Convicted sex offender ______ likely received a lesser sentence because of the potential “vilification” he would face, a leading criminal lawyer says.
John Miller, who was a former senior law lecturer at Victoria University and previous Wellingtonian of the Year, said the Sentencing Act 2002 set out mitigating and aggravating factors in sentencing offenders, and a number of those factors would have been taken into account.
Appearing before Judge Stephen Harrop at Wellington District Court on Friday, ______ was sentenced to eight months of home detention for indecently assaulting an elderly in a rest home.
At sentencing, Judge Harrop said the lifting of name suppression, which ______ had fought against, had been taken into account.
“There ought to be a discount to recognise the effect of publication on you as a form of penalty,” he said.
Miller – who did not condone ______ offending – said it was “unusual” for an offender to receive a sentencing discount in exchange for name suppression to be lifted, but it wasn’t as simple as first glance.
“For him, it’s going to be a harsher sentence. He’s going to be vilified up and down the country,” Miller said.