Peter Lloyd Machirus' criminal activities have cost him two Christchurch properties, ordered forfeited to the Crown in a reserved judgment by Christchurch District Court Judge Michael Crosbie.
The judge held that the properties at Acheson Avenue and Worcester Street were "tainted" because stolen property worth about $18,000 wasfound there as part of the police's Operation Rhino bust of a burglary and receiving ring, the Christchurch court news website reported yesterday.
The Solicitor-General sought to have the properties taken under the Proceeds of Crime Act.
Machirus, 63, is serving a 3 1/2 year jail term for his role in the criminal enterprise after being convicted on 20 receiving charges at a long jury trial last year.
Crown prosecutor Anne Toohey submitted in court that Machirus had never disputed - though the jury was never told - that he had previously admitted he was a criminal.
Acheson Ave is a commercial property in Machirus' name, bought by him in June 2004.
It is estimated to be worth $55,000. It was a partly completed commercial property to be set up as a bar.
Worcester St is registered in the name of Gary George Morell, an associate of Machirus' who was one of the 11 accused in the Operation Rhino case. He was eventually discharged on all charges.
Mr Morell's lawyer told the court his client had signed over the property to Machirus in payment for gambling debts.
The agreement was never completed, and Morell remained the registered owner.
The property has a valuation of $264,000 and is subject to a mortgage, and is also the subject of mortgagee sale proceedings.
Judge Crosbie ruled: "In my view, the properties, in the context of the offending involving the respondent, were used to facilitate the commission of the offence of receiving.
"They were not incidental to, but were central to the offending."
Worcester St was used as a residence for Machirus' partner and family members.
He found that Mr Morell was not the owner or landlord of the Worcester St property.
Mr Morell had no financial means to make the mortgage payments, there was evidence that the property dealings between him and Machirus had an ulterior motive, and Machirus dealt with the property as his own and paid the mortgage.
Machirus had submitted that the value of the properties to be taken would greatly exceed his offending.
