"It appeared to me that I had been misled, deceived and lied to"

Thursday 18 October 2018

Accounts showing where an ex-deckchair business owner sourced her wealth were never handed to the lawyer who helped her buy a Jersey apartment, the Royal Court heard yesterday, in the trial into whether she was spending the proceeds of crime.

Joanne Marie Jones (49) is charged with four counts of spending and transferring alleged drug trafficking money.

She denies all of the charges, but is accused of paying the alleged ill-gotten gains into UK bank accounts on trips to her native Wales, buying property there and purchasing six investment bonds for just under £300,000. 

The trial began this week with the prosecution opening their case against Miss Jones, whom they accuse of being a drug dealer.

Yesterday, the prosecution continued their attempts to trace Miss Jones’s financial trail and highlight certain cash sums without an explanation for how she came by them.

Pictured: Joanne Marie Jones's trial regarding alleged criminal money opened this week and is being heard in the Royal Court.

The Royal Court heard testimony from Solicitor Paul Scally, who assisted Miss Jones in buying an apartment in St. Peter. The proceeds from the ultimate sale of this property allowed Miss Jones to buy the investment bonds forming the basis of one of the counts brought against her.

During the questioning, the prosecution attempted to prove their claim that Miss Jones lied to him about where she got the money from to buy the flat.

Mr Scally, who assisted Miss Jones in the purchase of the Jersey property in March 2011, said that she told him the funds she was using came from three properties she owned in Wales. 

Pictured: Property Solicitor Paul Scally testified that Miss Jones told him she owned properties in Wales which she either rented or sold to gain the capital to buy the flat in Jersey.

Answering questions from Crown Advocate David Hopwood, Mr Scally said: “Joanne Jones explained to me that she had three properties in Wales” and that the money she was using to buy the flat in Jersey had been “accrued from rental on those properties and the sale of one.” Mr Scally added that Miss Jones told him the remainder of the funds for the purchase came from money her mother had left to her.

When he opened the prosecution’s case, the Crown Advocate claimed that Miss Jones “lied” when she told Mr Scally this, as “later on she admitted she didn’t own houses in Wales that she could have sold at that point.” 

Mr Scally said that he had asked Miss Jones for a copy of the statement from the account she said was either wholly or jointly in her mother’s name – but that statement was never produced.

Pictured: The trial centres around whether Miss Jones came by her vast amounts of money legitimately or by criminal activity.

Defence Advocate Michael Haines challenged Mr Scally on his ability to recall events that took place in 2011, as well as how deeply he investigated where Miss Jones got the money from that she used to buy the property.

Advocate Haines pressed Mr Scally as to why he didn’t follow up with Miss Jones about the bank statement, or ask for proof of sale regarding the property in Wales, suggesting that Mr Scally did not follow 'due diligence' when it came to verifying Miss Jones’s source of funds.

Mr Scally said: “At the time, that wasn’t part of our process and part of our procedure… I had no reason to disbelieve what she was telling me.”

Explaining his reaction when he heard that Miss Jones had been charged in relation to these offences, he said: “I was worried, I was upset, because it appeared to me that I had been misled, deceived and lied to.”

The prosecution will call its last witness today before the defence opens its case.