cannabis into the Island was not presented with a document outlining his legal rights before answering Police questions.

This was revealed yesterday during testimony in the Supreme Court trial of Curtis Ambrose Simmons.

Simmons, of Spicewood Drive in Warwick, denies importing the drug, possessing it with intent to supply and handling it with intent to supply on February 15 of last year.

Customs officers at the Civil Air Terminal found packets of plant material wrapped in grey tape concealed in two Smith Corona word processors which had been sent by a New York company called Montgomery Grant Computers.

The machines were addressed to an Ann Burgess of Busycomm Ltd. on Addendum Lane in Pembroke.

Busycomm's comptroller testified earlier in the trial that the company had never done business with Montgomery Grant, nor did they sell or deal Smith Corona products in 1992.

Police placed "dummy'' packages filled with crab grass and shredded paper in the word processors along with one of the original packets and returned them to the Airport.

Det. Con. Suzette Tucker testified yesterday that she and Det. Con. Ronald Greene set up surveillance in their unmarked vehicle at the facility after the switch had been made.

At approximately 4 p.m., they observed Simmons loading the boxes into a Federal Express van she said.

For the next three hours, the 29-year-old was tailed by Det. Con. Tucker, Det.

Con. Greene and other officers as he made deliveries in the central parishes.

Pc. Sherwood testified that around 7 p.m., he and Det. Con. Clark arrested Simmons outside a private residence on the Middle Road in Warwick.

Pc. Sherwood said when the courier was approached and told they were Police officers, Simmons replied: "Look, if these packages have drugs, I don't know anything about it, I just deliver packages.'' Mr. John Perry QC, representing Simmons, suggested the officers first introduced themselves as narcotics officers and told him he was being arrested for possessing a controlled drug.

Pc. Sherwood denied the term "narcotics officers'' was used, but admitted "possession'' appeared in his written statement of the incident instead of "conspiracy to import'', which was the original charge against Simmons.

"I guess I missed the error when I proofread it,'' he told the court.

According to P.c. Sherwood, Simmons was cautioned and informed of his rights by Det. Con. Clark at the scene, and by Det. Insp. George Jackson after his arrival in the enclosed courtyard at the Hamilton Police Station.

On the stand, Det. Insp. Jackson said he introduced himself to Simmons and told him he was not obligated to say anything. If he did, it would be written down and used as evidence.

The four-man, eight-woman jury heard that Simmons made no reply immediately following the caution.

The officer said when he pointed to the single word processor box in the back of the van and asked the courier where the other one was Simmons replied: "Can we talk?''.

"If I tell you, will I be able to walk out of here?'' he reportedly asked the officer.

According to a written report compiled by Det. Con. Greene, Det. Insp. Jackson told Simmons: "Let us hear what you have to say.

"An investigating officer must not let a suspect believe he will receive special favours,'' said Mr. Perry during the officer's cross-examination.

"You are leaving him with the impression that if he cooperates, he would walk out.'' Mr. Perry also disputed the officers' version of the conversation and inquired why the document had never been shown to his client for a confirmation of accuracy -- a standard practice when a suspect's statement is taken.

Det. Insp. Jackson said the exchange was not "a formal, sit-down interview'', but merely part of his notes on the case.

The officer admitted Simmons had not been told of his rights to legal assistance and a telephone before his comments were taken down in the court yard.

The case continues Monday in the Supreme Court.