Jail time increased for cocaine smuggler

A Jamaican man convicted of smuggling cocaine to Bermuda has had his sentenced increased by the Court of Appeal.

Dwayne Watson was originally sentenced to six years behind bars, but he will now serve nine years after prosecutors argued the sentence was “manifestly inadequate”.

Watson, who was arrested at LF Wade International Airport with $200,000 of cocaine, claimed he believed he was importing cannabis.

Appeal Judge Anthony Smellie said his claim was not enough to earn him a reduced sentence.

He said: “A mere assertion by a defendant that he believed the drug to be different from that actually imported must be approached with great circumspection.

“In response to an indictment for importation of an illegal drug, it can hardly be sufficient for him merely to point to the condition of the container itself as reason for his failure to ascertain the true nature of the drugs.

“There should ordinarily be something more — some objective point of reference — against which his professed belief might be assessed for credibility.”

Watson had flown to Bermuda from Jamaica via New York when he was stopped for a random search on September 1 last year.

Customs officers noticed he shook while he answered questions and that the suitcase had been zip-tied shut.

An x-ray of the case showed “irregularities” in the handle.

Customs officers drilled into the handle and found white powder inside.

A further search revealed 11 packages of cocaine and cocaine freebase, also known as crack, in the case’s base, handle and corners.

More than a kilogram of cocaine was found, which prosecutors said had an estimated street value of up to $200,634.

He told police he agreed to smuggle cannabis to Bermuda because he had struggled to find work in Jamaica and was shocked to find the packages contained cocaine.

Acting Puisne Judge Juan Wolffe sentenced Watson to six years in prison on the basis that he believed the drugs to be cannabis.

But the Crown launched an appeal on the grounds that the sentence was inadequate.

Elizabeth Christopher, for Watson, argued his youth, his early plea and lack of previous convictions — combined with his mistaken belief about the drug — meant the sentence was appropriate.

The Court of Appeal found that the judge had set the basic sentence “far too low”, which resulted in a low final sentence.

Mr Justice Smellie said: “While there is some cogency to Ms Christopher’s submissions, they do not justify or explain the disparity of sentencing in this case.

“This sentence, when assessed against the established principles and precedents of sentencing must be regarded as manifestly inadequate.”

It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers.

  • Take Our Poll

    Today's Obituaries

    eMoo Posts