Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2006]JRC106

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

26^th July, 2006

The Attorney General

-v-

Gaynor Bridgette Robinson

Dean Matthew Ely

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, on guilty plea to:

Gaynor Bridgette Robinson

Age:  38.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Ely and Robinson were stopped whilst at Jersey Airport.  They had been observed in the arrivals hall where Robinson was witnessed handing a twenty pound note to Ely.  Whilst officers were questioning Ely, Robinson began moving slowly away and had to be stopped.  Robinson was found to have some 268.94 grams of heroin concealed internally.  Robinson stated that she had been approached by Ely to bring drugs to Jersey for a payment of £1,500.  She had agreed but subsequently decided she did not want to go, but was then threatened if she did not.  Ely was found to have 2.62 grams of heroin concealed internally.  He stated that he was a heavy user of heroin but had come to try and wean himself off the drug.  When asked about the drugs Robinson had been carrying internally, he offered no comment answers.  The total local street value of the drugs was estimated at being £231,360.00

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, very difficult background including abuse, vulnerable, of low intelligence and easily exploited, full and frank admission at interview, willing to testify against co-accused if necessary, remorse, no previous drugs convictions, has a young son.

Previous Convictions:

11 previous convictions comprising 15 offences, none of which drug related.

Conclusions:

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Owing in part to the powerful mitigation, i.e. being willing to give evidence against her co-accused, 4½ years' imprisonment.

Dean Matthew Ely

Age:  29.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Robinson above.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, remorse, bad childhood bad record but only one previous drugs offence, has a young child.

Previous Convictions:

17 previous convictions comprising 94 offences, including one drugs offence for simple possession of heroin.

Conclusions:

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

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

Advocate M. L. Preston for Robinson.

Advocate R. Tremoceiro for Ely.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        The two of you jointly imported 271 grams of heroin into Jersey.  We accept that you acted as couriers and you both have a heroin dependency but it is very fortunate for the Island that you were intercepted and that Customs prevented these drugs from getting onto the streets.

2.        We agree with the Crown that the correct starting point is 11 years which is the bottom of the applicable bracket.  We do not think we should draw any distinction between you; this was clearly a joint venture.

3.        In mitigation Ely you pleaded guilty and we agree this was of value to the Court.  You have a poor record, however.  We have read the reports which show the difficulties you have had in your background.  We have read the letters and we are pleased to note the attempts you are making to overcome your heroin dependency in prison and to deal with the other issues.  All in all we consider that the Crown has made sufficient deduction.

4.        The sentence of the Court in your case is 7 years' imprisonment.

5.        Miss Robinson you have also pleaded guilty.  You also have a poor record, although it is not as bad as Ely's, and you have no drug conviction.  We have read the reports in your case which again show a very difficult background and we do note the position in relation to your son.

6.        The really important factor in your case is that you said you were willing to give evidence against your co-accused and made a statement, and the Court has repeatedly said that where offenders are willing to give evidence against other offenders in the drugs world and help bring them to justice, the Court will give a considerable deduction from the sentence to reflect that and to encourage others to do it.

7.        We have taken that particular matter into account and all the other mitigation which appears on the papers before us and we think we can give a slightly greater deduction than the Crown has already made.  The sentence in your case is 4½ years' imprisonment and we order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

No Authorities