Français
“Drug trafficking is a deadly trade. It is not just a business but the source of funding for an entire underground economy.” During her closing argument, the public prosecutor hinted at the potential severity of the sentences. On Friday, October 30, before the court of Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy, three defendants faced up to ten years in prison for engaging in drug trafficking in Saint Barthélemy in 2026. At the conclusion of a trial lasting more than six hours, two of the three men were sentenced to 36 months in prison, 12 of which were suspended. The third was sentenced to 18 months in prison, 6 of which were suspended.
The case began with a routine traffic stop by the gendarmerie on September 9. A 43-year-old man was riding a scooter on the road to Saint-Jean. His helmet was not fastened, and his headlight was defective. So far, nothing too serious. But the man appeared agitated, refused a drug test, and threw a small backpack over a fence. The officers retrieved it and discovered it contained cocaine, ecstasy, marijuana, and ketamine. Not to mention a crack pipe and a scale. The perfect combination. The man was arrested, and a search was conducted at his home. There, the gendarmes found more than a kilo of cannabis resin packaged in ten slabs.
Placed in police custody, the man described himself as a “drug addict.” Investigators soon discovered that two other people were linked to his activities. Once identified, the alleged accomplices were arrested and questioned. While in custody, they soon began to talk. The same was true in court, more than a month after they were placed in pretrial detention.
Bags seized upon disembarking the ferry
So it was, escorted by police and with handcuffs on their wrists, that the three men entered the defendants’ dock on Friday, October 30. They are 43, 37, and 21 years old. Before the trial began, the defense attorneys raised motions to dismiss the case on procedural grounds. These motions focused in particular on the denial of access to a lawyer during an interrogation by the police and alleged deficiencies regarding the time period during which the alleged offenses were committed. The court decided to consolidate these motions with the merits of the case and began reviewing the evidence.
The 43-year-old man explained that he was living with his 37-year-old accomplice in exchange for rent of 3,500 euros per month. He recounted that he “dealt” drugs both at home and at sales points across the island. His landlord would soon begin to profit from this drug trafficking. When the presiding judge turned to him to question him, the defendant burst into tears. He explained that he had gotten involved in drug trafficking because of financial difficulties. “I let myself get swept up in it,” he asserts. “I was afraid; I have mouths to feed, and I didn’t want to lose everything.” He recounts that he would regularly pick up a bag as he disembarked from the ferry that runs between Saint Martin and Saint Barth. “I’d take the bag and give it to the man,” he says, noting that this trafficking also allowed him to obtain drugs for his personal use. But he immediately admits to having participated in “two or three other things.” To which the presiding judge remarked: “Your statements are changing…”
“They made a killing”
Standing alongside his two co-defendants in the dock, the third defendant does not say a word. Since his attorney has requested that his testimony be excluded, mentioning his involvement during the trial would undermine this defense strategy. He therefore remains silent. Nevertheless, his accomplices confirmed on several occasions that the 21-year-old also took part in the trafficking.
“They made a killing,” declares the district attorney, noting that the searches led to the seizure of 1,262 euros, 612 grams of ecstasy, one kilogram of cannabis resin, 131 grams of cocaine, 111 grams of ketamine, and seven cell phones. She is seeking a four-year prison sentence for the 43-year-old man, three years for his landlord and accomplice, and two years for the youngest member of the group. The defense attorney for the first defendant highlights her client’s “vulnerability,” while the attorney for the “landlord” emphasizes that the latter has been “utterly transparent” throughout his interrogations and while testifying in court. As for the lawyer representing the silent young man, he strives to dismantle the evidence in the case point by point. “They’re settling for very little,” he laments, describing the case as “sloppily put together.” It’s all to no avail.
A committal order is issued at the hearing, and the defendants are sent directly to prison.
