Thompson v The Queen - [2016] NZHC 2753

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE JUDGMENT AND ANY PART OF THE PROCEEDINGS (INCLUDING THE RESULT) IN NEWS MEDIA OR ON THE INTERNET OR OTHER PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DATABASE UNTIL FINAL DISPOSITION OF TRIAL. PUBLICATION IN LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

CRI-2015-088-3515 [2016] NZHC 2753

BETWEEN
RACHAEL PATRICIA ANNE

THOMPSON Applicant

AND

CROWN Respondent

Hearing: 18 October 2016

Counsel:

N S Leader for Applicant
N J Dore for Respondent

Judgment:

18 November 2016

JUDGMENT OF WHATA J

This judgment was delivered by me on 18 November 2016 at 4.00 pm, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Date: ………………………….

Solicitors: Crown Solicitors, Whangarei

THOMPSON v CROWN [2016] NZHC 2753 [18 November 2016]

[1] Ms Thompson faces charges of money laundering and participating in an organised criminal group. She seeks discharge pursuant to s 147 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 on two grounds:

(a) The money laundering charge laid pursuant to s 12B of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 is a nullity, that section having been repealed prior to the alleged offending; and

(b)There is insufficient evidence to substantiate that she knew about the alleged organised criminal group or that her conduct contributed to the group.

[2] Ms Thompson is also jointly charged with her boyfriend, Miguel Martin, for possession of 0.6 grams of methamphetamine following the execution of a search at her address. She does not seek to have that charge dismissed.

Background

[3] Ms Thompson is charged as part of Operation Atlas, an investigation into the source of Methamphetamine supply in the greater Northland area. The primary focus has been the investigation into members of the Headhunters Motorcycle Gang and their associates, who were identified as responsible for the manufacture and distribution of methamphetamine. During the course of Operation Atlas numerous production orders were applied for and received in the Whangarei District Court. A large amount of cellular content was examined by the investigation team which resulted in the identification of prominent Northland Headhunters and associates.

[4] On 23 October 2015, a Surveillance Device Warrant was issued by Asher J. Regimen Martin and Tony Britton were identified and named in the warrant. Tony Mataki-Kaiaruna, Corey Uren and Tawaiti Snowden were identified during the course of the operation as heavily involved in the manufacture and supply of methamphetamine. Intercepted phone conversations have also identified Philip Housham and Bronson Broughton as involved in the supply of methamphetamine. Ms

Thompson and Katrina Britton were also identified in the course of the operation as the girlfriend and wife of Mr Martin and Mr Britton respectively.

The case against Ms Thompson

[5] The Crown alleges that on 4 December 2015, Ms Thompson is recorded as talking to her partner, Mr Martin, about handling money derived from the sale of methamphetamine. Mr Martin is recorded as telling her “not to go spending” and she replies, “I’m not it’s going away”. This is said to show that she was money laundering.

[6]…

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 Thompson v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Thompson v The Queen [2016] NZHC 2753
Case: [2016] NZHC 2753
Decision Date: 18 November 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Rachael Patricia Anne Thompson applied for discharge from a money laundering charge and a charge of participating in an organised criminal group. The application was heard and dismissed by Whata J in the High Court of New Zealand. The applicant contended that the money laundering charge was a nullity because the relevant section of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 had been repealed prior to the alleged offending. Additionally, the applicant argued that there was insufficient evidence to substantiate that she knew about the alleged organised criminal group or that her conduct contributed to the group. The court found that the money laundering charge was not a nullity and that the appropriate statutory provision was s 243 of the Crimes Act 1961. The court also found that there was sufficient evidence to allow the case to go to the jury on the charge of participating in an organised criminal group. The court amended the charge to reflect the correct statutory provision and dismissed the application for discharge.

Orders