[2025] EWCA Crim 1172

There were five co-defendants in addition to the applicant: James Kelly, Stephen Kelly, Paul Speedy, Dean Woods and Liam Hart.

The case involved a conspiracy to supply cocaine which took place between November 2018 and June 2019. The applicant had previously worked in a car factory, but he had lost his employment, suffered mental health difficulties, which are set out in a psychological report, and became involved in the supply of cocaine.

The defendants were involved over a seven month period in the nationwide wholesale supply of cocaine. James Kelly, Stephen Kelly, Dean Woods, Paul Speedy and Liam Hart worked together. The applicant operated independently of this group and supplied them and others with wholesale quantities of cocaine. The applicant was found on arrest to be in possession of two firearms and ammunition which he kept at the home which he shared with his partner, his mother and his sister.

The judge found that James Kelly had a leading role in organising the nationwide wholesale distribution of multi kilo quantities of cocaine on a daily basis. He arranged for the co-defendants Speedy, Woods and then Hart to deliver cocaine to the areas of Bradford, Bolton, Newcastle, London, Surrey, Nottingham, Scunthorpe, Grimsby, Sheffield and Wrexham. In total the police found that there were over 100 trips, and perhaps as many as 114.

Four drug seizures and one seizure of cash took place. The four drug seizures totalled 13 kilograms of import quality cocaine, although these were believed to be simply snapshots of the actual quantities of cocaine that had successfully been supplied. Each supply was between two and five kilograms of cocaine based on the evidence from the seizures. If each trip was a delivery of drugs and an exchange of cash, it was possible that between 200 and 500 kilograms of cocaine had been supplied. Even if half the trips were drug deliveries and the other half were separate deliveries of cash, that would still equate to between 100 and 250 kilograms of cocaine supplied over a seven and a half month period.

James Kelly's home was the hub of the organisation. Video and surveillance evidence, combined with ANPR and cell-site evidence, showed who was coming and going from that address. James Kelly organised the business from his family home and from his partner's home. He was in frequent daily contact with everyone in the organisation. When he was arrested he was in possession of two EncroChat phones.

Stephen Kelly was involved on a level below that of his brother James, according to the judge's findings and on the prosecution case. He was responsible for the laundering of the proceeds of the drugs conspiracy. Video surveillance showed that he and James Kelly were often together. They were very careful with the use of mobile phone communication devices. There was no phone contact between Stephen and James Kelly's phones during the conspiracy period. It is worth noting that reliance was placed by Mr Forte KC, who appears on behalf of the applicant, on the fact that the applicant had a role just below that of Stephen Kelly, and that in Stephen Kelly's appeal to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division it was estimated that the starting point taken in his case was around 21 or 22 years' imprisonment for the supply of drugs, before it was increased to take account of his relevant previous convictions.

Paul Speedy was one of the most prolific couriers in the conspiracy. He went on 66 trips. He was a taxi driver and would drive James and Stephen Kelly around. He drove James Kelly to all of the meetings with customers. He would sometimes meet with Dean Woods before Woods went on a trip.

Dean Woods was involved in about 30 trips. He was arrested in possession of an EncroChat phone.

Liam Hart was involved in nine trips. When Hart was arrested on 29 May, four kilograms of cocaine were found hidden in the roof lining of his vehicle. He had been to Newcastle on five occasions, Grimsby on two occasions, and also to Bradford.

Seizures connected with the conspiracy were made on 18 April, when a man called James Boon was arrested in Newcastle with two kilograms of cocaine with a wholesale value of between £60,000 and £70,000. On 13 May, a man called Tobias Allman was arrested in Liverpool with just over five kilograms of cocaine of 82 per cent purity with a wholesale value of between £150,000 and £175,000. On 20 May, a man called James Connor was arrested with just under £24,000 in cash. The purity of the cocaine varied between 61 per cent to 78 per cent.

The applicant supplied the group and others with cocaine. He was seen to supply Speedy and Hart with drugs which were then transported to other parts of the country. There was no visible phone communication between the applicant and any of the other conspirators, which suggested that he might have had some unidentified communications device to make arrangements, although no EncroChat phone was located. His involvement in the supply of Class A drugs and cocaine was far wider than that demonstrated by those six occasions when he was seen by surveillance officers to supply people in the organised crime group. That was clear from an analysis of a notebook, or tick list, recovered from his home address. Also recovered from his address was a drugs press.

The notebook recovered had a number of pages containing handwritten lists. The vast majority had two columns headed "in" and "out". It was estimated that in the 59 transactions shown in the notebook the amount of trade represented cocaine worth between £1.7 million and £2 million. There was some duplication in loose sheets found in the notebook.

On the last occasion, on 29 May 2019, the applicant was observed to transfer a bag to another conspirator, who was subsequently stopped and found to be in possession of just under four kilograms of cocaine.

The applicant was arrested on 24 June. He was the first of the main conspirators to be arrested. He lived with his partner in a flat in Everton. His property was searched, and the notebook was recovered. His family home in Liverpool was searched and the police recovered numerous mobile phones, rolls of duct tape, a box of vinyl gloves, metal plates and two cash counters.

In the attic of the family home, which was also occupied by his mother and sister, two firearms were found. One was a Russian made Makarov self-loading pistol with its serial numbers erased. This was in good working condition and functioned correctly. There was a box magazine packaged with the pistol which appeared to be of the correct type. Another identical firearm was also recovered in the same condition. There were also six boxes of 16 rounds of 9mm Makarov ammunition in good condition and viable. They were the correct calibre for use in both of the Makarov self-loading pistols. A further box of 40 rounds of ammunition of a different branding was found; they were not suitable for use with the two firearms.

When interviewed the applicant made no comment.

At the Magistrates' Court the applicant did not offer a plea. The Better Case Management Form, which we have seen on the Digital Case System, was partly completed. There was no tick on the box about whether the applicant had been advised on pleas. Under "Pleas" the accurate, but unhelpful, comment "indictable only" appears.

The case was committed to the Crown Court. The applicant pleaded guilty at the plea and trial preparation hearing. That followed, as we know, a conference in His Majesty's Prison Liverpool, where the applicant had been remanded in custody some seven or so days after the hearing in the Magistrates' Court. At that conference a record was made by his legal representative that the applicant was saying that he was guilty.

The sentencing exercise took place in February 2024. Before sentencing there was an email exchange between the solicitor advocate acting for the applicant, and Mr Travers, prosecuting counsel, who appears before us today as he did below, very properly brought to the attention of Mr Forte KC, who appears for the applicant on the renewed application before us. In an email, dated 21 February 2020, reference was made to the fact that the solicitors' clerk had just mentioned to the solicitor advocate the Better Case Management Form and the issue of credit. The solicitor advocate suggested that he should have said something like "Likely GP", or "Likely guilty plea" on the form.