Latest news with #Sellotape
The Herald Scotland
03-07-2025
- The Herald Scotland
Duo who planned to smuggle drugs in Kinder Eggs jailed for 13 years
McAllister, 53, was convicted of directing others – including Lamb – to commit offences including the sale and supply of controlled drugs, which included cocaine, heroin, spice, cannabis and etizolam. Lamb was convicted of being concerned in serious organised crime, including the sale and supply of the same drugs. Their scheme also included plans to smuggle drugs into a prison hidden inside Kinder Eggs. They were both sentenced at the High Court in Edinburgh after pleading guilty to their roles. Read More McAllister, of Glasgow, was sentenced to eight years and three months in prison while Lamb, also of Glasgow, will spend five years and four months behind bars. Sineidin Corrins, Depute Procurator Fiscal for Specialist Casework at the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS), said: 'This is a significant prosecution. These two individuals played pivotal roles in a coordinated operation to distribute illegal and harmful drugs. 'With this conviction, we have removed these drugs from the streets and made communities safer. 'This successful prosecution underscores our determination to continue to disrupt serious organised crime. 'We will continue to collaborate with our partners as a member of Scotland's Serious and Organised Crime Taskforce to tackle serious organised crime and this kind of case highlights the extensive work that has been ongoing against these groups.' McAllister was linked to the Escalade serious organised crime group with evidence secured by police revealing he was issuing direct instructions to Lamb. In addition, McAllister directed others in the storage, preparation, transportation and movement of controlled drugs. The court was told McAllister was also involved in directing other to conceal criminal property, specifically money and jewellery, associated with the proceeds of crime. On one occasion, McAllister was directing Lamb to hand over £25,000 to a shop to be laundered. Other evidence related to conversations about smuggling drugs into prisons hidden inside balloons and Kinder Eggs. McAllister was also heard discussing the delivery of cocaine and heroin, while he also referred to a 'stash house' where he planned to have a woman and child live to make the property seem legitimate. Lamb was eventually arrested in March 2023 after a search of his home revealed a quantity of drugs which included a quantity of Kinder Eggs containing drugs wrapped in Sellotape. The following day, McAllister was also arrested after police recovered numerous sim cards, phones and small quantities of cash during a search of his house. When police carried out a subsequent search of his sister's house, they found a bag that had previously been dropped off by McAllister. Within that bag was a mobile phone linked to McAllister which contained incriminating messages that demonstrated his involvement in the source and supply of cocaine and adulterant. The bag also contained bottles of THC, cash totalling £10,000, scales containing traces of cocaine and four watches valued cumulatively between £23,000 and £30,000.
Glasgow Times
03-07-2025
- Glasgow Times
Glasgow duo had plans to smuggle drugs into prisons
Charles McAllister, 53, and Stephen Lamb, 54, both of whom were linked to serious organised crime, have been sentenced to a total of 13 years and seven months behind bars for operating a drug-running operation. McAllister was convicted of directing others, including co-accused Lamb, to commit offences such as the sale and supply of controlled drugs, which included cocaine, heroin, spice, cannabis, and etizolam. READ MORE: Glasgow gangster jailed for role in UK's biggest-ever drugs conspiracy READ MORE: More than 600g of 'drugs' found by police in Glasgow Meanwhile, Lamb was convicted of being concerned in serious organised crime which included the sale and supply of controlled drugs, including cocaine, spice, cannabis and etizolam. The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) revealed the pair's criminal scheme included brazen plans to smuggle drugs into a prison hidden inside Kinder Eggs. The duo were sentenced at the High Court in Edinburgh after pleading guilty to their roles in serious organised crime between December 2022 and March 2023 at various locations in Glasgow, Lanarkshire, and West Lothian. McAllister, of Glasgow, was caged for eight years and three months after admitting directing serious organised crime. Meanwhile, Lamb, also of Glasgow, will spend five years and four months behind bars after pleading guilty to being involved in serious organised crime. Following the pair's sentencing, the COPFS said McAllister was linked to the Escalade serious organised crime group. READ MORE: More than £700k of 'drugs' found during major operation READ MORE: Stash of 'drugs, weapons, and cash' found in Glasgow Evidence obtained by police showed that he was issuing direct instructions to Lamb over the sale and supply of controlled drugs, including those for onward transmission to prison, and confirmed that Lamb was carrying out those tasks. Additionally, McAllister directed others in the storage, preparation, transportation, and movement of controlled drugs. The court was told McAllister was also involved in directing others to conceal criminal property, specifically money and jewellery, associated with the proceeds of crime. On one occasion, McAllister directed Lamb to hand over £25,000 to a shop to be laundered. Other evidence related to conversations about smuggling drugs into prisons, hidden inside balloons and Kinder Eggs. Meanwhile, on March 8, 2023, McAllister was also heard discussing the delivery of cocaine and heroin. He also referred to a 'stash house' into which he planned to install a woman and a child to make the property appear legitimate and discussed obtaining 20kg of cocaine with an associate. In March 2023, Lamb was eventually nicked by cops after a search of his home revealed a quantity of drugs, which included a quantity of Kinder Eggs containing drugs wrapped in Sellotape. READ MORE: Police pictured at 'drugs' raid at Cumbernauld property The following day, McAllister was also arrested after police recovered numerous SIM cards, phones and small quantities of cash during a search of his house. When officers carried out a subsequent search of his sister's home, they found a bag that had previously been dropped off by McAllister. The bag contained a mobile phone linked to the 53-year-old, which contained incriminating messages that demonstrated his involvement in the source and supply of cocaine and adulterants. The bag also contained bottles of THC, cash totalling £10,000, scales containing traces of cocaine and four watches valued cumulatively between £23,000 and £30,000. Both men will now face confiscation under Proceeds of Crime laws to recover monies illegally obtained. McAllister has also been made subject to a Serious Crime Prevention Order for a period of five years on his release from custody, which is designed to prevent him from re-offending. Sineidin Corrins, Depute Procurator Fiscal for Specialist Casework at the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS), said: 'This is a significant prosecution. "These two individuals played pivotal roles in a coordinated operation to distribute illegal and harmful drugs. 'With this conviction, we have removed these drugs from the streets and made communities safer. 'This successful prosecution underscores our determination to continue to disrupt serious organised crime. 'We will continue to collaborate with our partners as a member of Scotland's Serious and Organised Crime Taskforce to tackle serious organised crime, and this kind of case highlights the extensive work that has been ongoing against these groups.'
Indian Express
25-06-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
From 1947 to 2025: The never-ending Emergency
Half a century has gone by since the midnight knocks of June 25, 1975, inaugurated the dictatorship that we euphemistically call the Emergency. Overnight, 676 politicians found themselves in jail. Over the following days, Indira Gandhi proceeded to ban opposition parties, abolish elections, cripple unions, and make quick work of such quaint ideas as judicial independence and press freedom. A few thousand died resisting the regime, some 110,000 wound up behind bars, and a staggering eleven million were forcibly sterilised on account of Mrs Gandhi and her son's fixation with family planning. But, thanks to Mrs Gandhi's hubris, elections were called 18 months into the regime and the Emergency suspended. When she was duly defeated, it became possible to write the whole thing off as a bad dream — ghastly but, ultimately, brief and forgettable. The journalist Janardan Thakur, for instance, writes that when he had written up his history of the nightmarish biennium, he sealed his notes and clippings with Sellotape with the intention of never dusting them off again. The historian Bipan Chandra concluded his 2003 study of the Emergency by noting that the dictatorship was no more than a 'passing interlude' in the 'long march of Indian democracy…India's political miracle has continued.' Such judgements belong to a bygone era. With the misfortune of hindsight, we know this to be untrue. Echoes of the Emergency in our time serve as pointed reminders that it was not a parenthetical blip in India's long march of deepening democracy, but rather a style of rule that is still with us today. One need only think of today's cow vigilantes to be reminded of Sanjay Gandhi's arm-twisting Youth Congress — both states within a state. Modi's misuse of the CBI, whose motivated probes targeted over 20 opposition leaders for every NDA leader in 2014-24, recalls Mrs Gandhi's weaponisation of state institutions. Then we have the contempt for parliamentarism and the procedural trappings of democracy. Here is Modi's broadcasting minister Anurag Thakur on the protestors opposing the citizenship law of 2019: 'Desh ke gaddaron ko, goli maaro saalo ko (Shoot the bastards who betray the nation)'. No doubt he would have found an ally in Mrs Gandhi's crony Bansi Lal, who declared during the Emergency, 'Get rid of all this election nonsense. If you ask me, just make our sister president for life.' Like Mrs Gandhi, Modi often elects to rule by ordinance, interferes with judicial appointments, withholds advertisement revenue from newspapers that fail to toe the party line, and imprisons journalists, activists, and students who have the temerity to question his policies. When I was writing my history of the Emergency with the French political scientist Christophe Jaffrelot, the contemporary parallels became impossible to ignore. Our rather canny publisher, Michael Dwyer, proposed the Cassandra-like title we happily plumped for: India's First Dictatorship. As it was, the last general election gave credence to his intuition: 2024 had more than a whiff of 1977 to it. A good many opponents of Mrs Gandhi in the latter poll had campaigned against her from their prison cells; as for India's first dictator and her son, they had briefly attempted enlisting the army to prevent the Janata Party from taking office. Modi's third victory, likewise, was achieved in conditions that could hardly be described as free and fair: The opposition coalition had found its bank accounts frozen on the hustings; two chief ministers at the time were 'ruling' their states from behind bars. Modi is a product of his milieu. Born in 1950, he is roughly coeval with the postcolonial state. Growing up as a tea-seller in Jawaharlal Nehru's India, he would have descried in the first prime minister no exemplary democrat. Some 40,000 Muslims were killed during the annexation of Hyderabad. Later, Nehru suppressed communism through mass incarceration and, when the CPI accepted democracy, by undemocratically overthrowing its Kerala government. None of the six non-Congress and Congress minority regional governments during Nehru's tenure were allowed to complete their term in office. Kashmir's ruler was thrown in prison, and Hyderabad's largest opposition party was banned for a decade. Independent trade unions were laid low by the Industrial Disputes Act. Press freedom was dealt a blow by the First Amendment. Dissent in the Northeast was crushed with the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. Preventive detention was introduced in 1950 and then continuously renewed until the Congress lost its majority in 1969. Simultaneously prime minister, defence minister, foreign minister, and chief of the planning commission, Nehru betrayed a blithe disregard for institutions. His daughter was groomed to replace him from the late Fifties onward. Mrs Gandhi, of course, was more brazen and less democratic than her father, but the fact is that she was following in his illiberal footsteps on many counts — and, by extension, so is Modi today, though the comparison is bound to sting him. Between the three of them, the difference is not of substance but of degree. Emergency was a dark chapter, to be sure, but few others in independent India's history have been much brighter. The writer is a historian at the University of Oxford and author of Another India: The Making of the World's Largest Muslim Minority, 1947-77
Otago Daily Times
16-06-2025
- Health
- Otago Daily Times
Health and Disability Commissioner finds breach after disabled woman had socks taped to hands
A severely disabled woman had socks taped to her hands by her carers to stop her from putting them into her mouth. It's a move that her former carers have now acknowledged was 'not the most ideal of options' and one that has been criticised by Deputy Health and Disability Commissioner Rose Hall. 'I consider that restraining her in this way did not preserve her dignity or respect,' Wall said in findings made today after complaints by the woman's new care provider and family. Hall's findings also explored allegations that the woman's finances had been misused by her carers, and that they'd failed to change her, leaving her soaked in urine. The woman, who is in her 50s and severely disabled, was transferred from one provider, who had cared for her for the last 25 years, to another in 2023. Neither are named in the findings. The new provider was concerned that the woman arrived without any medical history paperwork or any other information detailing her care, including specialist appointments or allergy protocols. Because of this, the new provider said it struggled with the transition as staff lacked understanding of her history and behaviour. On the day the woman arrived at her new carers, her sleeves were tied together, and her hands were covered with socks, which prompted a complaint to the HDC in February 2023. In May the same year, the woman's sister also complained about the care her sister had received, and was concerned about socks being used as hand restraints. 'I did question staff why this had been done and they said it was to keep her hands warm,' part of her complaint read. 'On other occasions I have seen [the woman's] hands restrained with socks and bound secure with Sellotape. 'These types of restraint were constantly enforced on [her] to stop her from putting her hands in her mouth.' The disabled woman's sister also questioned the first care provider's use of their charge's bank account, and claimed that she was often left soaked in urine. 'Most times I went to visit my sister, she was soaking wet, and you could smell the urine…The urine would also be soaked through to her clothing,' the woman claimed. 'Not the most ideal of options' After the complaint was made, the first provider said it was the first time issues had been raised about the way it handled the woman, who had been in their care for more than two decades. A spokesperson for the first provider told the HDC that using socks as hand restraints was not something that it endorsed. '[The woman] has had a longstanding issue with sucking, licking, gnawing, hitting her mouth, and pushing her fist down her mouth to the extent where she would gag and sometimes choke,' the spokesperson said. The provider also claimed that the woman's sister had said that she didn't care how they stopped her from chewing at her hands, and that a GP had recommended they needed to keep her hands dry. 'While not the most ideal of options, any efforts to use socks have been out of a concern for the safety for [the woman] in a manner that best respects freedom to manoeuvre and manipulate her movements as she pleased whilst minimising risk to her around hand hygiene, skin integrity, and swallowing any bandages,' the provider said. The provider also denied any misuse of the woman's finances, and not changing her incontinence products to leave her soaked in urine. The provider said the woman was able to use the toilet herself, and would sometimes urinate in her bed overnight, but she was never left sitting in it, as claimed by her sister. The sister also alleged the woman was left in common areas with another intellectually disabled patient who was constantly masturbating, and she felt this was neither safe nor appropriate. However, the provider said that it catered for people with complex challenges and some of them lacked the capacity to know their behaviour was inappropriate. 'However, this is something staff are aware of and they have always been vigilant about these behaviours and address them immediately when they arise, in a safe and appropriate manner,' the provider's response reads. A lack of dignity and respect The Deputy Health and Disability Commissioner found the first provider had breached the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights by restraining the woman's hands with socks. 'In my view, this was an inappropriate restraint that did not preserve [the woman's] dignity, and the perceived need for this type of restraint could have been avoided by seeking specialist behavioural support.' However, it was only the inappropriate hand restraints that Wall was able to determine were a breach of the woman's rights, noting in her report that there wasn't sufficient evidence to explore the claim that the woman was left to sit in her own urine. As for the claim that the woman's finances had been misused, Wall said this didn't appear to be founded and that the provider's intention had been good and it had been paying out of its own pocket for unfunded personal expenses. In regard to the claim that the first provider had been slow in handing over its former patient's medical records, Wall found it had not been as forthcoming as it could have been, and lacked communication with the new provider, though this didn't constitute a breach of the code. Wall recommended that the provider apologise for regarding the hand restraints, but as the first provider is no longer providing residential care she did not recommend any extra training in this area. - Jeremy Wilkinson, Open Justice reporter
Otago Daily Times
16-06-2025
- Health
- Otago Daily Times
'They said it was to keep her warm': Disabled woman found with socks taped to her hands
A severely disabled woman had socks taped to her hands by her carers to stop her from putting them into her mouth. It's a move that her former carers have now acknowledged was 'not the most ideal of options' and one that has been criticised by Deputy Health and Disability Commissioner Rose Hall. 'I consider that restraining her in this way did not preserve her dignity or respect,' Wall said in findings made today after complaints by the woman's new care provider and family. Hall's findings also explored allegations that the woman's finances had been misused by her carers, and that they'd failed to change her, leaving her soaked in urine. The woman, who is in her 50s and severely disabled, was transferred from one provider, who had cared for her for the last 25 years, to another in 2023. Neither are named in the findings. The new provider was concerned that the woman arrived without any medical history paperwork or any other information detailing her care, including specialist appointments or allergy protocols. Because of this, the new provider said it struggled with the transition as staff lacked understanding of her history and behaviour. On the day the woman arrived at her new carers, her sleeves were tied together, and her hands were covered with socks, which prompted a complaint to the HDC in February 2023. In May the same year, the woman's sister also complained about the care her sister had received, and was concerned about socks being used as hand restraints. 'I did question staff why this had been done and they said it was to keep her hands warm,' part of her complaint read. 'On other occasions I have seen [the woman's] hands restrained with socks and bound secure with Sellotape. 'These types of restraint were constantly enforced on [her] to stop her from putting her hands in her mouth.' The disabled woman's sister also questioned the first care provider's use of their charge's bank account, and claimed that she was often left soaked in urine. 'Most times I went to visit my sister, she was soaking wet, and you could smell the urine…The urine would also be soaked through to her clothing,' the woman claimed. 'Not the most ideal of options' After the complaint was made, the first provider said it was the first time issues had been raised about the way it handled the woman, who had been in their care for more than two decades. A spokesperson for the first provider told the HDC that using socks as hand restraints was not something that it endorsed. '[The woman] has had a longstanding issue with sucking, licking, gnawing, hitting her mouth, and pushing her fist down her mouth to the extent where she would gag and sometimes choke,' the spokesperson said. The provider also claimed that the woman's sister had said that she didn't care how they stopped her from chewing at her hands, and that a GP had recommended they needed to keep her hands dry. 'While not the most ideal of options, any efforts to use socks have been out of a concern for the safety for [the woman] in a manner that best respects freedom to manoeuvre and manipulate her movements as she pleased whilst minimising risk to her around hand hygiene, skin integrity, and swallowing any bandages,' the provider said. The provider also denied any misuse of the woman's finances, and not changing her incontinence products to leave her soaked in urine. The provider said the woman was able to use the toilet herself, and would sometimes urinate in her bed overnight, but she was never left sitting in it, as claimed by her sister. The sister also alleged the woman was left in common areas with another intellectually disabled patient who was constantly masturbating, and she felt this was neither safe nor appropriate. However, the provider said that it catered for people with complex challenges and some of them lacked the capacity to know their behaviour was inappropriate. 'However, this is something staff are aware of and they have always been vigilant about these behaviours and address them immediately when they arise, in a safe and appropriate manner,' the provider's response reads. A lack of dignity and respect The Deputy Health and Disability Commissioner found the first provider had breached the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights by restraining the woman's hands with socks. 'In my view, this was an inappropriate restraint that did not preserve [the woman's] dignity, and the perceived need for this type of restraint could have been avoided by seeking specialist behavioural support.' However, it was only the inappropriate hand restraints that Wall was able to determine were a breach of the woman's rights, noting in her report that there wasn't sufficient evidence to explore the claim that the woman was left to sit in her own urine. As for the claim that the woman's finances had been misused, Wall said this didn't appear to be founded and that the provider's intention had been good and it had been paying out of its own pocket for unfunded personal expenses. In regard to the claim that the first provider had been slow in handing over its former patient's medical records, Wall found it had not been as forthcoming as it could have been, and lacked communication with the new provider, though this didn't constitute a breach of the code. Wall recommended that the provider apologise for regarding the hand restraints, but as the first provider is no longer providing residential care she did not recommend any extra training in this area. - Jeremy Wilkinson, Open Justice reporter
