Jury clears Whangārei man of gun charges after hearing he had been set up

Gary Loveland was on trial at the Whangārei District Court. Photo / Supplied

A convicted meth cook has been cleared of gun charges after successfully arguing he had been set up after a car deal soured.

A jury took just 45 minutes to return a not-guilty verdict on Tuesday following the two-day trial of Gary Loveland in the Whangārei District Court.

Nearly two decades ago, the 57-year-old was jailed for six years for his role in an operation that saw 11 offenders produce hundreds of thousands of dollars of methamphetamine at a home in Hamilton.

He went on to admit a raft of drug-related charges, including the manufacture and supply of meth, and at his sentencing, the judge at the time said Loveland had been “the cook” to drug kingpins.

At his most recent court case, Loveland defended charges of unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition following a June 2022 police search of his house bus in Woodhill.

The search turned up a modified semi-automatic firearm along with magazine ammunition and bullets.

But during the trial, defence lawyer Sumudu Thode, told the jury Loveland, of Whangārei, had been set up and the gun had been planted.

“Someone else put it there,” she said.

When police detective Josh Lautogo took the witness stand, he said the firearm and the ammunition had been found in a bag in the bus.

On top of the bag was a folder filled with letters addressed to Loveland from various Government organisations.

Lautogo said this led police to confirm the bus was Loveland’s and believe the weapon was also his.

Challenging Lautogo, Thode said the bus did not have a secure lock, was easily accessible from a driveway, and shared a community garden at the rear of the property.

“Anyone could have easily accessed the bus,” she suggested.

A man who is still unable to be located was said to be responsible for placing the gun in Loveland's house bus. Photo / NZME

Loveland elected to give evidence in his defence and in doing so he claimed he had been set up by an acquaintance named Mike*.

He and Mike had “bad blood” after Loveland sold him a car and did not receive payment.

Four days prior to the police search of his house bus, Mike dropped Loveland off in Hikurangi to stay with a friend, Loveland told the court.

When Loveland returned to his property on the morning of the police search, he went straight to an appointment and did not enter his bus, he said.

After officers located the gun that afternoon, Loveland claimed Mike could have entered the house bus to plant the gun, given he knew Loveland was away.

Crown prosecutor Alex Goodwin questioned whether there were hard feelings between the pair given Loveland accepted a ride from him.

“Mike did quite well out of you. Wouldn’t it be more accurate that you had bad blood with him because he got one over you?” Goodwin put to the defendant.

But Loveland said he did not have a vendetta towards Mike, who to date has not been located by police.

Loveland’s landlord also took the stand and told the jury she had been an acquaintance of Mike’s for eight years.

During that time, she had seen the gun in Mike’s possession, she said in evidence.

Following an altercation with him, Mike flashed her the firearm and so she ordered him off her property and has not heard from him since, she said.

“I vividly remember seeing the gun as it was not a normal gun, it had tape around it and some sort of rope.”

She confirmed it was the same gun as the gun pictured in trial’s photo evidence.

When asked if Loveland was around during this incident she replied “absolutely not”.

Thode reminded the jury they must be sure of what possession means.

“To have possession of something you need to know where it is, what it is and to have control of it.”

Following counsels’ closing statements the jury retired to consider their verdict. Less than one hour later they returned to the courtroom to deliver not-guilty findings on both charges.

Judge Philip Rzpecky dismissed Loveland and the jury.

*Mike is not the real name of the acquaintance.