THE KING v JIM DAVID THACKER - [2024] NZHC 3104

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TAURANGA MOANA ROHE

CRI-2021-070-4221

[2023] NZHC 3104

THE KING

v

JIM DAVID THACKER

Hearing: 18 August 2023

Appearances:

A J Pollett and C A Bourke for the Crown W T Nabney for Mr Thacker

Judgment:

8 November 2023

Reissued:

6 December 2023

SENTENCING REMARKS OF HARLAND J

Introduction

[1] Mr Thacker, you appear before the Court today for sentence on 53 charges, having been found guilty by a jury of 40 charges and having pleaded guilty to 131 charges at the outset of your trial and one during the trial. All charges arose out of the Police operation known as Operation Silk.

[2] The charges include possession of methamphetamine for supply, supplying that drug, possessing and possessing cocaine for supply, possessing a class B controlled

1 In my sentencing remarks I referred to 12 charges. However, there are in fact 13, 12 prior to trial and 1 during the trial.

R v THACKER [2023] NZHC 3104 [8 November 2023]

drug, possessing cannabis oil and cannabis for sale, money laundering, discharging a firearm with reckless disregard, unlawfully possessing firearms and pistols including prohibited firearms, ammunition and explosives, participating in an organised criminal group, theft and wilfully attempting to pervert the course of justice. A specific list of the charges will be included in my written sentencing remarks in a table.

[3] In respect of your convictions, the maximum penalties range from a term of life imprisonment for the methamphetamine charges to three years’ imprisonment for unlawfully possessing ammunition.

[4] It is clear that the sentencing outcome for you will be a lengthy term of imprisonment. The issue for me is what the starting point for that term of imprisonment should be and whether there are mitigating factors relating to you personally that justify reducing the term of imprisonment. And a key issue will also be what minimum term of imprisonment (MPI), if any, should be imposed.

[5] First of all, I outline certain matters of general importance that relate to the offending of the kind you have undertaken before addressing your specific offending and the mitigating matters that relate to you personally.

Your role in Operation Silk

[6] So, starting with your role in Operation Silk. On 6 September 2018, you were deported from Australia. At that time, you were the president of the Beenleigh Bandidos Motorcycle Club (Bandidos). You returned to New Zealand to live in the Bay of Plenty. I infer that you must have had an association with Hone Ronaki, Kelly Petrowski and Leon Huritu prior to your return to New Zealand but, even if this is not correct, on your return to New Zealand, you quickly established contact with them.

[7] Initially, you and Hone Ronaki were involved as senior members of the newly established Bandidos chapter in the North Island of New Zealand. At that point, it appears that Hone Ronaki may have been the president and you may have been…

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 THE KING v JIM DAVID THACKER

Details

AGLC: THE KING v JIM DAVID THACKER [2023] NZHC 3104
Case: [2024] NZHC 3104
Decision Date: 8 November 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Jim David Thacker was convicted on 53 charges, including possession of methamphetamine for supply, money laundering, discharging a firearm with reckless disregard, and participating in an organised criminal group. The court assessed the gravity of his offending, taking into account his role as the president of the Mongols gang and the quantity of methamphetamine involved. The starting point for his sentence was set at 22 years, with additional uplifts for other drug-related, firearms, money laundering, and attempting to pervert the course of justice charges. A 20% deduction was applied for personal and mitigating matters, including his guilty pleas and cultural background. Ultimately, Thacker was sentenced to 22 years and four months' imprisonment, with a minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) of 10 years.

Orders