A man who admitted being involved in a drug smuggling plot to police but denied any knowledge of the drugs in court was found guilty by a unanimous verdict yesterday.

Alexta Gill, a 31-year-old Guyanese national, had denied that he imported cannabis and cocaine into Bermuda on March 4, 2023.

However, after about two hours of deliberation, the jury of ten women and two men found him guilty of both charges.

Gill remained silent as the verdict was read in the Supreme Court.

Puisne Judge Juan Wolffe remanded Gill into custody and ordered a social inquiry report on the defendant, who had been out on bail for the past two years.

The matter is scheduled to return to the court in September for a sentencing date to be set.

Over the course of his trial, the jury heard that Gill, who lived in Canada, arrived on the island with Jhordan George-Horsford on a WestJet flight from Toronto on March 2, 2023.

However, one of their suitcases missed the flight and only arrived in Bermuda on an Air Canada flight two days later.

A search of the suitcase revealed six “bricks” of plant material later confirmed to be 9,472.6 grams of cannabis, and a bottle of whiskey, which was found to contain liquid cocaine, from which 812.4g of the controlled drug was extracted.

Gill and Ms George-Horsford were both arrested outside of Four Ways Inn and, after being taken to Hamilton Police Station, Gill was found to have cannabis, a grinder, scissors and a tray in his possession.

He later took part in two police interviews. In the first, he said he knew nothing about the drugs whatsoever, but in a second interview he claimed he had agreed to bring a suitcase to the island for someone named “Andre” to clear an $8,000 debt after receiving death threats.

Gill told police that he was given an empty suitcase, which he put his clothing in, and that he believed someone at the Toronto Pearson International Airport was involved with the plot.

He said in the interview that Ms George-Horsford, who was never charged with any offences in connection with the incident, had nothing to do with the plot.

However, Gill told the court that the pair had come to Bermuda on vacation for her birthday and he had no idea how the drugs came to be in the suitcase.

He claimed that he made up the story about “Andre” in an effort to be released from custody after receiving advice from Bruce Swan, who was serving as duty counsel.

When challenged, however, he admitted that the story he gave police before his incriminating comments did not mesh with the version he told the courts. He accepted that he offered conflicting details about where he bought cannabis, how a suitcase was damaged and where he spent his first night on the island.

In closing statements, Khadija Beddeau, for the Crown, said that Gill’s story was “a heap of nonsense”.

She said: “He wasn’t here as a tourist and he in fact agreed to transport those drugs into Bermuda as a way to pay off his debts.

“Think about the unbelievable things he asked us to believe as if such were true.”

Ms Beddeau said that when Gill had made admissions in his police interview it was not because of Mr Swan but because he knew his lies were not working.

However, Nicole Smith, representing Gill, said that the investigation into the case was “deficient” and the prosecution’s case was built on speculation.

She asked the jury to consider the gap in time between her client’s arrival and the arrival of the suitcase.

“That black suitcase remained somewhere for two days while my client and his then girlfriend were in Bermuda,” she said.

“We don’t know who had access to that suitcase. So how can we connect my client with regards to this suitcase?”

The trial was Gill’s second for the offences. The original trial ended abruptly last July as a result of an outbreak of Covid-19 among jurors shortly before they were expected to begin deliberations.

During that trial, the court heard the drugs found in the suitcase had a street value of up to $676,736.

• 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