A man accused of being involved in a drug plot said he was “somewhat” surprised to be asked to dispose of a package shortly after he collected it.

Melvin Simmons, under cross-examination, told the Supreme Court he thought it was “a little bit strange”, but did not ask any questions.

He told the court that his co-defendant, Kanhai Armstrong, had claimed that the package was not what he had ordered — despite earlier asking Mr Simmons to collect it for a family member.

Mr Simmons also confirmed that when Mr Armstrong went into the back of his van to check the package, he did not hear him speak to anyone on the phone.

Mr Armstrong, meanwhile, declined to give evidence in the case.

Mr Simmons and Mr Armstrong have both denied charges that they conspired with others to import cannabis into Bermuda and sell the controlled drug on an unknown date before August 5, 2020.

The court previously heard that 11 heat-sealed packages of plantlike material were found by customs officers on that date, hidden inside an ottoman chair shipped to the island under the name “Calvin Wade”.

The packages were found to contain a total of 6,167.6g of cannabis, which could fetch as much as $308,000 if sold on the streets of Bermuda.

After the drugs were removed, the ottoman was put back into its box and returned to customs.

The package was collected from Best Shipping by Mr Simmons on August 10 and the ottoman was later found torn open at the Tynes Bay tipping area.

Last week, Mr Simmons told the court that on August 7 he had run into Mr Armstrong, who had asked him to collect a package for a family member and provided him with the required paperwork and $269.39 in cash, exactly enough to cover the fees.

He said he collected the package and returned to his work parking lot, where Mr Armstrong went into the van to check it, emerging shortly after to say that the item was not what he ordered. He then told Mr Simmons to get rid of it.

Mr Simmons said that he dumped the ottoman and the cardboard box at Tynes Bay, where he noticed bags of sand fall out of the box.

Mr Simmons said he took the bags and left them at his workplace warehouse so he could use it for masonry work at his home.

He then left to do a job but was stopped by police and arrested.

As the trial continued yesterday, Mr Simmons said that he received his termination letter while he was held in custody but attempted to get into the business’s warehouse when he was released to get his tools.

“I had my belongings there,” he said. “I had my tools there.

“Sometimes we have furniture to dismantle or disassemble like shelving. We need tools for that.”

Daniel Kitson-Walters, for the Crown, also challenged Mr Simmons on his timeline.

Mr Simmons accepted that he was seen on CCTV leaving the Bermuda Air Conditioning Parking lot for Tynes Bay shortly after 9am, a trip which he said should take ten minutes.

However, CCTV footage from Tynes Bay showed him arriving shortly before 9.30am and leaving at 9.35am. He was stopped by police at about 9.45am near Washington Mall.

Mr Simmons maintained that he had gone straight to Tynes Bay after leaving BAC and had returned to BAC after leaving Tynes Bay to pick up cardboard boxes for delivery.

He added that he had not checked the time while at Tynes Bay and could not verify that the times on the CCTV footage were accurate.

Prosecutors also questioned Mr Simmons about where he thought he was going to take the package once he collected it.

Mr Simmons said he did not want to deliver the package to the address listed on the box because it was in St George’s and out of his “jurisdiction”.

However, he did not broach this with Mr Armstrong and said that because Mr Armstrong was at his work parking lot he thought he could deliver it to him there.

“Mr Armstrong was there so I didn’t have to go anywhere,” he said. “I didn’t have to move anywhere else.”

He accepted that he was asked to collect the package because Mr Armstrong did not have a car or van to carry it, but maintained that he felt bringing it to him at the parking lot would be sufficient.

The trial continues.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding criminal court cases. This is to prevent any statements being published that may jeopardise the outcome of that case