A lawyer may tell the Appeals Court today how his "basket case'' client was too distraught to take the stand in her Supreme Court drugs trial.

According to lawyer Julian Hall, Mark Pettingill was considering writing an affidavit outlining how he conducted the Supreme Court trial of Barbara Roberts.

Last November, William Roberts and his wife were sentenced to 12 years in prison after being found guilty of possessing $1.5 million of cocaine with intent to supply. The discovery was the largest seizure of drugs from a residential home in Bermuda's history.

The elderly Sandys couple, who were found guilty by a majority verdict, had pleaded guilty to possessing the drug but had denied planning to supply it.

William Roberts was represented by lawyer Richard Hector while Mr. Pettingill defended Barbara Roberts at their Supreme Court trial.

Yesterday, Mr. Hall informed the Appeals Court that Mr. Pettingill was considering providing the court with an affidavit outlining Barbara Robert's guilty plea and why she did not testify on her behalf during the trial.

"He said that Barbara Roberts at the time was a basket case, and those were his words,'' Mr. Hall said. "I hope to come back tomorrow morning with the affidavit.'' Court to hear of Robert's mental state He also argued that Puisne Judge Norma Wade-Miller gave insufficiently directions to the jury on the requirements for someone to be found guilty of possession with intent to supply.

"It was open to the defence to prove that they did not know, or suspected, nor have reason to suspect that the drugs were going to be for supply,'' Mr.

Hall said. "The judge had a duty to direct the jury.'' He also pointed out Mrs. Justice Wade-Miller made an error in her submission to the jury.

"The judge talked about something that was not heard by the jury,'' he explained. "She said that fairly serious allegations were made by the defence and that no evidence supported those claims. But the comments about the pair being set up were made in the absence of the jury. No allegations were made about witnesses in front of the jury.'' During the six-day Supreme Court trial, the jury heard how the couple had found a package containing 30 pounds of cocaine floating in the sea near their home last September.

They claimed they were too frightened to contact the Police in case their son Kirk, who had been investigated by narcotics officers in the past, might be implicated.

Instead they claimed that they planned to get rid of the parcel as soon as they possibly could.

But when Police raided their home four days later, the drugs were discovered in the refrigerator.

And part of the stash had been split up into one-ounce packages ready, the prosecution claimed, to be sold on the street.

Throughout the trial defence counsel argued the Roberts had acted to protect their youngest son and had ended up "holding the baby''.

The appeal continues today.