Blogger Nigel Nessling avoids prison after downloading 40,000 indecent images.

[G-Unit]

I think the McCanns would prefer if we didn't post as the debate keeps things going

The only connection to the McCanns was Nessling's support fr their cause. Why should they know or care?

[Brietta]

Are you suggesting there is something inherently wrong with stating that Nigel Nessling has been prosecuted and convicted under the Sexual Offences Act 2003? It's the truth isn't it?
Much the same as it's true Goncalo Amaral was convicted for falsifying evidence.
Is it perhaps you wish to be the arbiter of truth?

My preference is due process to which this man has been subject ... anything more than that, as having his name heading a special thread on this forum, in my opinion amounts to a mob of nameless individuals indulging in knee jerk vigil[ censored word]m. 

[Mr Gray]

The only connection to the McCanns was Nessling's support fr their cause. Why should they know or care?

I'm talking about posting in general

[G-Unit]

My preference is due process to which this man has been subject ... anything more than that, as having his name heading a special thread on this forum, in my opinion amounts to a mob of nameless individuals indulging in knee jerk vigil[ censored word]m.

Nessling's posts, in my opinion, were abusive and nasty. I would say he was a troll. His online behaviour appears to have been encouraged and applauded by some. Was that the right thing to do or should such behaviour always be condemned and discouraged by those interacting with such people?

 

[Mr Gray]

Nessling's posts, in my opinion, were abusive and nasty. I would say he was a troll. His online behaviour appears to have been encouraged and applauded by some. Was that the right thing to do or should such behaviour always be condemned and discouraged by those interacting with such people?

imo.......all abuse should be discoraged....including abuse towards the McCanns

[stephen25000]

My preference is due process to which this man has been subject ... anything more than that, as having his name heading a special thread on this forum, in my opinion amounts to a mob of nameless individuals indulging in knee jerk vigil[ censored word]m.

Well, bearing in mind what he accused others of, on a regular basis, that is just desserts. I.M.O.

[John]

Well, bearing in mind what he accused others of, on a regular basis, that is just desserts. I.M.O.

He got off too light compared to other sex offenders who were caught with much less material and were sent to prison. The damage done to some of these children by these deviants will stay with them for the rest of their life, if I had my way they'd all be strung up.

[stephen25000]

He got off too light compared to other sex offenders who were caught with much less material and were sent to prison. The damage done to some of these children by these deviants will stay with them for the rest of their life, if I had my way they'd all be strung up.

No doubt in my opinion.

He should have gone down and served time with a substantial custodial sentence.

[G-Unit]

My opinion is that some crimes are forgivable. I know a young man who got drunk and beat someone up. He went to prison. His family and girlfriend forgave him and stuck by him. He has never committed another crime, the couple have just had a baby and he is well on his way to getting a degree. He made a stupid mistake.

Nessling's crime wasn't a mistake. He isn't young and foolish, he's a mature man. He intentionally broke the law knowing full well what the consequences were likely to be. Even so, his crime would have been unremarkable and not worthy of singling out had he not sought to deceive people.

He presented himself as a fine upstanding member of society; an employed family man with a social conscience. He denigrated liars, bullies and child abusers but at the same time he himself lied, bullied people online, and abused the children whose images he viewed and collected.

A crime is one thing, and can sometimes be forgiven. Trust is another thing and is very difficult to regain once destroyed.

[Angelo222]

I have removed the last three or four posts as they are unnecessary. It matters little what label is applied to Nessling as his conduct was vile and now he and his loved ones are paying the price.  I agree though he should have been given a short prison sentence which might have had more impact on him and what he had done.  Out of interest, has he been sacked from the RAF?

[Angelo222]

My opinion is that some crimes are forgivable. I know a young man who got drunk and beat someone up. He went to prison. His family and girlfriend forgave him and stuck by him. He has never committed another crime, the couple have just had a baby and he is well on his way to getting a degree. He made a stupid mistake.

Nessling's crime wasn't a mistake. He isn't young and foolish, he's a mature man. He intentionally broke the law knowing full well what the consequences were likely to be. Even so, his crime would have been unremarkable and not worthy of singling out had he not sought to deceive people.

He presented himself as a fine upstanding member of society; an employed family man with a social conscience. He denigrated liars, bullies and child abusers but at the same time he himself lied, bullied people online, and abused the children whose images he viewed and collected.

A crime is one thing, and can sometimes be forgiven. Trust is another thing and is very difficult to regain once destroyed.

I wonder how much of this was made known to the judge before sentencing.

[G-Unit]

I have removed the last three or four posts as they are unnecessary. It matters little what label is applied to Nessling as his conduct was vile and now he and his loved ones are paying the price.  I agree though he should have been given a short prison sentence which might have had more impact on him and what he had done.  Out of interest, has he been sacked from the RAF?

He was a civilian. He was either a helicopter technician or a photocopier engineer, depending on the source.

[Mr Gray]

I have removed the last three or four posts as they are unnecessary. It matters little what label is applied to Nessling as his conduct was vile and now he and his loved ones are paying the price.  I agree though he should have been given a short prison sentence which might have had more impact on him and what he had done.  Out of interest, has he been sacked from the RAF?

As far as I can see he was sentenced in line with similar cases and according to a post by Alice in line with the current guidelines...

[G-Unit]

I wonder how much of this was made known to the judge before sentencing.

I think most of these crimes involve misleading others about who you are and what you're doing. I just find the particular deceptions by this man more disgusting because he used the disappearance of a child to promote his lies about himself.

[Mr Gray]

My opinion is that some crimes are forgivable. I know a young man who got drunk and beat someone up. He went to prison. His family and girlfriend forgave him and stuck by him. He has never committed another crime, the couple have just had a baby and he is well on his way to getting a degree. He made a stupid mistake.

Nessling's crime wasn't a mistake. He isn't young and foolish, he's a mature man. He intentionally broke the law knowing full well what the consequences were likely to be. Even so, his crime would have been unremarkable and not worthy of singling out had he not sought to deceive people.

He presented himself as a fine upstanding member of society; an employed family man with a social conscience. He denigrated liars, bullies and child abusers but at the same time he himself lied, bullied people online, and abused the children whose images he viewed and collected.

A crime is one thing, and can sometimes be forgiven. Trust is another thing and is very difficult to regain once destroyed.

What would anyone feel if this was their father....would they completely turn against their father and never speak to him again