Second appeal denied for Picton pensioner who groomed teenage boy
In July, his lawyer Rob Harrison appeared by audio visual link at the Wellington High Court, saying prison was too harsh a sentence because the offending was at the lower end of what was considered “sexual violation”. The appeal was dismissed on August 5 on the grounds the end sentence was “well within the range” and the presumption that imprisonment was the appropriate sentence for sexual violation “was not displaced”. However, Schmelz again appealed the sentence in October. Harrison argued that a miscarriage of justice might have occurred, saying the sexual violation by un...