A man has been convicted of having almost $1 million worth of heroin and six rounds of ammunition.

Winston Paynter was found guilty by unanimous verdict of drug possession with intent to supply and possession of ammunition without a licence after six hours of jury deliberation yesterday.

But Paynter, 42, claimed he was “disadvantaged” and did not have enough time to prepare for his case.

He told the Supreme Court that he had only two weeks to prepare his case after his trial date, which was originally scheduled for May, was brought forward to March.

He added that during his trial the prosecution had brought forward witnesses he did not know about previously.

Paynter said: “I do understand that it was not the court’s decision to move forward my court date.

“However, I believe that I did not have enough time to prepare for my trial.”

Paynter, who struggled to find representation and later fired his first lawyer in favour of Marc Daniels, admitted: “I know I had four years, ample time, to prepare myself.”

But he added: “With that said, I think the Crown had time to prepare too.

“[Prosecutor Alan Richards] introduced expert witnesses that we had not seen before, and I believe that put me at a disadvantage.”

Paynter, a temperature control technician, was stopped in his work van by a mobile police patrol while travelling between jobs on the afternoon of April 11, 2019.

Police found a manilla envelope in a white plastic bag in the rear of the vehicle, which contained 350 grams of heroin.

A police officer testified that he saw Paynter throw the bag into the back of the van as he was being pulled over.

He was later arrested on suspicion of being in possession of a controlled substance.

Three of the six officers involved in a later search of his Devonshire home detailed how they found a slew of drug-related items.

Contents included similar envelopes hidden behind a water heater, a cutting board containing traces of cannabis, and 17 bottles of a sleeping aid to ‘cut’ the heroin before it was sold.

Six rounds of firearms ammunition were also recovered.

Paynter claimed on the stand that, although the North Shore Road apartment was his official address, he had moved in with his long-term partner months earlier.

He said he allowed a younger cousin, who had been “getting into mischief”, to stay at his apartment and had no idea that drugs were being prepared at the home.

In the witness box, Paynter said he drove his van to his home on the night before he was stopped and left it there unlocked after his cousin, who was at the property with some companions, asked to borrow some tools.

His partner picked him up shortly after and they drove to her apartment, also in Devonshire, where they spent the night.

Anna Lambert, his girlfriend, took the stand and insisted that Paynter usually spent the night at her home instead of his own - including the night before he was stopped.

During closing submissions on Wednesday, Mr Daniels told the jury that the Crown’s case was full of “glaring inconsistencies” and “vacuous gaps”.

He explained that there were “so many unresolved questions,” including why officers initially stopped Paynter.

Mr Daniels further questioned why an expert handwriting witness had not been called to testify whether or not a list of incriminating names and addresses found at Mr Paynter’s apartment had been written by him.

But Alan Richards, for the Crown, said that the mountain of evidence proved that Mr Paynter was running a major drugs operation out of his apartment.

Mr Richards said: “If you look at the totality of the evidence, Mr Paynter’s suggestion that this is nothing to do with him is a fabrication – it makes no sense.

“We know he had access to the North Shore Road apartment – he wasn’t keeping clear of the place and he is now making an effort to distance himself from it.”

Puisne Judge Juan Wolffe adjourned the case for sentencing on April 6 and remanded Paynter into custody.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers.