A jilted lover who was jailed for posting nude photos of an ex-girlfriend online along with her name, phone number and a suggestion she was available for sex has successfully appealed his sentence.
Tyla Brittin, 21, was sentenced to one year jail under the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015 by Judge Paul Mabey QC in the Tauranga District Court in July.
Yesterday, the sentence was quashed and replaced with a sentence of seven months imprisonment with leave to apply for home detention.
Brittin had earlier pleaded guilty to posting the photos on a public website with the intent to cause harm.
At sentencing, Judge Mabey said the accused intended to belittle, hurt and embarrass the victim.
Through his lawyer Craig Tuck, Brittin appealed the sentence on the grounds of the sentence being "manifestly excessive" and argued home detention should have been imposed.
Brittin has already served 10 weeks of his original sentence.
The appeal was heard at the High Court at Rotorua on September 26 and yesterday, Justice Peter Woodhouse released his decision.
The case relates to Brittin posting naked photographs of his former girlfriend on an R18 website with her name and phone number, telling audiences she was willing to have sex.
The images were sent to Brittin by the woman via Facebook messenger within a two-week period of them making contact through a Facebook dating site in November 2015.
The pair met twice but did not have sex and the victim ended the relationship one day in December 2015, which was when Brittin posted the images and information online.
In his decision, Justice Woodhouse said the sentence he considered "should have been imposed in the District Court would have been one of home detention assessed against the alternative short-term sentence of imprisonment of seven months".
"I would have imposed a sentence of six months home detention," Justice Woodhouse said in his decision.
He said Brittin was granted leave to apply to the District Court for cancellation of the sentence of imprisonment of seven months and seek the substitute of a sentence of home detention if Mr Brittin found a suitable residence for home detention.
"It is not possible, at this time, to quash the sentence of imprisonment and
impose an appropriate sentence of home detention because there is no current home
detention report."