Damage limitation for client with drugs supply offences – St Albans Crown Court

11th October 2017 | Drug Offences News & Stories|
Nick Titchener headshot

Nick Titchener

Managing Partner


A humane outcome from a humane Judge reflecting circumstances

On the face of it, and having regard to the Sentencing Guidelines in relation to the Supply of Class A drugs, our client was at risk of receiving a custodial sentence in the region of 7-8 years having pleaded guilty to numerous offences of supplying class A drugs over a 3-4-month period, being in possession of knifes, with counterfeit currency and acquiring criminal property.

Our client had been the subject of a major Hertfordshire Police undercover operation, Protology, which had been implemented to combat drugs in the Borehamwood area. The Prosecution were treating him as playing a Leading role, in Category 3 of the Sentencing Guideline which placed him as major contributor to this criminal operation. It was alleged that our client was handling the ‘hot line’, sending ‘runners’  to make drug deliveries to the ‘customers’.

Our client readily accepted his guilt in connection with these matters.

As with so many cases, in understanding how there is often an important background and context to why things have happened or why someone may have become involved in committing such serious offences. We took the time to understand that. Having spent a long time getting all the background information together, we were able to distinguish our client from the sentencing guidelines.

The late Judge Plumstead who very sadly passed away in September of this year, took the time to listen to that background. Not to be fooled by a series of sob stories, and renowned for being tough but humane, he did take on board how are client’s behaviour and involvement in this drugs operation had been largely to how our client had spent much of his childhood being abused, in care homes, and being neglected. Most importantly, Judge Plumstead sitting at St Albans acknowledged how our client had taken positive and active steps to break this cycle whilst he had been in prison and how he had undertaken courses and made active steps in his own rehabilitation. These things made the difference, they were reflected in the Sentence that was passed when Judge Plumstead commented that he was impressed by the mitigation that we had put forward on our client’s behalf and due to this our client was only sentenced to 3 & half years custody.

Related Articles