Court martial for soldier accused of covertly filming women during sexual encounters
He admits taking the videos and images - but says the women consented, or he genuinely believed they were consenting at the time.
The women reject this, saying they had no idea they were being recorded.
Court martial proceedings began today for Smith at Burnham Military Camp before Judge Tom Gilbert.
A court martial is a military court that tries members of the armed forces for violations of military law.
It is a structured legal process, similar to a civilian court, and a decision on guilt or innocence is made by a panel of military members - three in Smith's case.
If a defendant is found guilty, punishments can include fines, demotions, or imprisonment.
Until today, the Herald could not publish details of the allegations against Smith.
Between August and November 2020, he is accused of 'intentionally or recklessly' making an intimate visual recording of a woman.
He is further charged with deliberately making intimate recordings of a second woman in November 2020 and December 2020.
The alleged civil offences contravene the Armed Forces Disciplinary Act 1971.
Judge Tom Gilbert. Photo / Pool
The names of women have been suppressed. Both were in new relationships with Smith at the time of the alleged offending.
Judge Gilbert also suppressed the specific details of the content of the videos and images.
He said the Herald could only describe the content of the material and 'what was engaged in between parties' as 'intimate sexual activity'.
Anything outside that description was prohibited.
During the trial, the court will hear from both complainants via audio-visual link, and the panel deciding Smith's fate will be shown the intimate recordings in question.
A number of other witnesses will also be called.
Prosecutor Flight Lieutenant Hannah O'Byrne outlined the Crown case against Smith this morning.
Corporal Manu Smith at the Court-martial proceedings. Photo / Pool
She said the first woman met Smith in July 2020, and a sexual relationship 'progressed quickly'.
During sexual activity at her Christchurch home she 'felt something was off' and when she looked up Smith was 'pointing his cellphone at her'.
She told him to stop recording and delete the footage.
'She told him off for recording her and he played it off as a joke,' said O'Byrne.
The woman assumed the footage was deleted - but Smith later sent it to her via Snapchat.
Snapchat is social messaging app where messages are designed to disappear after being viewed or after a set time
'She told him off again, saying she told him not to do that and it wasn't ok,' said O'Byrne.
The woman stopped seeing Smith and reported the matter to the police.
The second woman was at Smith's defence house in Burnham when she was recorded.
O'Byrne said that during sexual activity,, Smith took three photos of the woman.
'Without her consent - or even time to discuss what was happening. At the time,the she did not realise (photographs were being taken),' said the prosecutor.
Prosecutor Flight Lieutenant Hannah O'Byrne. Photo / Pool
Smith sent her the images on Snapchat, and she took screenshots.
She told him to delete the photos, and he 'played it off as a joke'.
Smith sent her the images on Snapchat, and she took screenshots.
The pair engaged in sexual activity a few days later.
'She could not see what he was doing,' said O'Byrne.
'She did not realise she was being filmed.'
Later on, she received a message from Smith on Snapchat.
Given his messaging history, she decided to turn on screen recording before she opened it.
It was the footage of her taken during sex.
'She asked if he had sent it to anyone else. He played it off as a joke,' said O'Byrne.
The second woman reported the incident to police, handing over the screen recordings.
Defence lawyer Matthew Hague. Photo / Pool
The court heard that during their relationships with Smith, they had willingly and knowingly sent him explicit images and video, including naked photos. These were sent via Snapchat.
Both vehemently reject Smith's explanation that they consented to him filming and or photographing them.
The first woman began giving evidence before lunch.
'In the video, you can see me trying to swipe his phone away, telling him to put it away,' she said.
She said there had been no discussion before sex about whether Smith could record. When she told him off, he was 'very blase'.
'He just said 'no, it's all good',' she recalled.
She said she felt 'pretty gross'.
'My privacy had been invaded,' she said.
In a brief opening address, Smith's lawyer, Matthew Hague, told the panel that his client denied all the charges.
'Let me be clear… what you've heard… is just allegations,' he said.
'It is not evidence. At present… the accused must be presumed innocent."
The court martial is set to continue for at least three days.
Anna Leask is a senior journalist who covers national crime and justice. She joined the Herald in 2008 and has worked as a journalist for 19 years with a particular focus on family and gender-based violence, child abuse, sexual violence, homicides, mental health and youth crime. She writes, hosts and produces the award-winning podcast A Moment In Crime, released monthly on nzherald.co.nz
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
5 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Two charges against Christchurch soldier dropped
Two of the charges against a Christchurch soldier accused of taking sexual videos without consent have been dropped. Corporal Manu Smith was facing a Court Martial on three counts of making intimate visual recordings under the Armed Forces Discipline Act. In a Court Martial, a military panel make a decision on the accused's guilt or innocence. On Tuesday morning, Justice Tom Gilbert, who was presiding over the court, advised the military panel that he had granted the defence's request to drop two of the charges. The judge said the two charges were dismissed for legal reasons, because in light of the evidence, he ruled that a properly directed panel could not reasonably convict on those charges. That afternoon, the accused Corporal Manu Smith gave evidence for the defence. Defence lawyer Timothy Leighton asked Corporal Smith why he had taken out his phone and started recording during sex with the complainant, and if the woman had known he was filming. Corporal Smith said he saw it as a way of expressing their intimacy and that she had seen that he was filming on his phone, and did nothing to indicate she wanted him to stop filming. He said the pair's relationship had been sexual from the start, and they both shared intimate sexual images with each other. Corporal Smith said the pair had talked about boundaries. "Yes, I expected the same respect from her that she did with me, in terms of sharing content with a third party or anybody outside. "...It was a circle of trust, it should have been. I don't want images of me shared with her girlfriends, nor would she want me to share intimate images of her." He said the pair had discussed filming sexual encounters, while discussing their sexual likes and dislikes, and he believed she was open to it. Corporal Smith said he believed he did have consent to record the sexual encounter which is the subject of the complaint, and he said if she had asked him to stop he would have. The prosecution's captain John Whitcombe asked Corporal Smith about the nature of his relationship with the complainant and whether she had reason to assume it was a exclusive relationship. Corporal Smith said the nature of their relationship was not discussed, but he saw it as non-exclusive and he believed she did too. Captain John Whitcombe challenged Corporal Smith's assertion that the woman had consented to the sex being filmed, asking if there was ever an express discussion about him filming on the day in question. Corporal Smith said they had talked about it in a light-hearted jovial way. "There was no black and white, no written agreement," he told the court. The defence and prosecution will give their closing addresses on Tuesday afternoon.
Otago Daily Times
5 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Two charges dropped against soldier accused of covert filming
Two of the charges against a Christchurch soldier accused of taking sexual videos without consent have been dropped. Corporal Manu Smith was facing a Court Martial on three counts of making intimate visual recordings under the Armed Forces Discipline Act. In a Court Martial, a military panel make a decision on the accused's guilt or innocence. On Tuesday morning, Justice Tom Gilbert, who was presiding over the court, advised the military panel that he had granted the defence's request to drop two of the charges. The judge said the two charges were dismissed for legal reasons, because in light of the evidence, he ruled that a properly directed panel could not reasonably convict on those charges. That afternoon, the accused Corporal Manu Smith gave evidence for the defence. Defence lawyer Timothy Leighton asked Corporal Smith why he had taken out his phone and started recording during sex with the complainant, and if the woman had known he was filming. Corporal Smith said he saw it as a way of expressing their intimacy and that she had seen that he was filming on his phone, and did nothing to indicate she wanted him to stop filming. He said the pair's relationship had been sexual from the start, and they both shared intimate sexual images with each other. Corporal Smith said the pair had talked about boundaries. "Yes, I expected the same respect from her that she did with me, in terms of sharing content with a third party or anybody outside. "...It was a circle of trust, it should have been. I don't want images of me shared with her girlfriends, nor would she want me to share intimate images of her." He said the pair had discussed filming sexual encounters, while discussing their sexual likes and dislikes, and he believed she was open to it. Corporal Smith said he believed he did have consent to record the sexual encounter which is the subject of the complaint, and he said if she had asked him to stop he would have. The prosecution's captain John Whitcombe asked Corporal Smith about the nature of his relationship with the complainant and whether she had reason to assume it was a exclusive relationship. Corporal Smith said the nature of their relationship was not discussed, but he saw it as non-exclusive and he believed she did too. Captain John Whitcombe challenged Corporal Smith's assertion that the woman had consented to the sex being filmed, asking if there was ever an express discussion about him filming on the day in question. Corporal Smith said they had talked about it in a light-hearted jovial way. "There was no black and white, no written agreement," he told the court. The defence and prosecution will give their closing addresses on Tuesday afternoon.
Otago Daily Times
16 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Dewar jailed over $113k theft
Former rogue cop John Dewar has been sent back to prison after a jury found him guilty of stealing $113,000 from a finance company of which he was the boss. It has been 18 years since Dewar was last jailed, for attempting to cover up rape allegations laid against police colleagues Clint Rickards, Bob Schollum and Brad Shipton. The trio were eventually cleared of raping Louise Nicholas, but Schollum and Shipton were convicted of raping a 20-year-old in Mount Maunganui in 1989. Dewar — a top officer in Rotorua when he left in 1999 — was jailed for four and a-half years, reduced from an initial six years — for the attempted cover-up. Yesterday, Dewar was back before Judge Noel Cocurullo in the Hamilton District Court for sentencing on three charges of theft by a person in a special relationship and three charges of obtaining by deception from a finance company he helped set up in 2015. Dewar was the brains, while his fellow shareholders provided the financial backing of the firm. The name of the company and its directors are permanently suppressed. A jury spent eight days hearing evidence last month relating to Dewar's offending between 2015 and 2019, when he stole about $113,000 to help pay off a personal loan, buy weed killer, a spray unit, a toastie machine maker and Hush Puppies shoes. Part of his defence was that he was never told not to act in the way he did. But the jury did not buy it and instead found him guilty. Crown solicitor Jacinda Hamilton said Dewar had "blatantly abused a position of trust and confidence by engaging in calculated and dishonest conduct that caused significant loss to a company with whom he was in a management position". Dewar had significant commercial experience but had "deliberately ignored his obligations of trust and confidence to the other directors and did so largely for his own financial gain". Ms Hamilton said it was a "classic illustration of the old adage a leopard doesn't change its spots". She said the Crown's estimated loss of $150,000 was conservative, as at trial, company directors had claimed it was more than $220,000. Ms Hamilton said there were no mitigating features of Dewar's offending despite his relinquishing his shareholding in the company, which had since been sold. She called for him to be jailed. Dewar defended himself at trial but had lawyer Louis Wilkins at his side offering advice when needed. Yesterday, Mr Wilkins did all the talking for Dewar and tried his best to keep him out of prison. He sought a lower starting point of 30 months' prison, then argued there were minimal aggravating features present in Dewar's offending, namely sophistication and the amount stolen. The judge noted a sense of sadness from several of the victims, who felt "somewhat betrayed" by his actions. "That there had been a solid friendship in many respects, they had been duped by your conduct." Judge Cocurullo took a starting point of three years' imprisonment and agreed to issue an uplift for his previous conviction. He then allowed him a 15% discount for offering up his shareholding as reparation, and a further 12% for medical issues before coming to an end jail term of 26 months. — Belinda Feek, Open Justice journalist
