Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2007]JRC113

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

14^th June 2007

Before     :

Sir Philip Bailhache, Kt. Bailiff, and Jurats Tibbo, King, Morgan, Newcombe and Liddiard.

The Attorney General

-v-

Saijid Miah

Shammem Miah

J (minor at time of offence)

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

Saijad Miah

2 counts 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.  (Counts 1 and 4).

Age:  29.

Plea: Guilty to Count 4.  Not guilty to Count 1 - pleas accepted.

Details of Offence:

Count 4: On 14^th October 2006 Saijid Miah and J travelled to London from Jersey together.  While in London Saijid Miah obtained a quantity of heroin and instructed J to conceal it when they travelled back to Jersey.  They returned separately on 16^th October 2006, Saijid Miah flying from London City airport and J flying from London Gatwick.  They went straight to the Bamboo Garden restaurant where they were arrested, J outside the premises as she was leaving, Saijid Miah in the staff quarters.  When asked if she had any controlled drugs on her, J said she had some concealed internally and that they were causing her great discomfort.  The packages were recovered and contained 54.7g of heroin.  J said that she had intended to pass the packages back to Saijid Miah.  He denied his involvement in interview and pleaded not guilty on indictment, but entered a guilty plea on 20^th April 2007.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea (although late), some remorse, had given valuable information to the Police and instructed Counsel to acknowledge that fact in open Court.  But for this, the Court would have imposed a sentence of seven years.

Previous Convictions:

Two convictions in the UK for possession of Class A drugs.

Conclusions:

Starting point 9 ½ years.

Count 4:	4 years' imprisonment.
Total:	4 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation order £1,501.21 or 4 months' imprisonment in default of payment.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs is sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Starting point 10 years.

Count 4:	3 years' imprisonment.
Total:	3 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation order £1,501.21 or 4 months' imprisonment in default of payment.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered.

Shammem Miah

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:  22.

Plea: Guilty (Counts 2 and 3 to remain on file). 

Details of Offence:

Count 1: On Friday 29^th September 2006 Shammem Miah was stopped by Customs Officers at Jersey Airport after arriving on a flight from Gatwick.  At first he denied having any prohibited items but on searching his bags packages of heroin weighing 16.29g were found concealed inside two mobile phone chargers.  He subsequently admitted his involvement with the importation and that he was to be paid £2,000 for bringing the drugs to Jersey.  He pleaded guilty on indictment.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea.

Previous Convictions:

Two convictions in the UK for possession of Class B drugs.

Conclusions:

Starting point 8 years.

Count 1:	4 years' imprisonment.
Total:	4 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation order in the nominal sum of £1.00.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs is sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

J

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:	Possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply contrary to Article 8 (2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978.  (Count 5).
1 Count of:	Possession of a controlled drug contrary to Article 8 (1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978.  (Count 6).

Age:  17 (16 at the time of offence).

Plea: Guilty to Count 4.  Not guilty to Counts 5 and 6 - pleas accepted.

Details of Offence:

See above for Saijid Miah.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, youth, previous good character, gave a statement against Saijid Miah and was prepared to give evidence at his trial.

Previous Convictions:

None.

Conclusions:

Starting point 8 years.

Count 4:

18 months' youth detention.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

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

Advocate L. K. A. Richardson for Saijid Miah.

Advocate P. S. Landick for Shammem Miah.

Advocate M. J. Haines for J.

JUDGMENT

THE BAILIFF:

1.        The Court is sitting to sentence these three defendants for offences involving the importation of heroin on two separate occasions.

2.        The first occasion was on 29^th September 2006, when 16 grams of heroin, with a street value of about £16,000, was imported by Shammem Miah concealed in two telephone chargers.  The second importation took place on 16^th October 2006 when 54 grams of heroin, with a street value of over £50,000, was imported by Saijid Miah and J.  The heroin was concealed internally by J, who was then aged 16 and involved in a sexual relationship with Miah.  She was expecting to receive some heroin by way of reward but the financial benefit was to be received by Miah. 

3.        We will take each of the defendants in turn, and as requested by counsel for Shammem Miah we wish to make it quite clear that we have considered his case entirely separately from the offence committed by Saijid Miah and J.

4.        Shammem is to be sentenced as a courier.  He admitted that he was to receive a £2,000 fee for transporting the heroin into Jersey.  He has a record for drug offences but not for offences connected with Class A drugs.  Defence counsel urged that we should take a lower starting point than that taken by the Crown Advocate.  We think, however, that the 8 years suggested by the Crown is correct, falling in the middle of the Rimmer band.  We are told that the defendant would not touch heroin himself and is aware of the devastating consequences for users of the drug, but was nonetheless prepared to bring the heroin into Jersey for commercial reasons.  We think the Crown was correct in its starting point and we think that the Crown Advocate has made the proper if not generous allowance for the mitigating factors.

5.        Shammem Miah, the conclusions of the Crown Advocate are granted and you are sentenced on the Count to which you have pleaded guilty to 4 years' imprisonment.

6.        We take next Saijid Miah who has a bad record including two convictions for possession of Class A drugs and for other offences of dishonesty.  He imported the heroin with a substantial value.  Counsel for J made certain allegations as to how Miah had groomed her for this exercise.  We have not taken those matters into consideration but there is no doubt that Miah corrupted a young girl, whom he used as the instrument of his money making enterprise.  The abuse of this vulnerable young girl with whom he was in a relationship was a contemptible act. 

7.        The Crown Advocate took a starting point of 9½ years' imprisonment but we think that is too low.  Miah sourced these drugs and was going to sell them in Jersey and spread the degradation and misery involved in the abuse of heroin in this Island.  He was not a mere courier.  The appropriate starting point, in our judgment, is one of 10 years' imprisonment.

8.        In mitigation he pleaded guilty to the indictment and expressed some remorse but that plea came late in the day and but for the factor to which we will turn, we would have imposed a sentence in the region of 7 years' imprisonment.

9.        The additional factor which we have, however, to take into consideration is that the defendant has given valuable information to the police as to the criminal activities of others, and furthermore he has instructed his counsel to acknowledge that co-operation in open court.  As we have said on many occasions it is the policy of this Court to encourage criminals to give information about the activities of other criminals.  The drug trafficking trade is founded upon fear, violence and intimidation and it is very much in the public interest that those higher up the chain should be aware that co-operation with the authorities is not only encouraged but rewarded.  We propose to reduce the sentence which would otherwise have been appropriate for this serious offence by 4 years. 

10.      The sentence of the Court is that you will be sentenced to 3 years' imprisonment for the count to which you have pleaded guilty.  [The defendant Miah left the Court].

11.      J, you have got into very bad and evil company, and have been very foolish.  You have paid a very heavy price for your folly, but you have also behaved criminally and you have been prepared to bring into Jersey a large quantity of this appalling drug which would have spread misery around the Island, if you had not been caught.  You will come out of prison in a very short while and you will need to use all your strength to keep on the straight and narrow.  We very much hope you will do so.  There will be lots of support available to you and we hope that you will take advantage of it.  We have read your letter carefully and we note that you have confidence in yourself, although you say it will be difficult, and indeed it will be.  We want you to know that we think you have a lot of talents and we have confidence that you can succeed if you set your mind to it. 

12.      We have to punish you for the crime you have committed.  The offence is so serious that we cannot avoid imposing a custodial sentence.  The conclusions of the Crown Advocate are granted and you are sentenced to 18 months' youth detention and I have to tell you that when you come out of custody you will be liable to be supervised by a probation or other officer, and we hope you will take advantage of that as well.

13.      We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

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