S v R

The appellant, S, appealed against his conviction on six counts of making an objectionable publication, contrary to the Films, Videos and Publications Classification Act 1993, and against the two and a half years imprisonment sentence imposed on him. S argued that the convictions were not reasonably supported by the evidence, and that the sentence was manifestly excessive. The court considered the evidence, including the complainant's testimony and the security camera footage, and concluded that the convictions were supported by the evidence. The court also considered the aggravating factors of the case, such as the exploitation of the complainant's nudity and the breach of trust, and the mitigating factors, such as the absence of sexual activity in the photographs. The court concluded that the sentence was appropriate and not manifestly excessive. The appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed.