The Court: Werribee Magistrates Court
The Lawyer: Dylan Morris
The Charges:
- Trafficking a Drug of Dependence
- Possess a Drug of Dependence
- Deal with Property Suspected of Being Proceeds of Crime
The Allegations:
Police attended the client’s property without a warrant and asked our client questions about trafficking cannabis. The police said that an anonymous source had indicated that the client had been trafficking. When asked by police if he had cannabis inside his property, the client told the police he did and then went and retrieved it. The client was arrested, read his rights, and taken to a nearby police station.
Retrieved from the house were 20 grams of cannabis (which the legislation considers a small quantity). Police did not locate any scales or spare bags in the client’s home. There were no incriminating text messages, and no surveillance was alleged. Ultimately, there was no indication of drug trafficking.
The client was interviewed and indicated on his recorded interview that he had been trafficking for five to ten years, essentially making admissions to the offences. Had the client contacted our office before participating in the interview, we would have strongly advised that he provide a no comment interview. By giving full and frank admissions to the police, the client effectively made the police’s case for them.
At Court:
Without the client’s admissions, the police would not have had a case of trafficking unless they had been able to obtain a statement from their anonymous source. As criminal lawyers, we know this rarely happens.
The admissibility of the record of interview was questionable, as the arrest resulted from what might be considered improperly obtained evidence. When attending the address, the police did not have a warrant. Rather than cautioning the client they instead applied some pressure to the client to make admissions at the scene.
The problem for the client was that the police had reasonable suspicion that he had committed a crime based on the information they had received. Before conducting the interview, the police cautioned the client, but he declined to talk to a lawyer and made full admissions.
The matter would ultimately come down to fairness. After considering all these factors, the client instructed us to plead guilty to the charges. The matter was case conferenced, and the above issues were raised with a prosecutor. The prosecutor was prepared to withdraw the Proceeds of Crime and Possession charges, and to amend the summary to read that the client had only been trafficking for two months. This was a significant reduction from five to ten years.
The Outcome:
Following submissions to the Magistrate regarding the client’s impressive cooperation and admissions, against the backdrop of what would have otherwise been a weak police case, the client was dealt with leniently by way of a $2500 fine.
This was a unique outcome of drug trafficking and should not be expected as a rule. Defendants rarely get away with a fine for trafficking a drug of dependence.
