The talk will consider the sentencing of an offender who committed intimate image abuse (colloquially “revenge porn”) and acted by way of implanted brain-computer interface. It will be argued that such a sentencing decision might generate some unusual questions about the aims of punishment. More specifically, sentencing submissions pertaining to neurobionic offending of the type envisaged might leave the sentencing decision-maker with some difficult issues to consider relating to the pursuit of retribution, rehabilitation, incapacitation and deterrence.