Dartford drug dealer sent back to jail

A convicted criminal who tried to relaunch a drug dealing network in the Dartford area has been sent back to prison after Kent Police scuppered his attempts.

Joe Eastwood was already on licence for previous offences, when an investigation by detectives identified him as the face behind a drug line.

Between 12 March and 21 May 2026, the phone had sent out bulk marketing messages to the mobile numbers of drug users in the Dartford area, advertising heroin and crack cocaine for sale.

The line was uncovered after some of the received marketing messages were found on a phone seized by police for an unrelated arrest.

Identifying criminals

Enquiries into the messages identified Eastwood as the person running the line.

The investigation found that no more marketing messages were sent after 21 May, which was the same date that Eastwood had run away from police who had seen him while on patrol in Ash Road, Hawley.

Shortly after, officers carried out a warrant at Eastwood’s home in the same road. A large amount of crack cocaine and heroin was found in a fishing gilet stored in an outbuilding, as well as scales and clingfilm.

While at the property, officers also found a handwritten note containing names and numbers which were confirmed to be recipients of the marketing messages sent by the drug line. Forensic testing found Eastwood’s fingerprints on the note.

A review of the drugs line also showed it had been used to make personal calls to Eastwood’s friends and family.

The 29 year old was charged on 1 June 2026 with being concerned in the supply of crack cocaine and heroin between 12 March and 21 May 2026. He admitted the offences at court the following day.

On 17 September at Woolwich Crown Court, Eastwood was sentenced to three years and four months’ imprisonment.

Detective Inspector Rob Hemsley said:

‘Joe Eastwood thought he could restart a drugs line, just weeks after being released from prison on licence for a similar offence. However our officers are skilled in detecting reoffending, and their determination ensured that the evidence gathered was so compelling, he was left with no option but to admit he was offending again.’