Key Takeaways
- A 20‑year‑old man was sentenced to 12 months supervision after secretly recording intimate images and video of his former girlfriend while she slept.
- The victim described a coercive, controlling relationship marked by daily sexual expectations, threats of suicide, and exploitation of her prior trauma.
- She contracted two sexually transmitted infections during the relationship and now experiences lasting shame, insomnia, and fear of darkness.
- The victim’s impact statement highlighted her resilience, stating she chose to live despite the abuse and refuses to let the offender retain power over her.
- The judge emphasized the breach of trust, declined the offender’s offer of $500 emotional‑harm reparation, and imposed special conditions including no contact and participation in a probation‑run programme.
Background of the Case
The incident came before the Alexandra District Court where the former boyfriend, whose name is suppressed, faced charges for taking intimate visual recordings without consent. The couple had been in a year‑long relationship from 2024 to November 2025. During that time, the man secretly captured two photographs and a video of the woman while she was asleep, exposing her genitals and breast. The victim discovered the material when she went through his phone, prompting her to involve police. A search warrant executed in December 2025 confirmed the existence of the illicit content on his device.
Details of the Non‑Consensual Recordings
The images and video showed the woman’s pyjama bottoms shifted to one side, revealing her genital area, and another frame exposing her breast. She stated she was unaware the recordings were being made and had not given any consent. When she confronted the 20‑year‑old, he offered no explanation for his actions. The lack of consent and the covert nature of the recordings formed the core of the prosecution’s case, underscoring a clear violation of her bodily autonomy and privacy.
Victim’s Description of Coercive Control
In her victim impact statement, the woman described how her former boyfriend “controlled every aspect of her life so suddenly.” She reported that sex was constant and expected—sometimes multiple times a day—and that any refusal was met with threats of suicide. She emphasized that he was aware of her history of prior sexual abuse yet continued to treat her as an object for his gratification, turning intimacy into something she endured merely to survive.
Health Consequences and Emotional Toll
The relationship resulted in tangible health harms: the woman contracted two sexually transmitted infections from the man. She described the ensuing shame as a “quiet shame that follows me into rooms.” Beyond the physical infections, she reported persistent psychological effects, including feeling unsafe while attempting to sleep and at times being unable to sleep in darkness. The trauma manifested in sleepless nights, hypervigilance, and a lingering sense of vulnerability that persisted long after the relationship ended.
Impact on Mental Health and Suicide Attempt
The cumulative effect of the abuse led the woman to attempt to take her own life. She disclosed that the trauma and control within the relationship pushed her to a breaking point. However, she framed her survival as an act of defiance: “I am proud I chose to live when you told me I did not matter.” She expressed that, despite being brought “to the edge of nothing,” she remains committed to growing, reaching, and choosing to exist, refusing to let the offender retain any power over her.
Offender’s Age and Defence Argument
At the time of the offending, the man was 19 years old. His defence counsel argued that men under 25 often have ongoing frontal lobe development, which can impair decision‑making and lead to poor judgment. This mitigation attempt sought to contextualize his behavior within a neurodevelopmental framework, suggesting that his actions stemmed from immature impulse control rather than deliberate malice.
Prosecution and Judicial Response
The Crown prosecutor rejected the defence’s reliance on brain development, contending that the conduct amounted to more than mere poor decision‑making—it was a calculated violation of trust and autonomy. Judge Emma Parsons acknowledged the offender’s willingness to engage in restorative justice but noted that the victim declined any such process. She also refused to accept the offender’s $500 offer of emotional‑harm reparation, stating that monetary compensation could not redress the profound breach of trust the victim experienced.
Sentencing and Conditions Imposed
Judge Parsons sentenced the man to 12 months of supervision, attaching special conditions designed to mitigate future risk. These include mandatory attendance with a programme organized by a probation officer and a strict prohibition on any contact with the victim. The supervision order aims to monitor the offender’s behavior, provide rehabilitative support, and ensure the victim’s safety and peace of mind moving forward.
Reporter’s Note
Brianna McIlraith, a Queenstown‑based reporter for Open Justice covering courts in the lower South Island, authored the report. Since beginning her journalism career in 2018, McIlraith has focused on business and financial journalism, bringing her analytical skills to this court coverage. Her article details the proceedings, the victim’s poignant statement, and the legal outcomes, highlighting the broader implications for consent, control, and survivor empowerment in intimate‑partner violence cases.