Lawrence Stephens was a teacher for 25 years before he was fired when he was prosecuted for possessing the most serious child abuse and bestiality images. Photo / Supplied

WARNING: This story details child sex abuse and may be distressing.

A former deputy school principal convicted of possessing child abuse and bestiality images has been sentenced to more than two years in prison.

Lawrence Peter Stephens, 50, pleaded guilty to five charges covering the possession of 218 images and one charge of making an objectionable publication.

Of those, 140 were of the most serious category, showing children engaged in penetrative sex.

Among the other images were 31 involving bestiality.

“This is not victimless offending,” said Judge Kevin Glubb before jailing Stephens for 28 months.

“It is actual children being brutalised in the most horrendous way.”

At his sentencing on Friday afternoon in the North Shore District Court, his former employer lost its bid for permanent suppression of its name.

But the school still cannot be named because its lawyer indicated he would be launching an appeal.

The objectionable publication charge stems from a graphic conversation Stephens had with a WhatsApp user where he discussed his desire to offend sexually against a 3-year-old.

It was that conversation in September 2021 which led police to discover Stephens’ trove of child abuse and bestiality material.

He spoke with the unidentified person via WhatsApp about child abuse images and his thoughts of abusing a toddler.

“In it, it’s clear you are speaking about a hypothetical 3-year-old child and what you would do with that child,” Judge Glubb said.

“That included engaging in sexual contact with them of the most serious kind.”

As a result of the conversation, he came to the attention of police. The summary of facts read in court does not state if it was via a tip from the other party or through other means.

He was arrested on April 28, 2022. A police digital forensics team recovered the images and videos from two phones and a hard drive.

Most of the victims depicted were children between toddler-age and 13.

“To suggest that it has a huge and long-lasting impact on those victims is understatement,” Judge Glubb said.

The judge said Stephens, aged 50, had not previously come before the court and until he was arrested had appeared to be a man of good character.

“People seem to believe they can sit behind a keyboard and access this material with impunity but it comes back eventually and that’s what we are witnessing on a regular basis.”

Stephens was supported in court by his wife of 21 years. She wrote a letter of support saying she believed his claim he was remorseful and had taken responsibility.

His letter of remorse said his strategies for dealing with stress had been poor. His use of alcohol and pornography was to cope with the pressures of work and later the Covid lockdown, he claimed.

“You also note only the apology that matters is to ensure this never happens again,” Judge Glubb said.

He had also undergone counselling.

Police sought a starting point of four years while his lawyer, John Munro, suggested three years before discounts.

Judge Glubb adopted a starting point of four years, increased by three months for the objectionable publication charge.

He received discounts of 25 per cent for his guilty plea, 10 per cent for remorse and rehabilitation and 10 per cent for previous good character.

That led to an end sentence of 28 months in prison, four months north of the range where home detention would become available.

His wife wept in the public gallery as he was led down to begin his sentence after being on bail.

Munro did not seek name suppression.

The school’s lawyer, David Dickinson, sought suppression of the name of the institution but did not oppose the man being named.

Paul Gillick, senior legal counsel for NZ Herald publisher NZME, said the argument by the school that it would be unable to manage the fallout of publication of his name in connection with the institution did not stack up.

“There is no evidence in our view … to substantiate the claim that publication of [the school’s] name would lead to undue hardship.”

The offending had no link to the school and publication of its name was a natural consequence of the man’s name becoming public, Gillick said.

Even if the test for extreme hardship required for permanent suppression was met - which Gillick said it was not - the public interest outweighed any argument for suppression, he said.

“The defendant was an employee and was trusted by the Teaching Council to conduct himself appropriately.”

Dickinson has 28 days to file an appeal. If an appeal is not filed, the school will be able to be named after the expiration of the appeal period.