Jersey Unreported Judgments

Superior Number Sentencing - Drugs - importation - Class A

[2020]JRC249

Royal Court

(Samedi)

30 November 2020

Before     :

J. A. Clyde-Smith O.B.E., Commissioner, and Jurats Crill, Blampied and Ramsden

The Attorney General

-v-

Amen Ben-Sghaier

Garrett McCarthy

Scott William Chadwick

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 4^th September, 2020, following a guilty plea to the following charges:

Amen Ben-Sghaier

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:  30.

Plea: Guilty

Details of Offence:

At approximately 5pm on Wednesday 11^th March 2020, Chadwick and Ben-Sghaier arrived on the Condor Liberation from Poole in a Volkswagen Gold ("the Car"), Chadwick was driving.

 

A search of the car revealed four plastic wrapped packages were found concealed in the lining of the boot compartment.  The packages were located in the boot of the Car between the floor carpet and the metal chassis.  A plastic scuff plate, which runs horizontally across the internal frame of the boot, had to be removed to access this location.  The packages were found to contain white powder which tested positive for the presence of cocaine. 

 

The white powder was examined by the States' Official Analyst and was confirmed to be 107.67g cocaine with a purity of 87%.

 

The boot of the Car was forensically examined and fingerprints were lifted from the plastic boot trim of the vehicle.  The packages were also examined for fingerprints but none were recovered.

 

At approximately 12:15pm on Thursday 12^th March 2020, McCarthy was arrested at Jersey Airport.

 

The mobile phones of all three men were examined and messages were found between Ben-Sghaier and McCarthy discussing the importation.

 

On 6^th July 2020, the results of the forensic examination was received by Customs.  This evidence identified Chadwick's fingerprint on the underside of the plastic scuff plate of the boot trim.   

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, personal mitigation

Previous Convictions:

12 previous convictions for 20 offences, mainly concerning violence, theft and fraud.  This is his first drug-related conviction

Conclusions:

Count 1:

Starting point 11 years' imprisonment.  5½ years' imprisonment.

Declaration of benefit sought in the sum of £13,123.08.

Confiscation order sought in the sum of £123.08. 

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:

Starting 11 years' imprisonment.  6½ years' imprisonment.

Declaration of benefit made in the sum of £13,123.08.

Confiscation order made in the sum of £123.08. 

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered.

Garrett McCarthy

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:  41.

Plea: Guilty

Details of Offence:

See above.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, previous good character. 

Previous Convictions:

No previous convictions.

Conclusions:

Count 1:

Starting point 11 years' imprisonment.  6½ years' imprisonment.

Declaration of benefit sought in the sum of £13,000.

Confiscation order sought in the sum of £470.75. 

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:

Starting 11 years' imprisonment.  6 years' imprisonment.

Declaration of benefit made in the sum of £13,000.00.

Confiscation order made in the sum of £470.75. 

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered.

Scott William Chadwick

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:  44.

Plea: Guilty

Details of Offence:

See above.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea.

Previous Convictions:

2 previous convictions for 5 offences.

Conclusions:

Count 1:

Starting point 10 years' imprisonment.  6 years' imprisonment.

No confiscation order sought.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:

Starting 10 years' imprisonment.  6 years' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered.

M. R. Maletroit Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate S. E. A. Dale for Defendant Ben-Sghaier.

Advocate M. P. Boothman for Defendant McCarthy.

Advocate A. M. Harrison for Defendant Chadwick.

JUDGMENT

THE Commissioner:

1.        The defendants stand to be sentenced for the importation of a commercial quantity of cocaine, 107.67 grams with a wholesale value of between £13,000 and £16,000 and a potential street value of between £30,000 and £50,000 if further adulterated.  The cocaine had a high purity of 87%.  The cocaine was concealed in the boot of a car driven by the defendant Chadwick who was accompanied by the defendant Ben-Sghaier.  The importation had been planned by Ben-Sghaier and the defendant McCarthy, the latter being the local contact who would have arranged the onward distribution of the drugs. 

2.        The guidelines in Rimmer v AG [2001] JLR 373 indicate a starting point bracket of 10 to 13 years for the importation of 100 to 250 grams, noting that where the purity is very high, at about 75% or higher, it may be appropriate to increase the starting point.

3.        The Crown seeks starting points of 11 years for Ben-Sghaier and McCarthy and 10 years for Chadwick.  We have considered the submissions of counsel and notwithstanding those submissions we agree with the starting points put forward by the Crown, namely that Chadwick is to be treated as the person involved in the transport of these drugs as the driver of the car and Ben-Sghaier and McCarthy as equally involved in the planning of the importation. 

4.        Taking Ben-Sghaier first he has a bad record, although this is his first drug related offence.  He is assessed at a moderate risk of reconviction.  He has the benefit of an early guilty plea but as he was in the car when these drugs were found, in our view, that is a plea that does not warrant a full one third discount.  He has frankly admitted that his involvement in this offence was for financial gain.  He says he intended to put the money he would make, stated by him to be £1,500, towards the cost of an eye operation.  He was diagnosed some 10 years ago with retinitis pigmentosa a rare genetic disorder which is degenerative.  He says there is a treatment which can cost anything from between £25,000 and £70,000.  The Social Enquiry Report, noting that this diagnosis was received 10 years ago and that since then the defendant has saved no money through either legal or illegal means, questions that his rationale for this offence was to obtain money towards an operation.  We have been informed by counsel today that this condition was diagnosed perhaps 8 years ago and not 10 years ago.  He has written a letter stating that this offence was committed out of desperation fearing the loss of his sight and inability to see his young son grow up. 

5.        The Crown consider that the contents of the Social Enquiry Report and the other material before the Court warrants a considerable discount for the defendant's personal mitigation and move for a sentence of 5½ years' imprisonment, a conclusion which Advocate Dale, his counsel, does not oppose.  We regard that discount for personal mitigation as being too high, having regard to everything put forward by Advocate Dale and the other material before the Court.

6.        Turning to the defendant McCarthy, he has no previous convictions and the benefit of a guilty plea which we do regard as being of value as he was not in the car when these drugs were found.  He had declined to engage with the Probation Officer, but has written what we regard as a very good letter of remorse.  The Crown move for a sentence of 6½ years' imprisonment for him and the Defence 5½ years.  In the light of the mitigation available to him and his letter we think that that sentence should be adjusted lower. 

7.        Turning finally to the defendant Chadwick, he had a cocaine addiction, which as the Social Enquiry Report states has ruined his life.  He has two previous convictions which are drug related and despite overcoming his addiction, he is assessed at a moderate risk of reconviction.  He has the benefit of an early guilty plea but as the driver of the car we do not regard that as justifying a full one third discount.  He agreed to act as the driver for the money, stating that his fee was to be £500.  He has written a good letter expressing remorse and he has produced a large number of references which speak highly of him, including one from his former wife and mother of his two children with her who stands by him.  The Crown moves for a sentence of 6 years' imprisonment and the Defence for 5 years' imprisonment.  Advocate Harrison, whilst accepting the starting point of 10 years, submitted that Chadwick should not receive a sentence higher than his co-accused.

8.        Mr Ben-Sghaier you are sentenced to 6½ years' imprisonment.  Mr McCarthy you are sentenced to 6 years' imprisonment.  Mr Chadwick you are sentenced to 6 years' imprisonment. 

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

Authorities

Rimmer v AG [2001] JLR 373. 

AG v Sheppard [2020] JRC 075

AG v Mkatapa [2020] JRC 037

AG v Ennis [2018] JRC 117