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

[G-Unit]

what do you understand by "making indecent images".....making hard copies of images?

The newspaper article wasn't specific, so take your pick;

Prohibited activities are labelled ‘making’ and distribution, and the legal definitions for each are as follows:

Making – “To take or permit to be taken or make any [indecent images].”

The Crown Prosecution Service have described prohibited ‘making’ offences (under Section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978) as:

To cause an indecent image to exist
Produce an indecent image through action
‘Bring about’ an indecent image (a particularly unspecific and wide-reaching definition)
https://www.lawtonslaw.co.uk/resources/making-vs-distribution-what-indecent-images-charges-actually-mean/

[stephen25000]

That it takes all sorts to make this world? its related to the McCann case because of his support I suppose.
I can imagine the furore it would cause if some guy like this was an anti and it came to light.
After reading a Brenda Leyland thread on here,people and glass houses come to mind.

Indeed it does Barrier.

[Erngath]

AFAIAC all paedophiles should be chemically castrated and/or spend the rest of their lives behind bars.   There is no cure for this vile perversion which actively encourages the terrible abuse of innocent children.

However -  I disagree that this disgusting person's crime should be seen to to have 'tainted' any missing child organisations - any more than I would agree that J. Saville's crimes can be said to have 'tainted' the charitable organisations for which he raised money, or the members of the public who worked hard to support them.  They are also his victims imo.

This is definitely NOT a case of 'mud sticks' imo - if that is what is being inferred by some.      This unforgivable crime belongs solely to Nessling and should not be used to cast aspersions on other people or to score points.

My sympathies are entirely and wholly with the abused children, and it's about time the 'owners' of the internet were required to spend some of their £billions on tracking down the sources of this 'dark side' of the web and bringing these monsters to justice.    I don't believe the technology does not exist to do that.

These people will always exist - but we don't have to make it so easy for them to ply their evil trade.
 . 
IMO

Excellent post.

[Erngath]

That it takes all sorts to make this world? its related to the McCann case because of his support I suppose.
I can imagine the furore it would cause if some guy like this was an anti and it came to light.
After reading a Brenda Leyland thread on here,people and glass houses come to mind.

All in your opinion only.

[Mr Gray]

The newspaper article wasn't specific, so take your pick;

Prohibited activities are labelled ‘making’ and distribution, and the legal definitions for each are as follows:

Making – “To take or permit to be taken or make any [indecent images].”

The Crown Prosecution Service have described prohibited ‘making’ offences (under Section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978) as:

To cause an indecent image to exist
Produce an indecent image through action
‘Bring about’ an indecent image (a particularly unspecific and wide-reaching definition)
https://www.lawtonslaw.co.uk/resources/making-vs-distribution-what-indecent-images-charges-actually-mean/

if we dont know...then we dont know and cannot take our pick with any accuracy. It can be simply forwarding an email. I dont condone or wish to make excuses for nessling but being from a scientific background I like to understand things

[barrier]

All in your opinion only.

I'm not a great fan of newspaper articles,but according to this KM introduced paedophilia through her book,was this the attraction for Nessling.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1384421/Kate-McCann-Im-tortured-thought-Maddie-abused-paedophile.html.

Yet we've not seen a word of condemnation from the family spokesman,yet when it was mentioned a higher profile person was linked to child abuse they were said to be horrified.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3642312/Kate-Gerry-McCann-horrified-Clement-Freud-child-abuse-claims-emerged-home-Praia-da-Luz-befriended-Madeleine-vanished.html

[Mr Gray]

I'm not a great fan of newspaper articles,but according to this KM introduced paedophilia through her book,was this the attraction for Nessling.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1384421/Kate-McCann-Im-tortured-thought-Maddie-abused-paedophile.html.

Yet we've not seen a word of condemnation from the family spokesman,yet when it was mentioned a higher profile person was linked to child abuse they were said to be horrified.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3642312/Kate-Gerry-McCann-horrified-Clement-Freud-child-abuse-claims-emerged-home-Praia-da-Luz-befriended-Madeleine-vanished.html

I wondered how long it would be before the mccanns would somehow be blamed...

[barrier]

I wondered how long it would be before the mccanns would somehow be blamed...

Show where any apportion of blame is attached? if not withdraw the post.

[Mr Gray]

Show where any apportion of blame is attached? if not withdraw the post.

I'm not a great fan of newspaper articles,but according to this KM introduced paedophilia through her book,was this the attraction for Nessling.



Yet we've not seen a word of condemnation from the family spokesman,yet when it was mentioned a higher profile person was linked to child abuse they were said to be horrified.

#Blamed for introducing paedophilia and blamed for not condemning Nessling

[barrier]

I'm not a great fan of newspaper articles,but according to this KM introduced paedophilia through her book,was this the attraction for Nessling.



Yet we've not seen a word of condemnation from the family spokesman,yet when it was mentioned a higher profile person was linked to child abuse they were said to be horrified.

#Blamed for introducing paedophilia and blamed for not condemning Nessling

So are you saying its not factually correct that Kate thought a paedophile had taken Madeleine? this after all is a McCann thread on the board of Justice forum.

[stephen25000]

Nessling is to blame for his actions.

No one else.

He chose to do what he did.

If he had these tendencies, he should have sought psychological and medical help.

[Erngath]

So are you saying its not factually correct that Kate thought a paedophile had taken Madeleine? this after all is a McCann thread on the board of Justice forum.

Are you saying that Kate McCann expressing her terror at what may have happened to Madeleine was the trigger which caused this man to download child pornography

[stephen25000]

Are you saying that Kate McCann expressing her terror at what may have happened to Madeleine was the trigger which caused this man to download child pornography

You don't know what happened, and neither did Kate Mccann.

After all, she wasn't there when Madeleine disappeared, was she.

As to Nessling, he had a choice. No one forced him to do what he did. it was of his own volition.

[Erngath]

Nessling is to blame for his actions.

No one else.

He chose to do what he did.

If he had these tendencies, he should have sought psychological and medical help.

Indeed but as was to be expected the McCanns are being suggested as the trigger which made him act on these tendencies.

[stephen25000]

Indeed but as was to be expected the McCanns are being suggested as the trigger which made him act on these tendencies.

We do not know what triggered Nessling's behaviour. Only he can answer that, and i don't see an answer forthcoming.