R v Read - [2013] NZHC 2005

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY

CRI-2011-070-7563

CRI-2012-070-1397 [2013] NZHC 2005

THE QUEEN

v

GARY JOHN READ KAHSHARN ORIINI READ JADE BRADY

Hearing: 9 August 2013

Appearances: R Jenson for Crown
P Mabey QC for G Read
T Balme for K Read
R Weir and H Carson for J Brady

Judgment: 9 August 2013

SENTENCING NOTES OF TOOGOOD J

R v READ & ORS [2013] NZHC 2005 [9 August 2013]

Introduction

[1] Gary John Read, Jade Brady and Kahsharn Oriini Read, you appear for sentence having pleaded guilty to a variety of drug offences relating to a substantial importation and distribution enterprise.

[2] Mr Read, you pleaded guilty to 70 counts of importing the controlled drug pseudoephedrine. I think 68 of those were at a time when the drug was classified as a Class C drug and two as a Class B; one count of possession of pseudoephedrine for supply; one count of possession of the Class A controlled drug methamphetamine for supply; one count of the unlawful possession of a firearm; and one count of participating in an organised criminal group.

[3] Ms Brady, you pleaded guilty to one representative count of supplying methamphetamine; one count of possession of methamphetamine for supply; one count of possession of the Class A drug LSD; one count each of possession of the Class C drugs BZP and cannabis for sale; one count of possession of a stun gun which is a restricted weapon; and one count of participating in an organised criminal group.

[4] Following your guilty pleas Ms Read, you are for sentence on nine counts of importing pseudoephedrine.

Factual background

[5] In February 2009, the Organised Financial Crime Agency in New Zealand began an investigation into persons of interest involved in organised crime. The investigating authorities received information that you, Mr Read, were involved in importing significant quantities of pseudoephedrine into New Zealand and supplying it to local gangs. Pseudoephedrine is a precursor to and vital ingredient in the manufacture of methamphetamine.

[6] It soon became apparent that you were masterminding a large scale and sophisticated importation operation predicated on commercial gain. This entailed

crushing ephedrine tablets and mixing them into a paste which would then be concealed in cosmetic containers. The cosmetic containers were mixed and packaged in Thailand, where you often travelled, and then mailed to New Zealand. The packages were sent on a frequent basis from around July 2009 until September 2011.

[7] A scattergun approach was used whereby the packages were sent to a number of different persons in New Zealand. Apart from several packages which were intercepted by Customs, all of the packages which were sent were delivered to the intended recipients. They were generally sent to close family members, most of whom were unwitting and assumed the packages related to your legitimate herbal remedies business and were being sent to them so you could avoid paying customs duties. Others, such as you Ms Read, were not so unwitting; and the case…

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 Read

Details

AGLC: R v Read [2013] NZHC 2005
Case: [2013] NZHC 2005
Decision Date: 9 August 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Gary John Read, Jade Brady, and Kahsharn Oriini Read were convicted for their involvement in a drug importation and distribution operation. The court had to decide the appropriate sentences for the three defendants, taking into account the nature and extent of their involvement in the drug operation. The court also had to consider the purposes and principles of sentencing, such as holding the defendants accountable for their actions, promoting a sense of responsibility, denouncing their conduct, deterring them and others from engaging in similar offending, and assisting in their rehabilitation and reintegration. The court assessed the seriousness of the offending and determined starting points for each defendant based on the extent of their involvement and the quantity of drugs imported and supplied. The court then adjusted the starting points based on personal aggravating or mitigating factors and applied discounts for the defendants' guilty pleas. The court imposed sentences of imprisonment for Gary Read and Jade Brady, and a sentence of home detention for Kahsharn Read, taking into account their individual circumstances and the need to achieve the purposes and principles of sentencing.

The final orders were as follows: Gary Read was sentenced to 11 years' imprisonment, with a minimum non-parole period of 5 years and 3 months, for his role in the importation and distribution of drugs. Jade Brady was sentenced to 2 years and 2 months' imprisonment for her role in supplying methamphetamine. Kahsharn Read was sentenced to 2 years' imprisonment, which was reduced to 10 months' home detention, with conditions including electronic monitoring, attendance at counseling and treatment programs, and prohibition from purchasing, possessing, or consuming alcohol or illicit drugs. The court also ordered the destruction of drugs and other exhibits seized during the investigation.

Orders