Barlow’s latest offending was described by his lawyer, Ian Miller, as “deeply unpleasant”, whereas Judge Snell said it was worse than that, and the charge should have reflected what happened. “It’s a rather innocuous charge for what was serious offending,” he said. The victim now wanted Barlow to get “serious help”, and did not want to hear from him ever again. Judge Snell was not sure if Barlow was telling the truth about him not recalling what happened because of his alcohol consumption, but there was no dispute that he had done it. The theft was reported weeks later when he still hadn’t paid, Judge Snell said.

Source: New Zealand Herald January 21, 2026 19:06 UTC