Mules

[liadnan]

Interesting post by Craig Murray on a rather different kind of topic from his usual: challenging the general view that seems to be being taken by all -including, it appears, by HMRC- that it's somehow appalling that two young British women might go on trial and possibly to prison for drug smuggling in the awful land of Foreign. As Murray points out (a) Ghana is a fairly stable democracy and there is nothing particularly wrong with its judicial system, it is insulting and patronising to assume otherwise without evidence, (b) the cocaine trade which is beginning to cause real problems there is largely the fault of demand in the developed world (and drugs policy here), (c) it's a bit difficult to believe the girls can have thought the bag was empty: 7lb is a noticeable weight, so there is clearly a case to be answered.

ETA: this isn't about drugs policy incidentally: actually I tend to the libertarian view that we'd do better to legalise the lot and let people go to hell as they choose. But for the present, trafficking is an offence under the laws of both Ghana and the UK, as a result of international policy largely directed in the developed world, yet continues to happen, largely because of demand in the developed world. Also if there are any criminal practitioners reading this (Ruthie?) I'd be interested in their views of what might actually have happened -in practice what might the charge and possible sentence have been- had they been picked up at Heathrow rather than in Ghana.

ETFA: Murray's comment on the Cahill and Smith case some years back may sound harsh. but ask anyone who has done any backpacking whether they could possibly fail to notice 40kg of heroin in their luggage -when most airlines ban bags weighing more than 25kg because they consider it too heavy for baggage handlers.

Comments

[karen2205]

Fair point. I'm looking at it as two *children* who were probably manipulated/led/coerced into doing something foolish, without really knowing what they've done. Of course, what they were doing in Ghana with the apparent lack of knowledge of their parents is another matter all together. I don't think a ten year jail sentence is an appropriate punishment for teenage foolishness though.

[greyarea.livejournal.com]

Good article, and I pretty much agree with the thrust of what he says. Interesting to read about Ghana as well; it's a place I know little about.

[alan1957.livejournal.com]

i would also tend to agree with the article. and i simply cannot believe that anyone these days (however young or not especially well educated) could imagine that they should carry suspicious bags through any airport, for any reason!

[ailbhe]

Old enough to have a baby, have sex, get married, and maybe join the army - not really children, I think.

I'd love to know how they made it to 16 unaware that drug-smuggling is serious.

[liadnan]

Under section 20 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 ("Assisting in or inducing commission outside United Kingdom of an offence punishable under a corresponding law.") it appears to me they could in theory get 14 years here (Schedule 4 of the act, bearing in mind it's class A and trial on indictment would be likely). I doubt whether they actually would, though I know very little about sentencing practice as it actually happens at the coal face, but then I have no idea what the real chances of them getting 10 years there are either and the report quite probably means no more than that that is the statutory maximum.

Indeed the maximum here under section 4(3) ("Supplying or offering to supply a controlled drug or being concerned in the doing of either activity by another.") is life for trial on indictment.

And on Jersey they'd lock them up in the appalling conditions of La Moye and throw away the key.

They're 16: I don't have any problem with them being treated as adults, though if convicted I certainly think they should go to juvenile prisons.

[booklectica]

That's very interesting, and I think I agree with him too. And also with his comment further down that cocaine should basically be treated like alcohol.

[karen2205]

But still young enough to be naive and uncertain about what they're doing. Probably not streetwise enough to know when they're getting themselves into trouble.

I'd have known better at 16. So would my sister. I'd have known better at 10 or 12, but not everyone is that bright. They probably knew drug-smuggling to be serious, but possibly not that that's what they'd got involved in.

[karen2205]

Yeah, that's a point re the English position.

I'm going soft in my old age I think:) They're young enough to be (probably) relatively easy to manipulate by powerful adults, even if they are old enough to know better.

I think it unfair to apply adult penalties to those who don't have the full rights of adults as a matter of principle. I'm not saying they shouldn't be required to stand trial or that they shouldn't be punished (if guilty) just that the punishment should be in proportion to the crime they committed and their own level of culpability.

[oursin.livejournal.com]

Exactly - at least at the UK end, one routinely gets interrogated as to whether anyone has had the chance to get into one's luggage unobserved, or whether anyone has given one something to transport. It's not easy to miss these messages!

[alan1957.livejournal.com]

'...at least at the UK end...'

The Ghanain Airport shown on television 'seemed' to be covered in anti-drug trafficking warning posters.

Plus (and I don't believe anyone has mentioned this point yet) even if you were so naive as to be unaware of the seriousness of drug smugling, surely the threat from terrorism would make someone think twice about carrying unknown luggage onto a plane you were travelling on!