|
Informants
Informant / informer: noun. a person who informs
against another; one who detects offenders and lays information against them for reward.
In such a small community one would think it virtually
impossible to secure a good informant, someone who was prepared to provide information in
relation to another's criminal activities. Not so.
The fines for possession of a controlled drug, or drug
equipment, are relatively high, reported in the Island's newspapers and imprisonment a
distinct possibility. If you have a drug habit, to serve a term of imprisonment
deprives you of an easy supply (albeit Bermuda's prison is currently the subject of
attention due to the use of controlled drugs within its walls).
For the first time offender, or the person who has not
previously been convicted, the inconvenience is greater.
It must be remembered that Bermuda is an island of 21
square miles. Certainly it has beaches, some good restaurants and an hospitable
atmosphere, ideal for socialising. But, 'island fever' can set in, the allure of the
world beckons and America is less than 300 miles away. Whatever your reason,
shopping, socialising, entertainment etc. it is good once in a while to take a break.
If you have a narcotics conviction the United States will
not permit you entry. It matters not that it is possession of a small piece of
drinking straw in which there were traces of cocaine, or possession of narcotics with
intent to supply. Once convicted, if you want to visit the US it is best to take a
flight to the UK then to the US. Expensive and protracted.
If you want to progress your narcotics 'business' then
access to the US is a must.
Whether you are arrested for possession of a SUSPECTED
controlled drug, or equipment bearing traces of a SUSPECTED controlled drug, should it
transpire that the suspect material is a controlled drug there is every likelihood you
will receive a conviction.
Once you have been arrested, conveyed to the station,
booked in and interviewed, bail will almost certainly follow. The SUSPECTED drug, or
equipment bearing traces of a SUSPECTED controlled drug will be sent for analysis.
You now have a period of up to 6 weeks to wait for the results of the examination.
More to the point, you now have a period of 6 weeks to
find the narcotics office something 'better', the next person up the ladder. If you
were arrested for possession, we want the supplier, or a supplier. If you can supply
this information and an arrest follows; you are free to go.
You will read (in my Diary) of the arrest of Vernon
Dill who was convicted of possessing cocaine with intent to supply. He was arrested
in November 1988 following details from an informant who, in company with his friends, was
never placed before a Court.
Possibly the most concerning aspect for anyone arrested
was the unknown. The narcotics office would be submitting the articles seized from
you as an exhibit for examination. The power of arrest extended to mere suspicion
that an article was a controlled drug or that the the 'equipment' in your possession was
drug paraphernalia and bore traces of a drug. The latter was generally 'crack' pipes
or a syringe, but could extend to a spoon or a short length of straw.
The concern for someone arrested in relation to a
SUSPICION was whether the 'slight belief' or 'faint notion' would be confirmed following
examination. Once arrested the items seized from a prisoner, potential exhibits, are
now in the control of the arresting officer.
The exhibits will be bagged, sealed and placed securely in
the Narcotics department before they are conveyed to the Government analyst. But
what happens to them from the time of arrest to being placed with the Narcotics office
custodian? Who knows.
The narcotics office was hardly a controlled environment,
certainly not sterile. Any amount of contamination could take place, accidentally or
otherwise. Drug equipment was regularly seized from 'crack houses', often without
prisoner. Many exhibits did not find their way any further than an officer's desk.
Why not?
What possible use would anyone in the narcotics office
have for a piece of foil bearing traces of a white powder; a stainless steel teaspoon with
a dried residue on the top, burnt beneath; a small plastic bottle with gauze on top
fashioned into a 'pipe' by use of a small length of tube?
You could never be certain the item seized from you would
not (much to your surprise) be analysed and found to be a controlled drug or have traces
of a controlled drug on it.
The simple solution was to inform on another.
In some cases this was simple, if you had a habit it would
only be natural for you to buy from a small-time dealer. In other instances, where
more serious amounts of drug were involved and the consequences that much more serious,
the Narcotics department may need something a little more 'spectacular'.
No one asked questions, everyone was happy with a 'good
result'. It is almost certain some of the smaller dealers were set up by informant
or their competitors. Bermuda had (has?) no official list of informants, no
register. There was (is?) absolutely no control over an informants activity or the
meetings held with them.
It would take a drug user, or small time dealer, little to
secure a quantity of cocaine sufficient to prosecute for possession with intent to supply.
As a small time dealer, you may be looking at some months in prison, why not buy
sufficient cocaine and sell it to a target then inform on him? It is not as if you
will lose much money; buy $1,500 of cocaine and sell for $1000 (too good a bargain to
miss) to your 'mark', take a loss of $500 to ensure you receive a verbal warning and are
never placed before the Court.
Who cared if the 'informant' was placed before the Court.
We already had his drug (from his initial arrest) which amounted to an 'on the spot
fine'.
Narcotics investigation is like no other. There is
no crime. No one comes running to the police shouting "that man stole my
drugs", "I've been beaten up for selling inferior narcotics".
Occasionally the residents of an area may complain that people are selling in their
neighbourhood or to their children. Sadly, innocent people are mugged for cash, or
burgled to pay for the drug habit of another and the occasional user dies. The only
crime is that which we went out and found.
In reality, the person setting up the 'mark' would lose
less, he had no doubt already 'cut' (adulterated, diluted the drug's purity - see cocaine)
and retained sufficient for himself or re-sale.
The 'mark' need not be someone the informant had bought
from before. The Island was small enough for most people to either know of another
area of supply or to be introduced a new supplier. There were many people who would
buy from more than one supplier and could make the connection. As a narcotics
officer you could dictate the target.
Many of the arrests for cannabis resulted not because
informants were attempting to avoid prosecution, some were simply seeking to cut out the
competition. There was a glut of cannabis, much supplied by the cruise ships and the
demand had not rocketed as had happened with cocaine.
Informants for heroin were rare as most of those who were
arrested were addicts and could not care less. In prison they could obtain a
heroin substitute.
The island was awash with informants. With some,
none of the above was applicable, they did it for the fun of it!
Please see the diary, or use the search facility to view
all instances where an informant is mentioned. An informant, for the purposes of
this site, will be consistently labelled throughout i.e. informant1.
It is possibly of note that the Drug Court (as reported in
the Bermuda Sun - 16.09.98) could put an end to one fear expressed by drug users /
dealers. It would also give Bermuda the chance to export drug users who, having
received a taste for the drug or the money that can be made selling narcotics, wish to
expand their knowledge, network or supply.
See: Bermuda
Sun 16th September 1998
|