Author Archives: Sydney Drug Lawyers

About Sydney Drug Lawyers
Sydney Drug Lawyers is a subsidiary of Sydney Criminal Lawyers® which specialises in drug cases.
September 13, 2016 Drug Possession
0

Send Drug Users to Rehab, Not Court, says Magistrate

Policy-makers and lawyers in Dubbo have renewed calls for a drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility in the area.

This proposal was previously suggested by former Dubbo local court magistrate, Andrew Eckhold, after observing a steady stream of habitual drug users flowing into his courtroom – many of whom could be dealt with more appropriately through rehabilitation programs rather than the criminal justice system.

The idea has gained traction after the Dubbo Local Aboriginal Land Council offered a parcel of land to parties interested in building the centre.

“We would be prepared to sit down with any government agency, any organisation, looking to build a facility that not only would just assist the Aboriginal community, but also the wider community,” Dubbo Local Aboriginal Land Council chief executive officer, Darren Toomey said.

“My biggest fear is that if we leave it any longer, it’s just going to get worse and we won’t be able to get hold of it.”

Drugs in Dubbo

The issue of drugs in Dubbo was recently thrust into the media spotlight after 100 police officers raided 14 homes in the area, resulting in seizures of ice, cannabis, fentanyl and prescription medications, and the arrest of 11 residents.

On a visit to Dubbo, Premier Mike Baird declared that new ‘tough on crime’ policies would be implemented in an attempt to tackle ice addiction across the state. Baird vowed to intensify roadside drug testing, increase maximum penalties for drug offences and record sales of pseudoephedrine in pharmacies, which he claimed would decrease manufacture.

Baird’s speech said little about support programs, and drug reformists argue there should be greater access to diversionary and rehabilitation services.

NSW currently has just three drug and alcohol rehabilitation centres west of the Blue Mountains – located in Brewarrina, Canowindra and Cowra. This means the closest facility for Dubbo residents is around two-and-a-half hours drive away.

Local Support

Late last year, nearly 6000 people put their names to a petition directed to Mr Baird and Dubbo MP Troy Grant to urgently fund a drug rehabilitation centre in the area.

One campaigner, Nguumambiny Indigenous Corporation volunteer Tahni Waters, said existing services are insufficient and the situation is setting up long-term users for inevitable failure. “The rehab centre is key to [reducing harm] and it can’t be in a year, two years or the next election, it needs to happen now”, she said.

Political Backing

Labor candidate Stephen Lawrence and Independent Colin Hamilton have put their support behind a rehabilitation facility in their local electorate of Dubbo, which they believe is an important step towards addressing the region’s growing drug problem.

“As a lawyer in the region over the last five years I have been shocked to see the physical decline in clients struggling with ice addiction as well as being horrified by some of the crimes the drug is causing,” Mr Lawrence said.

Meanwhile Nationals MP, Tony Grant, showed little interest in the idea, saying existing programs and services are doing enough to combat substance abuse.

Attacking Demand

While officers of the Orana Local Area Command are patting their own backs about the Dubbo raids, they have expressed concerns about reoffending rates of those who are arrested.

“Recidivism is a major, major factor,” acting superintendent Scott Tanner said. “A lot of those people that we did charge had come under notice prior.”

Mr Tanner admitted more should be done to rehabilitate offenders, adding that a new centre could be filled overnight and that the issue of illicit drug use is unlikely to ever go away. “Once ice has finished its run, there will be another drug of choice just as ecstasy, not long ago, was the drug of choice,” he said. “There will always be a drug of addiction.”

Drug reformists agree with that view, but are critical of the government’s current punitive approach towards drug use. The better way, they argue, is to treat addiction as a health issue rather than a criminal law problem, and to treat habitual users accordingly.

August 31, 2016 Border Controlled Drugs, Drug Importation, Drug Supply
0

95 kilos of cocaine in the luggage of just 3 people?

It’s a case that raises more questions than answers.

The Australian Federal Police (AFP) and Australian Border Force (AFB) are claiming that three Canadian tourists carried bags stuffed with 95 kilos of cocaine into Sydney, after apparently having the time of their lives in several South American countries.

They say a law enforcement operation involving agencies from around the world resulted in a raid on the Sea Princess while it was docked in Sydney Harbour.

Officers searched the ship when it berthed, allegedly finding suitcases full of the illegal white powder. It is the biggest seizure of narcotics through a passenger stream into Australia.

The cocaine, with an estimated street value of over $30 million, is said to have been stashed in luggage linked to two women in their 20s and a man in his 60s.

The trio were arrested and charged with importing a commercial quantity of cocaine, an offence which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

The Sea Princess travelled from Southampton in England, where the three Canadians boarded, and stopped over at a number of South American countries, including Colombia, Peru and Chile.

The AFP is unable to say whether the drugs were loaded onto the ship during one of those stops, or how the passengers were able to have so much cocaine alongside their ‘regular’ belongings.

International operation led to bust

Law enforcement officials are claiming to have disrupted a major international crime syndicate which they say was attempting to flood Australian streets with illegal drugs, although no further details have been provided. The ship was destined for other ports in Australia, but authorities are unable to say which cities the drugs were ultimately intended for.

The defendants came before Central Local Court where they did not apply for bail, and were formally refused.

Not the first cruise ship seizure

Tim Fitzgerald, the regional commander for the ABF in NSW, says this is not the first cruise ship seizure in our state:

“We had a similar situation last year … but this is the largest,” he said.

He went on to speak of the AFB’s success in seizing drugs:

“Last financial year alone the Border Force intercepted 18,000 [importations of] narcotics at our various borders, international mail centres, airports, sea ports, sea cargo, air cargo — 22.5 tonnes of narcotics… have been detected in two years.”

However, most agree this is a drop in the ocean compared to the overall quantity of drugs imported into Australia.

The three defendants will face court again in October, unless their lawyers make an application for bail beforehand.

Their defence, if they have one, is not yet known – although 95 kilos seems a lot of cocaine unless some other party had a hand in the events.

July 28, 2016 Drug Possession, Drug Supply
0

Splendour in the ‘Grass’

This year’s annual Splendour in the Grass music festival at North Byron Parklands attracted a young crowd from not only NSW and Queensland, but across the nation and even abroad.

The line-up featured dozens of star musicians and DJs including The Cure, James Blake and The Strokes, who had revellers partying from Friday through to Sunday.

But as usual, police and sniffer dogs were out in force to control the use of illegal drugs.

A total of 323 were allegedly caught in possession of cannabis, ecstacy, cocaine and ice – with 80 cannabis cautions issued and 200 facing court for drug possession and supply.

Despite the number of arrests, police say the crowd was generally well-behaved.

“Once again police worked closely with Splendour organisers to ensure a safe and enjoyable festival, so it was positive to see that the majority of attendees heeded police warnings and behaved themselves,” a police representative said.

“Our officers were even approached by music fans who thanked them for being there to keep everyone safe – it was tremendous to see such great support from the event community.”

Police once again warned of the dangers of taking illegal drugs, saying:

“We cannot reiterate enough how dangerous these substances can be”, Det. Sterling said.

“They are not only illegal but they can incredibly harmful to your health and, tragically at times, fatal…. We were not there to spoil the fun, but those who choose to break the law or threaten the safety of other festival goers will be stopped in their tracks and dealt with accordingly.”

However, as noted by junkee.com “Police and law-makers are never going to stop young people smoking a joint or taking MDMA at a music festival. They can’t even explain why those drugs are illegal while consumption of alcohol, a drug that kills thousands every year, is incredibly prevalent.”

There is a strong argument that introducing harm-minimisation measures like pill testing is a far more effective way of preventing overdoses and fatalities than simply arresting and charging people.

Most of those charged at Splendour are required to attend Byron Bay Local Court on 15th August.

Penalty for Drug Possession

The maximum penalty for drug possession is 2 years imprisonment and/or a fine of $2,200.

A fine comes with a criminal conviction, which is also known as a criminal record.

Help – I’m Facing Drug Charges!

In spite of the maximum penalties, a good lawyer may be able to convince the magistrate not to record a conviction against your name, even if you wish to plead guilty to drug possession or a minor drug supply.

In order to maximise your chances of avoiding a conviction, it is a good idea to prepare up to 3 character references and a letter of apology before your day in court, which can help persuade the magistrate to grant you a non conviction order’.

If you live closer to Sydney than Byron Bay, your lawyer may be able to have your case transferred to Downing Centre Local Court in the Sydney CBD, so you don’t need to travel back up north for your day in court.

If you are going to court and would like an experienced drug lawyer to represent you, call us anytime to arrange a free first conference. We offer fixed fees for all drug possession cases.

July 03, 2016 Drug Possession
0

The Dangers of Drug Use by Doctors

By Blake O’Connor and Ugur Nedim

A prominent Sydney dentist has been banned from practising after using the drug ice and formulating an elaborate scheme to avoid being drug tested.

Young Hoon Sun ran a successful dentistry and cosmetic surgery practice in the Sydney CBD, but began using ice after the tragic death of his brother in 2010. In order to avoid being tested, he fabricated airline tickets and sales receipts to make it appear he was on holidays at the time of the scheduled tests.

Sun admitted to the Tribunal that he was a habitual user of ice and that the tickets were to avoid testing, which has raised concerns that he was operating on clients under the influence of ice.

The NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal cancelled Sun’s right to practise in order to protect the general public.

This case is not the first and certainly not the worst example of doctors using illegal drugs.

Other Cases

An anaesthetist with a declared drug habit, Victorian doctor James Peters infected 56 women with Hepatitis C after injecting himself with prefilled syringes of the opioid fentanyl, which were intended for patients. After using a portion for himself, he then used the same syringes to deliver the rest of the fentanyl to patients.

Peters was subsequently convicted of several offences and sentenced to 14 years’ imprisonment. He had a long history of drug addiction whilst working at the Box Hill Hospital, which he declared to the medical board. However, he failed to declare his Hepatitis C status. The case prompted many to question why Peters was allowed to continue practising despite his declared drug habit.

A similar situation occurred in the United States, where a doctor infected 45 patients with Hepatitis C after injecting them with the same drug, fentanyl. Many of the patients developed lifelong complications – one having his leg amputated as a result of the virus. The doctor was deregistered, prosecuted and sentenced to 39 years in prison.

Drug Use Common Amongst Doctors

Two NSW studies raised concerns about drug use amongst medical practitioners, suggesting that:

  • the use of prescription drugs is more common amongst doctors than the general population, presumably due to the relative ease of access; and
  • 0.4% of the medical profession had ceased to prescribe Schedule eight drugs as the result of confirmed self-administration of opioids.

Statistics also suggest that Australian doctors have higher rates of mental illness, substance abuse, burnout and suicide than the general public, frequently caused by the high stress levels associated with medical practice.

Mandatory Drug Testing

Due to cases like that of Dr Peters, there have been calls to implement a uniform mandatory drug testing regime on all medical practitioners.

Currently in NSW, doctors can be tested by direction of the Medical Council of New South Wales if a condition has been imposed on their registration as a result of an inquiry or hearing, or the self-reporting of drug abuse.

If a positive drug test is returned, the Council can then take disciplinary action. However, many believe the current regime is inadequate and exposes members of the public to the dangers of being treated by drug-affected practitioners.

June 20, 2016 Drug Supply, Drugs General
0

President to Release Non-Violent Drug Offenders

US President Barack Obama recently commuted the prison sentences of 42 inmates as part of his push for criminal justice reform.

Most of the offenders are small-time drug dealers who have already spent many years in prison – some were sentenced to life-imprisonment under “three strikes and you’re out” legislation.

Obama has now commuted the sentences of 348 inmates – more than the previous seven US presidents combined.

US Prison Population

An estimated 2.2 million people are behind bars in the United States. This represents a quarter of the global prison population in a country with only 5 per cent of the world’s population.

A whopping one in 100 US adults are incarcerated, and two-thirds of released inmates return to prison within 2 years.

The direct cost to the US economy is enormous – US $60 billion per year, an increase of more than 300% over the past 20 years. The indirect costs are believed to be far higher than this.

Law Reform

The White House has released a statement saying the commuted sentences related to inmates affected by “outdated and unduly harsh sentencing laws,” including mandatory life sentences for non-violent drug offences.

“The individuals receiving a presidential commutation today have more than repaid their debt to society and earned this second chance,” the statement said.

The President is expected to commute more sentences before he leaves office in January 2017. He has also proposed legislation which would reduce sentence lengths for small time offenders, and focus on alternatives to imprisonment and rehabilitation.

The President said of the current system:

“It’s not keeping us as safe as it should be. It is not as fair as it should be. Mass incarceration makes our country worse off, and we need to do something about it.”

Justice Reinvestment

Some US states have already seen the benefits of ‘Justice Reinvestment’, an initiative proposed by the US Open Society Institute in 2003.

Justice reinvestment recognises that a disproportionately high concentration of offending comes from a small number of communities, which are normally categorised by:

  • High rates of poverty, child abuse or neglect, alcohol and drug use, and mental health problems,
  • Insufficient social services such as housing and employment support, and
  • low education levels.

By channeling funds into programs which address these problems, justice reinvestment has been remarkably successful in lowering offending rates and overall law enforcement costs in a number of US communities.

A 2014 report by the Urban Institute found that 17 states are projected to save as much as $4.6 billion through policies designed to channel spending into community projects and otherwise control corrections spending.

Seeing these benefits, a total of 21 US states have now signed up with the Council of State Governments Justice Centre and other non-profit organisations to investigate or apply justice reinvestment in their jurisdiction.

Closer to Home

Australia certainly has its own problems – with a sharply rising prison population caused by tougher bail laws and harsh sentencing regimes, despite falling overall crime rates.

Our Indigenous communities suffer from hugely disproportionate incarceration rates, while our politicians seem intent on spending more and more on enforcement and imprisonment, while losing focus on programs which address the underlying causes of offending.

It is hoped government will start to recognise the real, long-term economic and social benefits of preventative and diversionary programs, and shift expenditure towards initiatives that deal with the problem at its source.

April 28, 2016 Drug Possession, Drug Supply
0

High Drug Prices Do Not Reduce Demand

The United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime has brought forward a special session on international policy, which will focus on a number of issues including the current worldwide debate about the decriminalisation of drugs.

Those who support prohibition typically argue that it reduces demand by sending a clear message that drug use is unacceptable and dangerous, while those against say it does more harm than good by creating an illegal black market for drugs (and all the associated problems), unnecessarily criminalises otherwise law-abiding individuals, exposes users to potentially-deadly fillers and fluctuating purity levels, and wastes tens or even hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars.

This blog focuses on the question of whether high prices caused by drug prohibition reduces demand.

Cost of Australian Drugs

The 2015 Global Drug Survey found that Australian users can expect to pay dramatically higher prices for drugs than those in the US and Europe. It found that Australians pay an average €18 for an ecstasy pill and €166 for a gram of MDMA. This is second only to New Zealand, and slightly more than double of price in the third most expensive country, Switzerland.

Australian cocaine users are paying up to four times as much as users in Britain- cocaine is about $300 a gram in Australia, and $75 a gram in England.

”It’s a luxury item here [in Australia]. People who’ve got lots of money use coke and if you’re on benefits and doing crime you do crystal [methamphetamine],” Survey coordinator, psychiatrist Adam Winstock said.

The Australian Crime Commission described the price paid by local users as “astronomical” compared with other countries.

“When the drug is purchased in China it costs around $100 per gram; by the time it gets to Perth it’s selling for about $650 a gram,” the head of the ACC Chris Dawson said.

The 2011 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement similarly acknowledged the high price of drugs in Australia, noting the “extreme difference between Australian and international drug prices.”

Dr Adam Winstock says local prices are high because of the additional risk of importing drugs into Australia; a risk created by prohibition.

Quality of Australian Drugs

Drugs are also generally lower in purity in Australia, and can contain dangerous levels of deadly fillers.

In 2011, American street cocaine had an average purity of 52%, while the drug has an average purity of 19.85% in Australia.

The purity of ecstacy is also much higher in other parts of the world – pills in the UK have an average purity of 66.3% MDMA (the most common active ingredient), Danish pills have 59%, and Dutch pills have 77.5%. Meanwhile, the Australian government’s forensic facility, ChemCenter, says the average here is just 18.9%.

Prevalence of Drug Use

The 2014 United Nations World Drug Report says Australia is leading the globe in terms of recreational drug use.

Australia was found to be the world leader in ecstacy use per capita, the third highest user of methamphetamines and fourth highest user of cocaine.

Price Inelasticity

The concept of price elasticity relates to the influence of price on consumer demand.

Price elasticity is when consumers react negatively at the same rate as a price rise; for example, buy 10% less Adidas shoes when the brand’s prices rise by 10%.

The opposite principle, price inelasticity, is where consumers do not react to price changes at a corresponding rate. An example may be petrol, where a 10% price rise typically leads to a less-than 10% fall in consumption.

Surveys have found that drug use is characterised by price inelasticity; where price increases do not result in corresponding reductions in use, and that, by the same token, price falls do not cause an equivalent rise in use. This is said to be due to a range of factors, not the least of which is that habitual users will buy drugs regardless of price increases, and low prices are not normally a primary consideration for first time or recreational users.

Accordingly, it is argued that increases in prices caused by prohibition do not lead to a corresponding reduction in drug use.

Like many others, President of the Australian Drug Law Reform Foundation, Dr Alex Wodak, argues that changes in illicit drug use are fueled not by fluctuations in prices, but by growing socioeconomic inequality, mental health issues, low employment prospects and traumatic experiences.

He points out that prohibition and corresponding price increases do not decrease demand, as prohibitionists suggest, and we can only address high demand by seeing drug addiction as a public health issue and not a law enforcement issue; and focusing on providing resources to preventative and diversionary programs, rather than law enforcement bodies.

April 24, 2016 Drug Possession
0

What do pot smokers and the number 420 have in common?

The 20th of April has rolled around again (pardon the pun) this week, and pot supporters around the globe marked the (unofficial) International Marijuana Day in various ways, all of which included indulging in their favourite pastime.

The stalwarts say though, that if you want to do things properly, then you’re not only supposed to celebrate your love of weed on the 20th day of the 4th month, but that you’re supposed to so it at precisely 4.20pm.

Because it is still illegal to use marijuana for recreational enjoyment in many parts of the world, the origins of this weird celebration are hard to pin point.

But the Sydney Morning Herald reported this week that sources trace its beginnings to a high school in California in 1971. According to reports, a group of San Rafael High School students met every afternoon at 4.20pm to smoke cannabis by a statue of Louis Pasteur. Eventually, the story goes, the term ‘420’ became code-speak for teens talking about smoking weed in front of their parents or other disapproving ‘grown ups’.

A lot of people also believe that ‘Dead Heads’ (the name given to fans of hippy band the Grateful Dead) were instrumental in taking the concept of 420 to the world. Regardless of when, or how it began, the day is now celebrated around the globe.

Despite the day gaining a reasonable amount of media attention – especially on social media – there were no public rallies in Sydney, with marijuana reform advocates preferring to remain low-key.

In Melbourne however, almost 2000 people showed up at Flagstaff Gardens to get high, as reported by the Legalise Cannabis Support Crew Victoria Facebook page.

Police were present, but stayed in their cars, and there were no reported arrests.

420 in the US and Canada

In America, 420 draws huge attention and crowds, particularly in places where marijuana possession is illegal. As support for the legalisation of recreational marijuana use grows – with several states having it on the agenda this year – festivities are becoming more and more mainstream.

On April 20 this year in Canada, in an unprecedented move, the Canadian Health Minister said the Government intends to introduce legislation next year that would make the sale of marijuana legal. If this becomes a reality, Canada would become one of the largest Western countries to allow widespread use of the drug.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau pushed for full legalisation during his election campaign, and firmly believes in the regulation of marijuana – when it is sold, who it is sold to and when it is used – in much the same way that alcohol is regulated.

By drafting and enforcing appropriate legislation, the Canadian Government believes that it can keep the drug away from children and young people, stop major drug cartels from profiting, as well as take some pressure off the criminal justice system.

Medicinal Marijuana

In recent years, many countries have legalised marijuana for medical purposes, recognising the benefits of the drug as treatment for various conditions, including epilepsy and chronic pain. Actress Whoopi Goldberg recently launched a range of cannabis-based products designed to help women get through monthly menstrual cramps.

Medical marijuana is also used to treat muscle spasms caused by multiple sclerosis, nausea caused by chemotherapy, poor appetite and weight loss caused by illnesses such as HIV, nerve pain, some seizure disorders and Crohn’s Disease.

The Australian Government is following the lead international lead by working on a framework for legislation to cultivate and supply the drug for medicinal purposes.

Victoria recently became the first state to legalise medicinal cannabis, and Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce officially opened Australia’s first medicinal cannabis farm, in an undisclosed location near Tamworth in New South Wales.

However, with the exception of highly controlled circumstances, the cultivation, use and supply of marijuana remains illegal in Australia and the penalties can include a criminal record and even lengthy terms of imprisonment.

April 03, 2016 Drug Possession
0

Sniffer Dog Operations: A Quick Look at the Facts and Figures

NSW police claim that drug detection dogs are a necessary part of law enforcement.

However, a number of comprehensive reports have found that sniffer dog operations are ineffective and can have dangerous consequences.

Studies have shown that far from deterring drug suppliers, the presence of sniffer dogs can lead to unnecessary harm and even death through risky behaviours like ‘loading up’ – where users consume all of their drugs at once, before or during events, to avoid detection.

Since drug detection operations commenced in early 2001, sniffer dogs have become a regular sight at train stations, music festivals, and public events, while invasive and humiliating procedures like strip-searches are becoming more common.

Loading Up

According to Will Tregoning, the Director of harm reduction group Unharm:

“One of the real concerns is that people preload – they take all their drugs before attending the event, and that can happen in one of two ways.”

“The first is pre-planned, and that is concerning in itself because it means if people have made that decision to use drugs, rather than spacing it out in a way that can enable them to see the effects of the first pill, for example, before they take the second, they are just taking the lot and hoping for the best.”

“But perhaps even more concerning is the panicked overdose,” Tregoning said, a practice which has only grown more commonplace at music festivals and public events.

Some of the world’s leading research institutes echo these findings, with the Chief Executive of drug research and advocacy organisation The Penington Institute, John Ryan, describing sniffer dogs as “a recipe for overdose”.

“Police crackdowns with dogs won’t dent drug usage … Sydney already has more accidental fatal drug overdoses than traffic accident deaths.”

Ineffectiveness

In June 2006, NSW Ombudsman Bruce Barbour released his eagerly awaited “Review of the Police Powers (Drug Detection Dogs) Act 2001”.

The Report examined 470 drug dog operations over two years, the majority occurring in greater Sydney.

Its findings were highly critical of the use of drug detection dogs.

The review found that prohibited drugs were located in only 26 per cent of the recorded positive indications by drug dogs.

And of the 10,211 positive indications made, there were only 19 successful prosecutions for drug supply – representing 0.19 per cent of those searched.

Barbour concluded that: “the use of drug detection dogs has proven to be an ineffective tool for detecting drug dealers”.

His findings were a significant blow to the primary justification for the use of sniffer dogs – which was to detect and prosecute those engaged in drug supply.

The rate of detection since 2006 has remained low – government figures obtained in parliament by Greens MP David Shoebridge show that only around one-third of positive indications lead to drugs being found:

2007
Searches after positive indications: 7,603
Drugs found: 2,435
Percentage: 32%

2008
Searches after positive indications: 10,562
Drugs found: 3,748
Percentage: 35%

2009
Searches after positive indications: 17,321
Drugs found: 5,109
Percentage: 29%

2010
Searches after positive indications: 15,779
Drugs found: 5,087
Percentage: 32%

2011
Searches after positive indications: 18,281
Drugs found: 5,031
Percentage: 28%

2012
Searches after positive indications: 16,184
Drugs found: 5,280
Percentage: 33%

2013
Searches after positive indications: 17,746
Drugs found: 6,415
Percentage: 36%

TOTAL: 2007 – 2013
Searches: 103,476
Drugs found: 33,105
Accuracy: 32%

Bearing in mind that under the law, drug detection dogs can only be used without a warrant in areas where there is a typically high concentration of drug use eg clubs, bars, dance parties, train stations etc – and given that police operations tend to focus on areas where the concentration is highest (eg music festivals and selected stations eg Redfern and Kings Cross) – the figure of less than one-third is alarmingly low.

One might even suggest that, at some venues such as music festivals, the overall rate of drug use might not be much lower than this figure; and that randomly subjecting one-in-three people to searches might produce similar results.

That argument is supported by studies into the ‘normalisation of drug use among young people’; one of which collected data from the ‘Big Day Out’ music festival over a 4 year period between 2006 and 2009, finding that more than half of the respondents surveyed used illicit drugs.

Police Response

Despite these findings, NSW police continue to strongly defend their powers to use sniffer dogs, claiming the use of sniffer dogs is an accurate and reliable method of detecting drugs.

‘”Any suggestion otherwise is incorrect,” said Inspector Chris Condon of the NSW Police dog unit.

‘”Drug-detection dogs are an important facet of the overall harm-minimisation strategy of the NSW Police Force. Drug-detection dogs are an extremely effective deterrent to persons transporting drugs for the purpose of supply.”

Like many others, the Ombudsman disagrees:

“Overwhelmingly, the use of drug detection dogs has led to public searches of individuals in which no drugs were found, or to the detection of (mostly young) adults in possession of very small amounts of cannabis for personal use.”

The Tide is Turning

Over the past few years, several MPs, medical practitioners and community leaders have called for a change in policy.

As reported in one of our blogs, NSW Greens MP Jenny Leong recently introduced a Bill to end the use of sniffer dogs in public places without warrant, arguing that the policy allows police to get away with large-scale harassment and intimidation.

“The most recent expansion of the drug dog program was to allow the dogs to operate on the entire Sydney train network. That expansion has been a clear policy failure, with 4,925 searches conducted between 1 January 2014 and 18 May 2015 of which 3,948—or more than 80 per cent—were false positives.”

“Any other police program that was getting it wrong 75 per cent to 80 per cent of the time would be shut down immediately, and that should be the case with the drug dog program,” Leong said.

This comes after another highly publicised overdose in November last year, when 25-year-old chemist Sylvia Choi died after taking ecstasy at the Stereosonic music festival.

However, the State government is unwavering in its support of sniffer dog operations. A spokesperson for Deputy Premier and Minister for Justice and Police Troy Grant, recently said:

“The use of drug detection dogs is an important tool in our efforts to combat dangerous, illicit drugs,”

“They are deployed not only to detect these drugs and prevent their use and distribution, but as a form of high visibility policing to deter drug activity which is illegal.”

It seems the government is loath to remove police powers in any context, regardless of the evidence.

February 21, 2016 Drug Possession, Drug Supply
0

Stop Over-policing the Mardi Gras

For some, it was ironic for a representative of the NSW Police Force to advise police at the recent Mardi Gras briefing to be vigilant of “violent extremism” during this year’s celebrations.

Although the tensions that flared up in the aftermath of the 2013 parade have largely subsided, the memory of Jamie Jackson Reed and Bry Hutchinson’s brutal arrests that year have left many questioning policing practices at the iconic event.

Last year, LQBTIQ legal groups reported receiving “significantly more” complaints than usual about police conduct during the parade, including their heavy presence outside the Moore Park after party.

More than 800 extra police were on duty at last year’s parade, as part of Operation Northcote. According to Dan Stubbs, director of the Inner City Legal Centre, the number of additional police was unnecessary and disproportionate to the event.

“People do find it intimidating and it’s not a dangerous event. In fact, it’s the safest event in the city all year… especially when you compare it to Future Music or Stereo,” he said.

The last few years have seen police introduce a swathe of new measures targeting Mardi Gras patrons; including a ‘decency inspection team’ to police the suitability of outfits.

“Drug detection dog operations teach people not to trust police”

Although there has been a general increase in sniffer dog operations in Sydney, their relationship with the LQBTIQ community is particularly chequered. According to Will Tregoning, founder of the UnHarm drug decriminalisation campaign group,

“In the early days of the drug detection dog program they were used to target specific communities. We’re talking from the beginning in 2001, when the NSW Police used drug dogs for early operations. The gay clubs on Oxford Street were regularly targeted… What had been a place owned by the community, increasingly felt like a controlled space, and was a factor that lead to the downfall of that area”.

Mr Tregoning expressed his concerns to Sydney Criminal Lawyers® that the presence of sniffer dogs in the marshalling section of this year’s parade will lead to dangerous behaviour, such as ‘loading up’ on drugs. He feels police are creating distrust, and undoing the work undertaken over many years to build bridges between police and the LQBTIQ community.

“What the drug detection dog operations do is teach people not to trust police, they create antagony and mistrust within communities, including the gay and lesbian community… Police are there to take care of people, and yet the drug detection operations are doing the opposite. They’re taking away the opportunity for collaboration between community and the police,” he said.

“You need to cover them up or we’re taking the float down”

Decency Inspectors will again be present in the marshalling area of this year’s Mardi Gras, who have the job of deciding what event goers can and can’t wear. NSW Police corporate spokesperson for LQBTIQ people, Tony Crandell, admits that the decisions of these officers can be arbitrary.

“We are often asked what’s okay and what’s not, which is sometimes difficult to describe – when you see something offensive, you just know.”

In 2013, the Decency Inspection Team came under fire for demanding that members of the Leather Pride float, a staple of Mardi Gras, cover their backsides before being allowed to march in the parade.

“They said ‘we’ve got five of your boys in jocks and chaps,’” says the Sydney Leather Pride Association’s John-Bernard Tyndall. “And I went ‘it’s never been a problem before’. They turned around and said well it is a problem, it’s indecent, you need to cover them up or we’re taking the float down.”

Mr Tyndall told ABC News:

“I pointed out a couple of other floats that were going past which had less covered women on them, women with exposed breasts et cetera. And they basically said, well they’re women you’re men we have to draw a line somewhere.”

Mr Tyndall believes these inspectors are an example of over-policing, and that their decisions are arbitrary and gender biased.

“Two four six eight, gay is just as good as straight!”

It has been almost four decades since Sydney’s first Mardi Gras parade. On 24 June, 1978, a number of gay men, lesbians and transgender people met at Taylor Square to march down Oxford Street to protest against the government’s anti-homosexuality laws.

After a scuffle with police at Hyde Park, the group retreated to Kings Cross, where 53 people were arrested near Kings Cross Police Station. A week later, the Sydney Morning Herald newspaper published the names and addresses of those arrested, causing many of them to lose their jobs and be evicted from their rental properties.

Thankfully, four decades later, Australia has become a more tolerant society when it comes to LQBTIQ people – and police no longer share the same hostile attitudes they once did. Years of work and cooperation have built bridges between the groups, but there is still work to do.

Last year, the City of Sydney Council voted unanimously to ask the NSW Parliament, NSW Police Force and Sydney Morning Herald to apologise to the victims of the first Mardi Gras. With the motion going before Parliament later this year, it is hoped that this long-overdue apology will finally become a reality.

Co-chair of the 78’ers, Steve Warren, told the Star Observer: “An apology from the NSW Government, and from Fairfax news, is something that many 78ers and the wider community have been calling for some time.”

To those attending this year’s Mardi Gras, stay safe, look after your mates and have a blast!

January 21, 2016 Drug Possession
0

Does Minor Drug Possession Deserve a Criminal Record?

An article featured in yesterday’s Daily Telegraph describes how Sydney courts are clogged with first-time drug offenders – with 53 people appearing at Burwood Local Court earlier this week charged with offences arising from last year’s Stereosonic Music Festival.

Hundreds more will front the Downing Centre Local Court this month after being found in possession of drugs at the Field Day Festival on New Year’s Day.

Local Court magistrates see first-time drug offenders in court almost every day – and  the government’s hard fought ‘war on drugs’ is going nowhere but backwards.

Magistrates sentencing offenders for drug possession are generally minded to deal with these cases without recording a criminal conviction, and statistics show that around 80% of those aged between 18 and 20 who plead guilty to possessing MDMA (‘ecstacy’) receive a section 10 dismissal or conditional release order – which means guilty but no criminal record.

But some say non conviction orders are being handed out far too frequently, arguing that the only way to teach young drug users a lesson is to record a criminal conviction against their names.

Young, Wild and Free

Conservative commentators believe too many young people are putting their lives in danger by consuming drugs, thinking that they can will get a slap on the wrist if caught.

They argue that handing out non conviction orders fails to send a message that drug use is dangerous – encouraging young people to take drugs despite the risks.

A number of local court magistrates have started taking drug possession cases more seriously following a number of drug-related deaths at music festivals, including that of pharmacist Sylvia Choi at last year’s Stereosonic and 19-year-old Georgina Bartter at Harbourlife in 2014.

But is this really the best approach?

Why This Approach is Flawed

Those who work within the criminal justice system – and who have extensive dealing with those who use drugs – know very well that convicting first-time drug users does not deter others from taking drugs, and can even be counter-productive.

For one, it seems senseless to ruin a young person’s life over a single – albeit serious – mistake. A criminal conviction can have a devastating impact on an individual’s career before it has even truly begun. Many young people who come before the courts are still in the midst of a university degree and have worked very hard to get where they are.

Jeopardising a person’s future because of one mistake does not discourage reoffending – rather, convicting drug users could have the opposite effect by fostering the mentality that there is ‘nothing more to lose’ – and in turn, encouraging future drug use.

And in the vast majority of cases, individuals who are afforded a second chance by being granted a non conviction order learn their lesson and do not reoffend.

Secondly, many believe that treating drug use as a criminal issue, rather than a health issue, is the wrong approach. As discussed in previous blogs, European countries including Portugal and Ireland have recently decriminalised drug possession in a bid to encourage individuals to seek medical help, rather than penalising, stigmatising and alienating them through criminal prosecution. These countries have already seen the benefits of this approach, with more and more people seeking treatment – which is a more effective deterrent than a criminal conviction.

Thirdly, the logic that all drug use warrants a conviction fails to consider the fact that each case is different – and that magistrates are expected to exercise their discretion accordingly. An 18-year-old found in possession of a couple of capsules of MDMA, who pleads guilty to the offence and has no prior record should obviously be treated more leniently than a regular drug user found with 20 capsules who has a prior criminal record.

Finally, as mentioned in previous blogs, cannabis is treated very differently under the law to other drugs – with people found in possession of 15 grams of cannabis or less being eligible for a cannabis caution instead of being charged with drug possession. This is despite the High Court case of Adams v The Queen which says that all drugs are to be treated equally in the eyes of the law. Because of this inconsistency, a good criminal lawyer will make submissions to the court that, in the context of Adams, it would be unfair and inconsistent to convict a person found in possession of a small quantity of drugs other than cannabis.

Short of decriminalising or even legalising drug possession altogether, the better approach is to exercise a degree of leniency when it comes to dealing with young people who are found in possession of small quantities of illegal drugs for the first time.