An international drugs mule was yesterday found guilty of importing 66 pellets full of 150 grammes of cannabis and 361 grammes of cocaine with a street value of $125,750.

Jamie Edward Cox, 27, of Altenkessel, Germany, denied four charges of importation and possession of cannabis and cocaine with intent to supply on July 20, 2003.

The eight-woman, four-man Supreme Court jury delivered their majority verdict in less than two hours. There were nine for and three against conviction.

However, Cox was found not guilty of possessing the drugs with intent to supply by a 10-2 majority.

He was remanded until Tuesday when he will be given a date for sentencing.

Before the jury retired to decide, Puisne Judge Charles-Etta Simmons explained that they needed to be certain of many legal points before convicting Cox.

She said that in order to find Cox guilty of the two charges of possession with intent to supply, they had to be satisfied that he intended to bring the drugs here.

But if they thought there was a possibility that Cox was forced to bring the drugs here under duress, or was acting according to threats made against himself or another person?s life, then the jury should find Cox not guilty of importation with intent to supply.

Cox gave evidence this week that he was forced to bring the drugs here after running out of money in Jamaica and asked someone to lend him money to buy a new ticket to England.

But the new ticket came at a heavy price, according to Cox. He said he was beaten up, pistol-whipped on the back of a head, kidnapped, had two drops of acid splattered on his face and threatened with the death of his daughter and himself if he did not take the pellets to Bermuda.

But Mrs. Justice Simmons said: ?A person may not be criminally responsible when he acts to save himself from immediate death from someone in his presence. If you believe that he was threatened, you should find him not guilty. If you believe that he was not threatened, then you should find him guilty.?

In order to find Cox guilty of possession with intent to supply, they had to be totally convinced of several legal points.

In the end, the majority of the jury was not convinced that Cox knew he was carrying drugs nor intended to give the drugs to another person in Bermuda.

However, Crown counsel Graveney Bannister said Cox?s story was ?carefully fabricated, full of holes and nothing but lies?.

In her closing statement Victoria Pearman touched on the length of her client?s testimony during the trial that took over two weeks to finish.

?When you are telling the truth they can talk to you for two weeks (and not get the answers they are looking for),? Ms Pearman said. ?But the evidence of this defendant was that he was struggling to tell you every detail. The defendant was consistent... You can?t speculate! He is entitled to be given the benefit of the doubt.?

Ms Pearman also won a legal battle for her client during legal arguments on Monday when Mrs. Justice Simmons ruled that several Police records should not be used in evidence.

She ruled on Monday that the Police had been ?unnecessarily heavy handed? when they took Cox from the Airport and as a result two of the Police?s interview records involving Cox were to be made ?inadmissible?. She said that Cox had a ?civil grounds for the breach of his rights? as Police had not yet arrested him when they tried to take him to the hospital for an X-ray.

She said that Police acted irresponsibly when they told Cox to ?check in the telephone directory for a lawyer? but never gave Cox a phone book to look for one.

?No effort was made to facilitate his right (to a lawyer),? Mrs. Justice Simmons said on Monday.

She said that Cox?s right to a lawyer was treated like a ?promise, or a hope, dangled out in front of the accused like a carrot, but always with an unspoken condition attached, ?tell me what you want to hear,?? she said.

But as far as Ms Pearman?s claim that her client was not fed while in hospital, Mrs. Justice Simmons said on Monday that ?Police could not override the orders of the doctors?.

She also rejected that Cox was kept ?incommunicado? as he was ?allowed to make a call to Jamaica?.