Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - drugs - importation - Class A - perverting the course of justice

[2024]JRC226

Royal Court

(Samedi)

25 October 2024

Before     :

M. J. Thompson, Esq., Commissioner, and Jurats Cornish and Le Heuzé

The Attorney General

-v-

Christopher Charles Williams

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, 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:	Perverting the Course of Justice (Count 2).

Age:  38.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Christopher Williams was concerned in the importation of 5.46 grams of cocaine into Jersey in April 2023.  It is accepted that the cocaine was imported for personal use.  A package was posted from Edinburgh to the Defendant's home address using the name of the previous occupier of the address.  The sender of the package has been sentenced in relation to various drug trafficking matters including the April 2023 importation.  The financials of both the Defendant and the sender of the package were analysed and the Defendant had sent over £6,000 to the sender over a five-month period.

 

A search warrant was carried out at the Defendant's address and drugs paraphernalia was seized which had traces of cocaine on them.  The Defendant's mobile phone was seized.

 

The Defendant refused to provide his PIN numbers for his mobile when interviewed under caution in April 2023.  He denied knowledge of the package or knowing the sender of the package.

 

Two days after release from custody following the interview, the Defendant's phone had been remotely wiped.  The Defendant now accepts that he did this to hide correspondence between himself and the sender.  When interviewed about the wiping he stated that it was because there were personal photographs of his wife.

 

The Defendant's new phone was seized however this also had some content deleted but did show the Defendant looking up information about delivery times on the day the package should have been delivered, had a screenshot showing that he had transferred £10 to the sender of the package on 2 April 2023 and emails that showed his email address had been used to erase the contents of the phone

Details of Mitigation:

No relevant previous convictions and pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.  In the view of the Probation Service, he shows genuine remorse and there have been no behavioural issues since his arrival at HMP La Moye

Previous Convictions:

No relevant previous convictions.  Two from 2012 and 2020 for motoring offences.

Conclusions:

Count 1:	15 month's imprisonment.
Count 2:	9 month's imprisonment, consecutive.

Total:  2 years' imprisonment. 

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and the mobile telephone sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:	12 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	9 months' imprisonment, consecutive.

Total:  21 months' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and mobile telephone ordered.

Confiscation is postponed until 29 November 2024.

Ms L. Taylor, Crown Advocate.

Advocate M. L. Preston for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE COMMISSIONER:

1.        Mr Williams you are here to be sentenced.  The first count concerns you being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of goods, in this case cocaine.  The second count concerns you perverting the course of justice by deliberately wiping the content of a mobile telephone that was in the possession of the States of Jersey Police.

2.        Before we sentence you, in accordance with Article 6 of Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 1999 we postpone the question of a confiscation order until 29 November 2024.

3.        On 6 April 2023 a customs and immigration officer intercepted a parcel address to an individual at the address where you had resided since December 2021, sent from Edinburgh.  The package was examined and found to contain chocolate and cocaine.  The drugs were concealed within the chocolate.  On 12 April 2023 a search was carried out at your residence where you were arrested and cautioned.  While no drugs were seized, drug paraphernalia was seized including rolled up notes and small ripped plastic wraps with traces of while powder.  The notes and wraps were found to have traces of cocaine on them.  Your mobile phone was also seized.

4.        The resulting police investigation led to your bank account being analysed and showed that you were sending various transfers in multiples of £160 which the drug expert opined was the amount that a Mr Sean Heatlie had been selling grams of cocaine for.  Mr Heatlie was sentenced by this Court in November 2023 to 10 years and 4 months' imprisonment, in relation to multiple drug trafficking matters including the importation of cocaine.  The total amount paid by you to Mr Heatlie between September 2022 and January 2023 was £6,010.

5.        You were interviewed under caution on 12 April 2023 and denied using any drugs but did admit using drugs while in the UK.  You denied any knowledge of a package that had been seized on 6 April 2023.  You also refused to provide the PIN number for your mobile.  You were then released from custody however the police retained your mobile phone.  Within two days of your release your mobile phone was remotely wiped, the screen of the iPhone stated it was "locked to owner". 

6.        Mr Heatlie returned to Jersey in May 2023 and was arrested.  Examination of his mobile phone showed phone calls between you and him between November 2022 and January 2023.  There were then further phone calls on 31 March 2023, 5 April 2023 and 11 April 2023.  5 April was the date the package was sent from Edinburgh to your address in Jersey. 

7.        On 7 July 2023 you were arrested and two days later were interviewed under caution.  You answered no comment to all questions but did state that you had wiped the phone because it contained naked photographs of your wife.  Your new mobile phone was seized.  You also provided your PIN number to this new phone.  This phone also had some content deleted.  You were further interviewed on 2 October 2023 and again answered no comment to all questions on legal advice as your counsel has informed us. 

8.        The drugs in the package sent to your address contained a total of 5.646 grams of cocaine which the drugs expert opined represented seven 1 gram deals with a street value of between £840 and £1,570. 

9.        You appeared in the Magistrate's Court on 8 August 2024 and pleaded guilty to both charges.  You were remanded in custody from that date.  To date you have spent 79 days on remand which is the equivalent of 3 months and 26 days assuming a remission of one third.

10.     The Court's approach to sentencing drug trafficking offences is well established.  The case of Rimmer v AG [2001] JLR 373 requires the Court to reach a starting point before applying personal mitigation.  That starting point measures the seriousness of the offence by having regard to the quantity of drugs imported and the Defendant's role in the importation.  In particular we are required to assess your role and your overall responsibility for the offence.  In this case your involvement was obtaining drugs from Mr Heatlie.  This conduct led to an increase in the volume of dangerous drugs circulating in the island; this is not withstanding that we accept that the importation, as is accepted by the Crown, was for your personal use only which we have taken into account.  We have also taken into account your guilty plea and you have no previous relevant convictions.  We have also had regard to everything contained in the Social Enquiry Report as well as everything your counsel has referred to us in detail.  We accept that you have shown genuine remorse and there has been no behavioural issues since you have been in custody.

11.     In relation to perverting the course of justice, any offence of this kind is a serious offence as the court noted in AG v Dias [2017] JRC 114.  It would be unusual for a Court to look at not imposing a custodial sentence for a such offences.  The punishment for such offences also runs consecutive to any other sentence because it is separate misconduct.  We endorse this approach.

12.     In this case the Crown has moved for a sentence of 15 months' imprisonment on Count 1 and 9 months' imprisonment on Count 2, consecutive to Count 1, making a total of 2 years' imprisonment.  In respect of this period of time credit will be given for you for the time you have already spent in custody. 

13.     In light of your guilty plea and other mitigation we agree that the Crown was right to reduce its conclusions significantly from a starting point of 7 years' imprisonment which we agree with.  We have therefore concluded that in this case a custodial sentence must be imposed for Count 1, however we are prepared to reduce the recommendation of 15 months to a total of 12 months.  We also agree with the Crown that a sentence of imprisonment is justified for Count 2.  You deliberately frustrated a police investigation by wiping your phone remotely.  While at the lower end of the scale for this offence such conduct is still serious because it potentially hinders the police in their own efforts to catch those involved in the importation of supply of drugs within the island.  The Crown's conclusions are therefore justified.

14.     Accordingly Mr Williams you are sentenced on Count 1 to 12 months' imprisonment, and on Count 2 to 9 months' imprisonment, to make a total of 21 months' imprisonment.  Credit will be given for the time you have already served as we have said.

15.     We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and the original mobile phone seized which you wiped. 

Authorities

Rimmer v AG [2001] JLR 373. 

AG v Dias [2017] JRC 114. 

AG v Bowman [2024] JRC181

AG v Grzegorska [2024] JRC151

AG v Nicolle [2020] JRC201

AG v Le Guillou [2024] JCA204

Shahnowaz v AG [2007] JLR221