R v Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses - Sentence Judgment

¶ 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 1 of 17 IN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS 1 CRIMINAL DIVISION 2 3 INDICTMENT NO: 94 OF 2022 4 CHARGE 01580/22 and 01581/22 5 6 7 REX 8 9 V. 10 11 VIDOL ANFERNIE LA FLEUR 12 ONICA VIOLETTA BARCLAY 13 SHERON ANN MOSES 14 15 16 Appearances: Mr. Orrett Brown Crown Counsel for the Prosecution 17 Mr. Keith Myers for the Defendant Vidol La Fleur 18 Mr. Crister Brady for the Defendant Onica Barclay 19 Mr. John Furniss for the Defendant Sheron Moses 20 21 Before: The Hon. Justice Cheryll Richards KC 22 Submissions Heard: 17th March 2023 23 24 Sentence Judgment: 5th April 2023 25 26 HEADNOTE 27 Criminal Law-Section 3 of the Misuse of Drugs Act (2017 Revision), 28 Sentencing, Importation of a Controlled Drug, Cocaine 29 30 31 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 2 of 17 SENTENCE JUDGMENT 1 2

¶ [1] The three defendants are before the Court for sentencing following their guilty pleas to offences 3 of Importation of Cocaine contrary to s.3 (1) (a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act (2017 Revision). 4 5

¶ [2] The particulars of the charge against Vidol Anfernie La Fleur are that he on the 5th day of October 6 2022 within the jurisdiction of the Cayman Islands, without lawful excuse or without being 7 authorised in that behalf imported a controlled drug namely cocaine, 1,225.98 grams or 44.3 8 ounces. 9 10

¶ [3] The particulars of the charge against Onica Violetta Barclay are that she on the 5th day of October 11 2022, within the jurisdiction of the Cayman Islands, without lawful excuse or without being 12 authorised in that behalf imported a controlled drug namely cocaine, 1,164.55 grams or 41.07 13 ounces. 14 15

¶ [4] The particulars of the charge against Sheron Ann Moses are that she on the 5th day of October 16 2022, within the jurisdiction of the Cayman Islands, without lawful excuse or without being 17 authorised in that behalf imported a controlled drug namely cocaine, 693.68 grams or 24.47 18 ounces. 19 20

¶ [5] All three defendants first appeared in the Summary Court on the 10th October 2022. After three 21 adjournments to allow for legal aid arrangements to be settled, on the 15th November 2022, Ms. 22 Barclay and Ms. Moses elected trial in the Summary Court. They were arraigned and entered 23 pleas of guilty. The defendant La Fleur elected trial in the Grand Court. A short form preliminary 24 inquiry was conducted. 25 26

¶ [6] Mr. La Fleur first appeared in the Grand Court on the 25th November 2022. There was one 27 adjournment to allow for the filing of the Indictment. On the next appearance on the 9th December 28 2022, the defendant was arraigned and pleaded guilty. A Social Inquiry Report (“SIR”) was 29 ordered. 30 31

¶ [7] On the 18th January 2023, the two female defendants confirmed to the Summary Court that they 32 were maintaining their guilty pleas. This was notwithstanding what appeared to be some 33 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 3 of 17 equivocation which was recorded in the SIRs received in respect of them. Their cases were 1 transmitted by the Summary Court to the Grand Court for sentencing. 2 3

¶ [8] A SIR was provided by the Department of Community Rehabilitation (“DCR”) on the 8th 4 February 2023 in respect of Mr. La Fleur. It indicates that he denied knowing about the presence 5 of cocaine in the suitcase that he was carrying. On the 17th February 2023, sentencing was 6 adjourned for his Counsel to have a conference with him and to advise as to his position. On the 7 17th March 2023, Counsel advised that the plea of guilty of the defendant is to be maintained and 8 that no application is sought for the plea to be vacated. Sentence submissions were heard on that 9 date. 10 11

¶ [9] The maximum sentence for the offence of Importation of Cocaine is prescribed by s.16 (5) the 12 Misuse of Drugs Act and Part B of Schedule 2 to the Act. Section 16 (5) states:- 13 14 “(5) Notwithstanding subsection (1), a person who commits an offence that — (a) is 15 contrary to any provision of this Law; (b) is specified in Part B of Schedule 2; and (c) is in 16 relation to a controlled drug that is a hard drug, is, on summary conviction, liable to 17 imprisonment and a fine in accordance with Part B of Schedule 2.” 18 19

¶ [10] Part B of Schedule 2 provides in respect of importation of more than two ounces of a hard drug, 20 a maximum penalty for a first offence in the Summary Court of 20 years imprisonment in addition 21 to an unlimited fine. The maximum penalty in the Grand Court is a term of imprisonment of 35 22 years in addition to an unlimited fine. 23 24 THE FACTS 25 26

¶ [11] The prosecution has provided a summary of the facts which is not disputed. On the 5th October 27 2022, the three defendants arrived in the Cayman Islands from Kingston, Jamaica on board 28 Cayman Airways flight 603. They were travelling separately and acted as if they were strangers 29 to each other. However, the route by which they had all traveled from Suriname, their home 30 country, raised the suspicions of Customs and Border Control officers. This is known to be a 31 route used by drug traffickers. They had each travelled through Guyana, Trinidad and Barbados 32 before going to Jamaica. They each gave the address of the same local hotel and were scheduled 33 to depart on the same day the 18th October 2022. 34 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 4 of 17

¶ [12] Ms. Moses, who had left the airport in a taxi before suspicions were raised, was called back to 1 the airport. All three were detained and their luggage searched. Ms. Moses’s luggage had three 2 pairs of sneakers with false soles. The soles felt stiff to the touch. When pierced, there was 3 cocaine inside the soles. Additionally, Ms. Moses expelled a package from her anus which also 4 contained cocaine. Ms. Moses said that this was for her personal use. Ms. Barclay’s luggage 5 contained five pairs of sneakers which also had false soles with cocaine. Mr. La Fleur’s luggage 6 contained five pairs of sneakers with false soles which contained cocaine. 7 8

¶ [13] Each defendant was interviewed under caution in the presence of duty Counsel. In interview, Ms. 9 Moses admitted that Ms. Barclay is her daughter, and that Mr. La Fleur is the gentleman friend 10 of Ms. Barclay. She said that Ms. Barclay had been given the sneakers by a family friend by the 11 name of George in Georgetown, Guyana. She said that Ms. Barclay’s suitcase had been 12 overweight, and that Ms. Barclay had placed the three pairs of sneakers into her luggage at the 13 airport. Ms. Moses denied knowing that the sneakers contained cocaine but admitted that the 14 package which she had carried in her body was cocaine for her personal use. 15 16

¶ [14] Mr. La Fleur in his interview stated that Ms. Barclay is his girlfriend. He said that he had left his 17 suitcase with Ms. Moses and returned to find it heavier than before and locked. He said that he 18 was given instructions and plane tickets by Ms. Moses. The instructions included that he was to 19 say that he did not know the women and was travelling alone. He denied knowing that the suitcase 20 contained cocaine. 21 22

¶ [15] In her interview, Ms. Barclay explained that she had opened a bar, two or three months before 23 October 2022. She needed money to finish the bar. She sought the assistance of a family friend 24 named George. He offered her six thousand dollars in exchange for carrying ten pairs of sneakers 25 to the Cayman Islands. She was to receive further instructions on arrival in the Cayman Islands. 26 She said that she had placed the sneakers in Mr. La Fleur’s suitcase. 27 28

¶ [16] For the purpose of this sentence hearing certificates from the Analyst were received as Exhibit 29 11, photographs of the sneakers and drugs as Exhibit 22 and the antecedent records of the 30 defendants as Exhibit 3. 31 32 1 Pages 90 -103 of Hearing Bundle 2 Photographs at pages 106 to 123 of Hearing Bundle 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 5 of 17 ANTECEDENT HISTORY 1 2

¶ [17] The defendants have no previous convictions in the Cayman Islands and all self-report that they 3 have no previous convictions in any other part of the world. 4 5 SOCIAL INQUIRY REPORTS 6 7

¶ [18] The DCR has provided a SIR in respect of the defendant. La Fleur dated 6th February 2023. 8 Although all of the report is not set out herein, the Court has read this report in its entirety and 9 takes into account everything said therein in favour of the defendant. The defendant is twenty- 10 six years old. His early childhood was difficult due to the absence of his parents. This impacted 11 him negatively. Since leaving school at the age of fifteen years he has been gainfully employed 12 as a fisherman. 13 14

¶ [19] He has been in a relationship with Ms. Barclay since he was eighteen years old. He expressed to 15 the Probation Officer his anger at Ms. Barclay whom he blames for his involvement in this 16 offending. Family members describe him as a caring and kind person. Since being on remand he 17 has been working in the kitchen of the prison as a helper and attends educational and rehabilitative 18 programmes. He is described by the prison authorities as respectful and well behaved. 19 20

¶ [20] The Probation Officer’s view is that Ms. Barclay was the dominant partner in the relationship 21 given the age differences between the two. Mr. La Fleur was assessed as at medium risk of re- 22 offending with only one of the eight criminogenic factors in the High category. 23 24

¶ [21] The DCR has provided a SIR dated 12th January 2023 in respect of the defendant Barclay. 25 Although all of the report is not set out herein, the Court has read this report in its entirety and 26 takes into account everything said therein in favour of the defendant. 27 28

¶ [22] Miss Barclay is forty-three years old. She is the mother of one child who is twenty-two years old. 29 The child has completed school and is enrolled in a training programme. The defendant reported 30 having a good childhood with no history which would have had any adverse effects upon her. 31 She completed school without incident and was gainfully employed at various jobs. She told the 32 Officer that she obtained a bar license in September 2022 but said that due to financial constraints 33 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 6 of 17 the business was not productive. She said that she was promised money ($3,000.00) for bringing 1 the shoes to the Cayman Islands. She said that due to her own luggage being overweight she 2 distributed some of the sneakers into the luggage of the other two defendants. She said that the 3 trip to the Cayman Islands had been initially planned for them to seek work. It was after this was 4 planned that she was endeavouring to secure a loan to stock her bar and she was introduced to a 5 man by the name of “One Foot” who offered to lend her $3,000.00 if she would take the sneakers 6 to the Cayman Islands. She was told that sending them by mail would take a longer time. In 7 relation to her statements the Officer states:- 8 9 “Generally, when Ms. Barclay was asked about the discrepancies between the information 10 she had provided and what is indicated in the Police statement of facts, she appeared to 11 avoid addressing the discrepancies and continued to insist that she had no idea that the 12 sneakers that she was carrying contained drugs. She shared that there is no way she would 13 have knowingly placed her mother and her fiancé in a situation that would result in 14 criminal charges of such serious nature. 15 16 Overall, the interviews with the client and collateral information revealed a number of 17 discrepancies, and appears to suggest that Ms. Barclay has not been forthcoming with 18 information. It is assessed that Ms. Barclay failed to take full responsibility for her actions 19 and has instead continued to portray herself as a naive individual who was taken 20 advantage of due to her poor financial standing.” 21 22

¶ [23] Through the Probation Officer, the defendant asks for mercy for her family and says that she 23 believes that they should not be held accountable for her mistake. 24 25

¶ [24] Since being incarcerated, Ms. Barclay has been working in the kitchen of the Prison and earns a 26 small weekly stipend. She has participated in several courses and earned certificates. She speaks 27 of being ashamed of her criminal involvement and that she does not want her child or family to 28 know about her offending. She also reports that since being incarcerated her mental health has 29 declined due to emotional and physical abuse from other inmates. Prison staff have advised that 30 the defendant received a verbal caution as to her involvement with other inmates. 31 32 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 7 of 17

¶ [25] The defendant was assessed as being at medium risk of re-offending. Her score was a high one 1 under pro-criminal attitude or orientation. The Officer concludes that she continues to minimize 2 her actions and not to accept full responsibility and that her conduct in the course of travelling to 3 deny that she knew her co-accused is suggestive of criminal behavior. 4 5

¶ [26] The SIR in respect of Ms. Moses is dated 4th January 2023. Although all of the report is not set 6 out herein, the Court has read this report in its entirety and takes into account everything said 7 therein in favour of the defendant. The defendant is sixty-five years old. She is the mother of 8 five children all of whom are of mature years. She had a good childhood with no issues or 9 difficulties and as an adult has been gainfully employed. She has been occupied whilst at the 10 prison and enrolled in several courses and rehabilitative programmes, 11 12

¶ [27] Ms. Moses told the Officer that the shoes had been placed in her bag by her daughter. The Officer 13 identified discrepancies in the account of Ms. Moses as follows:- 14 15 “It is noted that throughout the interview with Ms. Moses, her stories kept changing about 16 her knowledge of having the drugs (cocaine) in pairs of shoes and the amount she had 17 inserted into her anus. She justified her responses by stating that her daughter, Onica 18 Barclay (co-accused) had purchased ‘stuff’ in Customs (Suriname) so upon their arrival 19 in Jamaica, her (Onica’s) luggage was overweight hence she placed the pairs of shoes into 20 her luggage. When probed about the reason for inserting the ‘forty dollars US worth’ 21 cocaine into her anus, she claimed it’s “just for personal use’. Asked about if she tends to 22 travel with her ‘personal use cocaine’ whenever she travels locally and internationally, 23 she became tearful and gave no verbal response. She further divulged that if she knew that 24 the shoes her daughter gave her had cocaine, she would have thrown it through the window 25 of the taxi when the taxi driver was summoned to return to the airport. Seemingly, based 26 on the discrepancies in her account and her disclosure of travelling frequently both locally 27 and internationally, she is fully aware that she violate[d] the Custom[s] and Border 28 Control Law of the Cayman Islands or any other countries that she [travelled] enroute….” 29 30

¶ [28] The Probation Officer also notes the inconsistency between her account of being a spiritualist 31 who treats people with herbs and her own account of using cocaine for symptoms of depression. 32 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 8 of 17 The Officer describes her attempt to justify the importation of cocaine into the Cayman Islands 1 as being for personal use for depression as suggestive of “her embedded criminal thinking”. 2 3

¶ [29] Ms. Moses was assessed as being at medium risk of re-offending. 4 5 THE CHIEF JUSTICE’S GUIDELINES 2002 6 7

¶ [30] The Sentencing guide in respect of Drug offences in the Cayman Islands is the Statement on 8 Tariffs and Guidelines for Certain Offences issued by the Chief Justice in 2002. This refers to 9 the widespread problem with cocaine abuse in these Islands and provides for a tariff for offences 10 of trafficking in hard drugs involving 2 ounces or more without mitigating circumstances of 10- 11 12 years. A tariff of 15 years or more is proposed when the offences involve substantial 12 importation or dealing of quantities of several ounces or kilos. A reduction from these 13 recommended tariffs is to be applied when there has been a guilty plea. The Guidelines further 14 state the recognition of the Courts that many of the people caught are couriers or intermediaries 15 and that the worst offenders in the chain of distribution often remain concealed. Assistance to 16 identify offenders in the chain will attract a substantial discount on sentence, for those offenders 17 who are prepared to co-operate with the police in their enquiries. It was stated:- 18 19 “As regards DRUG OFFENCES under the Misuse of Drugs Law and in particular those 20 related to the widespread problem with cocaine abuse in these Islands, the following tariffs 21 are now confirmed: … 22 23 At the other end of the scale of gravity, that is to say, trafficking in hard drugs in any 24 quantity as defined in the Misuse of Drugs Law, the maximum penalty prescribed for 25 offences involving 2 ounces or more is 20 years for the first offence and 30 years for a 26 second or subsequent offence with an unlimited fine in each case. That of course is the 27 maximum – the sentence for the worse possible offence by the worse possible offender. 28 29 The tariff for a first such offence, involving less than 2 ounces of cocaine or less than 4 30 grams of cocaine base without mitigating circumstances, will be 8 years. 31 32 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 9 of 17 For offences involving 2 ounces or more or 4 grams or more of cocaine base without 1 mitigating circumstances the tariff will be 10 to 12 years. 2 3 15 years or more will be imposed where such an offence involves substantial importation 4 or dealing in anyway either in powder or crack cocaine. We would define ‘substantial 5 importation or dealing’ as any transaction involving several ounces or kilo quantities. 6 The Courts recognise that many of the people caught are couriers or intermediaries and 7 that the worse offenders in the chain of distribution often remain concealed. Therefore 8 there will be a substantial discount on sentence for those offenders who are prepared to 9 co-operate with the police in their enquiries.” 10 11

¶ [31] In the recent case of Michael Palmer v R3, the Cayman Islands Court of Appeal (“CICA”) re- 12 affirmed that the Statement of Tariffs and Guidelines remains the definitive source of sentencing 13 guidance in cases such as the present. This is notwithstanding the passage of time since they were 14 propounded and notwithstanding that the maximum sentence for the offences has substantially 15 increased. 16 17

¶ [32] In that case the appellant Palmer imported 1.93 kgs of cocaine. He entered a plea of guilty in the 18 Grand Court on the 15th July 2019. He was sentenced on the 3rd October 2019 on the basis that 19 he was a courier. In sentencing him Chapple J. applied a starting point of 15 years. Following 20 reduction for mitigating factors and guilty plea, the appropriate sentence was determined to be 21 one of 8 years and 3 months. 22 23

¶ [33] The CICA approved the starting point of 15 years as being reflective of the Statement of Tariffs 24 and Guidelines. In its judgment the Appellate Court stated that this was a substantial importation 25 by a person who had at least some involvement in the planning. 26 27

¶ [34] In the related case Kemar Boothe v. R4, in which the appellant was said to have played a 28 significant role as one of the persons who had organised the importation of the drugs, the 29 Appellate Court considered that a starting point of 17 years was appropriate. 30 31 3 CICA Appeal 23/2019 Unreported Judgment dated 25th November 2020 4 CICA Appeal 3/2021 and 4/2021, Unreported Judgment dated 14th December 2021 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 10 of 17 UNITED KINGDOM SENTENCING COUNCIL DEFINITIVE GUIDELINES 1 2

¶ [35] The United Kingdom Sentencing Council Definitive Guidelines for Drug offences5 is of 3 assistance in determining the levels of culpability and harm for this offending. Under those 4 Guidelines the category of Harm is indicated by the quantity of the drug imported. Category 2 is 5 1 kg and above of cocaine. Category 3 is 150 grams of cocaine and above. 6

¶ [36] Ms. Barclay had 1.164 kilograms. Mr. La Fleur had 1.225 kilograms. Both are at a Category 2 7 level of Harm. Ms. Moses had 0.69 kilograms and is at Category 3 level of Harm. 8 9

¶ [37] Culpability is demonstrated by the role played by the offender. The Guidelines provide: - 10 11 “LEADING role: 12  directing or organising, buying and selling on a commercial scale; 13  substantial links to, and influence on, others in a chain; 14  close links to original source; 15  expectation of substantial financial gain; 16  uses business as cover; and 17  abuses a position of trust or responsibility. 18 19 SIGNIFICANT role: 20  operational or management function within a chain; 21  involves others in the operation whether by pressure, influence, intimidation 22 or reward; 23  motivated by financial or other advantage, whether or not operating alone; 24 and 25  some awareness and understanding of scale of operation. 26 27 28 5 Fraudulent Evasion of a prohibition by bringing into or taking out of the UK a controlled drug 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 11 of 17 LESSER role: 1  performs a limited function under direction; 2  engaged by pressure, coercion, intimidation; 3  involvement through naivety/exploitation; 4  no influence on those above in a chain; 5  very little, if any, awareness or understanding of the scale of operation; and 6  if own operation, solely for own use (considering reasonableness of account 7 in all the circumstances).” 8 9 SUBMISSIONS OF THE PROSECUTION 10 11

¶ [38] Prosecuting Counsel submits that the three defendants were involved in a substantial importation 12 of cocaine given the quantities imported. Counsel submits that Ms. Moses appeared to have 13 performed a lesser role under the direction of Ms. Barclay. Mr. La Fleur also appears to have 14 played a lesser role and limited function under direction. He may have been involved through 15 misplaced trust. Ms. Barclay appears to have carried out a significant role. She was motivated 16 by financial advantage and influenced others in the operation. 17 18

¶ [39] Counsel submits that there are three aggravating factors:- 19 20 i. The level of planning as indicated by the circuitous route taken; 21 ii. The quantity of cocaine which suggests that it was part of a larger drug smuggling 22 operation; and 23 iii. The relatively sophisticated concealment of the cocaine. 24 25

¶ [40] The prosecution is agreed that each defendant pleaded guilty at the first reasonable opportunity 26 and would ordinarily be entitled to a full discount for their guilty pleas. This is subject only to a 27 possible finding that the evidence against them is overwhelming. 28 29 30 31 32 33 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 12 of 17 SUBMISSIONS OF THE DEFENCE 1 2

¶ [41] Mr. Myers on behalf of the defendant La Fleur asks the Court not to distinguish between the 3 defendants who pleaded guilty at different stages. Counsel said that in relation to Mr. La Fleur 4 the evidence is not overwhelming and that the maximum possible discount is being sought. 5 6

¶ [42] Counsel submits that based upon the facts, the defendant played a lesser role and had a limited 7 function. He was clearly in a position of a courier or mule. He was acting under direction and did 8 not operate a management function in a chain. Counsel said that between leading and lesser roles 9 there is nearly a fifty percent difference in sentence which is significant. Counsel said that it is 10 accepted that the defendant had the larger amount of cocaine. 11 12

¶ [43] Counsel asked the Court to contrast the amount which the defendant had with the amount that 13 the appellant had in the case of Palmer. That appellant had almost 2 kilograms of cocaine. 14 Counsel said that this defendant had sixty percent of that and thus should be sentenced at the 15 lower end of the 2002 Guidelines. 16 17

¶ [44] Counsel also referenced the case of Seaford Laborde v, R.6. The appellant Laborde had in his 18 possession 987 grams of cocaine. He received a 14-year sentence in the Summary Court which 19 was upheld on appeal. 20 21

¶ [45] In mitigation, Counsel submitted that as indicated in the SIR, the defendant did not have the most 22 supportive of backgrounds. Counsel said that the Probation Officer’s view is that he is seeking 23 from his current relationship the emotional support which he did not have when he was younger. 24 Counsel said that the defendant is vulnerable and needs a crutch to rely on. One can see that he 25 became involved because of outside influences. 26 27

¶ [46] Counsel asked the Court to note that he is at medium risk of re-offending and said that although 28 the custody threshold has been passed, one would ask for compassion. He is a very young man 29 of good character, impressionable and needs support. Counsel said that any period of sentence 30 would be a deterrent for him. 31 32 6 CICA 19 of 2013, unreported judgment dated 24th October 2014 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 13 of 17

¶ [47] Counsel Mr. Brady on behalf of the defendant Barclay submitted that there are some similarities 1 of circumstances with other sentences imposed in previous cases. Counsel referred to the case of 2 Mitchell Comrie v. the Queen7. Counsel said that one can assume regardless of the role 3 performed, that the offence was carried out for financial gain. No one transports drugs for the fun 4 of it. Counsel said that arguably there were significant roles for the other two defendants as well. 5 Counsel submits that the role performed by the defendant Barclay should be classified as a lesser 6 role and not a leading role. Counsel said that Ms. Barclay would not be at the head or front of the 7 operation and would know very little. Counsel said that it is accepted that she would be the 8 contact person for the purpose of the trip, but this bears little distinction from the role of a courier. 9 Counsel urged that she was very low in the scale of the operation. 10 11

¶ [48] Counsel submitted that the amount of drugs in some of the authorities is significantly higher than 12 the amount in this case. Counsel referenced the case of R. v. Kenecia Millwood8 in which the 13 amount of the drug was 2.86 kgs, twice the amount of drugs which Ms. Barclay had. In the case 14 of Millwood, the Appellate Court considered that the appropriate staring point was 15 years and 15 not 17 years. The Appellant’s sentence was reduced from 12 years to 10 years. This was on the 16 basis that the role carried out was a lesser role. Counsel also referenced the case of R. v. Lesme 17 Perez and David Lobo9 where starting points of 18 years were applied for those in significant 18 roles and 12 years for those found to be couriers. Defendants who had provided help and 19 assistance received substantial reductions in sentence. 20 21

¶ [49] Counsel said that Ms. Barclay has provided the name and contact details of the person who gave 22 her the items but she was never aware of the contact person in the Cayman Islands and is not able 23 to provide more information. This supports the position that her role may not be as significant as 24 the prosecution argues. 25 26

¶ [50] In mitigation, Counsel submitted that from the SIR it can be seen that the defendant sought to 27 better herself through academia and that even while in prison she has obtained a number of 28 certificates which show that she is capable of making use of her time. Counsel said that transcripts 29 from her courses indicate a high level of intelligence on her part. Counsel produced to the Court 30 several transcripts and certificates. These include a Diploma and Academic transcript which 31 7 SCA 1 of 2011- [2012 (1) CILR Note 3] 8 8 CICA Appeal 30/2014 unreported judgment dated 7th November 2016 9 Ind 100/2017 - Grand Court unreported Judgment, 29th March 2019 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 14 of 17 confirms that the defendant completed studies in hospitality management in February 2023. The 1 records for eight certified courses were also produced. The defendant achieved high marks in all 2 courses. There is also a Certificate of successful completion in starting a business dated 16th 3 November 2022 and a Certificate in Expansion of Business dated 17th November 2022. Counsel 4 said that the defendant is working in the kitchen at the prison and is being productive. 5 6

¶ [51] Counsel said that the defendant accepts that she was foolish. There was a certain level of 7 desperation which drove her to embark upon the now ill-advised course. She is ashamed and 8 remorseful. Her early guilty and her co-operation as far as she is able to co-operate with inquiries 9 here and overseas is evidence of her remorse. She has significant feelings of guilt for the position 10 that her mother and Mr. La Fleur are in. Counsel said that it is not disputed that the custody 11 threshold is passed, and the defendant does not expect anything other than a custodial sentence. 12 She takes the matter quite seriously. 13 14

¶ [52] Counsel invites the Court to consider a sentence that will allow the defendant and her mother to 15 be able to leave the jurisdiction before long and return home. She would not wish to continue to 16 be a burden on the Islands and asks the Court to temper justice with mercy. 17 18

¶ [53] Defence Counsel Mr. Furniss on behalf of the defendant Ms. Moses submitted that the defendant 19 Moses is sixty-five years old. She has health issues10 and is older in years. She is the only one of 20 the three that imported cocaine for her own use. She was asked to return to the airport. She could 21 easily have gotten rid of the sneakers before she returned. Counsel submitted that under the 22 United Kingdom Sentencing Guidelines, the cocaine for her own use would be a Category 3 23 offence and would attract a sentence of 3 1/2 to 5 years. The starting point in those Guidelines 24 would be 4 1/2 years. 25 26

¶ [54] Counsel submits that given her lesser role, from a starting point of 12 years the defendant ought 27 to receive a sentence of no more than 5 or 6 years. Counsel said that the defendant is aware that 28 she will receive a custodial sentence and that the Cayman Islands views drug offences seriously. 29 Counsel asks that the Court view her situation with sympathy and consider her position in a 30 different light from that of the other two defendants. 31 32 33 10 Kidneys and cataracts 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 15 of 17 THE SENTENCE 1 2

¶ [55] It is evident from the route travelled that this was a carefully planned drug smuggling operation. 3 Photographs have been tendered in evidence of the sneakers. The method of concealment appears 4 to be relatively sophisticated. Notably, from the accounts given, the cocaine, which was placed 5 in the suitcases in Guyana, passed through three other countries and was not detected prior to 6 arrival in the Cayman Islands. 7 8

¶ [56] The defendants all pretended to be travelling separately. It is a reasonable inference that there 9 would have been no need for this pretense and for them to deny knowledge of each other if this 10 was legitimate travel for the purpose of seeking work in the Cayman Islands as claimed. So 11 deliberate was the attempt to appear to be traveling alone, that Ms. Moses who was cleared first 12 by Immigration had to be called back to the Airport after the other two had been stopped. It 13 makes no sense that a mother coming to a country for the first time would leave her daughter and 14 the daughter’s friend in the airport and travel on alone when they were all to be staying at the 15 same hotel. This is a case where each had possession of a suitcase in which was found in sneakers 16 the substance identified to be cocaine. Taken together with their conduct and the circumstances, 17 the evidence would be close to overwhelming that they each knew that they were carrying illegal 18 drugs. Ms. Moses had cocaine inside her body, even without her admission, the evidence in her 19 case as to that amount is overwhelming. However, the prosecution has charged one offence in 20 respect of Ms. Moses. 21 22

¶ [57] The ill effects of the use of cocaine upon the society is well known and has been highlighted in 23 numerous cases before this Court. To transport cocaine into the Islands is an offence of the utmost 24 seriousness and deserving of strong condemnation. Any sentences to be imposed must have as 25 its primary aims punishment as well as deterrence of others who would seek to import drugs into 26 the Cayman Islands. 27 28

¶ [58] Two of the defendants had more than 40 ounces of cocaine. One had more than 20 ounces of 29 cocaine. This is thus a case of substantial importation which under the 2002 Guidelines, would 30 attract a starting point of 15 years imprisonment depending on the circumstances. 31 32

¶ [59] The defendant Barclay from her own statements in interview appears to have played a significant 33 role. She was motivated by financial gain. While she is clearly not at the highest level in the chain 34 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 16 of 17 and does not appear to have performed a management function, she is more than a courier. On 1 her own account she received the shoes from a person by the name of “One Foot” and distributed 2 them to the others. She it was who influenced or involved the other two persons. She carried out 3 a function which in effect enlisted or recruited the aid of other couriers. It is not unreasonable to 4 conclude that had it not been for her the others would not have imported cocaine in these large 5 amounts. There is no indication that the defendants La Fleur and Moses are other than couriers. 6 7

¶ [60] With respect to the defendant La Fleur, while he is treated as a courier, he imported a substantial 8 quantify of cocaine. The starting point in his case is 15 years. 9 10

¶ [61] Under the United Kingdom Guidelines there would be an aggravating factor of the sophisticated 11 nature of the concealment as well as the attempt to avoid detection which would ordinarily serve 12 to increase the sentence. The Court does not propose to add to the starting points in this case in 13 respect of all three defendants and considers that the starting points adequately reflect the serious 14 nature of the offending. 15 16

¶ [62] In mitigation account is taken of everything said or written in the defendant La Fleur’s favour. 17 He has no previous convictions and is of good character. He is relatively young and has good 18 personal qualities. He had some childhood difficulties. Of some significance is that he may well 19 have been influenced by Ms. Barclay to carry the cocaine. He is said to be vulnerable and in need 20 of emotional support. He will be incarcerated in a foreign country away from his home and other 21 family members. Thirty (30) months (or 16.5%) is deducted from the starting point (of 180 22 months) for a sentence of 150 months. 23 24

¶ [63] He is afforded the full credit of one third for his guilty plea for a sentence of 100 months or 8 25 years and 3 months imprisonment. Time served is to be taken into account. 26 27

¶ [64] Onica Barclay is treated as more than a courier but much less than a management role. Applying 28 the Guidelines, she played a significant role. She had a substantial quantity of the drug. The 29 starting point in her case is one of 16 years imprisonment, (192 months). 30 31

¶ [65] In mitigation, the Court takes into account everything said or written in the defendant’s favour. 32 She has no previous convictions and is a person of good character. She is ashamed and 33 remorseful. There is said to have been an element of desperation which led to this offending. She 34 230405 R v. Vidol Anfernie La Fleur, Onica Violetta Barclay and Sherone Ann Moses – Ind. 94 of 2022 (CRJ) – Coram: Richards J, KC – Sentence Judgment Page 17 of 17 has co-operated and assisted as far as she is able. She has good personal qualities and has been 1 hardworking over her adult life. She has spent her time productively while on remand as 2 evidenced by the certificates produced on her behalf. She will be incarcerated in a foreign country 3 away from her home and other family members. Thirty (30) months (or 15.5%) is deducted from 4 the starting point for a sentence of 162 months. 5 6

¶ [66] She is given the full discount of one third for her guilty plea for a sentence of 108 months or 9 7 years imprisonment. 8 9

¶ [67] Ms. Moses is treated as a courier. She had the smallest amount of cocaine. She had about 20 10 ounces less than the others. A portion of this was for her personal use. A starting point is adopted 11 in her case of 12 years (144 months). 12 13

¶ [68] In mitigation, account is taken of everything said or written in the defendant’s favour. These 14 include the following. She is of good character with no previous convictions. Her age, she is 15 sixty-five years old and the possible adverse effect of any sentence upon her. Her health issues 16 and her personal circumstances as outlined in the SIR and by her Counsel. She appears to have 17 been a hard-working individual and is even now doing her best to be productive. Twenty-four 18 (24) months is deducted in mitigation. She is given the full one third discount for her guilty plea 19 for a sentence of 6 years and 7 months imprisonment. 20 21

¶ [69] In each case any time served is to be deducted. 22 23

¶ [70] The drugs are ordered forfeited to the Crown to be destroyed. 24 25 Dated this the 5th day of April 2023 26 27 The Hon. Justice Cheryll Richards KC 28 Judge of the Grand Court 29