Concurrent jail term

Press, 7 May 1983, Page 6

Concurrent jail term

A prison inmate described as “a middle man who had acted as a major link in a substantial drug organisation” was given a concurrent jail term by Mr Justice Cook in the High Court yesterday. Colin Austin Smith, aged 29, a former retailer, who is at present serving a fiveyear term on nine drug offences involving LSD and cannabis, was appearing for sentence on a charge of being a party to the supply of LSD to an undercover constable at Nelson. He was jailed for two years and a half, the term to be served at the same time as his five year sentence. Smith, who was represented by Mr A. C. HughesJohnson, had pleaded not guilty to the charge but a

jury found him guilty. Mr N. W. Williamson appeared for the Crown. Evidence was given at Smith’s trial on April 28 that he had told an undercover constable that he knew a person who had 1500 trips of LSD for sale at $8.50 each. He gave the constable two sample tabs and told him to go to the Marine Hotel at Sumner that evening. At the hotel Smith introduced the undercover constable to Danny Bartlett with the words: “Dan, here’s the man with the cash, and, Steve, here’s the man with the goods.” Next day the undercover constable went to Nelson with Bartlett where he was sold 300 tabs of LSD. for $2400.

Mr Hughes-Johnson said that Smith was only charged as a party to the offence and it was really a washing-up charge. He had pleaded guilty to a number of drug charges and counsel submitted that Smith should be given a concurrent term. When Smith was jailed his partner took over their retail business which involved a loss of 55000 to Smith. He was now rehabilitated as far as drug taking was concerned. Smith was engaged and an extension of his present term would not assist in his rehabilitation. He had said that he did not need any more jail and had learnt his lesson, Mr Hughes-Johnson said. Mr Justice Cook said that Bartlett had been sentenced

to four years jail for his part in the transaction but he knew nothing of his record. When Smith was sentenced on drug charges in December the High Court Judge had said while accepting that Smith was a middle man, the ease with which he obtained drugs in substantial quantities indicated that he was a major link in a substantial drug organisation. His Honour said he could see no reason to differ from that assessment. Counsel had emphasised that Smith had been cured of drug taking and hoped to lead a very different life when released from prison. He accepted that a concurrent term was appropriate, said his Honour.