Olympian’s brother admits to drug plot

The brother of former Olympic kayaker Nathan Baggaley has pleaded guilty to his role in a failed plot to smuggle up to $200m worth of cocaine into Australia.

Dru Baggaley, who is the brother of silver medallist and former world champion Nathan Baggaley was due to face a trial in Brisbane Supreme Court on October 28 over the alleged attempt to smuggle in the drugs off the Australian coast back in 2018.

But during his arraignment at Brisbane Supreme Court on Wednesday, Dru Baggaley pleaded guilty to attempting to import a commercial quantity of a border-controlled drug.

Nathan is facing the same charge but is yet to enter a plea.

His arraignment is listed in Brisbane Supreme Court on Thursday and the matter remains listed for trial.

Dru had pleaded not guilty to the charge during a trial in 2021 – with a court being told it involved an alleged attempt to smuggle more than 500kg of cocaine into Australia back in July 2018.

The Crown contended Dru and another man, Anthony Draper, used a boat to retrieve plastic packets of cocaine – valued at up to $200m – from a foreign freighter 360km off the coast of Queensland.

It is further alleged packets of cocaine were dumped into the ocean as Dru and Draper attempted to avoid authorities during a chase at sea.

Dru was handed a 28-year jail term after a jury found him guilty of the charge.

But he was granted a retrial and had his conviction set aside following separate Court of Appeal decision earlier this year.

Dru’s legal counsel argued a miscarriage of justice occurred due to the “trial counsel’s failure to adduce evidence” relating to their client’s alleged ownership of a phone which formed a key part of the Crown case against him.

In their published reasons, the Court of Appeal stated the trial counsel for Dru Baggaley failed to ask questions at trial to elicit evidence about the phone.

It included allegations of how Draper had posted the phone to Dru and asked him to buy a SIM card and charge card.

“No questions were asked as to the appellant’s having done that, or as to his having inserted the SIM card and the charge card into the phone at his parents’ house,” the judgment states.

“This omission was significant because the ownership of the phone was crucial to the Crown case against the appellant.”

“Failing to give the appellant the opportunity to give evidence about his coming into possession of the phone; his buying a SIM card and recharge card for it, and then passing it over to Draper was to fail to allow the appellant to put a very material part of his case before the jury.”

The court was told Dru believed the packets actually contained tobacco.