In the Royal Court, Paige Tardif, 32, admitted being concerned in the supply of the class B substance cannabis and the class C substances gabapentin and buprenorphine. She also pleaded guilty to possessing cannabis resin and cannabis.
The court suspended a two-year prison sentence for three years.
Prosecuting Advocate Phoebe Cobb told the court that the defendant had gone to the prison on 7 May last year. She was carrying a black carrier bag in which 1.27g of cannabis resin was found. A further 0.75g of herbal cannabis was found in another package in the bag. The drugs had a value of between £52-£63 based on the defendant’s pricing.
Three mobile phones were also seized which contained messages indicative of drug dealing.
The defendant had messaged her contacts asking if anybody wanted to buy 5g of cannabis for £150. In another message she offered blister packs of what was thought to be 10 gabapentin tablets for £25. In another, she offered 2mgs of ‘subby’ – a reference to buprenorphine – for £40. The messages indicated that she had been supplying drugs over a two-month period.
Tardif was interviewed twice following her arrest. In the first interview, she claimed that she had found the cannabis resin in her back garden and was trying to establish who put it there. She said she had decanted the herbal cannabis from her prescription. In the second interview, she reserved her right to remain silent.
In May 2024, she had been fined £400 in the Magistrate’s Court for possessing drugs.
Defending, Advocate Samuel Steel said his client had accepted responsibility for offending and vowed that she would never put her family in the same position again.
He told the court that this was a case of the social supply of drugs, which had been neither sophisticated nor established, and there had been no importation, coercion or violence and no use of weapons.
He said the street value of the drugs recovered was modest and described Tardif as someone who was not immersed in a drug-taking environment but had instead made impulsive decisions.
A probation report stated that she had spoken about changing her behaviour but had failed to turn such intentions into actions. The court was told that she led a chaotic lifestyle, made poor choices and maintained the wrong sort of social network.
Judge Catherine Fooks said the court rejected Tardif’s claims that she was aware of the offending only from the messages on her phone and that it had been carried out by someone else who she refused to name.
The court shared a concern of the probation officer that Tardif had failed to respond positively to non-custodial penalties previously but was also mindful of the impact a prison term would have on members of her family.
On balance the court decided that she should not be jailed.
A prison sentence of two years was imposed, but suspended for three years, for the cannabis supply offence.
Probation orders of one year, to run concurrently, were imposed for each of the other drug supply offences.
No separate penalties were made for the possession charges.