Stephen (Steve) Peter Crow represented himself when he appeared in Courtroon 11 of the Auckland District Court at 10 am this morning facing a charge under the Companies Act 1993, brought against him by the Ministry of Economic Development.
He was charged with acting as a company director while under a four year banning order imposed on him by the Registrar of Companies under s. 385 of the Companies Act – a ban that took effect on 16 April 2010. It is alleged that he breached the ban after he organised and led the 2010 “Boobs on Bikes” parade.
His former company Eden Digital Ltd, now directed by John M Carr CPA – a San Antonio US-based businessman and investor, was also named as an organiser of the porn promotion parade (which has always served to promote the Erotica Lifestyles Expo – run by Eden Digital Ltd – that is held a few days after the parade).
Crow told the court he was not a director of the pornography distribution company Eden Digital Ltd and he was part of the parade because of his experience with the “freedom of expression” event. (Eden Digital Ltd is fully owned by CVC Group Ltd, directed by John Malcolm Carr CPA).
Crow pleaded “not guilty” to the charge of breaching the banning order imposed under s. 385 of the Companies Act. A defended hearing is set for 12 September 2011.
See: Charge ‘attack on Boobs on Bikes’ [claims Steve Crow] by Ian Steward
“A prosecution of porn king Steve Crow is a veiled attempt to shut down his Boobs on Bikes parade, the pornographer has told a court.”
Despite this, he said he would plead guilty if he was granted a discharge without conviction.
Crow said because of death threats that had been received against the event, he always led the parade in person.
A permit for the parade, signed by Crow on behalf of Eden Digital, was presented to the court.
Crow said he signed it as an organiser of the event and not as a director of Eden Digital.
He said he was asked to front the parade because of his experience in organising the parade, in dealing with police and councils, and his long-standing identification with the event.
A permit was not necessary but he applied for one so police and councils would have a mechanism to deal with crowds.
He would not apply for future permits if the prosecution proceeded, he said, “and the Crown should think very carefully about the implications of that”.
Crow said he would plead guilty if he was granted a section 106 discharge without conviction.
Judge Russell Johnson said guilt was a necessary component of the discharge that he “could not get past”.
He declined the discharge application and indicated that if Crow pleaded guilty he would impose a fine.
Crow said: “I plead not guilty”.
A defended hearing was set for September 12.