Daniel Laidlaw was jailed for two years, nine months and two weeks on charges of forgery and fabricating evidence after creating fake WhatsApp messages to get off a rape charge. Photo / Supplied
A woman is warning others to be alert after a traumatic Tinder date resulted in a man creating fake WhatsApp messages and lying to a court after being charged with rape.
A Hamilton jury ultimately couldn’t decide if Daniel Laidlaw was guilty of the rape charge, instead coming to a hung jury verdict, with police later deciding not to pursue a retrial.
However, they found him guilty on charges of fabricating evidence and perjury after he created false messages to try to change the narrative of what happened in an inner-city hotel nearly five years ago.
Laidlaw was initially successful, and his deceit resulted in the woman “Sara” (not her real name) go from being viewed as a potential victim to someone who had made a false complaint.
Laidlaw was jailed and maintains he’s done nothing wrong and hasn’t shown any remorse.
Now, Sara has spoken to Open Justice to share her story about meeting Laidlaw, the “love-bombing”, the lies, and the “monumental impact” it has had on her life.
It all started on Tinder.
The victim and Laidlaw, who was living in Rotorua, swiped right on each other in April 2021, and instantly began chatting.
After a day or two, they began organising a date for the upcoming Friday night at a hotel in Hamilton, but she says she had no particular view about whether sex would result.
“We were just going to meet up for ice cream and wander around the city.
“He had booked a hotel room ... but I said I would see how I felt,” she said.
In outlining the facts of that night during Laidlaw’s sentencing in April last year, Judge Tini Clark said sex did take place, with the victim then leaving to get emergency contraception.
The next day, Sara went to police, alleging she had been raped, giving them screenshots of their communications and undergoing a medical examination.
Police did not ask to examine her phone, and after giving the information, she deleted the app.
The following day, she gave a video interview, and in July 2021, Laidlaw was arrested and charged with rape.
Around this time, Laidlaw lost his job, his mother suffered a stroke, and there was another Covid-19 lockdown.
Recalling the facts from the trial, Judge Clark said by September 21, Laidlaw had created a screen recording of a fake WhatsApp conversation.
The screen recording suggested that immediately after the victim left the hotel, there was a conversation between the pair about her getting emergency contraception, and the condom breaking.
He also alleged the victim stole some of his property and that he didn’t wish to hear from her again.
A report had been sought by police to establish the legitimacy of the chat, and it was initially deemed real.
It wasn’t until some months later that Laidlaw’s forgery was discovered.
Judge Clark said the fake chat had “quite a significant impact” on the police investigation into the rape charge.
“It certainly served to make the investigation into that matter far more difficult for police,” the judge said.
By March 9, 2022, police had decided the victim should be spoken to, and she was.
“She said [Laidlaw’s forged] conversation simply didn’t occur.
“She did not recall the content of it, and her phone was surrendered to police.”
Sara was interviewed again two days later and then suspected of making a false complaint.
That sent her into “somewhat of a tailspin”.
After denying the conversations, she then began second-guessing herself, and thinking that perhaps they had occurred, the judge said.
“Really, what I took from her evidence at trial was that this was a period of utter confusion for her, given what she knew had occurred,” Judge Clark said.
Meanwhile, the defendant swore an affidavit to have the rape charge dismissed, relying on the fake WhatsApp messages.
Laidlaw’s fraud was eventually discovered by a police officer reviewing the messages for a third time.
Judge Clark said she had “no doubt whatsoever” that the fabricating of evidence and swearing the affidavit was “designed to undermine the credibility of the victim and also avoid being prosecuted”.
“And indeed, the purpose of the creation of the screen recording was certainly having the desired effect because police started to doubt that the victim was telling the truth.”
But for the later discovery by police, the whole situation could have played out as Laidlaw had hoped, which was “the destruction of the credibility of the victim and the dismissal of charges against [Laidlaw]”.
In her victim impact statement, Sara told Laidlaw at sentencing that his actions “had a monumental impact on my life”.
“What you did left me feeling traumatised.
“I had to leave my job for six months to use this time to process and heal ... I moved back home to my family.
“I wasn’t myself ... I had anxiety. I felt numb.”
After being told she was going to be arrested, she felt the “world was closing in around me”.
“To my shock, I was read my rights ... and I was suddenly being treated as a criminal by police and accused of crimes that I didn’t commit because of your lies.
“That was harrowing and devastating.”
The victim said she used to have “such high trust and respect for police”, but after this experience, that had changed.
“I genuinely thought I was going crazy.”
She told Laidlaw his lies nearly ruined her, “mentally, spiritually, personally and professionally”.
Socially, she lost friends and didn’t feel safe around men she didn’t know.
“I thought my brain was lying to me, that I was going crazy, and that no one believed me.
“To try and make sense of everything, I ended up gaslighting myself.”
Talking to NZME after Laidlaw gave up the appeal of his conviction and bid for continued name suppression in December, the victim said if it wasn’t for a police officer discovering the one-word anomaly – ‘than’ and ‘then’ – she would have been prosecuted.
She has been so traumatised by her ordeal that she has lost faith in police.
“This has been so bad. I don’t have words to describe how bad this whole process been.”
The woman said she wanted her story out there.
“Knowing that he went into jail was a huge relief.”
Having the case finally behind her, Sara said she is moving on with her life, but isn’t going on any dates for a while.
“My trust in humans is pretty low these days,” she said.
Crown prosecutor Tom Sutcliffe said Laidlaw went to such significant efforts to pervert justice that he convinced police the communications were real.
“He then proceeded to factory-reset his phone so that there would be no digital footprint left to prove very clearly what he had done.
“As part of that process, he filed [a section 106 discharge without conviction] and part of that, an affidavit, pointed the finger at the complainant as a woman who had fabricated evidence and that she had been caught red-handed lying about what happened.
“In terms of charges of this type, it’s my submission that it doesn’t get any worse than this.”
Sutcliffe said Laidlaw pursued his defence “doggedly” through the trial, while the victim was “put through the wringer”.
He described Laidlaw’s offending as “cruel” and exacerbated by his affidavit calling the victim a liar.
Defence lawyer Amin Osama pushed for a good character discount of up to 25% due to Laidlaw being a first offender.
He also pushed for further discounts because of the “significant personal events” occurring in his client’s life at the time, including his mother’s stroke, him being made redundant, and the Covid-19 lockdown.
But Judge Clark struggled with the submission, given Laidlaw had maintained he’d done nothing wrong.
“In his life, at that point in time, there was a lot of stress, a lot of anxiety and it was in that context that he made a foolish decision,” Osama replied, “and then signed an affidavit.”
“But that was signed 21 April, 2022,” the judge replied.
“He’s stressed out and anxious. Is that it?” the judge asked.
“I’m suggesting there’s a contribution.
“When someone is stressed out, they’re anxious, there are all these big, traumatic life events occurring, the [ability] to make rational decisions ... is impaired.”
Laidlaw’s ex-partner was also in court to support him and had written a letter of support, detailing how much of a good father he was, “and the integrity he has”.
In pushing for a home detention sentence, Osama said Laidlaw had been assessed as being at a low risk of reoffending.
Judge Clark said she was not surprised to hear the significant effects the victim had suffered.
“The level of harm caused here, which has been described by the Crown as cruel, is certainly something that I take into account.”
Laidlaw’s offending was “significantly premeditated”, sophisticated and considered.
She said his offending struck at the “very heart of the administration of justice” and was designed to undermine the police investigation.
“I consider that [the offending] was cruel in the undermining of the victim who had done nothing wrong, and then coming forward about an event, and it did turn her world upside down as to how she was treated by police.”
After taking a starting point of three-and-a-half years, as suggested by Sutcliffe, she allowed a total of 20% in discounts, including 15% for previous good character.
“The defendant went to trial, he accepts no responsibility for his offending, no remorse, there are no mitigating factors other than those I have already announced,” she said.
Laidlaw was jailed for two years and nine-and-a-half months.
He will be eligible for parole next month.
In a statement to Open Justice, Waikato relieving district manager of Criminal Investigations Detective Inspector Kevin McNaughton acknowledged that Laidlaw’s actions “exacerbated what was already a traumatic situation for the victim”.
“The circumstances and aggravated features of any offending are taken into account by the court during sentencing.”
As a result of this offender’s actions, and the victim’s courage in this matter, police were able to lay further charges, including fabricating evidence and perjury – he was convicted and sentenced in 2025 to a term of imprisonment.
Police were duty-bound to complete a thorough investigation, and in doing so made inquiries to corroborate or refute evidence, and “as a result, the falsification of evidence was discovered”.
“Victims are the most important people in sexual assault reporting and investigations, and we want them to feel as comfortable as possible during the process.”
Police continually sought to improve their investigation processes and service to victims, he said.
“As such, learnings are continually incorporated into the content of Adult Sexual Assault (ASA) courses for specialist investigators.
“These learnings are thematic and anonymised, given the enduring suppression maintained by the victims of such offending.”
Belinda Feek is an Open Justice reporter based in Waikato. She has worked at NZME for 11 years and has been a journalist for 22.