A New Zealand High Court judge is mulling over whether teenage internet troll Tristan Barker should have been convicted of assaulting an Australian television journalist.
In September Barker was convicted and discharged after pleading guilty to assaulting Seven Network's Dave Eccleston during a Rotorua interview six months earlier.
In the High Court at Rotorua on Tuesday, his lawyer Bill Lawson argued the 18-year-old should have been discharged without a conviction against his name.
Justice Edwin Wylie reserved his decision, saying the appeal was complicated and one he needed time to consider.
Mr Lawson submitted that the police had not opposed a discharge without conviction.
He also argued the sentencing judge had not taken into account Barker's age, which indicated he was not sufficiently mature to stand back from physically retaliating when he considered Mr Eccleston, a seasoned journalist, was goading him.
Mr Lawson said the interview followed a media storm around comments Barker was alleged to have made on social media, but which had in fact been misquoted.
This had now been put right by some positive journalism.
Mr Lawson said Barker's actions had been at the lowest level of assault as defined by the Crimes Act, saying Mr Eccleston had not suffered any split skin, abrasions or contusions.
"What we are dealing with here is a young man with real talent and promise who is clearly highly regarded in the entertainment industry," he said, describing Barker as a promising basketball player.
He asked Justice Wylie to consider the possibility a conviction could prevent Barker taking up a basketball scholarship in the United States.
Crown lawyer Andy Hill said while it was accepted there had been more than usual media interest in Barker, it was not accepted his victim had provoked the assault.
Mr Hill said the police summary had outlined how Barker had first struck Mr Eccleston in the face with an open palm then, as the cameras stopped rolling and he attempted to walk away, Barker hit him a second time.
He submitted the district court had assessed the assault as a medium range offence and the conviction and discharge sentence was correct.
