Sentencing — forgery — using a forged document — discharge without conviction — climate change protest — freedom of expression — Sentencing Act 2002, ss 106 & 107. The defendant appeared for sentence after being found guilty on charges of forgery and using a forged document. She had written a letter in which she impersonated the organiser of a petroleum conference. She wrote that the conference had been postponed, and sent the letter to some 20 people who were planning to attend the conference. After receiving queries in response, the conference organisers had to inform the recipients of the letter that the conference was in fact going ahead as planned. The defendant admitted to writing and sending the letter, but said that it had been intended as satire and a protest against environmental damage caused by the petroleum industry. The Court considered that the offending was planned and premeditated and required a degree of skill, and that it had caused some disruption to others. The gravity of the offending was in the low to moderate range. The defendant sought a discharge without conviction, submitting that a conviction would make it difficult for her to borrow money, and would have a chilling effect on the right to protest. There was no evidence to support the first ground, and the Court commented that lending institutions would likely be mostly concerned with the defendant's ability to pay. The Court accepted the defendant's right to protest, but added that she did not have the right to break the law. The defendant's application for discharge without conviction failed because the consequences of a conviction did not outweigh the gravity of the offending. The sentence was 125 hours' community work. Judgment Date: 2 October 2023