Blairgworie man George Brodie has lost his appeal against his conviction and six-year jail sentence for his role in a Tayside drugs gang.
Heroin with a street value of more than £118,000 and £19,000 in cash was seized as a result of a swoop by Tayside Police as part of Operation Archangel.
Brodie was convicted at the High Court of being concerned in the supply of diamorphine to others between September 8 and 12 2009 at locations across Dundee, south Angus and east Perthshire.
Co-accused Andrew Sellars of Broughty Ferry was imprisoned for five years and three months; Stephen Donald of Charleston for five years; Joseph Torano of Dundee for four years and six months; Gary Burgess of Broughty Ferry for three years and six months, and Joseph Docherty of Glasgow for two years four months.
The Crown case was based on police surveillance and mobile phone records. The accused were observed at the car parks of Sainsburys in Dundee, the Dundee International Sports Centre and at a lay-by on the A923 Dundee to Coupar Angus Road.
Brodie and Sellars were later stopped by the police, and in Sellars’ car there was heroin worth about £6,000-£7,000.
There were records of telephone calls and text messages between Sellars, Donald and Brodie which showed Donald and Brodie were to meet Sellars to receive money from him to be followed by a delivery to Sellars.
The case against the men relied in part on eye-witness identifications by the police, and the trial judge gave specific directions about these in his charge to the jury.
He gave standard warnings as to the fallibility of such identifications and the need to assess them with care. He suggested how the jury should approach that evidence.
Brodie’s appeal was on grounds that the Lord Advocate, in leading the evidence on identification and in seeking a conviction from it, infringed Brodie’s rights by failing to direct them on the specific dangers of dock identification.
It was also contended that the judge mis-directed the jury in failing to direct them that what Sellars said in a call about paying someone was not evidence against Brodie.
In the appeal decision Lord Justice General Lord Gill said the jury had to be satisfied that there was a drug-supplying operation and that Brodie was knowingly involved in it.
If there was evidence that others were involved in the operation, Brodie’s association with them at the relevant time could justify the inference that he was actively concerned in it.
It followed that if the evidence of the phone call helped justify the inference that Sellars was involved in the operation, it could also point to Brodie’s involvement in it in the light of his association with Sellars at that time.
He considered that even if the identification of Brodie was disregarded, the other evidence was sufficient to warrant the conclusion that Brodie was concerned in the drug-supplying operation.
Lord Gill said the misdirection did not result in a miscarriage of justice. His two fellow judges agreed and Brodie’s appeal was dismissed.