R v Paki - [2015] NZHC 472

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY

CRI 2014-019-1743

CRI 2014-019-4812 [2015] NZHC 472

THE QUEEN

v

LORRAINE PAKI

THOMAS CROSBY, IAN CROSBY, AKE CROSBY

ISAAK MAIHI, PATRICIA THOMAS, SHAAN DWAYNE HENRY, MOSE IAKOPO, SOPHIE NUTH
MICHAEL JAMES DAVIS and DELICIA JEANS

Hearing: 13 March 2015

Counsel:

J N Foster for Crown
M H McIvor for Ms Paki
K Tustin for Mr Thomas Crosby
K Burroughs for Mr Ian Crosby and Mr Iakopo
R Laybourn for Ms Ake Crosby
C Bean for Mr Maihi
P Kaye for Ms Thomas
M A Edgar for Mr Henry

M Bates for Ms Nuth M Sturm for Mr Davis R Boot for Ms Jeans

Judgment:

13 March 2015

SENTENCING NOTES OF HEATH J

R v PAKI and ORS [2015] NZHC 472 [13 March 2015]

Introduction

[1] Lorraine Paki, Thomas Malcolm Crosby, Ake Taife Crosby, Ian David Crosby, Isaak Maihi, Patricia Thomas, Shaan Dwayne Henry, Mose Douglas Iakopo, Sophie Nuth, Michael James Davis and Delicia Jeans, each appear for sentence today for drug related offending detected during the course of a Police investigation code-named Operation Fremont. The operation was commenced in November 2013, and involved, in part, covert surveillance through the interception of private communications. The bulk of the charges relate to events that occurred in the period between 1 December 2013 and 9 April 2014. The latter date was when the operation was terminated.

[2] To accommodate the number of prisoners to be sentenced today and the need for some segregation, I will be sentencing in stages. While all prisoners except Ms Paki are currently out of Court, counsel for the remaining persons to be sentenced have confirmed agreement to the process I intend to follow. That will involve a general background being read out solely in the presence of Ms Paki. Particular comments in relation to the role played by individuals will be made while those people are in the dock. My comments on individual involvement will be brief. I have instructed the Registrar to make available to any members of the press who may wish to view them, copies of the summaries of facts on the basis of which sentencing is proceeding. In the event that there were reporting of the sentencing that will enable a more fulsome and accurate report to take place.

[3] All of those appearing for sentence today sought a sentence indication. Most took place before me on 24 November 2014.1 Two, in respect of Ms Jeans and Mr Davis were conducted by Asher J on 4 February 2015.2 Those indications were accepted. Pleas of guilty were entered in respect of the sentencing indications promptly, on 3 December 2014, in relation to those which I conducted. Those that were entered in consequence of Asher J’s indication, were entered about a week later,
on 10 February 2015.

1 R v Paki [2014] NZHC 2934, R v Crosby [2014] NZHC 2935, R v Maihi [2014] NZHC 2936,
R v Iakopo [2014] NZHC 2937.
2

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Paki

Details

AGLC: R v Paki [2015] NZHC 472
Case: [2015] NZHC 472
Decision Date: 13 March 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Lorraine Paki and eleven others were convicted of drug-related offences. They were sentenced following a police operation, code-named Operation Fremont, which ran from November 2013 until April 2014. The operation was focused on the supply of methamphetamine by members of the Waikato Chapter of the Mongrel Mob. The operation involved the interception of private communications. The primary issue for the court was to determine an appropriate sentence for each offender, taking into account the principles and purposes of sentencing. The court took into account the gravity of the offending, the degree of culpability of the offender, and the need for consistency in sentencing. The court also considered the personal mitigating factors of each offender, such as remorse and rehabilitation efforts.

The court sentenced Lorraine Paki to seven years imprisonment for her involvement in the drug supply business. The court considered her role as central and responsible for organising the purchase and distribution of methamphetamine. The court also sentenced Ian Crosby, Thomas Crosby, and Ake Crosby, who were all members of Lorraine Paki's family, to various terms of imprisonment. The court took into account their varying degrees of involvement and culpability in the drug supply business. The court also sentenced Isaac Maihi, Patricia Thomas, Mose Iakopo, and Sophie Nuth, who were associates of the Crosby family, to various terms of imprisonment. The court considered their involvement in the drug supply business and their level of culpability. Lastly, the court sentenced Delicia Jeans and Michael James Davis, who operated independently of the others, to various terms of imprisonment for their involvement in the supply of controlled drugs.

The court's sentencing decisions were based on the principles and purposes of sentencing, including holding offenders accountable for their harm, promoting a sense of responsibility and acknowledgement of their harm, denouncing the conduct, and deterring others from committing similar offences. The court also considered the need for consistency in sentencing and the personal mitigating factors of each offender.

Orders