The ACT Magistrates Court has found a woman who shared intimate images of herself and a former partner on her OnlyFans page after he withdrew consent acted out of a desire for retribution.
The woman has been spared jail time, and instead handed a suspended sentence of five months and 12 days, after being convicted of aggravated non-consensual distribution of intimate images over several months in 2022 and 2023.
Magistrate Ian Temby said the case was complicated by the victim’s initial consent to share the images on the OnlyFans site after the pair made six sexually explicit videos and a number of intimate photos when they were still together.
Woman posted victim’s letter withdrawing consent to Instagram
The victim ended the relationship in June 2022, before demanding the woman remove the photos and videos from her page and anywhere else they were published, effectively withdrawing his consent.
But the woman continued to sell the videos on her OnlyFans page, saying: “I ain’t getting rid of s***.”
“Hope you realise you fkd (sic) with the wrong b****,”
she said.
The man’s solicitor wrote to her reiterating his consent was withdrawn, that he had not been financially compensated for the profit she had received, that the material had also appeared on Instagram, to which he had not consented, and that the distribution was a criminal offence.
Magistrate Temby noted the woman did not reply, but later posted the letter on her Instagram account, saying” “HERE WE FKN (sic) GOOOOO, lost your power so you gotta (sic) pull this move ha ha ha ha weakkkkk (sic).”
In his ruling, Magistrate Temby took into account concerns about the woman’s mental health and that the relationship was marred by family violence, saying her culpability was reduced.
Previous consent does not mean victim ‘could not feel harassed’
Magistrate Ian Temby found the woman’s responses to being asked to take down the material were partly motivated by “animosity” towards the complainant. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)
A central issue in the case was whether the man’s initial consent meant there was less reputational damage after he withdrew his consent or whether, in the view of the prosecution, the previous consent did not “mitigate the offending”.
Magistrate Temby agreed with the prosecution but said the fact he contented for the images to be publicly shared “does inform the nature of the harm he is likely to have suffered once he withdrew consent”.
“His is a different experience to someone who, for example, made an intimate video only for private use but had their partner share the video publicly,” Magistrate Temby said.
“However that does not mean the complainant could not feel harassed and menaced by the continued distribution of the image once he withdrew his consent.“
Magistrate Temby said it was not entirely clear what motivated the woman to continue to share the images.
“Sharing the images through her OnlyFans page enabled her to earn money,” Magistrate Temby said.
But he also noted there was no evidence about the extent of any income derived from the images.
Magistrate Temby said at face value the responses to the victim asking for the material to be removed were “at least partly motivated by animosity towards the complainant and a desire for retribution”.
The woman will also serve a 12-month good behaviour order.
This post was originally published on this site be sure to check out more of their content.
