BREAKING NEWS
Luke Ronchi, Corey Anderson, Ross Taylor out in quick succession. NZ 151-6 ... Read more
Close

'Tindallgate' bouncer appeals sentence

LIAM HYSLOP
Last updated 14:02 27/02/2014
Jonathan Dixon
JOHN HAWKINS/Fairfax NZ
CONVICTED: Jonathan Dixon.

Relevant offers

Crime

Tired driver who killed two near Longburn 'should have known better' Sentry Taitoko: Family still seeking answers after cell death Firearms stolen in Rolleston burglary High-speed chase of teens in stolen car Phillip John Smith denied parole Man's holiday plans cancelled by judge Christchurch alcoholic jailed for drunken email threats to MPs Fergbaker supervisor sentenced for theft Two men found guilty of burning Auckland man Shalvin Prasad to death WA sex offender to dodge parole conditions by moving to NZ, police didn't know

The former bouncer at the centre of the "Tindallgate" incident during the 2011 Rugby World Cup is appealing his conviction and sentence.

Jonathan Dixon, 42, who leaked CCTV video footage of England captain Mike Tindall in a Queenstown bar where Dixon worked, was found guilty by an Invercargill jury last April of dishonestly obtaining the video from the bar by accessing a computer system.

The footage showed Tindall apparently flirting with an old flame and attracted wide media interest. Tindall is married to Queen Elizabeth's granddaughter, Zara.

Dixon was sentenced in August to four months' community detention and 300 hours' community work.

In the Court of Appeal today Dixon's counsel David More argued that the CCTV footage obtained by Dixon was not "property" under the Crimes Act, meaning Dixon should not have been convicted.

The footage was an electronic work and did not become property until it was printed or converted into some other physical or tangible thing, More said.

The sentence was "manifestly excessive" and handed down only because of the high profile of the case and the celebrities involved.

"I think everyone got carried away with the players involved in this case," he said.

"Had he gone into the bar with his own camera he wouldn't have committed any offence."

The bar had not been negatively affected and had actually used the publicity in subsequent promotional material, More said.

Crown prosecutor Stephanie Edwards said the electronic version of the footage had to be "property" and the conviction was correct.

"There is no difference between the electronic image and the same one being printed," she said

The security company which Dixon worked for was negatively affected by the episode as it lost its contract with the bar after the incident, Edwards said.

This meant Dixon's offending had caused significant harm to them, as well as others, and the sentence was justified.

Dixon was not in court for the appeal.

The court reserved its decision.

Ad Feedback

- Stuff

Special offers

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content