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

The magistrate was satisfied that the premises were drug premises. The woman pleaded not guilty, and said that she had a
lawful excuse for being there, and she stated in evidence:
That unit was rented by my husband and it’s natural that I’m there, I was there because that’s the unit rented by my
husband. 509
In considering whether she had a lawful excuse for being found on the premises, the magistrate noted that her evidence that
she had been asleep and had woken when police entered, had not been challenged. Nor had the evidence of her claimed
ignorance of the items thrown over the balcony, of the whistling and knocking, of the money that was found, of the people who
had been moving about the unit, or of the fortification of the door been tested. Accordingly, the magistrate found:
In my view, because it is possible to show that there is a duality of purpose, or a multiplicity of purpose for a particular
premises, it must be incumbent on the prosecution at the end of the day to show that there is some knowledge or otherwise,
or connection of an accused person with the nature of the premises being alleged. There may be situations, for example,
where a person owns a shop on which it is alleged, or through which it is alleged drugs are being traded, but there can also
be quite a legitimate use of that shop for which a lawful purpose in occupation or being on those premises can also apply
[emphasis added]. 510
Case study 13.
Dual purpose drug premises – girlfriend on premises with a clandestine laboratory in
granny flat, lawful excuse not accepted
In this case, a drug manufacturing operation had been set up in a house in a town north of Sydney. A woman and her
boyfriend were joint lessees of the house. The magistrate was not satisfied that the woman had a lawful excuse for being on
drug premises.
Police from the State Crime Command were investigating the manufacture and distribution of amphetamines. They received
information that one of their targets, a male, had organised to deliver a large quantity of amphetamine to a person on a street
corner. On the day in question, the man was seen driving in the area and, while under police surveillance, was seen to stop
and:
… leave his vehicle and walk to the footpath area, whilst holding a light blue plastic bag. The accused was seen to place the
plastic bag on the grass area approximately 6 metres from his vehicle. 511
Police then approached him and identified themselves. The bag contained a “red moist powder substance” 512 that police
believed was approximately 280 grams of pure amphetamine. The man was arrested, cautioned and taken back to his house.
Police then executed a Part 2 search warrant and found a clandestine laboratory set up in a granny flat attached to the rear of
the house. 513 His 21 year old girlfriend was home when they arrived.
Police found a number of items relating to drug manufacture in the granny flat, as well as some items in a bedroom in the
house. They also found a four litre container of liquid in the lounge room, and methylamphetamine in the fridge.
Items found in one of the bedrooms included thermometers, clamps, a separating funnel, two lengths of clear plastic hose,
glass receiver adapters, white ceramic stirrer bars and plastic containers filled with ph test strips. Four hundred and ninety
empty blister packs of various medications including Sudafed and Sinus Nasal Decongestant were found in a garbage bag
inside the wardrobe. 514
509 Liverpool Local Court, Police v. Huong Lan Nhan, 7 February 2002, p. 12.
510 Ibid, p. 21.
511 COPS event narrative, State Crime Command, Drug Premises Incident 9.
512 Ibid.
513 Police note that the man was “placed under arrest and cautioned”, and the “accused was then returned to his address”. COPS event narrative,
State Crime Command, Drug Premises Incident 9.
514 Property Seizure Exhibit Form, State Crime Command, Drug Premises Incident 9.
92
NSW Ombudsman
Review of the Police Powers (Drug Premises) Act 2001