AG v Williams [2024] JRC 226 (25 October 2024)

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 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 Page Last Updated: 01 Nov 2024 Back to top About JLIB Accessibility Contacts Copyright Disclaimer Feedback Privacy policy Site map BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII