Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2010]JRC178

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

29^th September 2010

Before     :

W. J. Bailhache, Q.C., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats De Veulle, Tibbo, Le Breton, Nicolle and Bullen.

The Attorney General

-v-

Stephen Richard Turucz

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 23^rd July, 2010, following a guilty plea to the following charge:

1 count of:

Being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the importation of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 61(2)(b) of the Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law 1999.  (Count 1).

Age:  47.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Turucz was stopped as he arrived at the airport on a flight from London.  An ionscan revealed the presence of drugs on a car key in his belongings and a subsequent x-ray revealed suspicious packages concealed internally. Turucz subsequently admitted he was carrying drugs internally and expelled 8 packages containing a total of 55.32 grams of heroin, with a purity of 39% and a street value in Jersey of £55,320. 

In interview he explained that he had been forced to undertake the importation on behalf of a man to whom he owed money.  He explained that the debt was in relation to money he owed for damage caused to a vehicle that he was supposed to have sold for the man in question.  He claimed that both he and his family had been threatened with physical violence and expressed great remorse given the predicament that his two children had been left in following his incarceration. 

Turucz also volunteered the location of a further 4 similar packages of heroin in a vehicle in the UK.  These in turn were recovered by the UK authorities. 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea; co-operation, he and his family subjected to threats, 2 children for whom he was the principle carer now in care, good letters of reference and remorse. 

Previous Convictions:

13 previous convictions for 43 offences; his last conviction was in 1999 and he had no previous convictions for drugs offences. 

Conclusions:

Count 1:

Starting point 9 years'.  5 years' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.  

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The Crown's starting point of 9 years was adopted, but the Court felt that having regard to all of the particular circumstances of this case, a further deduction could be made, and ordered a sentence of 4 years' imprisonment. 

Count 1:

4 years' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.

C. M. M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate C. R. Baglin for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You stand to be sentenced on one count of being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion on the prohibition of a controlled drug, namely heroin.  The importation of heroin into this Island is a very serious offence, anyone who has seen the misery which follows from addiction to this drug knows that.  Anyone who has been close to the drugs scene and many who have not are also aware of the very large profits which evil men obtain from this trade. 

2.        The Court has an established policy in dealing with offences of this kind, which is that, barring exceptional circumstances, a custodial sentence should be imposed.  The Court does not consider there are any exceptional circumstances here and indeed considers a custodial sentence is right in principle and applying the Rimmer guidelines we therefore take a starting point of 9 years' imprisonment.  The Court has noted that you have a poor record but has been very impressed by the efforts you have made to turn your life around since 1998.  That makes this lapse particularly sad.  We do not have to point out to you the damage which the offending has done to your family because you know that already.  The Court accepts that threats have been made against you and your family and that those are real, and has also noted that this cannot be very significant mitigation for all the reasons which are set out in previous authorities, but we have taken these into account as generously as we can in the circumstances of this case. 

3.        Taking into account your guilty plea and the remorse, the fact that you have been put under pressure with threats, the assistance in relation to the disclosure of drugs in the car at Gatwick, which is an important piece of mitigation, and taking into account, as I say, the improvement in your record and the credit for your efforts to change direction, and taking into account all the other material which is available by way of mitigation the Court sentences you to 4 years' imprisonment on this count. 

4.        We order the drugs be forfeited and destroyed. 

Authorities

Rimmer v AG [2001] JLR 373.

Whelan on Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Court of Jersey.

AG-v-McMahon 2000/74.