Suspended sentence for a "curious chemist" who made explosives

Friday 27 April 2018

A woman has been given an 18 months suspended sentence for being in possession of ingredients for making gun powder and for attempting to make an explosive substance.

Jessica Elizabeth Sinclair, 45, was staying at a property in the Vale when it was searched by Guernsey Police who found numerous chemicals which could be used to make explosives along with black powder (gun powder) residue.

The Royal Court heard yesterday how Sinclair had been born in Guernsey in 1972, but had left  in 2012 to live in Bristol to complete her gender reassignment. She had also wanted to access some higher education opportunities and as such commenced a chemistry degree at the University of Bristol, but she was unable to finish it after encountering mental health issues related to her gender reassignment.

In March 2017, Sinclair was staying at an address in the Vale which Guernsey Police had "legitimate reason" to search. During this process a number of items were found in her bedroom which were deemed to be suspicious and were later sent away for analysis.

The items included a large number of labelled chemicals in a brown cardboard box, a list of instructions with chemical symbols and numbers on, a glass jar, pestle and mortar and a container with balls in. Police recovered these items and a computer at this address with Sinclair admitting all the items belonged to her.

The findings of the forensic report showed that the chemicals found could have collectively been used for making low level explosive black powder (more commonly known as gun powder) and the expert noted that residue powder found was a poorly mixed low explosive substance. It was found that the written notes were 'milling instructions,' which could apply to the making of black powder.

The court heard how analysis of the computer belonging to Sinclair had picked up various related Google searches with the prosecution quoting: "Is it illegal to make black powder in the UK," as one of the relevant queries made. It was also found that various videos had been viewed also related to making black powder as well as videos on bottle bombs and bluetooth activation of explosives.

Pictured: File image of gun powder

In her defence advocate Roffey started by quoting her probation report where the officer had said: "I believe Miss Sinclair to be an eccentric individual with an active imagination. There is no evidence to suggest Miss Sinclair represents a risk to the public."

He continued to explain that it was in this way that she had pleaded guilty as she accepted the charge that she intended to make black powder, but it was her reckless curiosity and naivety which meant she was now in court.

Advocate Roffey went on to explain her personal circumstances and her passion for making things with chemicals including toothpaste and essential oils and more recently the interest in fireworks. He told the court that it was not unlawful to have an interest in chemistry and a legitimate interest in pyrotechnics.

Advocated Roffey said that Miss Sinclair had attempted to make black powder on island in the summer of 2016, but iterated two important facts; firstly that she had no desire to break the law and secondly that she didn't want to put anyone in danger.

Advocate Roffey used the example given by the prosecution of the Google search; 'Is it legal to make black powder in the UK,' and stated that this was looked up by Sinclair because she didn't want to break the law. He said: "Various sites will tell you that it is not illegal and therefore my client erroneously formed the opinion that it was legal to make black powder as long as it was less than 100grams."

He told the court that it was a plausible explanation for his client to be making black powder for fireworks: "It is a legitimate pastime to produce pyrotechnics, she didn't quite think through her actions. She didn't want to do any harm. She wore gloves and goggles and felt that it was not dangerous to anyone else."

Fundamental to the defence argument was the use of graphite, Advocate Roffey said: "The deliberate use of graphite instead of charcoal meant that that it didn't truly react and the powder had a lower explosive performance." He revisited the forensic report and drew attention to the opinion stated within that the use of graphite would create a low explosive substance and told how his client had deliberately used this chemical to reduce risk.

Advocate Roffey said: "You may be alarmed at the content of the internet history, however this represents a tiny proportion of internet history and the vast majority shows perfectly unremarkable activities."

In summing up for the defence Advocate Roffey described his client as unconventional but with a very low risk of reoffending. He told the court that she had voluntarily returned to the island and co-operated fully with the investigation. He reminded the court of the main four areas of mitigation; It was a one off, her deliberate use of graphite, her ignorance for the law and that there was no sinister intent.

In summing up Judge Finch charged Sinclair with the two counts; knowingly being in possession of items to make explosives and attempting to make an explosive. 

Judge Finch said: "You have some scientific background are unemployed and bored but you went beyond the law. You are deemed eccentric but there was no sinister intent, the only person you put at risk was yourself."

Sinclair was given 18 months suspended sentence for each offence to run concurrently suspended for two years.