Review of the Police Powers (Drug Premises) Act 2001 - NSW ...

All of the occupants were charged with being found on, entering or leaving drug premises. All were Asian: one aged 15, two
aged 16, one 17, and the others were in their early to mid-20s. 478 Three of those charged failed to appear at court, and the
offences were proved in their absence. 479 Of those who did appear at court, the young person found on the roof, a 16 year old
male, said that he didn’t know who the premises belonged to, or who had the lease. He said that he knew that there were drugs
on the premises, and in the words of his lawyer, he “happened to be there at the time the police raided”. 480 He pleaded guilty,
was convicted and put on two years probation. The other 16 year old male received a $100 fine, a 20 year old male received a
three months gaol term, and a 25 year old male received a nine month bond. 481
In sentencing the defendant who received the three month gaol term, the magistrate said that he did not accept that the
defendant was not aware of the drug related activity taking place on the premises:
What I see as relevant in this case is the fact of the police findings and the very clear evidence of significant drug dealing on
these premises where Mr Lam was present.
He says he was not aware of that. There does appear, on the police facts, to have been some clear and ostensible indications
in those premises to anyone being there of the nature of the activity although Mr Lam said that he was not aware of that but a
fact I must take into account, Mr Lam has a history, including some involvement in illegal drugs and that is a relevant matter
which the Court has regard to as well as with his history of offending… 482
Case study 8.
Young man found on drug premises in Cabramatta returning a key
A 22 year old male arrived at a drug premises in Cabramatta five minutes after police had begun to execute a search warrant.
The magistrate was satisfied that the premises were drug premises. 483 The man said that he had gone to the premises to return
car keys that he had borrowed the night before. Although the defendant said that he had stayed at the house the night before,
and admitted that he had smoked drugs while he was there, the magistrate concluded that:
An interpretation in my view as to being there the night before does not ground sufficient reason to extend a definition pursuant
to section 12, and therefore does provide him, in my view, with a defence in relation to a lawful purpose or excuse being to
return the car keys that Mr Tran may well have given him. 484
In this case, the magistrate accepted the lawful excuse put forward by the defendant because, at the particular time when the
man was found on the drug premises by police, he was returning car keys.
Case study 9.
Boyfriend goes to girlfriend’s house for dinner
Police suspected that one of the male occupants (occupant A) of the house was involved in the commercial supply of heroin.
One afternoon, his vehicle was stopped and searched by police after they received information that he was to take a delivery of
drugs that day. No drugs were found in the car. An urgent application for a Part 2 search warrant was then made with the after
hours magistrate “to prevent the loss of evidence”. 485 Police were concerned that occupant A was aware of their interest due to
the vehicle stop that afternoon.
478 One was 20, one was 21, and the other 25 years old.
479 These were Asian males, aged 15, 17 and 21 years.
480 Campbelltown Children’s Court, Police v. [defendant’s name], 4 February 2002.
481 At the time of writing, this fine was unpaid, and had been referred to the State Debt Recovery Office Personal communication, Campbelltown
Children’s Court, 11 December 2003.
482 Fairfield Local Court, Police v. Bao Lam, 26 November 2001, p. 3
483 Liverpool Local Court, Police v. Tula Ong, Nhep Siv and Simean Sun, 11 June 2003, p. 33
484 Ibid.
485 Part 2 Search Warrant Application, State Crime Command, Drug Premises Incident 3.
88
NSW Ombudsman
Review of the Police Powers (Drug Premises) Act 2001