Drug pusher appeals again

Despite a previous appeal failure – a counter appeal increased his sentence – a drug pusher is appealing agian, this time to get his 18 year sentence reduced.

Northern Advocate: Drug kingpin Maxwell Beckham claims police misconduct

The alleged poice miscoinduct – listening in to his phone conversations – pales compareed to beckham’s Misconduct as a drug pusher.

Maxwell John Beckham, 67, from Mangonui, is serving an 18-year jail term with a minimum non-parole of nine years on charges of conspiracy to manufacture and supply methamphetamine and supplying methamphetamine, cocaine, cannabis oil and ecstasy.

He was originally sentenced by the High Court in Auckland to 13-and-a-half years’ jail with a minimum non-parole period of seven years.

Beckham appealed the conviction in the Court of Appeal while the Solicitor General appealed against the length of the jail term on the grounds that considerations the sentencing judge made in reducing the sentence by five years no longer existed.

That court dismissed Beckham’s appeal but granted the Crown appeal, and replaced his original sentence with one of 18 years’ jail.

Having had his sentence increased – sounds fair enough to me for someone so involved in ruining peoiple’s lives – Beckham is trying to get it reduced. He must still have money to pay for lawyers.

Beckham then went to the Supreme Court and alleged an abuse of process by police relating to the granting of three interception warrants obtained for electronic surveillance.

He was arrested after a six-month inquiry in 2008 during which police tapped his cellphone and bugged his car.

Police listened to privileged conversations between Beckham and his lawyer while the former was in custody 18 months before his trial in the High Court.

The Court of Appeal had ruled there was no abuse of process by police and the interception warrants were properly issued.

But that hasn’t stopped him trying.

The Supreme Court granted him leave to appeal in July 2013 and the approved ground of appeal is whether he should have received a reduction in his sentence for breach of his rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

During his Auckland trial, it was revealed Beckham was the kingpin of a methamphetamine syndicate.

Detectives found $865,720 hidden in a vehicle at his home when Beckham was arrested in 2008. Beckham’s assets and cash worth more than $10 million have been restrained.

Still enough cash to keep legally campaigning to reduce his sentence.

I have no sympathy for him, considering the number of life sentences of addiction he will have inflicted on people.

Leave a comment

13 Comments

  1. Ian McKinnon

     /  22nd January 2015

    This bastard typifies the reason why legal aid should be abolished.

    Reply
    • Mike C

       /  22nd January 2015

      @IanMcK. Woo-Hoo !!! Finally something that you and I totally agree upon. LOL.

      Reply
  2. “someone so involved in ruining people’s lives”
    “life sentences of addiction he will have inflicted on people”

    You mean like breweries, cigarette companies, and the states which use them to generate revenue?

    http://www.alternet.org/10-hardest-drugs-kick

    A team of researchers led by professor David Nutt of London’s Imperial College once set out to determine which drugs were most harmful based on their addictive properties (the resulting article suggested that alcohol and tobacco are more harmful than cannabis and ecstasy, and led to Nutt getting fired as the UK’s top drug adviser). Dutch scientists replicated the London study and devised a “dependency rating” that measured addictive potency of the biggest drugs out there on a precisely calibrated scale of 0-to-3.

    1. Heroin
    2. Crack Cocaine
    3. Nicotine
    4. Methadone
    5. Crystal Meth
    6. Alcohol
    7. Cocaine
    8. Amphetamines
    9. Benzodiazepines
    10. GHB

    Reply
    • Yes I’ve seen this list, by the Prof… BUT; I think Nicotine should be at the top & Alcohol 2nd, because the ‘harm’ of drugs in society is totally subjective (based on prejudice & misinformation), but there is no doubt that deaths & A&E admissions are definitley the highest for the ‘legal’ drugs. I read that over 5000 deaths annually from tobacco & about 1000 from alcohol, just in NZ. ALL illegal drugs, apparently less than a few hundred (?) & Cannabis; no actual ‘official’ deaths EVER recorded (except maybe the odd road death.. mostly over stated & highly exaggerated) by the police & media !

      Reply
  3. You do the ‘crime’.. you do the time (cant argue).. BUT this is further proof that there is a market for ‘other drugs’ (besides alcohol & tobacco) & prohibition is NOT the solution.. time for a rational, alternative approach eg. legal, licensed, regulation (similar to alcohol & tobacco) & at least R18, as is now happening overseas with cannabis. Its 2015 !!

    Reply
    • For common substances like cannabis, alcohol, and tobacco to be licenced there has to be a competent authority. The state isn’t competent to manage licensing of addictive or harmful substances, and neither does it have the authority to do so.

      The only practical solutions IMO are educating people about the health risks and being vigilant regarding those who supply drugs to minors.

      Reply
      • I agree with most of your comment.. you can never ‘plug all the holes’..
        BUT again; PROHIBITION is NOT the answer.. in fact most of the current ‘problems’ around ‘illegal drugs’ in society, are the result of this failed policy : black-markets, gangs, corrupt ‘officials’ & even a lot of the burglary & theft to pay the over-inflated B-M prices.

        You say, no competent authority &/or no ‘authority to do so’ (based on what ?) other countries are managing ‘to do so’

        I was told that cannabis cannot be ‘legally regulated’ because it breaches UN conventions.. IF you read the ‘UN single convention on narcotic drugs 1961’.. it gives clear exemption to medicinal, scientific & industrial uses of the drugs in the schedule (including cannabis) & says possession ‘under legal authority; which to me sounds like ‘regulation’ not Prohibition.

        PROVE me wrong.. anyone…

        Reply
        • No authority based on no right to interfere with people’s private lives. The usual argument that they have the right to make law because they are sovereign is a fallacy because their political sovereignty doesn’t have the necessary qualities for effective legislation – you can’t get good law from fraud, end of story.

          I agree that prohibition is not the answer, but keeping alcohol/nicotine/drugs away from minors is more a case of responsible parenting.

          Reply
  4. Kittycatkin

     /  22nd January 2015

    Don’t say that in France, you’ll be arrested for this freedom of expression.

    Reply
  5. I tried Marijuana but it did not work on me.
    Also tried Speed but it had no effect. Tried Meth-Amphetamine, but it was a waste of time. Obviously my genetic sequencing is drug-immune, and should be scientifically investigated and harvested.

    Reply
  6. The damn cheek of him, appealing his sentence. He deserves to spend the rest of his nefarious life behind bars. I save my sympathy for those who have been wronged by the judicial system, not lowlifes’ like Maxwell Beckham. Irony. A deliberate lawbreaker, complaining about the law being broken against him. Ya gotta love Karma, when it comes back to bite some deserving villains in the arse.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Kittycatkin Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s