Shropshire man involved in drugs case has cash forfeited
A Shropshire man arrested for drugs offences has had to forfeit nearly £8,000 which was seized by police when they searched his home.
West Mercia Police successfully applied for £7,850 seized from Stephen Jonathan Richards, 37, of Hinwood Road, Westbury, near Shrewsbury, to be forfeited under the Proceeds of Crime Act.
The application was made by the Force’s Economic Crime Unit at a hearing before Telford magistrates yesterday. The cash was the total amount found by police on three separate occasions between February 20 and May 8, 2009.
A search warrant was executed at Richards’s home under the Misuse of Drugs Act on February 20, 2009. Officers discovered six envelopes in a bedroom drawer containing a total of £5,580 together with a golf ball size ball of white powder which when examined was found to be 13.9 grams of cocaine.
His home was searched again four days later under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act when a further £830 was seized, together with a small amount of cannabis and some mobile phones.
Richards told police he had saved the cash in the envelopes over the past three or four years. He had also sold a motorcycle and a car and had won £400 playing poker the night before his arrest.
He admitted having cocaine for his own use and was later sentenced to a community order by Shrewsbury Crown Court for possession of the drug.
On May 8, 2009, officers carried out another search warrant at his home under the Misuse of Drugs Act when various items were seized including a plastic bag containing cocaine residue and two cash bags holding £1,440.
During interview, Richards said he had obtained the cash from a combination of betting on horses, playing poker with friends, winning on gaming machines in pubs and the sale of a watch.
In September 2009, he appeared before Shrewsbury magistrates court and was fined £100 with £100 costs after admitting possessing cocaine and cannabis.
Detective Inspector Gavin Kinrade said: “I’m delighted with the court’s decision to forfeit all the cash which was sized by the police.
“The circumstances of the respondent’s arrests, the seizure and admission of drug usage, together with his previous convictions and flawed explanation for the seized cash, led me to conclude it was obtained through unlawful conduct.
“In the absence if any reasonable explanation as to the source of the cash, the court was entitled to conclude it has been obtained through unlawful conduct and therefore was recoverable property under the Proceeds of Crime Act.”
