Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2006]JRC175

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

1^st December 2006

Before     :

F. C. Hamon, Esq., O.B.E., Commissioner and Jurats Allo and Newcombe.

The Attorney General

-v-

Claire Louise Fowler

And

Christopher James Fowler

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following guilty pleas to the charges:

Claire Louise Fowler

 

1 count of:

Concealing or disguising the proceeds of drug trafficking contrary to Article 30 (2) (a) of the Drug Trafficking Offences (Jersey) Law 1988.

Age:  31

Plea: Guilty

Details of Offence:

Stopped by Customs prior to boarding a ferry to Portsmouth.  Money concealed in suitcases in the boot of the car.  Bundles wrapped in scented nappy sacks and cling film to mask scent from sniffer dogs.

Details of Mitigation:

Claire Fowler admitted offence in her interview.  Had received cash through her letter box in the preceding three weeks with instructions to destroy what it was packed in and to re-pack it in scented nappy sacks and cling film.  Admittedly she did not want to think it was drugs money but admitted she knew it must be.  She said she was asked to take £100,000 to the UK in return for £2,000 payment by a man she knew but refused to name.  Said she would be telephoned on her mobile once in the UK and would be given instructions as to where to take the money.  Crown accepted that neither defendant had an integral and knowing part of the drug trafficking operation, but was peripheral to it and not aware of details of the traffickers' business.  Crown said if this had not been the case, there might be no reason to distinguish in sentence between trafficker and launderer. 

Previous Convictions:

None.

Conclusions:

Count 1:

30 months' imprisonment.

Confiscation order sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

Christopher James Fowler

 

1 count of:

Concealing or disguising the proceeds of drug trafficking contrary to Article 30 (2) (a) of the Drug Trafficking Offences (Jersey) Law 1988.

Age:  25.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Claire Fowler above.

Details of Mitigation:

Christopher Fowler's knowledge was even more limited than his wife's.  Limited to knowing for 24 hours that £25,000 in car with reasonable grounds to suspect proceeds of drug trafficking.  Crown suggested Court bound to sentence on basis that proceeds of Class 'B' drugs because no evidence to show what drugs being sold - that defendants should be given the benefit of the doubt.

Previous Convictions:

Common assault (1995); theft (1996); road traffic (1966); being drunk and disorderly (2001); common assault (2004); drink driving, resisting arrest, driving without due care and attention and failing to stop and report an accident (2006).

Conclusions:

Count 1:

8 months' imprisonment.

Confiscation order sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:

140 hours' Community Service Order.

Confiscation order made.

M. T. Jowitt, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate R. C. L. Morley-Kirk for C.L. Fowler

Advocate M. J. Haines for C.J. Fowler.

JUDGMENT

 

THE COMMISSIONER:

1.        This is in every sense an unusual case.  When the Fowlers were stopped at the Harbour there was over £100,000 found in the car in cash.  Mr Fowler, who was driving the car, has no related drug offences, but the money is quite clearly the proceeds of drug trafficking. 

2.        We have to say that Mrs Fowler is not a stranger to the drugs trade and we say that advisedly, because her brother has been incarcerated in France for attempting to smuggle a commercial quantity of cannabis.  Her other brother had three drug convictions.  Some of the money was wrapped in scented nappy sacks and cling film apparently to confuse the English sniffer dogs trained to find money.

3.        The Crown has taken the view that the money is the proceeds of Class 'B' drugs in the absence of any plausible explanation which is not likely to be forthcoming.

4.        It must be said at once that Mrs Fowler is of previous good character.  Mr Fowler has a minor record and both present a low risk of re-offending according to the Reports we have read very carefully.

5.        We cannot, as counsel remind us, lay down any guidelines although we entirely agree with the Court of Appeal in England, which said in Crown and Greenwood 16 Cr. App. R (s) p.614 (1995):

"Those who launder money from drugs are nearly as bad as those who actually deal in them.  It is merely one step along the line."

6.        We fully appreciate that there are three children involved in this matter.  However we believe on the facts that Mr Flower was on the periphery of this case and in those circumstances we cannot follow Crown Advocate Jowitt's conclusions.

7.        Mr Fowler we are going to sentence you to 140 hours' Community Service.  This is a direct alternative to custody but had we not done that we would have followed the conclusions of the Crown and sentenced you to 8 months' imprisonment.

8.        As to Mrs Fowler, we have sympathy for her but this money was brought into the house over a prolonged period of time and she in fact packed the money in a suitcase and put it in the car.  In those circumstances we regret that we have to follow the Crown Advocate's conclusions and we sentence you to 30 months' imprisonment. 

Authorities

Wayne Miles Greenwood 16 Cr. App. R (s) p.614 [1995].