American who smuggled £800,000 of cocaine in parmesan cheese jailed
Jamie Choi, 23, from California, was stopped as she tried to enter the UKafter arriving on a flight from Brazil on 25 May this year.
There was one question Heathrow border guards had for her. 'What's with the massive 8kg cheese?'
Choi tried to bluff officers insisting that a friend had begged her to buy the parmesan from the famous cheesemaking country of Peru to bring back to London for them all to try.
But when officers examined the cheese, they found it contained 94 per cent pure crack cocaine – giving it a street value of £800,000.
The National Crime Agency, took over the investigation, tracing Choi's route zig-zagging across South America after flying from Los Angeles to Lima on 20 May 2025.
By the next day, Choi had flown to Asuncion, Paraguay, staying there until 24 May when she flew to Heathrow Airport after changing at Sau Paulo, Brazil.
But only a single notebook entry was found in Choi's handbag dated 21 May 2025 – the day she left Lima.
It read: 'I dropped out of UCSB [University of California Santa Barbara] on Monday. Currently I am in Paraguay in South America solo travelling for the first time. It's been amazing so far.'
Choi, who was charged with importing Class A drugs, pleaded guilty to the offence at Isleworth Crown Court on 6 August.
NCA senior investigating officer, Barry Vinall, said: 'We've seen people trying to smuggle cocaine into the UK hidden inside all manner of innocuous looking items, but Border Force and the National Crime Agency are well-practised in finding drugs, whatever the disguise.
'Smuggling drugs into the UK is simply not a risk work taking – it has consequences, as seen in this case.'
Choi has been jailed for five years and three months today. More Trending
It came after three Britons escaped the death penalty in Indonesia after being caught with cocaine hidden in Angel Delight packets.
Lisa Stocker, Jonathan Collyer and Phineas Float from East Sussex were stopped at Bali's international airport with 17 packages of cocaine in February.
Stocker, who is a mum-of-three, and her partner Collyer had travelled together via Qatar while Float was accused of receiving the packages at an airport hotel.
But Stocker broke down in tears and told the court she was tricked into carrying the drugs, with her friend telling her it was Angel Delight.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
2 hours ago
- South Wales Argus
Cardiff highest percentage of unreported violent crimes
This statistic was gathered by Get Licensed, a security firm, which conducted a survey to explore crime reporting trends and shoplifting habits. The survey revealed that Cardiff had the highest percentage of residents failing to report violent crime in the UK. In contrast, London, Edinburgh, and Southampton each recorded 7 per cent of residents who admitted they wouldn't report violent crime. The survey also highlighted a trend across the UK: people aged 25-34 are the least likely to report a violent crime if they witness one. Further findings from the survey showed that almost a quarter (23 per cent) of Britons have witnessed minor crimes, such as shoplifting, and chose not to report them. In addition, 12 per cent of those who have never witnessed a crime said they would ignore it if they did. The survey provides a detailed overview of crime reporting trends and shoplifting habits across the UK.
ITV News
4 hours ago
- ITV News
Melania Trump threatens $1bn lawsuit over Hunter Biden's 'salacious' Epstein comments
Melania Trump has demanded that Hunter Biden retract comments linking her to sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and threatened to sue him for over $1 billion in damages if he does not. Trump takes issue with two comments made by the son of former President Joe Biden in an interview this month with American journalist Andrew Callaghan. He alleged that Epstein introduced the first lady to her husband, President Donald statements are false, defamatory and 'extremely salacious,' Melania Trump's lawyer, Alejandro Brito, wrote in a letter to Biden. Biden's remarks were widely disseminated on social media and reported by media outlets around the world, causing the first lady 'to suffer overwhelming financial and reputational harm,' he wrote. Biden made the Epstein comments during a sprawling interview in which he lashed out at 'elites' and others in the Democratic Party he says undermined his father before he dropped out of last year's presidential campaign.'Epstein introduced Melania to Trump. The connections are, like, so wide and deep,' Biden said in one of the comments Trump disputes. Biden attributed the claim to author Michael Wolff, whom Trump disparaged in June as a 'Third Rate Reporter.' He has accused Wolff of making up stories to sell books. Asked in a subsequent interview on Callaghan's Channel 5 News YouTube channel if he would like to apologise, Biden bluntly responded: "F**k that. That's not going to happen." The first lady's threats echo a favoured strategy of her husband, who has aggressively used litigation to go after critics. Public figures like the Trumps face a high bar to succeed in a defamation president and first lady have long said they were introduced by Paolo Zampolli, a modelling agent, at a New York Fashion Week party in letter is dated August 6 and was first reported Wednesday by Fox News Lowell, a lawyer who has represented Biden in his criminal cases and to whom Brito's letter is addressed, has been contacted for comment.
Telegraph
4 hours ago
- Telegraph
I fear visiting Britain to promote my book, when speaking freely can get you in trouble
'New Zealand woman … and 6-year-old son detained by US immigration,' blared a recent story in the New Zealand Herald. So far, so scary. It seems the woman went to the US based on her marriage to an American. They divorced before she adjusted her status to permanent resident. When she tried to get back into the US from a trip to Canada, she and her son were detained by US Customs and Border Protection. She reportedly applied to re-open her green-card application on the grounds that she was allegedly a survivor of domestic abuse. She may or may not have a case. But the bottom line is that this is a complicated immigration case that will work itself out in due course, not an innocent tourist mum being blocked by the American jackboots of Leftist imagination. A few weeks ago, I was invited on a podcast in New Zealand. The other guests were Stephen Young, a professor at Otago University whose 'areas of research involve the intersection of Indigenous peoples … drawing from critical and social theories,' and Zane Wedding, 'an activist who's been involved in recent pro-Gaza rallies'. They appeared to want me as a proxy pinata for President Trump's highly successful (though controversial) policies to control the southern border and deport aliens here illegally. The podcast's premise was that Kiwi academics were being hassled at US airports. 'A number of our universities are now advising academics to clean their social media profiles, travel with burner phones, and reconsider attending US conferences altogether,' they said. Their implication was that research would grind to a halt, tourism would dry out, and sundry other disasters would result from the alleged border crackdown. But when I researched the claims, practically nothing came up. Yes, a May 2025 article alarmingly said 'NZ travellers warned of increased detention risk at US border', and the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade's travel advice for the United States is set at level 2, 'exercise increased caution'. But the Ministry said that in the year to that point, '24 New Zealand passport holders have sought our assistance because they have experienced immigration difficulties in the US … Typically, we would see 14-25 cases per year.' No crisis there. Indeed, a government spokeswoman said that 169,000 New Zealanders had travelled to the US in the year to March 2025 – up from 168,000 for the same period a year earlier. The global Left is panicking about the US president or secretary of state using powers in immigration law to deny visas or entry to foreigners who endorse or espouse terrorism or undermine our national security or foreign policy. They seem to believe that the United States, uniquely among nations, is obliged to admit foreigners who rail against our system of government and capitalism, and advocate for radical foreign political causes. We don't. We have rules which visitors are asked to respect, or else they're not welcome. Meanwhile, the rest of the Anglosphere is policing speech not just about politics, but about statistical and biological truth. I worry more about free speech there than here. Armed with facts, I was easily able to counter the narrative that the US was a threat to free speech. In fact, I told the podcast hosts that I was more afraid of speaking in New Zealand – or Australia, Canada, and Great Britain, the rest of the 'Five Eyes' of English-speaking countries that share intelligence data. To promote my new book, The Ten Woke Commandments (You Must Not Obey), I will be speaking in the US and Europe. In the United States, our First Amendment protects my free speech. I'll go to the Five Eyes countries if invited, but with trepidation, because several of the woke commandments I urge readers to reject in the book appear to have become state-sanctioned truth in some of these countries. Deviation from that dogma, or adherence to factual truth that threatens some sub-group's subjective sense of safety, can result in cancellation, ostracisation – or, in some cases, legal trouble. In Australia, the case of Tickle v Giggle grinds on. It boils down to a website for women being sued by a biological male who wants access to the site. Commenting on the case might be risky – 'transgender vilification', defined as 'a public act that could incite hatred, serious contempt or severe ridicule towards people who are transgender', is against the law in New South Wales. Kirralie Smith, head of the Australian group Binary, says she's had 'vilification' complaints against her 'for calling male soccer players 'male''. In my book, I discuss gender ideology in two chapters. I state the fact (not opinion) that mankind is a sexually dimorphous species with only two sexes. If one bloke in Scotland finds it offensive, could that be 'stirring up hatred' – an offence under their Hate Crime and Public Order Act? I'd hope not, but the fact the question even has to be asked is chilling to free expression. In the chapter titled 'You Will be 'Woke' to Imaginary Oppression', I use hard data to debunk myths about crime – who are the victims, and who are the perpetrators. In Britain, a data point in the debate about migration is the rate of crime by foreign compared to UK-born men. Whatever the true statistics are, they might cause someone offence – but that does not make them false. Facts are facts. Their purpose is not to vilify, but to inform policy. The Free Speech Union is fighting to protect ordinary Britons who state factual truths or express their opinions. The British Government, meanwhile, seems determined to crack down on negative views of mass migration if they are injudiciously expressed. In Canada, former PM Justin Trudeau's government suppressed free speech over Covid mandates and advocated an Online Harms Act that would create a new hate-crime offence with a maximum sentence of life in prison. His Liberal Party successor, Mark Carney, seems little better. And in New Zealand, they have a Human Rights Act under which using 'words which are threatening, abusive, or insulting' or 'inciting racial disharmony' are offences. Such laws naturally chill free speech, because the definitions and lines are rarely clear, absent court cases of which no one wants to be the guinea pig. The New Zealand Law Commission has been looking at extending the categories protected under the Human Rights Act to 'people who are transgender, people who are non-binary and people who have an innate variation of sex characteristics'. But while people with disorders of sexual development indubitably exist, the concepts of 'transgender' or 'non-binary' require a belief – that humans have a 'gender' which sometimes doesn't match their biological sex, and that human beings can exist without being of either sex. These are convictions of faith, not facts that can be proven or disproven empirically. Despite the panic from the Anglophone Left, the home of free speech remains the United States. It's in the rest of the ex-British Empire where it is in jeopardy. Simon Hankinson is a senior research fellow in The Heritage Foundation's Border Security and Immigration Center and author of The Ten Woke Commandments (You Must Not Obey) from Academica Books
