Drug-dealing poker champ fails in bid to reduce his non-parole period – Stuff

Stuff

Shane Tamihana, also known as Shane Thompson, was considered Hawkes Bays biggest meth dealer. (File photo)

A jailed poker champ once regarded as Hawkes Bays biggest methamphetamine dealer has failed to convince the Supreme Court he has a reasonable argument for reducing his non-parole period.

Shane Tamihana, who also goes by the name Shane Thompson, was well known on the national poker circuit before being jailed for 13 years in 2018 after pleading guilty to having the lead role in a $4.2 million methamphetamine ring.

At Tamihanas sentencing, Judge Geoff Rea said he was the most comprehensive methamphetamine dealer Hawkes Bay has ever seen and [the offending] puts you up there on a national scale over the last 10 years as well.

Rea imposed a minimum non parole period of 6 years, making him ineligible for parole prior to November 2024.

READ MORE:* Supreme Court throws out slave trader's bid to overturn conviction * Man sentenced to three years in prison after stabbing at Hawke's Bay holiday park* Judge gives meth dealer a chance with 'extremely merciful' sentence

Over an 11-month period in 2016 and 2017 Tamihana had pushed $4.2 million worth of meth into the Hawke's Bay region.

Police found a further 2.6kg of meth at a co-offenders property and more than $170,000 total in cash.

Tamihana was a high-flying poker champ and a frequent visitor of Aucklands Sky City Casino. (File photo)

In 2019, Tamihana was one of six meth offenders involved in a groundbreaking appeal to the Court of Appeal (known as Zhang v R), which resulted in a judgment that opened the door for judges to consider imposing more lenient sentences for offenders who played lesser roles.

Tamihana and Jing Zhang were the only two offenders to have their appeals dismissed. Others had their sentences quashed and lessened.

Following his unsuccessful appeal, Tamihana appealed to the Supreme Court seeking an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal.

Tamihana wanted to challenge the weight that had been given to his personal circumstances and how those factors might affect the term of his minimum non-parole period. He also wanted to argue that the imposition of a non-parole period eroded the impact of a guilty plea.

THREE

Patrick Gower investigates New Zealand's methamphetamine epidemic in Patrick Gower: On P. (Video first published in May 2021)

In a judgment released on Wednesday, the panel of Supreme Court judges ruled that the Court of Appeal had recognised that Tamihanas personal circumstances required closer consideration but, after undertaking that consideration, it was still decided that the minimum non-parole period was appropriate.

Nothing raised by the applicant calls into question that assessment. We see no appearance of a miscarriage of justice in the approach adopted to this case, the judges said.

Tamihanas application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Last year Tamihana had a house and more than $90,000 confiscated by the Crown under the Proceeds of Crime Act.

Read more here:

Drug-dealing poker champ fails in bid to reduce his non-parole period - Stuff