Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2008]JRC210

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

1^st December 2008

Before     :

M. C. St. J. Birt, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Bullen, Clapham, Le Cornu, Morgan and Liddiard.

The Attorney General

-v-

Carl Allan Armstrong

William Swanston

Lesley Carole Swanston

Filipe Abreu Afonso

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused were remanded by the Inferior Number on 17^th October, 2008, following guilty pleas to the following charges:

Carl Allan Armstrong

First Indictment

1 count of:

Conspiracy to fraudulently evade the prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 61(2)(b) of the Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law 1999.  (Count 1).

Age:  45.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

The case involved the importation of 197 grams of heroin sent via the postal system from Armstrong, based in Liverpool, to William Swanston based in Jersey.  This quantity of heroin was sent over a period of approximately 10 months in small packages which never contained more than 3½ grams of heroin at any one time.  Armstrong was purchasing the heroin in Liverpool for £50 per gram and charging William Swanston £100 per gram.  This contrasted with the Jersey price of between £200 and £250 per gram.  Armstrong was paid for the heroin via moneygrams sent by either William Swanston, Lesley Swanston or Afonso.  A number of bank transfers were also made directly into Armstrong's bank account.  The total amount sent and utilised for drugs was £19,700.  The vast majority of the payments were made directly by William Swanston albeit Lesley Swanston sent a total of £9,881 and Afonso sent a total of £3,048.  Once the heroin was received by William Swanston, he sold 50% keeping 50% for himself and his wife.  By acting in this way he was able to self fund the next purchase and effectively have his heroin at no cost. 

Count 3 was a personal amount of heroin found at the Swanstons' home address.  Count 4 related to a separate importation consisting of a personal amount by William Swanston and Count 5 was the possession of that amount.  Count 6 was a personal amount of cannabis found on Lesley Swanston at the time of her arrest and Count 7 was a personal amount of heroin found on a prior occasion on Afonso. 

Afonso had admitted after the first payment that he was aware that the monies being sent were for the purposes of purchasing drugs and pleaded guilty to Count 1 on that basis.

Lesley Swanston pleaded guilty to an Article 37(1) offence on the basis that on or about approximately half way through sending the payments she was suspicious of the funds but continued to send them on her husband's behalf.

The Crown took as a 'starting point' for Armstrong and William Swanston a period of 12 years' imprisonment based upon their respective roles and the quantity and value of the heroin concerned ie: 197 grams of heroin.  The Crown took a 7 year 'starting point' in relation to Count 4 being the importation of 178 milligrams of heroin.  A 'starting point' of 8 years imprisonment was taken for Afonso on the basis that the amount of money that he had sent could have purchased 25 grams of heroin and a 'starting point' of 10 years imprisonment was taken for the supply Count on the Second Indictment against William Swanston based upon the admitted fact that he had supplied half of the quantity imported ie: 98 grams were supplied to other persons.  No 'starting point' was taken for the Article 37(1) offence.  The Crown indicated that the sentences for William Swanston would be concurrent.

Details of Mitigation:

The Crown contended that he was a mature defendant and did not have the benefit of youth or good character.  Uncooperative in interview but subsequently co-operative by providing a factual basis for a guilty plea.  The main mitigating factor was the guilty plea.

The Defence contended that he played a lesser role than that of William Swanston and, therefore, should have a lower 'starting point' and also a lower sentence than was moved for.  William Swanston had set up the scheme.  Armstrong had only used one supplier and was at a low level in the drug world.  He was described as a naïve drug supplier at the lower end of the chain.  He was an addict.  He had the benefit of his guilty plea.

Previous Convictions:

A total of 9 convictions for 19 offences including assaults, criminal damage, burglary, theft, gross indecency, conspiracy to supply controlled drugs, supplying controlled drugs and possession of controlled drugs.

Conclusions:

First Indictment

Starting point 12 years' imprisonment.

Count 1:

7 years' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Confiscation order in the nominal sum of £1 sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The main offence with which the Court was concerned was the importation of heroin by the post on numerous occasions over a 10 month period in 2007.  William Swanston was the main player in Jersey and sent £19,700 to Armstrong in Liverpool.  Armstrong used to money to purchase heroin in Liverpool keeping approximately half for himself for his own addiction.  He sent the other half to William Swanston which half was kept for the supply to William Swanston and for his own addiction and that of his wife.  On the factual basis accepted by the Crown, 197 grams was sent in total and over the period the maximum amount sent on one occasion was 3½ grams.  William Swanston kept half for himself and his wife and selling the other half to fund the next instalment.  Afonso was part of the conspiracy in that on 7 occasions he sent money given to him by William Swanston by money gram to Armstrong knowing that the funds would be used to purchase heroin.  A total of £2,562 was sent and he received one or two "hits" on each occasion.  Lesley Swanston has pleaded guilty to assisting her husband to retain the benefit of drug trafficking.  Agreed basis was put forward in that she became suspicious that the monies that she was being asked to send were derived from drug trafficking.  After her suspicions aroused she sent some 12 payments at her husband's request which totalled £3,100.

He sent 197 grams of heroin over a 2 month period.  The Crown has taken a 'starting point' of 12 years being the mid point in the appropriate Rimmer Guideline band and the Court agreed with that 'starting point' given the quantity of heroin and the scale and nature of his level of involvement.  In mitigation he had a guilty plea.  He had a poor record including 3 offences of supplying drugs  The Court had read references and letters provided and was pleased to note that he was staying free of drugs whilst in prison.  The Court concluded that the Crown had made proper allowance for all relevant mitigation.

Conclusions granted.

William Swanston

First Indictment

1 count of:	Conspiracy to fraudulently evade the prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 61(2)(b) of the Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law 1999.  (Count 1).
2 counts of:	Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978.  (Counts 3 and 5).
1 count of:	Being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 61 of the Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law 1999.  (Count 4).

Second Indictment

1 count of:

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

Age:  50.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Armstrong above.

Details of Mitigation:

The Crown contended that he was a mature individual and did not have the benefit of youth or good character.  He had been fully co-operative in interview making full and frank admissions as to the arrangements that were in place.  Co-operation had been followed by the provision of a factual basis for the guilty pleas etc.  A guilty plea was of significance.  The Crown had regard to the information contained in the background reports and the other documents before the Court. 

The Defence contended that he was an addict who had only supplied himself and friends.  He lived in abject poverty.  He had made no money out of the arrangement.  He was not the usual type of drugs organiser.  It was contended that Armstrong was close to the source and, therefore, William Swanston should have a lesser sentence than him.  He had wanted to end the arrangement but was persuaded by others.  He was a desperate addict.  He was devoted to his wife and had taken steps to improve himself and to overcome addiction whilst in custody.  He had written his own Indictment in relation to the Second Indictment.  He was more co-operative than Armstrong.  He was the first to plead guilty to the conspiracy Count.  He had taken full responsibility for his actions.  It was contended that greater credit for a guilty plea and co-operation etc. should be given justifying a lower sentence than had been sought by the Crown. 

Previous Convictions:

29 convictions for a total of 57 offences including 7 offences for possession of controlled drugs, larceny, handling, burglary, motoring, public order and assaults.

Conclusions:

First Indictment

Starting point 12 years' imprisonment.

Count 1:	7 years' imprisonment.
Count3:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 4:	Starting point 7 years' imprisonment, 3 years' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 5:	3 months' imprisonment, concurrent.

Second Indictment

Count 1:

Starting point 10 years' imprisonment, 5 years' imprisonment, concurrent with the First Indictment.

Total:  7 years' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Confiscation order in the sum of £730 sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The main offence with which the Court was concerned was the importation of heroin by the post on numerous occasions over a 10 month period in 2007.  William Swanston was the main player in Jersey and sent £19,700 to Armstrong in Liverpool.  Armstrong used the money to purchase heroin in Liverpool keeping approximately half for himself for his own addiction.  He sent the other half to William Swanston of which half was kept for the supply to William Swanston and for his own addiction and that of his wife.  On the factual basis accepted by the Crown, 197 grams was sent in total and over the period the maximum amount sent on one occasion was 3½ grams.  William Swanston kept half for himself and his wife selling the other half to fund the next instalment.  Afonso was part of the conspiracy in that on 7 occasions he sent money given to him by William Swanston by moneygram to Armstrong knowing that the funds would be used to purchase heroin.  A total of £2,562 was sent and he received one or two "hits" on each occasion.  Lesley Swanston has pleaded guilty to assisting her husband to retain the benefit of drug trafficking.  Agreed basis was put forward in that she became suspicious that the monies that she was being asked to send were derived from drug trafficking.  After her suspicions aroused she sent some 12 payments at her husband's request which totalled £3,100.

He was most heavily involved at the Jersey end selling half and keeping half of the heroin imported.  The Court did not think it was possible to distinguish between him and Armstrong and agreed with the Crown's 'starting point' of 12 years' imprisonment.  In mitigation he had his guilty plea although he had a poor criminal record including offences for possession.  He had no previous drug trafficking offences.  He had made attempts to overcome his addiction and the Court urged him to continue with those efforts.  The Court had regard to all the matters covered in the papers and had accepted that he was co-operative even though he had involved both his wife and Afonso in the enterprise.  Such matters balanced out and the Court did not think it was appropriate to draw any distinction between him and Armstrong.

First Indictment

Starting point 12 years' imprisonment.

Count 1:	7 years' imprisonment.
Count 3:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 4:	1 year's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 5:	No penalty.

Second Indictment

Count 1:

Starting point 10 years' imprisonment, 5 years' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total:  7 years' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.

Confiscation order in the sum of £730 made.

Lesley Carole Swanston

First Indictment

1 count of:

Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978.  (Count 6).

Second Indictment

1 count of:

Assisting another to obtain the benefit of drug trafficking, contrary to Article 37(1)(a) of the Drug Trafficking Offences (Jersey) Law 1988.  (Count 2).

Age:  46.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Armstrong above.

Details of Mitigation:

She did not have the benefit of youth and although she had a criminal record it was of a minor nature.  She had the benefit of co-operation in terms of putting forward a factual basis for a guilty plea and the principle factor was her guilty plea.  The Crown also noted the information contained in the various background reports.

The Defence contended that there were exceptional background circumstances justifying a non-custodial sentence.  She had given an early indication of a guilty plea to the Artilce 37 offence.  She had spent an equivalent sentence of 9 months in custody and had then been on strict bail conditions, all complied with.  She had played a passive role acting under pressure from her husband.  Now wanted to try what life is like without drugs.  This could be best achieved by a non-custodial sentence.

Previous Convictions:

2 convictions for 3 offences: two possession of controlled drugs and minor motoring offences.

Conclusions:

First Indictment

Count 6:

2 weeks' imprisonment.

Second Indictment

Count 2:

18 months' imprisonment, concurrent with Count 6 on the First Indictment.

Total:  18 months' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Confiscation order in the nominal sum of £1 sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The main offence with which the Court was concerned was the importation of heroin by the post on numerous occasions over a 10 month period in 2007.  William Swanston was the main player in Jersey and sent £19,700 to Armstrong in Liverpool.  Armstrong used to money to purchase heroin in Liverpool keeping approximately half for himself for his own addiction.  He sent the other half to William Swanston which half was kept for the supply to William Swanston and for his own addiction and that of his wife.  On the factual basis accepted by the Crown, 197 grams was sent in total and over the period the maximum amount sent on one occasion was 3½ grams.  William Swanston kept half for himself and his wife and selling the other half to fund the next instalment.  Afonso was part of the conspiracy in that on 7 occasions he sent money given to him by William Swanston by money gram to Armstrong knowing that the funds would be used to purchase heroin.  A total of £2,562 was sent and he received one or two "hits" on each occasion.  Lesley Swanston has pleaded guilty to assisting her husband to retain the benefit of drug trafficking.  Agreed basis was put forward in that she became suspicious that the monies that she was being asked to send were derived from drug trafficking.  After her suspicions aroused she sent some 12 payments at her husband's request which totalled £3,100.

She had assisted her husband with the sum of approximately £3,000 in difficult circumstances.  It was a less serious charge compared to the conspiracy charge.  The Court accepted that she had been acting at the request of her husband and had considered the reports.  It considered her involvement as less serious.  She spent the equivalent of 6 months on remand.  The Court had considered carefully whether a non-custodial sentence could be imposed.  Normally those involved in money laundering warranted a custodial sentence.  On balance, they decided to proceed with a non-custodial.

First Indictment

Count 6:

18 months' Probation Order, concurrent.

Second Indictment

Had the Court imposed a custodial sentence then the Court agreed with the Crown's conclusions of 18 months imprisonment.  The normal Community service would be 240 hours but having regard to the amount of time she spent on remand this was reduced to 180 hours Community Service Order.

She was given a clear warning that she was extremely fortunate not to have been sent back to prison and if she failed to comply in any way with the Court Orders or re-offend then the inevitable consequence would be that she would likely go to prison.

Count 2:

18 months' Probation Order, 180 hours' Community Service Order and 6 month Treatment Order, concurrent.

Total:  18 months' Probation Order, 180 hours' Community Service Order and 6 months' Treatment Order.

The Court ordered the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Filipe Abreu Afonso

First Indictment

1 count of:	Conspiracy to fraudulently evade the prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 61(2)(b) of the Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law 1999.  (Count 1).
1 count of:	Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978.  (Count 7).

Age:  37.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Armstrong above.

Details of Mitigation:

The Crown contended that he did not have the benefit of youth of good character.  He had the benefit of co-operation in putting forward a factual basis for the guilty plea being the main mitigating factor.

The Defence contended that he had not been involved in collecting or sending the money and had only benefited by small personal amounts of heroin.  He had been unemployed for the last 2 to 3 years due to his addiction.  He had help from the Probation Services etc, in the past but had relapsed.  He had been using his time in custody positively carrying out various courses etc.  His partner and child remain supportive.  Contended that the 'starting point' was too high.  Suggested the possibility of a non-custodial sentence.  On the issue of deportation the Defence contended that he had been in Jersey for 14 years with his partner and child and that his continued presence was not detrimental to the Community.  He had not been a burden on the Community.

Previous Convictions:

10 convictions for 18 offences including fraud, possession of controlled drugs, larceny and obstruction.

Conclusions:

First Indictment

Starting point 8 years' imprisonment.

Count 1:	4½ years' imprisonment.
Count 7	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.

Total:  4½ years' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Confiscation order in the nominal sum of £1 sought.

Recommendation for deportation sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The main offence with which the Court was concerned was the importation of heroin by the post on numerous occasions over a 10 month period in 2007.  William Swanston was the main player in Jersey and sent £19,700 to Armstrong in Liverpool.  Armstrong used to money to purchase heroin in Liverpool keeping approximately half for himself for his own addiction.  He sent the other half to William Swanston which half was kept for the supply to William Swanston and for his own addiction and that of his wife.  On the factual basis accepted by the Crown, 197 grams was sent in total and over the period the maximum amount sent on one occasion was 3½ grams.  William Swanston kept half for himself and his wife and selling the other half to fund the next instalment.  Afonso was part of the conspiracy in that on 7 occasions he sent money given to him by William Swanston by money gram to Armstrong knowing that the funds would be used to purchase heroin.  A total of £2,562 was sent and he received one or two "hits" on each occasion.  Lesley Swanston has pleaded guilty to assisting her husband to retain the benefit of drug trafficking.  Agreed basis was put forward in that she became suspicious that the monies that she was being asked to send were derived from drug trafficking.  After her suspicions aroused she sent some 12 payments at her husband's request which totalled £3,100.

He had assisted in the conspiracy but on the version accepted his involvement was at the lower end.  He had a very limited involvement in that his name and identity was used by William Swanston to send monies.  The Crown had suggested a 'starting point' of 8 years based upon the amount of heroin that could be purchased with the monies sent by Afonso.  The Court agreed that this was the correct analysis.  However, the Court felt able to reduce the 'starting point' having regard to his limited level of involvement and took a 'starting point' of 6 years.  In mitigation he had his guilty plea.  He had a previous criminal record including for drugs.  The Court had read the various letters and reports and the efforts that he was making whilst in custody to overcome his addiction. 

On the issue of deportation the Court had no hesitation in concluding that his continued presence was to the detriment.  He had been involved in class A drugs and was assessed at being of high risk of re-offending.  However, the Court had to have regard to his Article 8 rights and those of the family etc.  Given the length of time he had lived in Jersey and that of his partner and the fact that they had a child born in Jersey the Court concluded that on this occasion it would be disproportionate to recommend deportation.  However he was given a clear warning that if on his release he re-offended then he was at real risk of being deported notwithstanding the length of time that he had lived in Jersey.

First Indictment

Starting point 6 years' imprisonment.

Count 1:	3½ years' imprisonment.
Count 7:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.

Total:  3½ years' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered.

Confiscation order in the nominal sum of £1 ordered.

No recommendation for deportation made.

J. C. Gollop, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate E. Le Guillou for Armstrong.

Advocate D. J. Hopwood for W. Swanston.

Advocate D. Gilbert for L. C. Swanston.

Advocate S. A. Pearmain for Afonso.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        The main offence with which the Court is concerned is the importation of heroin by post on numerous occasions over a period of some 10 months in 2007.  William Swanston was the main player in Jersey.  Over the period he sent moneygrams totalling £19,700 to Armstrong in Liverpool.  Armstrong used that money to purchase heroin in Liverpool.  He would keep approximately half in order to feed his own addiction and he would send the other half by post to Jersey for collection by Swanston.  On the version of events which the Crown has accepted, Armstrong sent approximately 197 grams of heroin to William Swanston over the period in packets containing a maximum of 3½ grams on any particular occasion.  Swanston in turn, would keep approximately half of what he received in order to feed his own and his wife's addiction and he would sell the remaining half to recover his outlay.  Afonso has pleaded guilty to being party to this conspiracy on the basis that on some 7 occasions he sent money given to him by William Swanston by moneygram to Armstrong, knowing that this was intended to be used for the purchase of drugs which would be imported to Jersey.  The total which he sent in this way was £2,562.  His reward was to receive one or two hits of heroin for his personal use on each occasion, he too being a heroin addict.  Lesley Swanston has pleaded guilty to assisting her husband to retain the proceeds of his drug trafficking.  Again, there is an agreed basis for her plea, which is that after a while she became suspicious that money which she was being asked to send by moneygram on her husband's behalf, was derived from drug trafficking.  After she became suspicious she sent some 12 money orders to Armstrong on her husband's behalf involving a total of some £3,102. 

2.        We will deal with each defendant in turn.  First of all, Carl Armstrong, you were concerned, as we say with the importation of this quantity of heroin over a 10 month period.  In our judgment the Crown have correctly fixed the starting point of 12 years being the mid point of the applicable bracket in the Rimmer guidelines, this having regard to the amount but also the nature and scale of your involvement.  In mitigation, we take into account the fact that you have pleaded guilty, you have a poor record including previous supply of drugs, we have read the letters that you have forwarded to us and your mother's letter and we are pleased that you are attempting to stay clear of drugs in prison and hopefully are succeeding in doing so.  Nevertheless, we think that in all circumstances the Crown has made allowance for all the available mitigation in their conclusions and therefore the sentence on Count 1 in your case is one of 7 years' imprisonment.

3.        William Swanston, you were the most heavily involved at the Jersey end, as we say, being involved in the importation of this amount and in turn, disposing of half and keeping the other half to feed yourself and your wife's habit.  The Crown have taken the same starting point.  Your Advocate argues that a distinction should be made but we think that it is not possible to distinguish between the involvement of you and Armstrong and therefore we take a starting point of 12 years.  In your case there is also the guilty plea, you too have a poor record, including possession of drugs but no previous dealing offences.  We note your attempt also to overcome your addiction whilst in prison and we do urge you to continue with that because until you do, the outlook is bleak.  We have read all the reports and all the mitigation that appears from the papers.  We accept, as your counsel has said, that you were more co-operative when interviewed than Armstrong, but conversely, you did involve your wife and Afonso in the conspiracy and all in all, we think that these factors balance each other out and that therefore no distinction is to be drawn between you and Armstrong.

4.        The sentence in your case is on Count 1; 7 years, on Count 3; 1 month, on Count 4; 1 year, on Count 5 this seems to us to be a complete duplication of Count 4 and therefore we impose no penalty.  On the Second Indictment the sentence is 5 years, all of these to be concurrent, so the total is 7 years.

5.        Afonso, you assisted in this conspiracy in the way we have described.  However, we do accept that it was, on the version accepted by the Crown, a very limited involvement.  The sums of money were given to you at the relevant office in Jersey by William Swanston; you simply gave your name to the transaction.  He told you how much there was and you were very much acting simply to assist in these particular transactions.  The Crown have suggested a starting point of 8 years on the basis that the amount you sent would have purchased 25 grams.  We think that is a correct analysis in terms of the amount with which you were involved indirectly by sending this money.  However, we think regard has to be given to the nature and scale of your involvement.  Given its very limited nature we think it takes it outside the applicable Rimmer brackets and we think the correct starting point is one of 6 years.  You too have pleaded guilty, you have previous convictions including possession of drugs but no dealing offences.  We have read the letters from you and your partner and your son, we have had regard to the reports and we note the effort you are making to conquer your addiction and hope that succeeds.

6.         We think that the right sentence for you allowing for all these matters, is on Count 1; 3½ years, on Count 7; I month, concurrent, that is a total of 3½ years' imprisonment.

7.        Now as to deportation, we have no hesitation in saying that your continued presence in the Island is detrimental.  You have been involved in the importation of class A drugs and you are assessed as being at high risk of re-offending.  However we must have regard to your Article 8 rights and those of your family.  Given the length of time you have spent in Jersey and that your partner has also been here for many years and that your child has been born and brought up here so far, we think it would be disproportionate on this occasion to recommend your deportation.  However, I want to make it absolutely clear that if you re-offend when you come out, then on such an occasion you will be at real risk of being deported notwithstanding the length of time you have spent in the Island.

8.        Lesley Swanston, you assisted your husband in the way that we have described by sending approximately £3,000.  Superficially there are similarities in what you did as compared with Afonso but we think there are differences which make your involvement less serious.  First of all there is the nature of the offence, you are charged with money laundering rather than being party to the conspiracy to import drugs.  Secondly, we accept that you were acting at the request of your husband in the context of a relationship, the details of which we have seen in the reports, whereas Afonso was acting entirely for his own benefit.  So we do regard your involvement as being less serious.  In mitigation we take into account your guilty plea, your minor previous record and the other matters which are fully set out in the reports.  We also take account of the fact that you spent 9 months in prison on remand.  We have had to consider very carefully whether we can proceed by a non-custodial sentence as your Advocate has urged.  Normally those involved in money laundering will always go to prison but on balance we think that yours is an exceptional case and we can proceed by way of a non-custodial sentence.  However not only do we think this because we are keen that you should be given the assistance of the Probation Service to try and overcome your problems, but also because you must be punished for your involvement in this matter.

9.        The sentence we impose in your case is as follows, on Count 2 of the Second Indictment; 18 months' Probation Order with a 6 months' Treatment Order.  What this means is that you must attend the Alcohol and Drugs Service as directed and you must comply with all their treatment goals and their testing as required, so you will be subject to random testing.  The prison sentence which we would have had in mind is that moved for by the Crown namely 18 months.  That would have suggested a Community Service Order of 240 hours but we do make allowance for the time you have spent in remand so we impose a Community Service Order of 180 hours.  On Count 6 of the First Indictment we make a Probation Order for 18 months concurrent.

10.       I need to warn you that you have been extremely fortunate in not being sent to prison.  It is absolutely vital that you comply with the directions of your Probation Officer, that you turn up for meetings when you are called upon to do so, that you attend any courses they tell to go to, that you attend the Drug and Alcohol Service and that you perform the Community Service.  If you start failing to do these thing or if you re-offend, then you will be brought back here and then the inevitable consequence is likely to be that you will go to prison.

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

 Authorities

Rimmer, Lusk and Bade -v-AG [2001] JLR 373.

Drug Trafficking Offences (Jersey) Law 1988.

AG-v-Morgan [2006] JRC 031.

AG-v-Soares and Aguiar [2008] JRC 015

R-v-Nazari [1980] 3 All ER 880.

Camacho-v-AG [2007] JCA 146.

AG-v-Atkinson and Others [2007] JRC 090.

AG-v-Fagin [2005] JRC 031.