The 37-year-old - formerly known for his fashion-related posts, photography and society event appearances under the moniker David Grr - appeared via audio-visual feed in Auckland District Court today as he was sentenced for the abuse of a friend who woke up one night in 2007 to find Pegler performing a sex act on him.
He pleaded guilty to that charge, punishable by up to 20 years imprisonment, late last year.
But Pegler was already in prison, serving a nine-year sentence that was handed down in the High Court at Auckland in 2022 after a jury found him guilty of abusing two other teen boys on separate occasions.
At the time, the media was allowed only to refer to him in broad terms as an influencer, barred even from mentioning the fashion niche in which he operated, until his sentencing later that year.
The suppression was extended when he requested to challenge the sentence with the Court of Appeal and extended again when he attempted to challenge the Court of Appeal decision via the Supreme Court.
The appeal process, however, was ultimately unsuccessful.
Pegler first appeared in court on the charges for his first two victims in February 2020, accused of offending over the four years prior.
His High Court at Auckland trial began in August 2021, but it had to be aborted after more than a week of evidence due to the nationwide lockdown caused by the emergence of the Covid-19 Delta variant. A new trial was started in May the following year.
The man’s first accuser told police and later jurors that he first met the defendant in 2015, when he was 16 and trying to make headway in the fashion industry.
Despite Pegler being in his late 20s, the two became close friends and social media messages showed they were flirtatious at times. But the teen also clearly told the defendant that he wasn’t gay and didn’t want anything other than friendship, Facebook Messenger exchanges showed.
David Pegler, aka influencer David Grr, appears in the High Court at Auckland for sentencing on multiple sexual abuse charges in October 2022. His identity was kept secret for the following two years as he disputed the outcome to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. The appeals were ultimately unsuccessful. Photo / Michael Craig
“Bringing up these things wasn’t anything I was ever going to do. It was excruciating,” the victim testified.
“I originally came forward because I got to the point where I didn’t want to have this happen to someone else. This was eating away at me quite corrosively.”
Pegler would later enter the witness box and describe the accuser as a liar and a “tease” who was using him to get ahead. He said the accuser had been exploring his sexuality at the time and as a result would give mixed messages. He denied having spiked the teen’s drinks on two occasions. He also denied blackmailing the teen by threatening to destroy his reputation or release nude photos if the teen didn’t relent to sexual acts.
All sexual acts between the two of them were consensual, he told jurors.
Pegler disagreed with prosecutors that there was a power imbalance between the two because of their ages, his success as a fashion personality and the parties he attended with New Zealand’s social elite. If anything, he said, it was the teen who was “street smart” and “wanted to get ahead”.
Pegler’s second accuser at the same trial said he was 18 years old when he twice woke in the defendant’s bed after nights of heavy drinking to find the defendant performing a sex act on him. Like the other accuser, he also acknowledged some flirtatious behaviour with the defendant but said he wasn’t gay and insisted he never gave consent for any sexual acts.
David Pegler, also known as social media influencer David Grr, was often spotted at fashion industry events such as this Trelise Cooper Summer Collection showcase in Newmarket in 2012. Photo / Norrie Montgomery
“Flirting with someone is not an invitation to [let someone perform sex acts on] you while you’re asleep,” then-prosecutor Sam Teppett would later retort during his closing address.
“The word ‘no’ didn’t comprehend in his brain.
“What he did was not consensual.”
Jurors agreed, returning guilty verdicts for five counts of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection involving both accusers.
Pegler was acquitted of one count of sexual violation, along with three counts of blackmail and two counts of aggravated wounding by stupefaction.
“Your offending included that of the most intrusive kind,” Justice Rebecca Edwards would later say at his sentencing in Oct 2022.
“Your victim was vulnerable, you assaulted him while he was heavily intoxicated and asleep and defenceless.”
Appeal over third accuser
Until now, the media have also been restricted from reporting that Pegler had a third accuser who testified against him during the 2022 trial. That testimony, and the judge’s instructions to the jury that followed, were the basis for his conviction appeals.
The third complainant, referred to in court documents only as “K”, said he had been victimised in 2011. Like the others, he described waking up after a night of drugs and alcohol to find Pegler sexually abusing him.
Although his allegations were not the basis for the trial, his recollections were used by the prosecution as propensity evidence - intended to show a pattern of behaviour.
Pegler had been found guilty by a district court jury in July 2015 of sexual violation of K by unlawful sexual connection and was sentenced to 10 months home detention. But that conviction was overturned on appeal on the basis of new expert evidence about “confabulation” - false memories that can result from excess alcohol and drug use.
David Pegler, aka influencer David Grr, appears in the High Court at Auckland for sentencing on multiple sexual abuse charges in October 2022. His identity was kept secret for the following two years as he disputed the outcome. Photo / Michael Craig
On the morning of a judge-alone retrial in March 2017, the Crown opted not to present evidence rebutting the expert witness and the defence asked the judge to dismiss the charge. The request was granted, resulting in Pegler’s deemed acquittal.
Around that time, Pegler also was granted permanent name suppression. Previous media reporting about the charges against him were ordered removed from the Internet, although the previous case appeared to remain an open secret mentioned frequently on less stringently regulated social media.
“The status of the District Court [permanent suppression] order is unclear in light of the trial and convictions on the [subsequent] charges and the interim suppression orders presently in place and because it was not addressed by counsel in the submissions to this Court,” the Court of Appeal noted in its 20-page decision last June rejecting Pegler’s appeal.
“We have assumed that the earlier permanent suppression was overtaken by the later interim orders and that the appellant accepts he is no longer entitled to suppression in relation to the K allegations...”
Citing a UK Supreme Court case, Pegler’s appellate lawyer, Nick Chisnall KC, had argued to the Court of Appeal that Justice Edwards had improperly instructed the jury about the necessary standard of proof for the propensity evidence ahead of their deliberations. The standard should have been beyond reasonable doubt, just as it was for the accusations Pegler was on trial for, Chisnall said.
He also argued that the jury should have been told the reason for the deemed acquittal, specifically the confabulation expert evidence.
The Court of Appeal ultimately disagreed, noting that New Zealand law has “taken a different course”.
“In short, the [High Court] Judge’s directions complied with the settled law and involved no error,” Justice Jill Mallon wrote on behalf of the three-judge panel.
Four months later, in October last year, a Supreme Court panel issued a five-page judgment declining Pegler’s request to argue the case one last time before them.
“This proposed ground has insufficient prospects of success to warrant a second appeal,” the justices wrote. “Nor does anything raised by the applicant give rise to the appearance of a miscarriage of justice.”
Fourth accuser comes forward
Under normal circumstances, the Supreme Court decision would have meant the end of Pegler’s long-lasting suppression.
But because a new charge involving a fourth accuser had been filed earlier in the year, his identity was protected until the new case was settled. Under the Criminal Procedure Act, the media is automatically barred from reporting details of a defendant’s previous convictions while serious charges remain pending unless given explicit permission from a judge to do so. The law is intended to protect a defendant’s fair trial rights.
That restriction has now fallen away, however, after Pegler pleaded guilty to the latest charge.
David Pegler attends the Children of Vision Launch at Auckland's St Kevin's Arcade in March 2009. Photo / Norrie Montgomery
According to the agreed summary of facts for the case, Pegler and the victim were friends in 2007 and the victim - a teenager who had recently finished high school - spent the night at Pegler’s family home in Remuera while visiting Auckland to attend a concert.
“One day that week, Mr Peglar and [the victim] were at Mr Peglar’s home ... along with three other female friends, for a BBQ and general socialising,” state the court documents, which adopt an alternate spelling of the defendant’s surname.
“Later that evening, Mr Peglar, [the victim] and two of the three female friends went to sleep in Mr Peglar’s room. [The victim] was asleep by himself on a mattress on the floor.”
When he woke up to the abuse, the victim rolled over so that the act couldn’t continue but pretended to still be asleep.
“Mr Peglar quickly stopped and fled back to his own bed,” court documents state.
Peglar would later claim, as he did with his other accusers, that the act was consensual.
During today’s hearing, Crown prosecutor Kate Haszard strongly opposed the insinuation that the latest victim had invited the activity. Judge Kevin Glubb agreed, declining to allow a discount for remorse as a result.
“You have attempted to victim blame, in essence,” he said. “I set that aside entirely.”
The victim, now a married father of three, said he struggled for years to come to terms with what happened at the hands of someone he looked up to and trusted.
“The betrayal cuts deep,” he said, explaining that for many years he was “unable to shake the feeling that those closest to me would harm me”.
He wasn’t seeking revenge, he said, but after years of trying to forget and minimise the incident he needed to stand up for himself and let Pegler know that what he did was not okay.
“I have the right to heal and be heard,” he explained. “The harm David has caused goes beyond the physical - it has quite literally shaped my life.”
Defence lawyer Susan Gray sought a two-year starting point for her client, noting that the imposed sentence would be served on top of the nine years he’s already serving. She sought discounts for his guilty plea, background, youth at the time of offending and remorse.
“He has suffered trauma and ongoing bullying and racism,” she said, explaining that her client still suffers PTSD.
Pegler has recognised the harm he has caused and has sought therapy while in prison, she pointed out.
In a report prepared for Judge Glubb ahead of the sentencing, Pegler was assessed as being a high risk of causing harm to others and a moderate risk of re-offending. He noted that the victim had looked up to Pegler as someone of influence, and that the ripples of such offending reach out “wide and long and they cannot be underestimated”.
But he also noted that he had to take into account Justice Edwards’ High Court sentencing in 2022 and try to determine what her uplift would have been had she known about the current case.
He settled on an uplift of 10 months, making his new combined sentence nine years and 10 months imprisonment.
Pegler will have to serve at least one-third of the sentence before he can begin to apply for parole. The judge encouraged him to continue his therapy in the meantime.
‘When terrible people get their comeuppance’
Before his first arrest in 2014, Pegler was frequently seen out at fashion showcases and high-society gatherings. The Herald on Sunday described him as a “self-styled man about town”.
But his most high-profile moment had been when he got into an online feud with then-17-year-old Lorde, who at that time was still grappling with her newfound international stardom.
On his Facebook page, he had posted an unflattering photo of her at the beach, resulting in vitriolic comments from followers that got the singer’s attention. She asked him to take it down and he did.
David Pegler, also known as social media influencer David Grr, attends the Launch of Among Equals event at Cotton On in Newmarket in September 2016. Photo / Norrie Montgomery
In a teen magazine months later, Lorde revisited the incident and said she was surprised at how stressful it was to her.
Pegler responded by advising the singer to “harden up”.
“If she takes everything personally she’s going to be a wreck by the end of the year,” he said.
The singer eventually got in the last word.
On the same day in 2014 that police publicised details of Pegler’s arrest, she tweeted to her many followers: ``when terrible people get their comeuppance’‘.
Pegler’s once-thriving Instagram account, from which he made money through sponsored posts, is now private but he still has just under 60,000 followers.
Even as his legal troubles came to a head in past years, he continued to grow his online profile, taking advantage of the court suppression orders so that most internet searches resulted in his own promotion.
He posted a picture of himself walking along a beach in July 2021, one month before his first High Court trial. Another beach photo was posted the following October after the trial was aborted by Covid.
“Life’s always better at the beach even if the world is falling apart,” he wrote.
His online posts have been dark, however, since April 2022 - one month before the trial that would result in his imprisonment.
“His offending has destroyed his career which he spent many, many years building up,” his lawyer explained today.
Craig Kapitan is an Auckland-based journalist covering courts and justice. He joined the Herald in 2021 and has reported on courts since 2002 in three newsrooms in the US and New Zealand.
Sign up to The Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
