��һ�ǿ�����

A woman embroiled in a Family Court battle took revenge on her ex-husband’s new wife through OnlyFans and ended up in the criminal court. 

The divorcee, who can’t be named for legal reasons, took screenshots of explicit content on the new wife’s OnlyFans account and sent them to elderly relatives and friends of the couple, most of whom didn’t know about the new wife’s side-hustle. 

OnlyFans is an online subscription video service where viewers pay to see exclusive material from their favourite “content creators”. 

The ex-wife’s actions left the new wife shattered and destroyed relationships with some of her loved ones. 

“The night I found out she had sent the images to people I wanted to die,” she said. 

Now the ex-wife has pleaded guilty to distributing an intimate visual recording without consent and appeared for sentencing in the Tauranga District Court. 

Before sentencing started, Judge Paul Geoghegan told the woman the ongoing “war” was causing harm to the children she shared with her ex-husband, and her actions meant “these disputes just go on and on and on”. 

“Until your children get to 18, when they can leave home and say ‘Wow, that’s great, we don’t have to have anything to do with our parents again’,” Judge Geoghegan said. 

The woman told the judge: “I’m a good parent, your Honour, this actually doesn’t have anything to do with my children... I’ve never had any criminal convictions, let alone any concerns with my children, just for the facts.” 

Judge Geoghegan addressed her lawyer and said: “That tells me a bit about the insight, Mr [Bill] Nabney”. 

Judge Paul Geoghegan. Photo / Andrew Warner 

The judge said where there was harm to a family member – the partner of the children’s father – it would inevitably impact their shared children. 

The summary of facts said there was longstanding toxicity between the woman, her ex-husband and his new wife. 

The ex-wife somehow purchased the new wife’s OnlyFans content, which the Crown said was geo-blocked so it wasn’t available in New Zealand. 

Nabney, the woman’s lawyer, said it wasn’t possible to geo-block content; the judge said he wasn’t sure who was correct. 

Screenshots from the new wife’s account and linked Instagram profile were forwarded to six people via the ex-wife through Facebook Messenger. 

Only one of the six was already aware the woman created content on OnlyFans. 

Some of the recipients were “extremely distressed”, given the content’s graphic nature. 

The new wife changed her account name and associated social media platforms. 

However, a later search of the ex-wife’s iCloud storage revealed some of the screenshots were stored there. 

Some months later, after charges had been laid, a new witness was contacted by the ex-wife. 

The ex-wife sent five images from the victim’s OnlyFans page, stating it was “leaked”. 

She said: “I can’t send you the graphic ones because it’s illegal lol but use your imagination … disgusting.” 

The summary of facts states the websites the images had been sourced from were “leaked” sites, so images don’t come up in internet search engines. The images and content would have been sourced before the ex-wife’s name change on OnlyFans in order for them to be leaked. 

The charges the ex-wife faced for sharing explicit images from the OnlyFans account of her ex-husband's new wife were made under the Harmful Digital Communications Act. 

‘I wanted to die,’ says new wife 

In her victim impact statement, the new wife said when she found out what her husband’s ex had done it broke her. 

The ex-wife went to “extreme lengths” to access the images she’d put on the internet in a “controlled and private capacity”. 

“Not only did she send the images to my family, she sent them to my husband’s family, our friends, and other people who have forwarded them on,” she said. 

It had cost her relationships with family and friends. Her dad no longer spoke to her. 

“This was also a way I could financially provide for my family, something I can no longer do.” 

Nabney said his client acknowledged the victim had suffered harm because of the people the photos were sent to. 

However, he said this wasn’t a case where the material had been accessed illegally, or where the defendant had been involved in the production of the material. 

“This is imagery created by the victim for sale,” Nabney said. 

He also said the offending happened “in the context of extremely bitter proceedings in the family court”. 

‘Absolute toxicity’ between parties 

When it came to sentencing, Judge Geoghegan referred to the “extreme animosity” between the parties. 

“That is clearly evident not just from what I have read, but in my discussion with you this afternoon,” he said. 

Judge Geoghegan said the breach of the account privacy caused the victim extreme distress, which was understandable in the circumstances. 

“Although you appear to have little appreciation for that,” he said. 

He noted the woman had “some remorse” for sending the content to the victim’s mother, but otherwise was not sorry for her actions. 

“You feel somewhat justified in what you have done, and I sincerely hope that you reflect on that.” 

He referred to information before the court that the new wife had reported the ex-wife for alleged fraud and child abuse, which the ex-wife had denied. 

“All of that is confirmation of the absolute toxicity of the relationship between two parents, which will be taking an immeasurable toll on the children they purport to love,” Judge Geoghegan said. 

“Having spent a number of years in the family court, I am not naive enough to think that a relationship and the toxicity in that is only one way. 

“Your actions simply contribute to the continuing toxicity.” 

The charge carries a maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment, and the Crown asked for a starting point of 12 months’ imprisonment. 

The judge felt a starting point of eight months was likely more appropriate, however, he decided to stop short of a sentence of imprisonment. 

That would have had a “severe impact, in all likelihood” on the woman’s children. 

“They are the real victims of this offending in many respects,” the judge said. 

The woman was sentenced to 200 hours’ community work, with the judge noting the conviction would likely be an impediment in the Family Court, where the battle continues. 

Hannah Bartlett is a Tauranga-based Open Justice reporter at ��һ�ǿ�����. She previously covered court and local government for the Nelson Mail, and before that was a radio reporter at ��һ�ǿ�����talk ZB.