Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2007]JRC092

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

3^rd May 2007

Before     :

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

The Attorney General

-v-

Shomsul Islam

And

Tim Kong

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

Shomsul Islam

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) 1999.  (Count 1).
1 count of:	Possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply, contrary to Article 8(2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978.  (Count 2).
1 count of:	Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978. (Count 3).

Age:  32.

Plea: Guilty  (Counts 2 and 3), Not Guilty (Count 1).

Details of Offence:

Kong admitted importing 99.62 grams of heroin, 49% by weight diamorphine.  Wholesale value £17,550 - £19,650.  He was to be paid £1,000 to make the delivery.  Islam met Kong on the steps of the A & E Department at the Hospital (under the CCTV) having contacted him by mobile phone.  The exchange was made and both Defendants were arrested shortly thereafter, Islam being in possession.  Islam carried £210.50 cash:  Kong carried £70.65 in cash.  Financial investigations revealed unexplained income in Islam's bank account of £44,221.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty pleas, co-operation with police, good character.  Both had gambling addictions but no background of alcohol or drug abuse.  Islam had gambling debts of £10,000.  He purported to name the organiser of the importation but his information was not supported by intelligence.  Islam at low risk of re-offending. 

Previous Convictions:

None.

Conclusions:

Count 2:	6 years' imprisonment.  (Starting point 11 years).
Count 3:	2 months' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 6 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation order £210.50.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 2:	5 years' imprisonment. (Starting point:  10 years).
Count 3:	2 months' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 5 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation Order £210.50.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs is ordered

Tim Kong

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) 1999.  (Count 4).
1 count of:	Supplying a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5(b) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978.  (Count 5).

Age:  56.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See above.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty pleas, co-operation with police, good character.  Both had gambling addictions but no background of alcohol or drug abuse.  Kong at medium risk.  Kong did not know who had organised the importation.  No evidence was found of any financial benefit; indeed no assets were identified.  Kong had carried out the importation for financial reward; he was destitute living in London in charitable hostel and wanted money to return to Hong Kong.

Previous Convictions:

None.

Conclusions:

Count 4:	5 years' imprisonment.  (Starting point 11 years).
Count 5:	5 years' imprisonment. (Starting point 11 years), concurrent.

Total: 5 years' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 4:	5 years' imprisonment. (Starting point:  10 years).
Count 5:	5 years' imprisonment, concurrent.  (Starting point:  10 years).

Total: 5 years' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs is ordered

S. Sharpe, Crown Advocate.

Advocate P. S. Landick for Islam.

Advocate R. Tremoceiro for Kong.

JUDGMENT

THE COMMISSIONER:

1.        In the afternoon of Thursday 16^th November last year Islam was stopped by a Customs Officer at the airport.  He told the Officer that he had been to London to visit his family.  He was trailed to his home address in Sand Street.  About 11 o'clock the same evening he went to the General Hospital and stood on the steps leading to the Accident and Emergency Department.  He left and then Kong appeared.  Islam in the meantime had come back and was clearly waiting for him.

2.        At 11.15 Kong was arrested and cautioned by a Customs Officer.  He had a mobile telephone and £70 in cash on his person.  He also carried a key for room 4 at the Hotel Sandranne. 

3.        Islam was similarly arrested and cautioned.  Eventually he admitted to carrying drugs and the Customs Officers retrieved a brown package containing heroin.  Kong also had on his person a ticket for a journey from the Airport to the Weighbridge on the same day that Islam had arrived in Jersey.

4.        There was a search of the rooms in the Sandranne Hotel.  A sanitary towel was found around the packaging of the heroin and there were identical sanitary bags in the room at the Hotel.  The packet of heroin contained 99.62 grams of heroin.  The street value and this, apparent  dichotomy was explained to us by Crown Advocate Sharpe, is between £19,924 and £49,810, but the important figure is the wholesale value which is between £17,550 and £19,650. 

5.        Kong is aged 56.  He has a serious problem with gambling.  He was apparently offered £1,000 at a Casino in England in return for making the delivery.  He denies that he knew that the packaging contained drugs.  He lives apparently in charitable accommodation outside London.

6.        Islam is married with two children.  He too is a gambler, who came to the Island in 1997 and returns periodically to the United Kingdom.  He tells the same story as Kong.  In the leading appeal case of Rimmer Lusk & Bade -v- AG [2001] JCA148 possession with intent to supply gives a starting point from the 9 to 11 year band. 

7.        We agree, of course, with both counts that the starting point is flexible but we are able to follow Mr Tremoceiro's clear argument, and the particular argument of each accused, that if the amount went up slightly we would be in the higher band and after careful consideration we will make the starting point for both the accused at 10 years.

8.        The learned Jurats have carefully considered all the valuable mitigation given by Advocates Landick and Tremoceiro and we will, in the light of Advocate Landick's comments and the mitigation available, slightly reduce one of the sentences. 

9.        Islam has named his supplier in open court, but he is in our view as much involved as Kong.  We have to show that bringing drugs of this kind into Jersey does cause tremendous harm to anyone eventually taking them.  However, we are going to make the following order.

10.      Islam on Count 1, your not guilty plea is accepted.  Count 2, starting point of 10 years' you are sentenced to 5 years' imprisonment.  On Count 3 to 2 months' imprisonment, concurrent.

11.      Kong, starting point of 10 years.  On Count 4 to 5 years' imprisonment, on Count 5 starting point of 10 years to 5 years' imprisonment, concurrent. 

12.      We order forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

Rimmer Lusk & Bade -v- AG [2001] JCA 148.