Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - drugs - importation - Class B

[2017]JRC209

Royal Court

(Samedi)

8 December 2017

The Attorney General

-v-

James Edmund Church

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following a guilty plea to the following charge:

Age:  59.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Church was stopped by Customs Officers when he disembarked the car ferry from Poole.  During a search of his vehicle an ion scan swab of luggage in the boot compartment gave a positive indication to the presence of drugs.  Further investigation of the boot compartment revealed a void between the boot and the rear seats, inside which was a plastic box sealed with duct tape.  The box contained nine packages each containing ten bars of cannabis resin; total weight of the 90 bars was just under 8·59 kilos.  Wholesale value in Jersey £36,000 - £45,000, street value £130,000 - £170,000. 

Details of Mitigation:

Immediate acknowledgment of guilt.  Formerly a successful motor trader, several years of ill health had reduced his circumstances.  Selling vehicles from home, one was stolen, not covered by his insurance - owner threatened the defendant and immediate family if not recompensed, later gave the defendant opportunity to clear debt by carrying a consignment of cannabis to the island in his car. 

Previous Convictions:

One unrelated motoring offence 15 years previous; treated as being of good character. 

Conclusions:

The Crown took the view the defendant was a courier who, suffering a debilitating hereditary condition (medically confirmed), undertook the importation to clear a non-drug-related debt when pressure was brought to bear on him.  Discount for guilty plea, lack of previous convictions, clearly remorseful; no additional credit accruing from threats. From a starting point of five years' imprisonment the Crown moved for a sentence of three years' imprisonment. 

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought. 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered. 

Ms E. L. Hollywood, Crown Advocate.

Advocate G. N. A. Pearce for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE BAILIFF:

1.        You are here to be sentenced on one count of being knowingly concerned in the importation of nearly 8.59 kilograms of cannabis resin concealed in a car, which it appears that you bought with money provided to you by a well-known criminal family in London.  It is not impossible that you were set up for this importation, but you did not have to give in to the pressure under which you found yourself.  The drugs had a wholesale value between £36,000 and £54,000 in Jersey and a street value of between £130,000 and £170,000 so it was an importation of considerable value. 

2.        You have entered an immediate guilty plea on the first occasion you were presented and you have full credit for that.  You have expressed genuine remorse which we accept.  Aged 59, you have only a drink driving conviction and therefore we treat you as a person of good character.  As you have heard in Court today the Court is charged to apply the Court of Appeal's decision in Campbell-v-AG [1995] JLR 136, which requires us to assess your involvement in drug trafficking.  The quantity of the drugs is the primary factor to which the Court has regard, but we are entitled to look at all the circumstances to work out, for ourselves, and form a judgment upon the involvement which you had. 

3.        The Crown, we think probably on the basis of the quantity, takes a starting point of 5 years' imprisonment.  Your counsel has urged us to the view that it is too high as a starting point and he says that your involvement was very much reduced.  You were to take the drugs over in the car, you were not to receive any cash payment, you would be forgiven the debt that you were due to pay to the family in question and, you had no part either in financing or in the delivery of the drugs in Jersey. 

4.        The Crown takes the view that your explanation is a credible one and in those circumstances it seems to us that we should also take that approach and that being so, we accept the submission which Advocate Pearce has made on your behalf that your involvement in drug trafficking was not at the level which the Crown has taken it to be and we therefore take the starting point of 4 years' imprisonment.  The Crown has allowed you 2 years off that starting point for personal mitigation, and having regard to the guilty plea and the remorse and your good character, having regard to health issues and indeed everything which has been said on your behalf, very persuasively, by Advocate Pearce we think that the Crown is right in its assessment of the mitigation and that we should therefore sentence you to a total of 2 years' imprisonment which is what we do. 

5.        You will appreciate from everything you have read and been told that the Island takes the importation of drugs very seriously, perhaps more seriously than in other jurisdictions and that is why the penalties are, in some cases, regarded as being higher than one would expect, certainly in England.  We have that policy established by Court of Appeal decisions and it is there to protect our people as you seem to accept in the letter which you have written to us. 

6.        You are sentenced to 2 years' imprisonment. 

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

Authorities

Campbell-v-AG [1995] JLR 136.

Whitehouse-v-AG [2002] JLR Note 28.

AG-v-Marshall [2016] JRC 117.