Jersey Unreported Judgments

Superior Number Sentencing - Drugs - importation and possession - Class A and Class B

[2021]JRC270

Royal Court

(Samedi)

1 November 2021

Before     :

R. J. MacRae, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Ramsden, Christensen and Austin-Vautier

The Attorney General

-v-

Barry John Picot

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 6^th August, 2021, following a guilty plea to the following charges:

1 count of:	Being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of goods, 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 2).

Age:  36. 

Plea: Guilty. 

Details of Offence:

On 4^th February 2021, a Customs and Immigration Officer examined a special delivery postal packet addressed to the Defendant's home address.  The package contained a packet of highlighter pens and two colouring books.  Within the highlighter pens were several plastic wraps containing brown powder, these were tested and gave a positive reaction to the presence of heroin (Count 1).

On 5^th February 2021, a Customs Officer assembled a substitute package containing a covert audio device and an ultraviolet marker powder. The package was handed to a Jersey Post postman for delivery during his usual round.

At 12pm that afternoon, the Defendant approached the postman whilst he was on his round in Newgate Street and asked if he had any mail addressed to him.  The postman informed the Defendant he would deliver any mail addressed to the Defendant when he reached his address. The postman attended the Defendant's address at approximately 1pm and handed the substitute package to the Defendant who present with his partner.

Customs Officers attended the premises approximately 20 minutes later and the Defendant and his partner were arrested.

On searching the property, officers found scales and a small quantities of suspected cannabis (Count 2).

The Defendant was interviewed and said that he was expecting a package containing controlled drugs but did not know the type of drug or quantity.

The covert audio device obtained two recordings, the first being the conversation the Defendant had with the postman on Newgate Street, and the second being a conversation between the Defendant and his partner within the flat which indicated that they both knew the package contained heroin.

The marker pens were decanted and found to contain a total of 16 wraps.  These held a combined weight of 38.94 grams of heroin, with an average purity of 33%.

The quantities of cannabis were analysed.  They comprised of four cling film wraps, three containing a combined weight of 742 milligrams of cannabis resin, and the fourth containing 105 milligrams of herbal cannabis.

An expert report was completed and provided a valuation of the drugs.  He opined the heroin had a value of £19,500 to £39,000 if sold at location street value.  He further opined the cannabis resin was valued at between £20-£35 and the herbal cannabis at £5.

The prosecution against the Defendant's partner was discontinued as it was not in the public interest.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty pleas, importation was relatively unsophisticated.

Previous Convictions:

The Defendant has 33 convictions for 223 offences comprising of only one drugs offence for possession of cannabis in February 2006.

Conclusions:

Count 1:	Starting point 9 years' imprisonment.  4 years and 9 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	4 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent to Count 1.

Total:  4 years and 9 months' imprisonment.

Declaration of benefit sought in the sum of £19,525.

Confiscation order sought in the nominal sum of £1.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:	Starting point 9 years' imprisonment.  4 years imprisonment.
Count 2:	4 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent to Count 1.

Total:  4 years imprisonment.

Declaration of benefit ordered in the sum of £19,525.

Confiscation order ordered in the nominal sum of £1.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered.

M. R. Maletroit Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate S. E. A. Dale for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Barry John Picot you are 36 years old with an extensive and unenviable criminal record, and you fall to be sentenced today for a postal importation of a commercial quantity of heroin with a street value of up to £39,000, together with possession of a small quantity of cannabis.

2.        On the 4^th February 2021, Customs Officers intercepted a postal packet addressed to you at your home in Seaton Place.  The package purported to contain two colouring books and some highlighter pens.  In fact, the highlighter pens contained concealed plastic wraps which in turn contained carefully packaged 2 gram portions of brown powder.  The packages total 16 in number, totalling 38.9 grams of heroin with average purity of 33%.  The representative street value is between £500 and £1,000 per gram giving a valuation of between £19,500 and £39,000.

3.        Having removed the drugs, Customs Officers created a substitute package using the original packet and a covert audio device.  This was given to a postman and you approached the postman on his round, and you were handed that package for which you had been waiting.  Shortly thereafter you were arrested at your home address and the police found a small quantity of cannabis resin (Count 2), measuring 742 milligrams the street value of between £20 and £30, together with some digital weighing scales.

4.        You were interviewed by the police and after some prevarication you admitted that you were expecting a package containing controlled drugs but did not know, you said, the type or quantity.  You accepted the offending was your fault and not the fault of your partner with whom you lived, and you accepted the cannabis was yours.  In fact, the covert audio device produced recordings indicating that you knew from conversations you had with your partner that you were expecting to receive heroin in the post.

5.        You did not enter a guilty plea on your very first appearance in this Court, but you did 1 week later on 16^th July 2021, and the Crown state and we agree that you should be given full credit for that guilty plea.  Although you have a substantial number of previous convictions, they are not, save for one minor matter, for drug offences.  Furthermore, you have not been in trouble for 5 years, which for you is an achievement.

6.        Pursuant to the guidelines in Rimmer v AG [2001] JLR 373 the starting point for importing into Jersey between 10 and 50 grams of heroin is between 8 and 10 years' imprisonment.  In the circumstances of the facts of this case we agree with the Crown's assessment of a starting point of 9 years' imprisonment.  You were a warehouseman, you were fulfilling a crucial role in the chain of supply of control drugs, and you were entrusted with these valuable drugs by a third party.

7.        Now we have read with care the Probation Report in your case and listened to what all your counsel has said on your behalf.  You engaged with Probation well following your last conviction and you were voluntarily engaging with the Alcohol and Drug Service prior to these offences, and we have been particularly assisted by certain paragraphs from the Social Enquiry Report and because of the fact that they provide you with significant additional mitigation, we are going to refer to some of those specific paragraphs in our sentencing remarks.

8.        Paragraph 14 of the Report refers to you 'self-referring yourself' to the Alcohol and Drug Service in April 2018, volunteering that you were misusing illicit opiates and commencing treatment.  You were also referred to the ADHD clinic for assistance with that challenge that you also face.  From one of the drugs that you were given to manage your misuse of opiates you suffered severe side effects.  You found things during this period very difficult, but you managed to regulate your behaviour and during one-to-one sessions, you disclosed details about your living circumstances which throughout have been difficult, with limited clothing, living on your overdraft and experiencing the difficulties referred to by your counsel, which have made it very hard for you to work.

9.        Professionals working with you expressed concern that you and your partner were being 'cuckooed', by which they mean taken over in order to establish a base for illegal drug dealing.  This was due to your being perceived to be vulnerable owing to your intellectual and development disabilities.  Your partner has been assessed by the Learning Disability Service and a report in relation to you in February 2016 indicates that you suffer from border line intellectual functioning.  You are described in the Probation report as being "exceptionally malleable".

10.      As to this period of partly voluntary supervision by the Probation Service and the Drug and Alcohol Service, the author goes on to observe that you are understandably proud, as this is the longest period of probation supervision you have managed without breach for non-compliance or reoffending.  Given the range of risk factors identified when you were sentenced 5 years ago, it could be considered that you have exceeded expectations and indeed, following the ending of your probation order as I have said, you continued voluntary contact with the Probation Service as well as voluntary contact with the Alcohol and Drug Service.

11.      We have read and taken into account not merely that report, but also the letters from your partner and her mother and all the other mitigation available to you today.  We are impressed that you have undergone a detoxification programme in custody and that is to your credit.  You do remain though, Mr Picot, at high risk of reconviction and we hope that you sustain the efforts you have begun in custody.  You must understand that heroin is a most pernicious drug which destroys and takes lives and anyone involving themselves in importing or dealing it should always expect a custodial sentence. 

12.      Having regard to all the circumstances, the sentences we impose today are on Count 1, 4 years' imprisonment and Count 2, 4 weeks' imprisonment concurrent, making a total of 4 years imprisonment.

13.      We have already made the orders already in relating to forfeiture, destruction, and confiscation.

Authorities

Rimmer v AG [2001] JLR 373.