He was initially granted interim name suppression but it lapsed at his sentencing in Whangārei District Court this week.
Judge Greg Davis refused to grant an application for a permanent order but allowed the man until the end of the week to file an application to appeal the decision.
Outlining the offending, Judge Davis said the objectionable publications were categorised in group A, B and C. Publications the man exported included 22 Group A publications - the most serious - seven Group B publications, and eight Group C publications.
The possession charge involved six publications that fell into Group A, eight that fell into Group C, and 80 that fitted into a loose category of other objectionable images.
The earlier indicated sentence was for a starting point of two years and eight months, imprisonment.
In submissions at this week's sentencing hearing, counsel Stephen Ross said a pre-sentence report for the man was positive. It recorded the embarrassment and guilt he felt daily about the offending. He had self-referred to appropriate counselling.
Judge Davis discounted the starting point by a full 25 per cent for the guilty pleas and another four months for the work the man had done to address his offending.
The judge converted the remaining prison term into 10 months of home detention but emphasised the conversion was for the sake of one of the man's dependants – not his.
The sentence would be followed by six months of conditions, including assessment and treatment by a Department of Corrections-directed psychologist, and prohibitions on the man associating with children under 16 and using internet-capable devices.
The non-custodial sentence meant the man would not be automatically added to a national register of child sex offenders - the decision was at the court's discretion.
Considering the issue, Judge Davis referred to two questions established by the High Court: whether an offender posed a real and genuine risk to the lives and sexual safety of a child or children generally; and whether the offending involved a risk of sufficient gravity to justify the offender being registered.
The judge noted prosecutor Richard Annandale's concern that after the post-detention conditions expire, the man could potentially get work where he came into contact with children. Registration would create a layer of protection.
While private citizens could not search the register, there would be an onus on the man to tell his probation officer before taking up any employment involving children. The officer would then have to disclose the conviction to the prospective employer.
But the Judge said that had to be weighed against a psychologist's assessment that the man posed a low risk of reoffending.
The judge also noted the man was currently training for work where he would be unlikely to come into contact with children.
His offending was limited to imagery and the downloading of imagery. There was nothing from his past behaviour to suggest children in his company were at particular risk.
Registration was therefore not necessary, the judge said.
The application for permanent suppression was on the grounds publication of the man's name would cause extreme hardship to him or a person connected to him.
Judge Davis said he did not accept the threshold was met for the man. He deliberated longer over his decision regarding one of the man's dependants but ultimately found the threshold was not met for that person either.
Sexual harm - Where to get help
If it's an emergency and you feel that you or someone else is at risk, call 111.
If you've ever experienced sexual assault or abuse and need to talk to someone, contact Safe to Talk confidentially, any time 24/7:
• Call 0800 044 334
• Text 4334
• Email support@safetotalk.nz
• For more info or to web chat visit safetotalk.nz
Alternatively contact your local police station - click here for a list.
If you have been sexually assaulted, remember it's not your fault.
