this offence is one of 14 years' imprisonment.  Having regard to your rôle, in other words the nature and scale of your involvement, we think that, notwithstanding that the amount is 10 kilos greater than any previous amount, the correct starting point is one of 12 years.

4.        We turn next to the mitigation listed by your counsel.  We take into account the guilty plea, and we think it is of more value than in a case where a person is caught with drugs on their person.  As Advocate Juste said, it would have been open to you to have sought to cast the blame elsewhere and to deny knowledge of the drugs. 

5.        We consider your age, 60; we take into account that you have no previous convictions for drug offences and that, apart from one offence, your offending stopped in 1982.  We have had regard to the circumstances leading up to the offence, your ill health, the fact that you had lost your job in Spain and were very short of money.  Advocate Juste has also relied upon your health; you suffer from angina and other matters.  We have reminded ourselves of the principles laid down in Valler -v- A.G. (18^th July 2002) Jersey Unreported; [2002/133] and we do not consider that a deduction can be made for your health in this case.

6.        We have also considered the other matters in the reports which appear before us.  In all the circumstances we think the correct deduction from the starting point is one of 3 years.  The sentence of the Court therefore is one of 9 years' imprisonment and we order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

A.G. -v- Chartier (4^th October, 2002) Jersey Unreported; [2002/180].

Clark -v- AG (24^th July, 2001) Jersey Unreported [2001/155].

A.G. -v- Dicker, Driscoll & Wakeham (28^th October, 1998) Jersey Unreported; [1998/216].

O'Brien & Smith -v- A.G. (6^th June, 2002); [2002/112].

Valler -v- A.G. (18^th July, 2002) Jersey Unreported; [2002/133]

Campbell & Ors -v- A.G. (1995) JLR 136 CofA

C.S.P. A1-4A to A1-4C.