High Court Orders Recovery of Jamaican Property in Drug Trafficking Case

13 Jan 2025Court Report

The High Court ruled on the recovery of property linked to drug trafficking, highlighting the application of the Proceeds of Crime Act

Introduction

The High Court, presided over by HHJ Richard Roberts, delivered a significant judgment in the case involving the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and defendants Mr Glenford Robert Adams and Ms Melissa Latoya Nembhard. The case centred around a Civil Recovery Order application under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 concerning a property in Kingston, Jamaica.

Background

The property in question, located at 11 Christopher Boulevard, St Andrew, Kingston, Jamaica, was allegedly purchased with proceeds from Mr Adams' drug trafficking activities. The DPP sought to recover the property, asserting it was acquired through unlawful conduct.

Case Details

Mr Adams, with a history of drug-related criminality, admitted during police interviews that the property was purchased using funds from his drug trafficking operations. Despite his absence at the trial, he had previously consented to a Civil Recovery Order.

Second Defendant's Defence

Ms Nembhard, appearing in person, contested the claim, arguing that the property was purchased by her grandmother, Silver Nelson, with contributions from family members. She denied any involvement in the unlawful acquisition of the property.

Evidence and Witnesses

The court heard testimonies from various witnesses, including financial investigator Mr Craig Law, who supported the DPP's claim. The Second Defendant's witnesses, however, provided conflicting accounts, undermining their credibility.

Findings

HHJ Roberts found the DPP's case credible, concluding that the property was indeed purchased with proceeds from Mr Adams' illegal activities. The court dismissed Ms Nembhard's defence, citing inconsistencies and lack of supporting evidence.

Conclusion

The court ruled in favour of the DPP, ordering the recovery of the property under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. Ms Nembhard was also ordered to pay the claimant's costs, amounting to £30,784.34.

Implications

This case underscores the effectiveness of the Proceeds of Crime Act in recovering assets linked to criminal activities, serving as a deterrent against using illicit funds for property acquisition.