A high-flying professional who exposed himself in a central Auckland park has been told by a judge he needs to acknowledge his actions and "do something about it".
The 31-year-old was previously found guilty of two counts of doing an indecent act at a judge-alone trial at Auckland District Court but continues to protest his innocence.
Today, Judge Rob Ronayne sentenced him to 120 hours community work and ordered emotional harm reparation of $1000 for the victim.
He accepted publication of the man's name would lead to significant repercussions but said it did not meet the threshold of "extreme hardship" required for permanent name suppression to be granted.
Judge Ronayne said the court had to be careful it was not seen to be creating a two-tiered system whereby people of high professional and social status received preferential treatment when it came to suppression.
However, defence counsel Ron Mansfield said he had papers ready to file with the High Court challenging the convictions.
Judge Ronayne accordingly continued suppression until the outcome of the appeal was known.
The order covered the defendant's name, occupation, place of work and his image.
The charges stemmed from incidents in June and August 2013 when a female jogger encountered the defendant performing lewd acts in Mt Eden domain.
The witness, whose name was also suppressed, said she first thought it was a man urinating in public but as she got closer it was clear it was a sexual act.
She said on the August occasion the man appeared more confident and he stood closer to her, prompting another call to police.
Because of the woman's description and the fact the defendant had previously been granted diversion for doing an indecent act - masturbating in his car in Mt Eden - he became the main suspect in the case.
"He genuinely denies being involved and considers the result to be a grave miscarriage of justice," Mr Mansfield said.
Judge Ronayne said the man had an "impressive list" of references.
"You're clearly a man of considerable ability; somebody who can, and I have no doubt will, contribute to his family and the community in the future," he said.
"You've had a serious deviation ... you need to accept that and do something about it."
Mr Mansfield suggested a conviction was the only penalty the court needed to impose but the judge disagreed.
"You're not a man who's able to claim a youthful mistake. You knew exactly what you were doing," he said.
The defendant was given until the end of the week to file his appeal and his sentence will be suspended pending that hearing.