Share House Culpability?

[gamma.goblin]

Im curious as to the culpability level of living in a share house in NSW to those who do not participate in the particular illicit activity.If you are not in NSW, then it would still be interesting to hear your understanding of the situations there.

For example, I know they have these 'drug house' laws now that relate to selling drugs from the premises, which means everyone in the place can be busted, but is there any power in the law for police to, say, arrest the flatmates of a drug user who keeps all the drugs and associated parephenalia in their own bedroom?

What about something like drying 'shrooms? Does this equate to drug production? I can appreciate that flatmates would have to know if something like a meth lab was in operation under their roof, but they would have no idea if a flatmate did a quick bho extraction while everybody was out, and then put everything back in their room.If the cops found the condensing tube with hash residue in a bedroom, would this be enough for them to arrest the entire household on drug production charges? Even though the magistrate would most likely just roll their eyes?

cheers

[Torsten]

For example, I know they have these 'drug house' laws now that relate to selling drugs from the premises, which means everyone in the place can be busted, but is there any power in the law for police to, say, arrest the flatmates of a drug user who keeps all the drugs and associated parephenalia in their own bedroom?

The drug house laws are quite specific, but I am actually not too familiar with them. They simple don't apply in most cases. I am pretty sure a case has to be made to a warrant signing magistrate that the drug house laws apply.

For all other cases the law protects private spaces - in theory. So, if one member in the household is in trouble then all common spaces and his spaces can be searched, but not spaces the suspect has no right to access. In practical terms this can be a bit vague though. If for example there is a bong in the communal space and no one owns up to owning it then the cops could claim cause of an immediate need to search the house for drugs. If the bong owner owns up and all others deny involvement then they technically have no right to search the private areas that don't belong to the suspect.

This probably works for most minor cases, but when it comes to raiding a house for a meth lab I am sure they won't give a rat's ass who has access to which rooms. Also, if all they know is that drug are beign sold/manufactured/stored from/at the house, but no individual has been identified then the warrant will cover all spaces.

What about something like drying 'shrooms? Does this equate to drug production? I can appreciate that flatmates would have to know if something like a meth lab was in operation under their roof, but they would have no idea if a flatmate did a quick bho extraction while everybody was out, and then put everything back in their room.If the cops found the condensing tube with hash residue in a bedroom, would this be enough for them to arrest the entire household on drug production charges?

Simply drying shrooms is unlikely to get a manufacturing charge. It would be simply possession or maybe trafficking. If you also had a quantity of jars sitting around as well as finished product then things start to look a bit different. Again, if it is what looks like for personal use then the cops won't waste their time with manufacturing charges. But if it looks like enough for trafficking [and that is not a lot], then I am sure they'd just love adding that charge. Mind you, a judge probably won't bother too much with that at small amounts.

If a hash tube is found in a bedroom then they are unlikely to arrest anyone other than the owner of that space. However, if he disputes owning it then they CAN arrest and question everyone. They can however only charge one of you with that possession. The reasoning here is that anyone could have dropped that tube into that room to frame the guy or simply to create confusion. So cops have the right to go on fact fnding missions by arresting everyone.

Basically in a share house you have to have an agreement that the person taking the risk will also own up to the risk when asked, or you have to agree to share the risk. This should be done before you start anything, so that everyone knows where they stand. It also really helps to have locks on private doors and to use them. A cop is less likely to break a door down of someone who is likely to be innocent than to just push his way in and have a peek. Locks also eliminate the actual possibility of a housemate dumping shit in your room for whatever malicious or confused reason he might have.

[Anodyne]

Basically in a share house you have to have an agreement that the person taking the risk will also own up to the risk when asked, or you have to agree to share the risk.

I read a legal aid pamphlet once that described a situation like this:

*cops knock on door for noise disturbance/suspicious smell/whatever

*they peer in and see a bag of dope on the kitchen table

*none of the ppl admit to owning it

*fuck-all cops can do, as it's communal space and no individual can be blamed

Of course, this only works if everyone sticks to the story "it's not mine, I have no idea where it came from - we had a party last night, someone must've left it here", and no one has any other drugs in the house, at least as far as I understand it. But this was about 10 years ago, laws may've changed - anyone know if this would still work?

Interestingly, the contrast story went like this:

*cops knock on door for noise disturbance/suspicious smell/whatever

*they peer in and see a housemate pushing a bag of dope under a newspaper on the kitchen table

*cops arrest that person for possession

Apparently they've got a "you touched it last" rule - even if it didn't actually belong to that person, they were still "in possession" of the drugs while they were hiding them, and therefore can be charged. I'm not certain, but I think that even if the real owner comes forward, they can both get charged.

[Torsten]

I read a legal aid pamphlet once that described a situation like this:

yep, spot on BUT ONLY IF there is nothing else illegal in the house. ie, the cops can't arrest 3 people for one bag of dope, but they can search all areas of the house on the basis of that bag of dope, and then make arrests for anything else they find.

Apparently they've got a "you touched it last" rule - even if it didn't actually belong to that person, they were still "in possession" of the drugs while they were hiding them, and therefore can be charged. I'm not certain, but I think that even if the real owner comes forward, they can both get charged.

you can't both be charged for possession, however, there are charges like hiding evidence, supply, etc that could be made to fit the situation.

[MrBumpy]

hmm... I was told pretty much the opposite thing by a policeman in high school.

The scenario he put forward was the police show up at a party, walk in, there is a bowl of green vegetable matter on the table and a pipe next to it. He then asks us if no one claims ownership who can be charged?

He said that everybody in the room could be charged for posession, since everyone in the room has the ability to take control of the bowl or some shit.

Could have our local constable care been telling us bullshit?

-bumpy

[simon_marklar]

you might claim its not yours, but the finger prints on the bag might say otherwise ;)

[Torsten]

Could have our local constable care been telling us bullshit?

yes. the only person at a party who could possibly be held responsible would be the person in possession, or the owner of the house.