A Supreme Court jury took just over an hour to find a Beauty Point man not guilty of perverting the course of justice.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
The trial of Patrick Simon Bailey began on Monday.
Patrick Simon Bailey, 44, who has pleaded not guilty to a count of pervert justice on September 8, 2021.
he Launceston Pathology specimens collection officer Gregory Lovett was giving evidence in the trial of
Beauty Point man offered cash to a specimen collection officer to cover up circumstances of his failed urine test, a Supreme Court jury in Launceston heard.
The Crown allegation is that Mr Bailey tried to provide a false urine specimen so that drugs would not be detected in his system.
At the time of the test Mr Bailey, then of George Town, was subject to a home detention order which prohibited him from using drugs.
A Department of Community Corrections officer Rebecca Devine told the court that a positive test to drugs by Mr Bailey on September 8 would trigger an application that he had breached the terms of the order and subject him to possible prison term upon resentencing.
Home detention is an alternative to prison with strict conditions such as abstaining from drug use.
Crown prosecutor Matt Hills asked Mr Lovett, a specimen collector of 33 years experience, about the day he tested Mr Bailey.
He said that Mr Bailey held his hands in front of his groin so that he could not see Mr Bailey's penis at the time of producing the urine sample.
He said Mr Bailey handed him a cup of liquid which was not warm. It is expected that urine will be between 33-38 degrees.
Mr Lovett said he saw a small valve in Mr Bailey's hand and then noticed a wet patch on his top.
He said that he asked Mr Bailey he wanted to do a second sample.
"He said there was no point because it was going to be positive [for drugs]," he said.
"He offered me cash to keep quiet but I said you have to go now."
Mr Hills asked exactly what Mr Bailey said.
"Can I give you cash to keep quiet?," Mr Lovett said that Mr Bailey said.
He said a specific amount was not mentioned.
Mr Lovett agreed under cross examination by defence counsel Fran McCracken that the liquid provided by Mr Bailey was never tested.
"It was disposed of, it wasn't a valid sample," Mr Lovett said.
He said he had seen similar valves used as well as fake penises.
Detective Nathan Wheldon told the jury that a search of Mr Bailey's home in October found a bottle in a fridge containing urine with the name Jake Benham written on it.
Ms McCracken asked Mr Wheldon: "Could it have said snake venom?."
"I think it said Jake," Mr Wheldon said.
Mr Bailey gave evidence that he had been using illicit substances while on the home detention order.
He said that on September 8 he was sitting in the waiting room at Launceston Pathology when a deliveryman came and dropped the valve and accidentally kicked it towards him.
"I picked it up and started playing with it," he said.
He said he had never seen the item before.
Mr Bailey said he became agitated when Mr Lovett called him a liar.
"He told me to piss off," he said.
Mr Bailey said that the urine in the fridge was labelled snake venom so that the kids didn't drink it.
Mr Hills asked whether Mr Bailey whether he told Ms Devine that the order was better than going to prison.
He suggested that Mr Bailey had a motive to avoid a positive test.
"I didn't want to go back to prison," he said.
Mr Hills, Ms McCracken and Justice Robert Pearce will sum up the case before the jury begins deliberations on Wednesday.