Wilson v R
| Jurisdiction | Cayman Islands |
| Judge | Schofield, J. |
| Judgment Date | 02 June 1989 |
| Court | Grand Court (Cayman Islands) |
| Docket Number | No. 124 of 1988 |
| Date | 02 June 1989 |
Schofield, J.; Harre, J.
No. 124 of 1988
Grand Court
Criminal law - Appeal against conviction — Importation of cocaine — Possession of cocaine with intent to supply — Whether magistrate erred in finding that the appellant had not rebutted the presumption of possession of the cocaine — Appeal dismissed.
Mr. Hampson for appellant
Mr. Sibbles for Crown
Christopher Rolando Wilson (“the appellant”) was convicted in the Summary Court of offences of importation of cocaine and possession of cocaine with intent to supply. He now appeals against those convictions.
Barry Ramoon, a Customs Officer, was an duty at the Owen Roberts International Airport on the 14 th June, 1988. A flight arrived from Kingston, Jamaica and, acting on information, Mr. Ramoon called the appellant out of the line of passengers. He took him into a private room in the Customs office and there searched the sports bag which the appellant was carrying. At the top of the bag were three pairs of trousers and on feeling the waistband of one of those pairs of trousers Mr. Ramoon noticed something was wrong. He cut the waistband and found a clear plastic bag with a white substance inside resembling cocaine. He immediately cautioned the appellant and asked him what the substance was. The appellant said “Cocaine” and “I can't believe Phillip did this to me”. When asked how he knew it was cocaine the appellant replied, “I saw it on T.V.”.
The customs officer checked the other two pairs of trousers and, similarly, in the waistband he found nine additional plastic bags with a similar white substance inside. Indeed the white substance was sent off for analysis and proved to be 138.7 grams of 58% cocaine hydrochloride.
When the other bags were found the appellant kept saying in a hysterical manner “I can't believe Phillip did this to me.”
When cross-examined Mr. Ramoon acknowledged that the three pairs of trousers were smaller than the size of trousers worn by the appellant.
The appellant hails from Allman Town, Kingston, Jamaica. He testified that he is a student and was waiting to take an entrance examination to go into business college. He said that about a week and a half before he came to Cayman one Phillip Morrison came to see him and said he was coming to these Islands to investigate the setting up of a business here. He suggested that the appellant came to Cayman to get a summer job and he bought the appellant the air ticket.
About three days before he travelled Morrison came to his home and brought him the ticket. He said he was trying to borrow a travelling bag. The morning before he left Morrison, again came to his home with a blue plastic hag. From the bag he produced the three pairs of trousers in which the cocaine was found. The appellant put the trousers on top of his other clothes which he had already packed. He had no idea that anything was concealed inside them.
He had given Morrison $1,100 Jamaica dollars with which to buy two hundred U.S. dollars for him. They were supposed to be travelling together and the reason why Morrison gave him the trousers was that Morrison only had a small strap bag. Morrison did not arrive at the airport to travel with him and the appellant did not therefore carry with him the $200 U.S. dollars which Morrison was supposed to give him.
The appellant only had $70 U.S. with him and so he arranged for a lady at the airport to lend him $100 CI. He returned the $100 as soon as he cleared Immigration, the intention of borrowing it being to enable him to clear Immigration.
Last year he was involved in drugs education in Jamaica because he thinks involvement with drugs is wrong. He knew nothing about the drugs and had he done so he would have reported the matter to the police.
He said Morrison and he were supposed to stay at the same hotel in Cayman.
In his judgment the learned magistrate referred to the presumption set up by section 7(1) (b) of the Misuse of Drugs Law. The appellant acknowledges that he was in possession of the three pairs of trousers and that the trousers had bags of cocaine concealed in their waistbands. These facts raised a presumption that the appellant was in possession of the cocaine...
To continue reading
Request your trial