The Allegation

​

Hassan Noor was charged after allegedly attempting to possess a commercial quantity of methamphetamine following the delivery of a consignment to a property at Horsley Park.

The prosecution alleged that:

• a consignment containing a commercial quantity of methamphetamine had been imported into Australia from the United States

• the drugs were concealed inside four pressure washers

• the consignment was delivered to a property at Horsley Park

• Noor travelled by taxi to the property on 2 December 2019

• Noor and another man, John Scarlis, loaded four hessian sacks into the boot of the taxi

• Noor was therefore knowingly attempting to possess a commercial quantity of a border controlled drug

The Crown case relied heavily on circumstantial evidence to establish that Noor knew, or was reckless as to the possibility, that the sacks contained a border controlled drug.

​

The Reality of the Case

The prosecution case arose from an Australian Border Force and NSW Police investigation into a consignment imported from the United States.

Evidence established that:

• the consignment contained four pressure washers with methamphetamine concealed inside their internal mechanics

• 83 packages were recovered, with a gross weight of approximately 192.8kg and a calculated pure methamphetamine weight of 143kg

• the methamphetamine was removed and replaced with an inert substance before the consignment was reconstructed

• on 2 December 2019, the consignment was transported to a property at Horsley Park

• Noor travelled to the property by taxi and met John Scarlis at the gate

• Noor instructed the taxi driver to drive to the rear of the property, where the two men loaded four hessian sacks into the boot

• Noor then asked the taxi driver to return him to Kellyville

Noor did not give evidence at trial and no witnesses were called on his behalf. His case was that the evidence against him was insufficient to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

​

Our Defence Strategy

In a case based primarily on circumstantial evidence, the defence must carefully examine whether the evidence actually establishes the accused's knowledge and intention beyond reasonable doubt.

Key issues included:

• whether Noor knew what was contained inside the hessian sacks

• whether the circumstances established that he knew the sacks contained a border controlled drug

• whether the evidence demonstrated that he was knowingly attempting to possess the methamphetamine

• whether reasonable alternative explanations remained open on the evidence

• whether the Crown had excluded every reasonable inference consistent with Noor's innocence

The defence challenged the strength of the circumstantial case and argued that the evidence did not establish Noor's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

​

The Court's Considerations

The Court of Criminal Appeal was required to independently assess whether the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's guilty verdict.

The Court considered:

• the nature and strength of the circumstantial evidence

• the circumstances in which Noor travelled to the Horsley Park property

• the loading of the hessian sacks into the taxi

• whether the evidence established Noor's knowledge of what was inside the sacks

• whether the Crown had excluded reasonable possibilities consistent with his innocence

• the limited advantage the jury had over the Court in assessing a largely uncontested circumstantial case where Noor did not give evidence

The Court found that the inferences relied upon by the Crown were, in important respects, no more than speculation. It concluded there was a reasonable possibility that Noor did not know that the sacks contained a border controlled drug.

The Court further found that the Crown had failed to exclude an inference consistent with Noor's innocence that was reasonably open on the evidence.

​

The Result

Noor had originally been found guilty following a jury trial in the District Court of NSW and, on 7 June 2024, was sentenced to five years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years.

He appealed against his conviction on the basis that the jury's verdict was unreasonable and could not properly be supported by the evidence.

The NSW Court of Criminal Appeal:

• extended the time for Noor to seek leave to appeal

• granted leave to appeal

• allowed the appeal

• quashed the conviction

• entered a verdict of acquittal

• quashed the sentence imposed by the District Court

The Court held that it was not open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of Noor's guilt.

​

Why This Case Matters

This case highlights the importance of carefully examining circumstantial evidence in serious drug matters.

It reinforces that:

• the presence of a person at a location connected with drugs does not automatically establish knowledge or possession

• the prosecution must prove the accused's knowledge and relevant state of mind beyond reasonable doubt

• circumstantial evidence must be considered as a whole

• reasonable possibilities consistent with an accused's innocence must be excluded before a conviction can properly stand

• where the Crown's case depends substantially on inference, speculation cannot replace proof beyond reasonable doubt

• an appellate court may overturn a conviction where the evidence does not support the jury's verdict beyond reasonable doubt

​

Our Expertise

At Abbas & Co Lawyers, we act in serious criminal matters including:

• commercial quantity drug offences

• drug importation and possession charges

• Commonwealth drug offences

• complex criminal investigations and prosecutions

• appeals against criminal convictions

We know how to:

• carefully analyse circumstantial evidence

• examine the prosecution's case and alleged chain of events

• identify weaknesses in evidence concerning knowledge and intention

• challenge inferences that are not supported by the evidence

• identify reasonable alternative explanations consistent with innocence

• develop strategic appeals where a conviction may not be supported beyond reasonable doubt

​

Speak to Us

If you or a loved one is facing serious drug charges or has been convicted following a criminal trial, obtaining experienced legal advice is critical.

Serious drug offences can carry significant penalties, and the prosecution must establish every element of the alleged offence beyond reasonable doubt.

If you believe a conviction may not be supported by the evidence, Abbas & Co Lawyers can assess the circumstances of your matter and advise you on your legal options.