Four women arrested over alleged cocaine-smuggling plot involving towels soaked in vinegar, chilli
Lottie Twyford
, ABC
Photo:
AAP
Police have charged four women in Brisbane over an alleged failed attempt to import 30kg of cocaine into Australia.
The Australian Federal Police (AFP) allege two 18-year-olds tried to smuggle drugs wrapped in towels soaked in vinegar and chilli.
The pair were stopped by Australian Border Force (ABF) officers, when they arrived in Brisbane on a flight from Hong Kong on 3 July.
Four suitcases were searched and police say they contained 20 bricks of a white substance, which allegedly returned a positive result for cocaine.
They were each charged with one count of importing a commercial quantity of a border-controlled substance.
Two other women, whom police allege provided them with instructions relating to obtaining passports, airline tickets and accommodation, have also been arrested.
The 23-year-old and a 21-year-old have been charged with one count each of attempting to possess a commercial quantity of a border-controlled drug.
Both offences carry a maximum penalty of life in prison.
Police say all four women appeared before the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Friday and three were granted bail.
One of the 18-year-olds was refused bail.
All are expected to return to court in July.
AFP Detective Acting Superintendent Natalie Scott said criminals would go to great and sometimes novel lengths to import drugs into the country.
"The AFP and ABF work closely every day to disrupt criminal efforts to bring harmful drugs into our country," she said. "Anyone who attempts to import drugs will be stopped and met with the full force of the law."
The AFP urges anyone who sees suspicious behaviour at airports to report it.
- ABC
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
Qantas 'contacted by potential cybercriminal' after attack on data of up to 6 million customers
Qantas says it takes matters of cybersecurity "incredibly seriously". Photo: AFP Qantas says it has been contacted by "a potential cybercriminal" less than a week after revealing a "significant" breach and theft of data on up to 6 million of its customers from its records during a cyber attack. The airline said in a statement on Monday that it is working to verify the legitimacy of the contact and have contacted the Australian Federal Police (AFP). It has not confirmed the nature of the contact or whether a ransom was sought. A spokesperson for the AFP told the ABC that it was investigating the contact. "The airline has been highly engaged in assisting authorities and the AFP with investigating this incident," a statement said. The update comes after the airline detected unusual activity on a third-party platform used by a Qantas contact centre. Qantas said last week that it was investigating the proportion of the data that had been stolen, though it expected it would be "significant". The airline said that it was continuing to work with "specialist cybersecurity experts to forensically analyse the impacted system". That investigation has determined that the system was now secure and no credit card details, personal financial information or passport details were accessed in the breach. "We want to reassure all of our customers that there is no impact to Qantas' operations or the safety of our airline," Qantas said in a statement. On Friday Qantas chief executive Vanessa Hudson issued an apology to the airline's customers, saying the business takes matters of cybersecurity "incredibly seriously". "What I would first like to say is acknowledge the impact to all our customers and, first and foremost, I'd like to apologise to them," she said in an interview with Channel Seven in Athens. "I know this data breach is a serious concern. I know the stress that it has created for many, many millions of customers. "And so, right up front, I want to say we take this seriously and we are going to do everything that we can to communicate transparently." - ABC
RNZ News
6 hours ago
- RNZ News
Guilty verdict in mushroom murder trial: What happens if there's an appeal?
By Mikaela Ortolan for ABC Erin Patterson arriving in the back of a prison transport vehicle at Latrobe Valley Magistrate's Court in Morwell, Australia. Photo: AFP / MARTIN KEEP After a marathon trial involving more than 50 witnesses, Erin Patterson has been found guilty by a jury of murdering three relatives by lacing their meals with death cap mushrooms. The high-profile case has captured a global audience, with seats at Morwell's Latrobe Valley Law Courts in regional Victoria filling each day for more than two months. After about a week of deliberations, a Supreme Court jury on Monday delivered its verdict, finding the 50-year-old guilty of murdering Don and Gail Patterson and Heather Wilkinson. It also found her guilty of the attempted murder of Ian Wilkinson, the only surviving guest of the lunch. But the case's time in the courts may not be over, with the possibility Patterson could appeal the decision. Patterson will have 28 days from the date of her sentence to begin the process of lodging an appeal, according to the Supreme Court of Victoria. Her legal team can appeal either the guilty verdict itself, the sentence handed down or both of those things together. Outside of this window, convicted people must file for an extension of time which may or may not be accepted by the courts. University of Newcastle criminology researcher Xanthe Mallett said the prosecution would also have the opportunity to appeal a sentence once that had been handed down. "If in cases where the sentence is considered to be too lenient, the prosecution can appeal that - the severity of the sentence, but they can't appeal a not-guilty verdict," she said. Erin Patterson was found guilty on three counts of murder and one of attempted murder today. Photo: ABC News There are a number of grounds the defence can appeal on. High-profile barrister Robert Richter KC said the most common ground was that the verdict was unsatisfactory and unreasonable. "The Court of Appeal might find that it isn't sufficient to justify a conviction," he said. "But that on its own is a very difficult ground to get home, because it sort of does not usurp the function of the jury, but what it does is it looks at what a jury ought to have concluded or should have concluded." Richter said if any of the directions given to the jury had misstated the law, it could be grounds for an appeal, but noted the judge presiding over the high-profile case had been "very careful". Mallett said the defence would need to demonstrate that there was some error of law or some problem that was sufficient to be granted grounds of appeal. "Every case is obviously unique," Mallett said. "If [the defence] appeal ... or want to appeal, they would look at every part of the case, looking for anything that they felt was a legal justification." If an application to appeal is granted, the matter will go before the Court of Appeal but it could take months before a court date is set. Richter said if the appeal succeeded in front of a panel of three judges in the Court of Appeal, there were two possibilities. "One is to say the evidence was not sufficient to produce a verdict beyond reasonable doubt," he said. "Or alternatively there have been errors and so the verdict has to be quashed." If the verdict is quashed a retrial could be ordered. If an application for leave to appeal is rejected in the first instance by the Court of Appeal, relevant parties could apply for leave to appeal in the High Court. "That requires demonstrating particular problems that have a special application in the criminal law that the High Court would accept as important enough to give leave to appeal," Richter said. "But the percentage of cases that get special leave to appeal in criminal matters is very, very low." If leave to appeal is not granted, the verdict or sentence stands and the matter does not continue further. - ABC
RNZ News
8 hours ago
- RNZ News
Erin Patterson guilty of all charges in mushroom murder trial
Erin Patterson has been found guilty of murdering three of her estranged husband's relatives, by serving them beef Wellingtons containing death cap mushrooms. The jury also found Patterson guilty of attempting to murder Heather's husband Ian, who survived the mushroom poisoning but spent months in hospital. Michael Giles of the South Gippsland Sentinel-Times has been covering the trial and spoke to Lisa Owen. To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following: See terms of use.
