��һ�ǿ�����

A man��blackmailed��another man he met off Tinder, threatening to tell his family about his sexual preferences if he didn’t hand over money to keep him quiet.��

Kavinesh Lal was initially paid $80 to��perform the sex act��on the victim in a carpark.��

But, nearly a year later he went on to demand eight more bribes, taking advantage of the possibility of the victim being disowned from his family due to their conservative views.��

Lal, who later told police he did it because he needed the money, appeared in the Hamilton District Court for sentencing on one representative charge of blackmail earlier this week.��

The court heard Lal and the victim met on Tinder in September 2021.��

After a short exchange, the pair agreed to meet and that the victim would pay Lal $80 for a sexual act to be performed. The pair met in a carpark, where the act happened and the money was exchanged.��

The victim had no intention of seeing Lal again.��

But, in July 2022, Lal called the victim and threatened to expose his sexual preferences to his family if he didn’t pay him money.��

Both Lal and the victim are members of the same community, and the victim’s family are described in court documents as “extremely conservative”. The victim feared he would be disowned should they find out what happened.��

The defendant used this to his advantage.��

On July 8, the victim reluctantly paid Lal $100 to prevent him from saying anything.��

After that, Lal demanded another $100, which was paid on July 11. The victim demanded that he not contact him again.��

In March 2023, Lal contacted him again and demanded more money using the same threats.��

On March 27, the victim paid him another $100.��

The following month he contacted the victim’s parents via social media and told them the victim owed him $200.��

He didn’t mention the sex act, but he took the opportunity to extort a further $1000, in five $200 payments, between April 1 and April 29.��

All up he was paid $1300.��

Lal admitted his role when spoken to by police and said he knew what he was doing was wrong, but that he was struggling financially at the time and needed the money.��

His lawyer Laura Hann said Lal didn’t have a history of this sort of offending and urged the judge to issue a home detention sentence.��

She also pushed for a 25% discount for his guilty plea as the previous delays were the fault of the procedural delays by the Crown.��

However, Judge Cocurullo declined to do that, saying Lal had an opportunity to plead guilty earlier, but the judge agreed to a 20% discount.��

At a previous hearing, Judge Cocurullo noted how Lal used the victim’s family’s views against him.��

“You knew that was the case and used it to your advantage.”��

The judge sentenced Lal to five months’ home detention and ordered he repay the victim $1300.��

Belinda Feek is an Open Justice reporter based in Waikato. She has worked at ��һ�ǿ����� for nine years and has been a journalist for 20.��