Two young girls, their family and friends have been torn apart by revelations their private daily routines were filmed and viewed by a man they trusted.
A Blenheim health professional was today sentenced to four years in prison on more than 30 charges of child sexual exploitation with covert filming at the heart of his abuse.
Several charges were representative.
The man, who has permanent name suppression, filmed the victims showering and using the toilet on 144 occasions.
Proof he was present was his zooming in and out on his victims using a spy camera hidden in a power socket.
On one occasion he accidentally filmed himself entering the bathroom and moving a towel on a rail that had covered the hidden camera.
“An important observation was that you appeared to be controlling the recording as it was happening,” Judge Tony Snell said at today’s sentencing in the Nelson District Court.
He said that demonstrated the motives were sexual.
The man, described as having been a “high functioning member of the community”, hung his head and sobbed as he heard five of the six victims’ statements, read on their behalf during the hearing.
One said she was shocked, sad and embarrassed.
Another said knowing he had viewed her in such a way and that police had seen the videos had caused “immense distress”.
Another was left “physically sick” at knowing the man had “captured parts of her she didn’t like to look at herself”.
The man’s former partner said the shame and sadness were so immense they often avoided going out in public and were considering leaving town.
Judge Snell said the victims had been left ashamed, degraded, humiliated and terrified that people would find out what had happened to them.
“They are victims of a sexual predator, which is you, which is ironic because you blame much of this on your own experience being a victim.”
The man was earlier found guilty at a judge-alone trial where he maintained that while his body might have been involved, his mind wasn’t.
“I’m still not quite sure you accept it was you doing this,” Judge Snell said.
Offending over 16 months
The charges for offending over 16 months fell into three categories: knowingly making an objectionable publication, making an intimate visual recording and possessing an objectionable publication.
Crown prosecutor Jackson Webber said there was no evidence the recordings were distributed or shared.
Defence lawyer Hannah Stuart said the offending wouldn’t have happened if not for the long periods the man had been unwell because of what happened to him as a child.
The first tranche arose from him installing and operating a covert video camera at two properties, where he filmed the victims using the bathroom.
He took a large number of screenshots from the videos.
Charges of possession of child sexual exploitation material arose from him sourcing material online.
Almost 2700 images found
In February 2023, police searched his Marlborough home and seized devices that were assessed by a specialist forensics unit.
Judge Snell said material from a phone could not be extracted until December 2024 because the passcode given to police was wrong.
Almost 2700 still images – screenshots from 58 videos featuring three young girls in the bathroom, showering, using the toilet and dressing – were found in deleted data on an iPhone.
The images were created between October 2021 and February 2022.
Other charges related to 86 videos found in a recycle bin on the man’s iPhone, taken using covert cameras hidden in a bathroom power socket.
Judge Snell said it was notable the total recording time of the 86 videos was 23 hours.
Forty-three of the videos focused on the victims using the toilet.
Charges 12 to 33 related to internet-sourced child exploitation material between April and December 2022, which had been repeatedly accessed.
Police also found a file of images dating back several years.
“It’s clear from the evidence you were accessing such material back in 2015 for your own viewing,” Judge Snell said.
He said the offending against the victims he filmed was “shameful, exploitative conduct” and a “massive breach of trust”.
From an adjusted starting point of five years in prison, the man was awarded a minimal discount for his previous good character and personal circumstances, including that he had suffered abuse as a child, verified by a psychologist’s report.
Judge Snell also accepted the man’s remorse was genuine in part.
