Poppy Morandin.
Police have confirmed that they are investigating the nude photo scandal linked to the current season of Married At First Sight.
The incident involves MAFS brides Olivia Frazer and Domenica Calarco, whose feud has been well-documented on the show.
Following an argument between the pair, Frazer searched Calarco’s name on Google, finding her ‘OnlyFans’ account and sourcing a naked photo of Calarco.
Frazer then distributed the image to multiple other contestants on the show, without Calarco’s consent.
One of the grooms, Cody Bromley, is seen berating Calarco about the image on the show remarking: “we’ve all seen an image of you pretty much naked… does Jack know you had an OnlyFans?”
‘OnlyFans’ is an online subscription-based platform, which has become popular for people to post nude photos on.
However, the terms of the website restrict users who pay for content from reproducing, distributing, or transmitting posted images.
The incident prompted a wave of support for Calarco, including a Change.org petition started by viewers, demanding the eSafety Commissioner take immediate action for the alleged image-based abuse.
Police have since confirmed that a complaint has been made to officers, and that the incident is being investigated.
“On Saturday, March 19, 2022, a complaint was made to officers at Inner West Police Area Command about the alleged distribution of an image without consent that occurred in late 2021,” said an NSW Police spokesperson in a statement.
“Inquiries are continuing, and no further information is available at this stage.”
Intentionally Distributing an Intimate Image Offence in New South Wales
Intentionally distributing an intimate image of another person without the consent of the person is an offence, pursuant to section 91Q of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).
An intimate image is defined as an image of a person’s private parts, or of a person engaged in a private act, in circumstances in which a reasonable person would reasonably expect to be afforded privacy.
It also includes images altered to appear to show this.
The offender must know the person did not consent or be reckless as to whether the person consented to the distribution
The maximum penalty is imprisonment for 3 years and/or a fine of $11,000.
A person consents to the distribution of an intimate image if the person freely and voluntarily agrees to the distribution of the intimate image.
It is emphasised that even if a person distributes an image of themselves, it is not by reason only of this fact, to be regarded as them having consented to any other distribution of the image.
Exceptions include where the conduct alleged to constitute the offence:
- was done for a genuine medical or scientific purpose,
- was done by a law enforcement officer for a genuine law enforcement purpose,
- was required by a court or otherwise reasonably necessary to be done for the purpose of legal proceedings.
Further exceptions include where a reasonable person would consider the conduct of the accused person acceptable, having regard to each of the following:
- the nature and content of the image,
- the circumstances in which the image was recorded or distributed,
- the age, intellectual capacity, vulnerability, or other relevant circumstances of the person depicted in the image,
- the degree to which the accused person’s actions affect the privacy of the person depicted in the image, and
- the relationship between the accused person and the person depicted in the image.
If found guilty, a court may order the person take reasonable actions to remove, retract, recover, delete, or destroy any intimate image recorded or distributed by the person within a period specified by the court.
If they fail to do so, without reasonable excuse, a maximum penalty of 2 years imprisonment and/or a $550 fine is applicable, pursuant to section 91S(2).