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

[G-Unit]

Suffolk man avoids prison after downloading over 40,000 indecent images of children

Ipswich Star

By Jane Hunt
16 November 2017

Nessling, 59, now of Stowmarket, admitted three offences of making indecent images of children and possessing prohibited images of children.

He was given a 16-month prison sentence, suspended for 12 months, and ordered to do 150 hours unpaid work in the community.

He was also ordered to take part in a 35 day rehabilitation activity programme and ordered to sign the sex offenders’ register for ten years. He was also made the subject of a sexual harm prevention order.

Sentencing Nessling, Judge David Goodin said: “You plainly have it in you to be a decent, responsible member of society.”  He told Nessling, who is a father and a grandfather with no previous convictions, that the offences he had committed clearly crossed the custody threshold.  However, he felt able to pass a suspended sentence because he had admitted the offences at an early stage and there was sufficient prospect of rehabilitation in his case.

More:  http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/ipswich-man-avoids-prison-after-downloading-over-40-000-indecent-images-of-children-1-5283183

                                    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some may argue that Nigel Nessling's conviction for viewing, making and downloading child pornography has nothing to do with the case of Madeleine McCann.

While his offence may have no connection, the man himself certainly did. He was involved with a group called Forever Searching, which, in turn, is said to have been approached by the McCanns to help them with their search. 

2010
The charity I am raising money for is Forever Searching. I have been involved with, and helping to raise money for this charity for a couple of years now.
https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/vee8

One of the founders of this group (I'm not sure it's a charity) was quoted as saying it was launched in September 2007 by six women in response to Madeleine's disappearance.

It works by using a network of worldwide volunteers registered on the site to distribute posters, emails and press releases.

Forever Searching also sets up pages on social networking websites for each of the children they investigate.

The McCanns approached Forever Searching just after the site launched as part of a global campaign to find their daughter. Niamh said: "They are still suffering immensely. They contacted us because they knew we could reach people from around the world to help them in their search.

Read more at: https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/ulster-woman-forever-searching-for-madeleine-1-1872708

Forever Searching was organised;

2008 Facebook
We are looking for volunteers to help within our small, friendly, professional group. Can you spare some computer time? As a volunteer you will need to use the internet to research possible target audiences, as well as emailing posters of missing children worldwide. You will be allocated a Team Leader who is there to assist you whenever needed. You will be required to email your weekly progress reports to your team leader and discuss where to focus next. You will need to have basic computer skills, be reliable and have a passion for missing children. If you wish to help our group please register at www.foreversearching.com We thank you – and the children thank you

At one point the UK Missing Persons Bureau was recommending the group as have This Morning on ITV.
http://www.sardawales.org.uk/old_site/4._Organisations_Help_and_Support.pdf
http://missingpersons.police.uk/en-gb/about-mpb/our-history
https://www.itv.com/thismorning/missing-people-helplines

So some of Nessling's online activity between 2008 and 2019 was probably directed by Forever Searching and his progress was reported back to them.

I'm not suggesting that the group knew of or condoned ny of his other activities at all. People with agendas often infiltrate organisations in order to achieve their own ends. What I am saying is that he worked his way into one  organisation which was in contact with the McCanns for some reason. Whatever his role was in that organisation, I assume they had no knowledge of his activities as vee8 because I assume they would not condone them.

377

[John]

I will allow this thread as long as it is based on factual information with appropriate cites.

[faithlilly]

I will allow this thread as long as it is based on factual information with appropriate cites.

The newspaper article I posted during the week which you deleted was factual. Why was that deleted ?

[G-Unit]

The newspaper article I posted during the week which you deleted was factual. Why was that deleted ?

I started the thread because I want to explore how easy it is for people like Nessling to deceive others. He presented himself as someone who cared deeply about missing children but at the same time his actions meant he was condoning/encouraging child sex abuse.

Please do post carefully and factually so we maybe learn something from this.

A lot of what he posted as vee8 has been deleted, but his blog still exists which demonstrates his attitudes and opinions to a certain extent.
https://nigelnessling.wordpress.com/about/

[misty]

I started the thread because I want to explore how easy it is for people like Nessling to deceive others. He presented himself as someone who cared deeply about missing children but at the same time his actions meant he was condoning/encouraging child sex abuse.

Please do post carefully and factually so we maybe learn something from this.

A lot of what he posted as vee8 has been deleted, but his blog still exists which demonstrates his attitudes and opinions to a certain extent.
https://nigelnessling.wordpress.com/about/

Without being familiar with someone in real life & knowing that they access the dark web, how can you make a judgement on someone who holds largely the same opinions as yourself on a particular matter?

[faithlilly]

Without being familiar with someone in real life & knowing that they access the dark web, how can you make a judgement on someone who holds largely the same opinions as yourself on a particular matter?

Perhaps there's a lesson to be learned from all this by everyone commenting on th case ?

[misty]

Perhaps there's a lesson to be learned from all this by everyone commenting on th case ?

Do you think it will stop the allegations about a certain member of the Tapas 9 & the endless accusations of all supporters being "paedo enablers" or will Nessling's conviction simply provide more fuel for the sceptic machine?

[Alice Purjorick]

Well what ever, Nessling like Amaral is now a convicted criminal.
Sceptics like supporters may now bore for England with the mantra...
I bet there is already a song sheet from the Brill Building on what to say in response to:
"Dress it up how you like, the man now has a criminal record for sex offences and will remain on the sex offenders register for ten years".
There ain't a lot more to say really.. 

[faithlilly]

Do you think it will stop the allegations about a certain member of the Tapas 9 & the endless accusations of all supporters being "paedo enablers" or will Nessling's conviction simply provide more fuel for the sceptic machine?

I did say there was lessons to be learned on both sides.

[misty]

 To even discuss whether or not innocent posters/members of the public who are passionate about a particular cause could be using groups as a smokescreen for something far darker is sewing the seeds of suspicion & discontent amongst us. Do we want to go down that route because, if so, I'm out of here.

[Alice Purjorick]

I started the thread because I want to explore how easy it is for people like Nessling to deceive others. He presented himself as someone who cared deeply about missing children but at the same time his actions meant he was condoning/encouraging child sex abuse.

Please do post carefully and factually so we maybe learn something from this.

A lot of what he posted as vee8 has been deleted, but his blog still exists which demonstrates his attitudes and opinions to a certain extent.
https://nigelnessling.wordpress.com/about/

[undoes plaster over mouth]

When I was a kid we had a saying:
"Never turn your back on a cubmaster". It worked for most for some it didn't.
What you describe has been going on for years. Organisations that are for childcren are, not surprisingly, like magnets for certain types. I don't know the answer except that all the initiatives devised by governments, of varying flavours, since I was a boy haven't worked and realistically there is no reason to believe the next one will. Maybe it's one of those problems to which there is no solution except to teach your kids to be vigilant and not trust anyone at face value then just hope for the best?

[stephen25000]

To even discuss whether or not innocent posters/members of the public who are passionate about a particular cause could be using groups as a smokescreen for something far darker is sewing the seeds of suspicion & discontent amongst us. Do we want to go down that route because, if so, I'm out of here.

Then that will have to be avoided Misty.

As to Nessling, his accusations against other people have come home to roost.

[G-Unit]

Do you think it will stop the allegations about a certain member of the Tapas 9 & the endless accusations of all supporters being "paedo enablers" or will Nessling's conviction simply provide more fuel for the sceptic machine?

It depends what you call 'allegations'. If I choose to discuss the statements in the PJ files which refer to a certain member of the T9, I'm not accusing or alleging; I'm discussing. Some people seem unable to understand that distinction.

I have never called any supporters 'paedo enablers'. As far as I know there is no 'sceptic machine', but if there is I'm not a cog in it. I don't speak on anyone's behalf but my own.

I would like people to stop assuming;

that there's some kind of organisation telling people what to say and think.
that everyone belongs to it and
can therefore answer questions about it.

From what I have read of Nessling's posts he was very sure that he was right and he was pretty scathing about those who didn't agree with him. All his efforts on behalf of the McCanns were wasted in my opinion, because of what he was doing at the same time; encouraging child sex abuse.

Those who were fooled by him, who agreed with him and encouraged him will now suffer because of their association with him. They couldn't be expected to know what he was, but they could have disassociated themselves from some of his worst posts and views in my opinion.
tand concepts such as compassion or charity.

[stephen25000]

It depends what you call 'allegations'. If I choose to discuss the statements in the PJ files which refer to a certain member of the T9, I'm not accusing or alleging; I'm discussing. Some people seem unable to understand that distinction.

I have never called any supporters 'paedo enablers'. As far as I know there is no 'sceptic machine', but if there is I'm not a cog in it. I don't speak on anyone's behalf but my own.

I would like people to stop assuming;

that there's some kind of organisation telling people what to say and think.
that everyone belongs to it and
can therefore answer questions about it.

From what I have read of Nessling's posts he was very sure that he was right and he was pretty scathing about those who didn't agree with him. All his efforts on behalf of the McCanns were wasted in my opinion, because of what he was doing at the same time; encouraging child sex abuse.

Those who were fooled by him, who agreed with him and encouraged him will now suffer because of their association with him. They couldn't be expected to know what he was, but they could have disassociated themselves from some of his worst posts and views in my opinion.
tand concepts such as compassion or charity.

That, in my opinion, is an excellent post G-Unit.

[G-Unit]

To even discuss whether or not innocent posters/members of the public who are passionate about a particular cause could be using groups as a smokescreen for something far darker is sewing the seeds of suspicion & discontent amongst us. Do we want to go down that route because, if so, I'm out of here.

We have been asked to use facts and cites on this thread. Has anyone suggested that people may be doing/have done that? I expect people get involved for a variety of reasons and only they know what they are..