Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
Jersey Unreported Judgments
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> AG v Cameron, Darren, Hicks and Taylor [2013] JRC 120 (20 June 2013)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2013/2013_120.html
Cite as: [2013] JRC 120
[New search] [Help]
|
Before : |
W. J. Bailhache, Q.C., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Le Cornu, Morgan, Kerley, Milner, Liston and Blampied. |
The Attorney General
-v-
James John Dean Cameron
Stephen Wayne Darren
Jonathan William Hicks
Stephen Raymond Taylor
Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused were remanded by the Inferior Number on 12th and 19th April, 2013, following guilty pleas to the following charges:-
James John Dean Cameron
|
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). |
|
1 count of: |
Supplying a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5(b) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 4). |
Age: 25.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
Importation of 16.5 kilograms of high quality "pollen" cannabis resin packed into custom-built compartments hidden in front and rear bumpers of Jaguar car, brought from UK to Jersey on car ferry. Street value up to £262,000.
Defendants' roles varied. Darren was the Jersey connection for the importation, and his English friend Hicks was the physical importer, using his own car. Taylor assisted Hicks with fitting and unfitting the compartments, both in the UK and Jersey. Cameron received approximately half the consignment a few days after the delivery of the drugs to Jersey, intending to sell it on within Jersey.
Count 4 (a separate offence) reflected Cameron's earlier supply of about 200 grams of cannabis to another for £2,000 on or about 27th October, 2012.
In late November 2012, Cameron had asked Darren whether he could obtain some cannabis for Cameron to sell. Darren said that he could, within 2-3 weeks. It was not the Crown's case that Cameron incited Darren to import the cannabis that was subsequently recovered nor that Cameron was otherwise involved in the importation. Darren then made contact with Hicks.
Taylor helped Hicks in the UK to assist in the fitting of two welded drawer compartments within the voids at the front and rear bumpers of a Jaguar which Hicks had bought earlier that year. The cannabis was snugly packed in rows of 100 gram heat-sealed packs within these compartments.
Hicks travelled to Jersey by ferry on 8th December, 2012. Hicks then called Taylor and asked him to come to Jersey to assist in dismantling the compartments on the Jaguar. Hicks paid for Taylor's travel and hotel.
On 12th December, 2012, police officers observed Darren accessing a single garage beneath the residential block "The Dunes" on La Greve d'Azette and driving off. Darren then visited a rural compound off Rue de Presse, where there were shipping containers, work vehicles and other vehicles.
Darren then met Hicks and Taylor who were in the Jaguar. They all went to the compound at Rue de Presse. Hicks and Taylor removed the rear bumper from the Jaguar, and approximately 8 kilos of cannabis resin was taken out of the drawer compartment in the rear bumper.
Darren drove off with the cannabis, met with Cameron and handed the drugs to him. Cameron got into another car with a plastic sports bag holding the drugs, and a friend drove him away.
That car was stopped by officers and Cameron was arrested. The bag with the drugs packages was found between Cameron's legs in the passenger footwell.
Darren returned to the compound. Police arrived. Hicks and Taylor were arrested. Darren ran across fields but was detained by police officers shortly afterwards. Darren threw a key with an attached electric fob into the undergrowth but this was recovered. The key was for the container and the electric fob was for the garage at "The Dunes."
The following items were seized during searches:-
Cameron at time of arrest (in car)
1. 80 x 100 gram bars of cannabis resin: 7.716 kilograms (street value £80,000-£100,000).
Shipping Container
2. 4 bars of cannabis resin: 382.01 grams (street value £4,000-£6,000).
3. 2 bars of cannabis resin: 94.10 gram and 83.54 grams (street value £2,000-£3,000).
4. £34,890 cash.
Jaguar (front bumper)
5. 89 bars of cannabis resin: 8.537 kilograms.
Darren's Garage at "The Dunes"
6. 2 bags containing £50,010 and £21,980 cash (total £71,990).
Darren's home address
7. Cannabis resin weighing 2.26 grams (notional value of £20-£30).
8. £960 cash.
Cameron's home address
9. Cannabis resin weighing 1.6 grams and 1.41 grams (notional value of £30-£45).
10. €9,490 cash.
11. Deal lists indicating amounts of over €100,000.
Hicks' room at Radisson Blu Hotel
12. £2,000 cash.
Details of Mitigation:
The Crown: Offence committed for profit; guilty plea entered on Indictment; little other mitigation; did not have the benefit of youth or good character although no previous convictions for drug trafficking offences. Full admissions made during police interview following initial denials.
The Defence: Re Count 2: Starting point of 5 years accepted as appropriate. Re Count 3: Defence considered conclusions to be excessive but given that the sentence was to run concurrently, no further observations were made.
Count 4: Defence noted that Cameron wrote his own Indictment in respect of this Count on the basis that the Crown had no further evidence other than Cameron's admission, as police had only witnessed a handover of a bag and could not prove what was in it (£2,000 paid for drugs). Defence cited AG-v-MacKenzie and invited the Court to consider imposing a lesser sentence on a concurrent basis in respect of this count.
Generally not as mature as co-accused; previous non-custodial penalties satisfied; good work record and qualifications; remorse.
Previous Convictions:
2 convictions for 8 offences. No previous convictions for drugs offences.
Conclusions:
Starting point 5 years' imprisonment.
|
Count 2: |
3 years and 4 months' imprisonment. |
|
Count 3: |
1 month's imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 4: |
6 months' imprisonment, consecutive. |
Total: 3 years and 10 months' imprisonment.
Forfeiture and destruction sought of the drugs, the Jaguar (BJ53 U2A and all mobile telephones, save for the defendant Darren's phone.
Confiscation Order in the sum of £9,725.71 sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
The Court noted that Cameron was involved purely for the purposes of financial gain.
Re Count 2, on basis of weight involved (8 kilograms cannabis resin), the starting point fell at the top of the first sentencing bracket in Campbell (2-6 years) and the Crown had selected the correct starting point of 5 years' imprisonment. The Court also considered Cameron's level of involvement, stating that Count 4 of the Indictment showed that he was "clearly in business". Sentences for Counts 3 and 4 were, however, to run concurrently with that of Count 2.
Full discount for guilty plea. The Court noted an absence of previous drugs convictions and his strong work record. References and letter from Cameron noted. The Court considered that he had shown remorse for his actions. Not a young man therefore no credit for age. The Court considered that the correct sentence was one of 3 years' imprisonment in respect of Count 2.
Starting point 5 years' imprisonment.
|
Count 2: |
3 years' imprisonment. |
|
Count 3: |
1 month's imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 4: |
6 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 3 years' imprisonment.
Forfeiture and destruction ordered of the drugs, the Jaguar (BJ53 U2A) and all mobile telephones, save for the defendant Darren's iPhone.
Confiscation Order in the sum of £9,725.71 made.
Stephen Wayne Darren
|
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) 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 6). |
Age: 52.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
See Cameron above.
Details of Mitigation:
The Crown
Offence committed for profit; guilty plea on Indictment; no other mitigation; 52 years old and not of good character; previous conviction for drug trafficking offences in 2003 (5 year custodial sentence); partial admissions in interview.
The Defence
Re Count 1: Defence accepted that Darren fell within the second sentencing bracket (6-10 years) but submitted that by virtue of the quantity Darren fell at the lower end of the bracket and as such a starting point of 7-7½ years should have been selected. Accepted involvement as point of contact in Jersey.
Need for consistency in sentencing in light of Darren's previous sentence for trafficking 20 kilograms of cannabis in 2003. On that occasion a starting point of 8 years was taken resulting in a sentence of 5 years. No evidence to justify the gap between the starting points for Darren and Taylor once their respective roles had been considered.
Strong employment record; personal references and remorse.
Previous Convictions:
10 convictions for 23 offences including possession of a controlled drug x 4 (of which 1 x Class A); production of a controlled drug x 1; importation of a controlled drug x 1; and possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply x 1.
Conclusions:
Starting point 9 years' imprisonment.
|
Count 1: |
6 years' imprisonment. |
|
Count 6: |
1 month's imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 6 years' imprisonment.
Forfeiture and destruction sought of the drugs, the Jaguar (BJ53 U2A and all mobile telephones, save for the defendant Darren's phone.
Adjournment of Confiscation hearing to 27th August, 2013, sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
Darren was the "prime mover" in a sophisticated operation. He was the Jersey connection. In light of weight and quality and Darren's level of involvement and given that he was motivated purely by substantial financial gain, the Court considered that Darren fell at the midpoint of the second sentencing bracket in Campbell (6-10 years). The Crown's starting point of 9 years was based on an arithmetical error. The Court took a starting point of 8 years.
Substantial discount in respect of his guilty plea. However little else in the way of mitigation. This was particularly so given that he had been convicted and sentence to 3 years' imprisonment in 2003 for similar offences.
Starting point 8 years' imprisonment.
|
Count 1: |
5 years and 4 months' imprisonment. |
|
Count 6: |
1 month's imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 5 years and 4 months' imprisonment.
Forfeiture and destruction ordered of the drugs, the Jaguar (BJ53 U2A) and all mobile telephones, save for the defendant Darren's iPhone.
Confiscation hearing adjourned to 27th August, 2013.
Jonathan William Hicks
|
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) Law 1999 (Count 1). |
Age: 48.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
See Cameron above.
Details of Mitigation:
The Crown
Guilty plea; little other mitigation; 48 years old and not of good character; non-custodial sentences for previous offences; limited admissions in interview.
The Defence
Re starting point: starting point should be 7-7½ years.
Insufficient weight had been given to mitigating factors other than guilty plea.
Not intended to be involved in the further dissemination; should be treated as a courier on the basis that he had not funded the importation and had no stake in the profit. Only received a meagre "wage" in respect of large consignment; early guilty plea; admissions; remorse; previous convictions only relate top personal amounts; should be considered as first offence. No previous terms of imprisonment; good work record; personal circumstances; out of character.
Previous Convictions:
3 convictions for 4 offences including possession of a controlled drug x 3.
Conclusions:
Starting point 9 years' imprisonment.
|
Count 1: |
6 years' imprisonment. |
Forfeiture and destruction sought of the drugs, the Jaguar (BJ53 U2A) and all mobile telephones, save for the defendant Darren's iPhone.
Confiscation Order in the sum of £4,114.44 sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
More than a mere courier. In particular Hicks had (1) obtained the car used for the purposes of the importation, (2) recruited Taylor in order to adapt the car for that purpose and (3) accepted by way of his factual basis that his level of involvement was comparable to that of Darren. Like Darren, Hicks fell at the midpoint of the second sentencing bracket in Campbell (6-10 years). The Court adopted a starting point of 8 years.
Full credit for guilty plea. The Court noted that he had more in the way of mitigation than Darren.
Starting point 8 years' imprisonment.
|
Count 1: |
4 years and 9 months' imprisonment. |
Forfeiture and destruction ordered of the drugs, the Jaguar (BJ53 U2A) and all mobile telephones, save for the defendant Darren's iPhone.
Confiscation Order in the sum of £4,114.44 made.
Stephen Raymond Taylor
|
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) Law 1999 (Count 1). |
Age: 58.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
See Cameron above.
Details of Mitigation:
The Crown
Guilty plea; 58 years old and not of good character; little other mitigation; previous convictions for possession and production of controlled drugs. Cooperative.
The Defence
Need to be distinguished from Hicks and Darren, given limited role. Indication that Taylor wished to serve time in UK. If sentence of 4 years or less passed he would be eligible to apply for the Home Detention Curfew scheme which would allow him to care for his disabled son.
Accepted that as a mechanic he played an essential role. £400 "wage" and lack of "dirty" phone suggest low end involvement. Involvement arose from financial difficulties. Remorse. Compelling personal mitigation (son's disability). Guilty plea. Character references. Significant gap in offending. Used time on remand constructively.
Previous Convictions:
7 convictions for 20 offences including :- possession of a controlled drug x 3 (Class B); production of a controlled drug x 1 (Class B) and permitting premises to be used for smoking cannabis x 1 (Class B).
Conclusions:
Starting point 7 years' imprisonment.
|
Count 1: |
4 years and 6 months' imprisonment. |
Forfeiture and destruction sought of the drugs, the Jaguar (BJ53 U2A) and all mobile telephones, save for the defendant Darren's iPhone.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
The Crown gave anxious consideration to Taylor's sentence given the Crown's acceptance of his lesser involvement.
On the basis of weight Taylor fell within the second Campbell sentencing bracket, however, given the lesser role played by him, the Court adopted a starting point of 6 years.
Credit in respect of his guilty plea, relative good character (noting his previous conviction for cannabis offences for which the Court noted he had been sentenced on the basis that the drugs were for his personal consumption) and the compelling personal mitigation put forward on his behalf.
Starting point 6 years' imprisonment.
|
Count 1: |
3 years and 6 months' imprisonment. |
Forfeiture and destruction ordered of the drugs, the Jaguar (BJ53 U2A) and all mobile telephones, save for the defendant Darren's iPhone.
W. A. F. Redgrave, Esq., Crown Advocate.
Advocate R. S. Tremoceiro for Cameron.
Advocate M. J. Haines for Darren.
Advocate J. W. R. Bell for Hicks.
Advocate S. A. Pearmain for Taylor.
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:
1. You are here to be sentenced on an Indictment alleging various drugs offences against you, the most serious charges are those in Counts 1 and 2. On Count 1 Messrs Darren, Hicks and Taylor are charged with being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of cannabis and on Count 2 Mr Cameron is charged with possession of cannabis with intent to supply.
2. The Court's well-settled policy in relation to sentencing for offences of this kind is that a custodial sentence is almost invariably imposed. The guideline case is that of Campbell in 1995 and it tells us that we must assess your respective involvement in drug trafficking. For these purposes the quantity of the drugs is a key factor, in fact it is probably the most material indicator. For quantities of 1-10kg a starting point of 2-6 years' imprisonment, and for 10-30kg a starting point of 6-10 years' imprisonment. In the case of Messrs Darren, Hicks and Taylor the Crown has taken a starting point of 9 years for Messrs Darren and Hicks, and 7 years for Mr Taylor; and clearly has done so on a false premise, by making an arithmetic error in relation to the amount of drugs and its place in the bracket. And so we have had to review the conclusions on what we believe to be the right starting point in those circumstances.
3. Mr Darren, we consider you to be one of the prime movers in this importation. We have taken into account the quantity of the drugs which suggests a starting point of 7 years, and we have looked also at the quality of the drugs and their value; we have looked at the sophistication of the importation and we have taken into account that this was a purely money-driven exercise. It was done for financial gain. In our view the correct starting point, within that bracket, having regard to the involvement in drug trafficking, is that in your case we should take a starting point of 8 years' imprisonment.
4. We have considered what mitigation there is on your behalf. We allow you substantial mitigation for your guilty plea. There does not appear to us to be very much else by way of mitigation, but we have given some allowance at the absolute margins for a little extra mitigation. However, you have a previous conviction for the same sort of behaviour and that was only a few years ago.
5. In the circumstances we think the right sentence to impose upon you is 5 years and 4 months' imprisonment.
6. Mr Hicks, in your case we consider you to be more than just a courier. You put up your car. It appears that you organised Mr Taylor, and it also appears from paragraphs 54-55 of the Crown's summary of facts, that you have accepted that your involvement was pretty much the same as that of Mr Darren. In the circumstances we are taking 8 years as the starting point for you as well.
7. However, you have slightly more mitigation to this extent. We give you credit for your guilty plea and we are treating you as being substantially of good character and therefore we are making allowance for the other mitigation you have.
8. We think the right sentence for you is 4 years and 9 months' imprisonment.
9. Mr Taylor, we have given anxious consideration as to your involvement in the drug trafficking. We note that the Crown places you as being less involved than Mr Darren and Mr Hicks, and we have accepted that. We are therefore taking a starting point of 6 years' imprisonment in your case.
10. Allowing a discount for your guilty plea and your relative good character, we take into account the cannabis conviction last December, but the Court in England in that case seems to have accepted that it was an offence committed for, as it were, therapeutic purposes for your arthritis, and we have taken into account the personal mitigation you have.
11. You are sentenced to 3 years and 6 months' imprisonment.
12. Mr Cameron, in relation to Count 2 we consider that, clearly, you fall within the band of 2-6 years' imprisonment given the amount that was involved. On an arithmetic basis you should be somewhere towards the top end of that band. We note that your counsel agrees the Crown's starting point of 5 years, and we think that that was correct. You were involved in this for purely financial gain. The conviction on Count 4 of the Indictment shows that you were, as it were, in business and that therefore is going to be reflected in the starting point of 5 years' imprisonment.
13. Having regard to the mitigation that you have we have given you an allowance for the guilty plea, as has the Crown. Your counsel says that we should make an allowance for your youth. We do not do so. We think at the age of 25 you are quite old enough to know how you should behave and we do not allow you anything for that. But we have taken into account your absence of drugs convictions and that fact that you have had a good work record and of course your remorse and other matters which your counsel has pointed to.
14. You are sentenced on Count 2 to 3 years' imprisonment, in relation to Count 3; 1 month's imprisonment, concurrent, and on Count 4; 6 months' imprisonment, concurrent, making a total of 3 years' imprisonment.
15. I want to say something about the references which we have read in the case of all four of you with care. In your different ways you all have wives, partners, children, or other family members who will be deeply affected by the custodial sentences which are imposed. Many of these people have written letters of support and as I say we have read them all. We are asked to exercise, in some cases, leniency because of the effect upon them of the sentence which will be passed on you. This we will not do. It is not for us to exercise leniency out of respect or concern for your family members, even though we have respect and concern for them. You should have thought about them in advance before committing the offences. That may sound harsh but it is true and perhaps you should reflect on that when in prison and use your unhappiness about the consequences for your loved ones as the spur to ensure you do not commit further offences in the future. There is, though, an uplifting side to their letters. First of all they show that each of you has good qualities, and the Court has been pleased to know that. Secondly, their support and their knowledge of your good qualities are things on which you can build while you are in prison, and you should rely on that until the time of your release.
16. We order the drugs to be forfeited and destroyed, and we also order the car to be forfeited and destroyed, and the mobile telephones to be destroyed save the iPhone belonging to Mr Darren which is to be retained until such time as the Confiscation hearing is completed.
Authorities