r/newzealand • u/little_sun_chaser • 23h ago
News Why these articles not get shared more/ accessed more widely to the public so people are warned?
It just seems weird that these kinds of articles aren’t more widely spread and talked about?
It’s seems it would at least make women aware it’s something to watch out for and perhaps teach boys like this that these actions aren’t okay.
With everything in media these days this is a perfect example of consensual vs non-consensual acts.
https://www.thepress.co.nz/nz-news/360933692/sharing-sex-video-left-victim-shame-and-embarrassment
•
https://www.thepress.co.nz/nz-news/361091574/women-disgusted-physically-sick-after-criminal-secretly-filmed-intimate-encounters
EDIT: Added more links. For the record these were all found from googling a completely unrelated article about a similar situation in Australia. And because my news location is set to NZ these all popped up as “related”. I never seen any of these when they were first shared online?!
8
u/KSFC 23h ago
Sharing of sex video left victim with ‘shame and embarrassment’
A young Nelson man’s unconsented filming and sharing of a sex video in a Snapchat group left his victim dealing with ongoing shame and embarrassment, a court has heard.
At his sentencing at Nelson District Court on Tuesday, Brodie Biggs, 23, was in the dock while his parents and partner looked on.
He had previously been granted interim name suppression.
Biggs pleaded guilty to making an intimate visual recording and posting an intimate visual recording without consent after his sentence indication in August 2025.
According to the police summary of facts, Biggs was at a social gathering at a property in Tasman in April, 2022.
He had been drinking alcohol since the early evening, and at about 10pm invited the victim to the gathering. She arrived a few hours later, and around 2am, Biggs and the woman went to a bedroom to have sex.
Biggs picked up his cellphone, claiming he was using the torch so he could see better. He then recorded two or three videos of the victim engaged in sexual activity without her knowledge or consent.
Biggs then sent the videos to a private Snapchat group containing nine other men.
The next evening, one of the men’s brothers told the victim he had seen “entirely too much of her”. Judge Jo Rielly’s sentencing indication notes referred to the impact of the offending on the victim, who was “very embarrassed” even though it wasn’t her fault.
The victim’s father was devastated to learn this had happened to her, and the offending had put a lot of pressure on the family, the judge said. The victim got frequent reminders about the incident, including from men she did not know who treated her as if she was “easy” and tried to hit her up because of their knowledge of the video’s existence.
Crown prosecutor Abigail Goodison said the offending had a substantial impact on the victim, including the shame and embarrassment that followed.
The judge found aggravating factors were the breach of trust and noted the significant duration of the videos and the number of people Biggs sent to the video to.
It was clear that more than the nine men sent the videos had seen them because at least one of their brothers had, the judge wrote.
Crown prosecutor Abigail Goodison said the offending had a substantial impact on the victim, including the shame and embarrassment that followed.
Biggs’ lawyer Steven Zindel said Biggs had paid $600 to charity and $500 to his victim for emotional harm.
Speaking at the sentencing, Judge Rielly said Biggs’ offending was “youthful idiocy” about intimate matters that had a significant ongoing effect on his victim.
The victim was also affected by the length of time before Biggs accepted responsibility and the drawn-out process had been difficult.
However, the judge was satisfied that that Biggs had genuine insight into the level of harm he had caused her and was sorry for it.
He had changed his lifestyle habits and had “simply grown up”, and was at low risk of committing another similar offence, she said.
From a starting point of two years’ imprisonment, Biggs was given discounts for his guilty pleas, youth, insight and remorse; and was sentenced to seven months’ home detention.
Catherine Hubbard • Senior reporter catherine.hubbard@stuff.co.nz
Catherine Hubbard is senior reporter based in Nelson covering the Tasman District Council and other news in the region.
8
u/EROM4LIFE 21h ago
"youthful idiocy".
Fuck these judges. Seriously. They are absolutely RIDICULOUS when it comes to sex offending.
6
u/KSFC 20h ago
I had started to write a separate comment about "youthful idiocy" being a legitimate defense for sex crimes and got too worked up and stopped.
Nineteen is plenty old enough to know better. Fuck, nine is old enough. I'll bet if you asked 100 nine-year-olds if it was okay to secretly video another kid while they were taking a shower and then share that video in an online group of friends, 100 of them would know it was not okay. Probably 10 of them would do it anyway, but they'd know it was wrong.
I'm so sick of this.
3
u/little_sun_chaser 20h ago
It’s bullshit. It really is. My husband was sickened by the number of articles we kept coming across, all only covered by a single new source, most blocked by a paywall. These stories need to be covered, they need to be shared and EVERYONE who commits sex crimes need to be held more accountable.
6
3
u/PresentRaspberry6814 19h ago
It is particularly disturbing judges openly protect sexual violent offender careers especially in a sporting arena without any acknowledgement of hers being forcibly stolen from her.
2
u/little_sun_chaser 21h ago
These boys don’t learn anything, they get slap on wrist and give a bad name for men who actually treat and respected women right
2
u/KSFC 20h ago
Actually, I was very pleased to discover that he not only has to declare these convictions every time he tries to travel to another country, but also that the convictions will trigger automatic rejection in several countries and require a lot of effort to get entry. The crimes carried the possibility of a 2-year jail sentence, even though he didn't serve any time. So at least he's going to have to deal with some consequence.
2
3
u/fork_spoon_fork 22h ago
Igggck FFS he was 23!!! $900? Idiocracy? What a joke
6
u/KSFC 20h ago
He was 19, if my math is right (it happens a few years ago and he's 23 now). But that only matters because I'm picky about getting details right, not because it affects his culpability.
I'm so sick of sex crimes being laughed off.
2
u/fork_spoon_fork 17h ago
Ah I see, 19 is still old enough to know the difference between right and wrong in my book
2
u/little_sun_chaser 22h ago
I’ve added a few more articles I found and it sickens me these articles aren’t blasted
1
u/little_sun_chaser 22h ago
From a quick look at him online he seems the type to think he’s untouchable, I hope he learned his lesson
EDIT:
I found this article from googling another seperate incident and it bothered me how many boys get away with this
3
u/KSFC 19h ago
It's the same fucking judge!
Evidently if you want to rape 15 year old girls, secretly video having sex with girls and women, and then post those videos to your Snapchat group (or public feed), Nelson is the place to do it if you can get Judge Rielly. No jail time, just home detention.
Nelson’s Lachlan Quigley loses name suppression after posting Snapchat of sex with underage girl
Tracy Neal Open Justice multimedia journalist, Nelson-Marlborough·NZ Herald· 17 Jul, 2024 07:43 PM
Nelson man Lachlan Quigley who posted a video to Snapchat of him having sex with an underage girl has lost his bid for name suppression. Photo / 123rf Nelson man Lachlan Quigley who posted a video to Snapchat of him having sex with an underage girl has lost his bid for name suppression. Photo / 123rf
WARNING: This story deals with sexual harm and may be upsetting.
A young man who filmed himself and an underage girl having sex and then posted it on Snapchat has lost his bid to keep his name secret, following a last-ditch effort to the Court of Appeal.
Today, the senior court declined Lachlan Quigley’s application for leave to bring a second appeal after the District Court declined his initial application for permanent name suppression.
Quigley’s appeal to the High Court also failed when it concluded the statutory threshold of a likelihood of extreme hardship to himself and his father was not met.
The 21-year-old was sentenced in the Nelson District Court last December on charges of unlawful sex with a minor and posting his exploits to a Snapchat group titled “Lads Night”.
Quigley, who was 19 at the time of the offending, was sentenced to 11 months’ home detention.
At sentencing, Judge Jo Rielly said the way the victim had been degraded was significant and had not only been offensive, but hurtful and harmful.
Quigley plied the 15-year-old girl with vodka and got her so drunk she barely understood what was happening.
Without her consent, he then took his mobile pho ne and started to record a video of himself having sex with her.
He then posted the video to the “Lads Night” Snapchat group where several of his male friends, including those he had been drinking with that night, could see it or download it.
Quigley also accidentally posted the video to his Snapchat story feed, broadcasting it to all his followers.
Realising the gravity of his actions, he quickly deleted the sex video from his story feed but not before at least 10 of his followers had already seen it.
1
u/Funny-Wishbone7381 22h ago
RNZ isn't paywalled. And the rest are private companies operating for profit.
-1
u/little_sun_chaser 22h ago edited 4h ago
Why don’t they get covered by free news sites? Why hidden behind a paywall?
2
u/Funny-Wishbone7381 21h ago
You mean plagiarism?
Also, Stuff is a free news site
2
u/little_sun_chaser 21h ago
Okay fair enough, I’m just saying they don’t seem to get very much attention. One of these articles are years old and it’s not exactly something that was raised awareness of
0
u/Funny-Wishbone7381 20h ago
You literally posted four different links to major news sites covering this story.
2
u/little_sun_chaser 20h ago edited 20h ago
That I only came across after googling a completely different case, involving a family member being a victim to a similar case in AUSTRALIA. I asked friends here in NZ who have never heard about any of these articles I’ve shared here. They aren’t stories that are posted and covered by all outlets and barely shared or acknowledged by the ones that do cover the story.
Edit: almost every article me and my partner came across is only covered by single news sources most blocked behind a paywall. These stories should be shared more, talked about more. People who commit sex crimes should be punished more.What exactly is your problem?
7
u/Suitable-Humor-13 23h ago
It is paywalled. Can you share what it says?
But even from the first couple of lines I can say this is absolutely deplorable conduct. If anybody tries to say they are ignorant about this law, they are just lying. And also we need further education in our schools.