A comedian who admitted he sexually assaulted his young daughter will have to wait another week before finding out his new sentence.
The man pleaded guilty last March to performing an indecent act on the child, who was in bed with him and his wife, but walked away without conviction in September.
Judge Mark Perkins reserved his judgement at a resentencing hearing at the Auckland District Court today.
A new sentencing date has been set down for next Friday.
Judge Perkins told the Court he must decide how much the man's daughter has been affected by the offending.
"There is an argument that the [psychological] effect on the child of the offending is a result not of the offending itself but the actual breakup of the family."
If he is not discharged without conviction, the defence has requested either a fine or community service sentence, partly because the man has already suffered financial hardship due to the offending.
In the Crown's submissions, lawyers argued the effects on the comedian's future career have been minimised by a permanent name suppression order.
At the previous sentencing last year, Auckland District Court judge Philippa Cunningham ruled the consequences of a conviction would outweigh the offending and said the man was a talented New Zealander.
She said there was "a low consciousness of action" because he was drunk, took into account his guilty plea and said he was remorseful and unlikely to reoffend.
Cunningham also took into account the negative publicity he had received, in spite of his identity and that of his family being suppressed, as well as the impact on his career.
She said the consequences of the incident had been "little short of dire" and that a conviction would compound those consequences.
Letting him go without a conviction meant he could try to restore his reputation and allow him "the opportunity to persuade people that they should give him work".
It would also help his relationship with his children.
But in a High Court decision released in April, Justice Murray Gilbert ruled the man should be resentenced.
Gilbert agreed with Crown submissions that the consequences of a conviction did not outweigh the offending, that the judge did not take into account that the guilty plea meant the man had admitted he intended to carry out an indecent act on his daughter, and said the fact the man was drunk should not have been a factor.
The impact on the man's daughter was severe, the judgement shows.
According to a victim impact statement prepared by a child psychologist, she has twice been referred to Auckland Sexual Abuse Help since the offending and felt some responsibility for the incident.
The psychologist noted she had developed "a strong sense of doubt about her own self worth".
She was also pulling her hair - a "behavioural disturbance" associated with stress.
- © Fairfax NZ News
Do you wear a lifejacket when you are on the water - no matter what vessel you are in?