A Supreme Court jury was not given proper directions by an Acting Judge before it convicted a 50-year-old London taxi driver of importing nearly half a million dollars worth of heroin into Bermuda, the Court of Appeal heard yesterday.

Martin Cashman was sentenced to 11 years in prison in February after he was convicted of possessing and importing the heroin into Bermuda on October 5, 2003.

But Elizabeth Christopher, representing Cashman, said it ?may be a dangerous precedent to set? if the Appeals Court uphold her client?s conviction.

She said that the trial judge, then-Acting Justice Archibald Warner, did not give proper directions to the jury and did not follow procedure.

?The jury had no indication that the question they asked at 3 p.m. was going to be answered,? Ms Christopher said. She that it was inadequate that the jury was allowed to reach a guilty verdict without their question being answered.

However, Appeals Court judge Sir Anthony Evans, said that ?before the jury gave their verdict, the learned judge asked them if they needed more help, and they said no?.

Next, Ms Christopher called Mr. Warner?s direction to the jury was ?grossly oversimplified? in respect to Cashman?s good character.

During the trial in February, Mr. Warner said: ?The fact that (Cashman) is of good character, is it less likely that he would commit the matter for which he had been charged? ?It doesn?t mean he didn?t commit what he has been charged with?.

Yesterday, Ms Christopher said that finishing his summary on a more negative tone effectively undid the positive aspects of it.

However, Appeal Court judge Austin Ward thought Mr. Warner was quite right: ?Good character of itself cannot provide defence to a criminal charge,? he said.

Next she said that it was said that Chapman lied to a Police officer at the airport when he arrived in Bermuda.

She said that it was not clear what question the Police officer had asked Chapman, but more importantly, she said Mr. Warner ?did not make clear that the jury should not look at a lie as an admission of guilt?.

The final ground of appeal was that the jury was misdirected and were confused about the issue of whether or not to convict Cashman on the basis of whether he knew he was carrying drugs.

She said it was misleading to say that because Cashman helped Police with an unsuccessful sting operation that he knew about a drug ring.

?Or that he was just such a good chap that he wanted to assist Police to uncover what was really happening,? Mr. Justice Ward asked.

Director of Public Prosecutions Vinette Graham-Allen contested all of the grounds for appeal.

?There was no miscarriage of justice,? Mrs. Graham-Allen said.

?The appeal should be dismissed. The evidence was overwhelming. The learned judge?s directions were correct. There were no irregularities of procedure?.

Acting President of the Court of Appeal Justice Gerald Nazareth said that the three judges had heard all of the evidence and would reserve judgment.