Samuel sought intensive supervision, a community-based sentence where Bellamy could be directed to complete rehabilitation programmes.
Bellamy, who has a history of mental health and alcohol issues, was off his schizophrenia medication at the time of the offending, Samuel said.
He is now back on his medication, and saw how his offending would have been disturbing for Hawkesby, the court heard.
“His outlook on life is looking better,” Samuel said.
However, a police prosecutor said he had continued to send messages to a media outlet while on bail, a breach of his bail conditions. Police had not laid charges in relation to this breach.
Samuel said this was a misunderstanding and his client had been meaning to message police, not the media, regarding items taken from him.
Judge Sellars agreed intensive supervision was appropriate. He was remorseful and had acknowledged his actions were offensive and harmful to Hawkesby, the Judge said.
“She did indeed feel extremely uncomfortable and feared for her safety as a result of these messages,” Judge Sellars said.
He was sentenced to intensive supervision with conditions not to consume illicit substances and to attend alcohol treatment and other rehabilitative programmes as directed by a probation officer.
Judge Sellars also imposed a special condition requiring him to hand over any electronic devices with a communication capability for inspection upon request.
The Judge said removing all access to electronic devices was not realistic in the modern world and not conducive to rehabilitation.
Court documents state the man sent 55 messages to the same media outlet during a roughly three-week period in January and February this year.
“Many of these messages were homophobic, sexual and threatening in nature,” police documents state.
Court documents refer to two later specific early-morning messages in which the defendant appeared to outline sexual fantasies.
“These messages caused the victim to fear for her safety,” court documents state.
When asked by police why he sent the messages, the defendant said he felt “threatened” over fears the benefit would be cut. No other explanation or elaboration was provided.