1

TEARAWAY

Prosecution allegations

On Friday the 14th of February 2012 Police from the Sturt Local Service Area were contacted by New South Wales police and were advised that an Adelaide man had been arrested for possessing cannabis.

This person took part in a recorded interview with NSW detectives during which he nominated this defendant, Terry Tearaway, as being the person who supplied the cannabis. The courier stated that he was taking the cannabis to Sydney on behalf of Terry and in return was receiving $450 and a quantity of cannabis.

At about 8.00 am on Saturday the 15th of February Sturt police attended at Terry Tearaway’s home 15 Slight Street Seaford and conducted a search of premises. Police located a spare bedroom in the house that had been fitted out with Hydroponic equipment. The room had a large amount of discarded cannabis leaf lying on the floor (two green garbage bags full).

A small amount of cannabis was also found drying in a second bedroom of the house. A set of electronic scales was located in the kitchen of the house and these scales had what appeared to be traces of cannabis on them.

Police then had a conversation with the defendant Terry Tearaway, this conversation was recorded on a tape recorder. Terry admitted that the cannabis found in the house was his but denied having it for the purpose of sale stating that it was for personal use only.

The defendant refused to make any further comment in relation to the matter and was arrested and conveyed to the Sturt Police Station where he was charged.

Prosecution request forfeiture of drugs and equipment to the Crown.

EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY

SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Form 4

/ INFORMATION
Magistrates Court of South Australia

Summary Procedure Act, 1921
Sections 101 / Court Use
date filed
Informant
Name:. THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBER OF THE POLICE FORCE
AddressADELAIDE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SECTION
Defendant
Name:TEARAWAY, Terry
Address
Offence details
The Information of the undersigned a member of the Police Force of Adelaide who on the 10th day of March 2012 states that Terry Tearaway on the15th of February 2012 at Seacombe Heights in the said state:
Knowingly had in his possession a prohibited substance namely cannabis for sale.
Section 33C(3) of the Controlled Substances Act 1984.
This is a Minor Indictable Offence
Other orders sought (forfeiture, compensation, additional penalty, destruction or the like – Rule 15.03)
......
DateInformant Witness
(Registrar, Deputy Registrar or Justice of the Peace)
(Not required if Complainant is a Public Authority)

Controlled Substances Act 1984

33C—Sale of controlled plants

(1) A person who—

(a) sells a large commercial quantity of a controlled plant; or

(b) has possession of a large commercial quantity of a controlled plant intending to sell any of them or their products, is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty: $500 000 or imprisonment for life, or both.

(2) A person who—

(a) sells a commercial quantity of a controlled plant; or

(b) has possession of a commercial quantity of a controlled plant intending to sell any of them or their products, is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty:

(a) for a basic offence—$200 000 or imprisonment for 25 years, or both;

(b) for an aggravated offence—$500 000 or imprisonment for life, or both.

(3) A person who—

(a) sells a controlled plant; or

(b) has possession of a controlled plant intending to sell it or its products, is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty:

(a) for a basic offence—$50 000 or imprisonment for 10 years, or both

(b) for an aggravated offence—$75 000 or imprisonment for 15 years, or both.

(4) An offence against subsection (3) involving a cannabis plant (and not involving any other controlled plant) must be prosecuted, and dealt with by the Magistrates Court, as a summary offence but if the Court determines that a person found guilty of such an offence should be sentenced to a term of imprisonment exceeding 2 years, the Court must commit the person to the District Court for sentence.

(5) If, in any proceedings for an offence against subsection (1), (2) or (3) it is proved that the defendant had possession of a trafficable quantity of a controlled plant, it is presumed, in the absence of proof to the contrary, that the defendant had the relevant intention concerning the sale of the plants or their products necessary to constitute the offence.