R v Blair

[2012] NSWDC 188

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Blair [2012] NSWDC 188
Hearing dates:	6 September 2012
Decision date:	06 September 2012
Before:	Berman SC DCJ
Decision:	Sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 5 years with a non-parole period of 3 years.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - Drug trafficking - Internal concealment
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	The Crown Kay Louise Blair
Representation:	Mr J Peluso - offender Director of Public Prosecutions J H Fisher & Sons - offender
File Number(s):	2012/70661

SENTENCE

1. HIS HONOUR: Kay Blair is a drug courier. She does not have the excuses offered by many other drug couriers who appear in this Court. She did not get involved in bringing drugs into Australia because of gambling debts. She cannot say she had a poor upbringing with bad role models. Instead she had every opportunity offered to her and so what made her make the decision to get herself involved in serious drug trafficking is something of a puzzle.

1. She was born in New Zealand and moved to South East Asia after she formed a relationship with a man. That relationship ended and she formed another relationship. From the moment she entered that relationship her partner began asking her to get herself involved in drug trafficking. She said that she resisted his offers and resisted his suggestion until, he was deported from Thailand to Nigeria, his country of birth. Then, she says, she finally gave in to pressure.

1. She met up with other friends of her partner who gave her some pellets. She concealed them by swallowing some, inserting some in her vagina and inserting some in her clothing. She could not conceal them all so she gave some back. She then travelled to Australia.

1. The attention of Customs officers was drawn to her. When they began questioning her their suspicions were clearly aroused. She told a strange story and had nothing to back up what she was saying about the purposes of her trip to Australia and other earlier trips she had undertaken. They conducted a frisk search which proved negative, but suspicions were so highly aroused that Customs officers said that they would detain her for an internal examination.

1. It was at that moment that Ms Blair stopped telling lies and began to tell the truth. She told Customs officers that she had concealed some packages. They were eventually recovered. They were found to contain heroin, pure weight of just over 200 grams. She has been in custody since that date.

1. Ms Blair was brought up on a dairy farm in New Zealand by parents who clearly love and support her. She has siblings. Neither of them have been involved in crime in any way. She left home to go to university and almost completed a degree. She has only one subject to complete before she will complete that degree.

1. There is nothing in her background to explain why she did what she did, apart perhaps from a suggestion made by a psychologist that Ms Blair is easily led. There are certainly some circumstances in Ms Blair's life which would suggest the accuracy of that assertion. She moved countries, and changed religion because of a relationship she had entered into and then decided to commit this most serious criminal offence because of pressure put on her by a person in a different relationship. Maybe that is what explains Ms Blair's decision to commit this serious crime.

1. She has no prior criminal convictions. Of course, most drug couriers are in the same boat. Those higher up the drug distribution and trafficking hierarchy often use people with no prior convictions as couriers because it makes it less likely that their importations will be discovered by the authorities. She is now in custody in Australia and will of course serve the remainder of her sentence of imprisonment here. She has no family in Australia. She has no friends in Australia. Her parents have visited her in custody and plan to do so in the future, but they will not be able to visit her as often as they would like and so Ms Blair will do her time in custody relatively isolated. On the other hand there are many worse off than she is. She does speak English, in contrast to many other drug traffickers who are sentenced in these Courts. On top of that of course there is this circumstance, Ms Blair knew full well what she was doing when she arrived in Australia and she can hardly be heard to complain too much if a consequence of her voluntary decision to do what she did means that she will spend some time apart from her family and friends.

1. Ms Blair is certainly a young woman who is capable of achieving something in her life. She has plans for the future and, as I mentioned earlier, retains the support of her family. She thus has good prospects of rehabilitation which is an important matter in assessing the sentence to impose upon her.

1. She gave evidence that it was not until she went into custody that the reality of the miseries of drug use became apparent to her. Her evidence was that, and I paraphrase, on an intellectual basis she knew that drugs were bad and they cause problems for people, but this was not brought home to her until she experienced it for herself first hand. I can understand that attitude. Getting close up to drug use is an eye opening experience. Nothing can really prepare anyone for close observation of the life of a drug addict. Whilst intellectually it is easy to say that drug use is bad, I can understand how Ms Blair would say that it was not until she went into gaol in Australia that she actually understood the consequences of her offending.

1. I want to mention one matter simply for the purposes of ensuring that people understand that I have not taken it into account. Ms Blair was a woman who travelled a lot. Her trips were often paid for by her partner, the man who got her involved in this offending. I have grave suspicions about the real purpose of Ms Blair's earlier travels, but I am not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that she has done this sort of thing before. I mention this circumstance only to ensure there is no suggestion that I have taken earlier offending by Ms Blair into account. I am not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that she has offended in any way before and so will treat her as having committed this offence for the first time.

1. I note that Ms Blair pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity. That is consistent with her decision to come clean with the Customs authorities as soon as she was told that they were going to conduct an internal examination. Her willingness to facilitate the course of justice displayed both then and by pleading guilty entitles her to a reduction in the sentence I would otherwise have imposed by twenty-five per cent.

1. The Crown helpfully provided me with a schedule of cases concerning internal concealment of drugs. The range of sentences imposed in other courts is quite a narrow one. Mr Peluso did not question the accuracy of the range or suggest that his client was outside that range. Accordingly the sentence that I impose is as follows.

1. Ms Blair is sentenced to imprisonment. I set a non-parole period of three years to date from 29 February 2012. The non-parole period will expire thus on 27 February 2015. I set a head sentence of five years.

**********

Decision last updated: 11 October 2012