skip to the end, Paragraph 35, if you want to read the conclusion and avoid all the nasty stuff.

Unfortunately some of us have to deal with cases of this general nature, in a professional capacity, on a regular basis (in my case thankfully not very often, for some people several times a day.)

This case, although enormously disturbing for the child, her family and society in general, at least did not include the imposition of physical torture or even death that other cases end in, as we all know from far too many recent reports from the UK, Belgium and Russia, to name but three countries in the news at present.

All I can beg is that anyone who still thinks that pornography, and particularly, of course, child pornography, on the Internet is "funny", "a bit of a lark", "harmless fun", "a useful safety valve" or anything other than a dangerous and harmful evil, please to reread this judgement and to think again, and, if you can bear to, pass the message on as I am doing now.

Timothy

I understand Neil Duncan at one time was a PPrune member,
but why does all of this and the court report have to be made public on Pprune?
Does it benefit anybody?
Does it interest anybody?Should it?
I find it all rather misplaced, I did not understand even why a sticky was posted when this sick individual was arrested.
I think he gets way more attention this way than he deserves.

Court reports are matters of public record in the US; I think they are in the UK also. Why shouldn't it be made public? If it inspires one person to report a suspected pedophile, it's worth its bandwidth a million fold.

It benefits/interests the individual Pprune members whom he lied to, attempted to mislead, defraud etc. and when uncovered made considerable problems and accusations privately and publically against those parties to cover his tracks...

It benefits/interests the Pprune membership as a whole who can now understand what was going on for that period of 18 months when NDR was attempting to cause maximum disruption to this forum and some its members

If u were one of those individuals affected then you understand the 'benefit' :*

...and is not making a wider audience aware of the aspects/signs of pedophile behaviour of benefit/interest...I certainly wasn't aware of many of the signs that apparently are common to this kind of character defect!?

Timothy,

Well said, indeed!

G

On the positive side, think how much NDR will have improved 'Bubba' the lifer's sex life, and 'Razor' the psychopath's opportunity for catharctic aggression release. :E

Just read the whole report and rather regret doing so :yuk:.

Very frightening. At NDR's original trial, a number of people expressed concern that his sentencing being delayed for social and psychological reports would get him a lenient sentence. As it turns out, the work of these professionals ensured the opposite. Now rather more inclined to believe sentencing based upon social and psychological reports than the lurid headlines that can go with it.

Thing I find most disturbing about all this is how he used a vulnerable parent to get to the child. How is that mother going to feel each time she tries to get support for her already damaged child?

sick sick sick. Better for him to rot in gaol forever

Evening Star

...........fortunately, for that is how I like to think of it. The presiding Judge at NDR's trial had, just a few weeks previously, might even have been shorter than that, was villified in the press and on TV for his leniency in the subject of very unsavoury incident before him, concerning a paedophile and a baby! He gave that person a very short sentence indeed. That WAS sick in my view and he had to run the gaunlet of a rightful attack in the press.

So..................I hope that NDR, before the same Judge, got life because that Judge felt some kind of guilt and the need with NDR's trial to, shall we say, redress the balance - the status quo! NDR has 5 and half years to go before he can be considered for parole. I rather hope that he will get nothing and serve the full term.

Now, I am going forget him.

Eh

The severity of a sentence shouldn't be decided because a judge needs to it should be because the offence justifies it, not out of revenge.

I have to admit the life sentence surprised me a bit, horrible enough as the crime is its not murder or manslaughter . Personally I'd be very surprised if he did serve life, it's more a token sentence than a realistic sentence IMHO.

Correct me if I'm wrong....

Coco

There is a surprising number of offences for which a life sentence may be imposed. Manslaughter isn't usually one of them.

B2N2,The report was not "made public on Pprune" - it was made public on the Scottish courts' website, and linked to from Pprune.

Having been unfortunate enough to have met the Guvnor once (I suppose I should count myself lucky to have only met him the once, and not become involved in any of his cons or worse) I, for one, am interested in seeing him get what he deserves, and I can only assume that those who know him better than me also appreciate the link being here.

FFF
-------------

Those who read the report and wish they hadn't done so are often the same people who turn a blind eye to the victims of such a man in later life. There is a strong possibility that this child will grow up with guilt and loss of self worth. She will take a lot of convincing that she was not in some way to blame. All too often such victims go through life, often harming themselves and resorting to drink and drugs as a coping strategy. Nobody believes them or they are told to put the incident behind them and 'get on with life'. Sweeping it under the carpet is not good enough, we should be constantly aware of what these people do.
Life imprisonment, certainly - with regular attention from other prisoners, who often have children of their own.

No Nineiron. Those who regret reading the report are, based upon understanding, even more likely to treat the victims with compassion.

Nineiron,

You would be surprised just what abuse victims are capable of achieving in their lives. Just because Trisha/Oprah/the tabloid press like to believe they all become miserable human beings doesn't necessarily make it so.

witchdoctor I fear that statistics show that the most likely thing that abuse victims will achieve in their lives is to abuse others.

I know that there are many uplifting counter-examples, but the grey truth is that many go on to dish out similar abuse to that they have suffered.

Timothy

Precisely

I just wonder sometimes how these life sentences are decided. These life sentences that don't mean life sentences do my head in.

Four young fellas over here from posh homes just got respectively 4 years, two years, nine months & one aquitted for manslaughter, kicking & punching another young man to death outside a nightclub, mind you it may have been provoked by the deceased. But still that's the value placed on a human life, an irreversibly crime.

I also wonder are they putting the Guv through any kind of rehabilitative program to try & cure him of his weird tendencies or sickness or whatever you like to call it, if not they should be otherwise the prison authorities etc are wasting their time & taxpayers money. If not you're right, he shouldn't be let out until the authorities are passably confident he won't get back to his old ways even then IMHO he should be tagged for life.

If the Guv gets life, what does that weirdo Marc Detroux in Belguim get, six life sentences, who cares. A life sentence should mean a life sentence, not five years off there for this & ten years for there for that, that makes a joke of the whole Judicial system IMHO. Also this sentence should only be handed down if the crime fits the punishment.

The crimes the Guv did deserved a harsh sentence but whether it deserved life I'm not so sure & whether he'll serve life, I have my doubts. Sorry just my opinion & I still think the childs mother was an eejit! :mad:

Coco

Not sure about NDR's case for rehab / retraining. I do know that it is not appropriate in some cases as it can be counterproductive, dependent on the offenders profile and character. Some paedophiles actually get as much of a kick out of the rehab as they do out of offending!:mad:
My opinion, for what it's worth, is that I would rather my taxes went on keeping the likes of NDR behind bars. Kids & parents have enough to worry about without being preyed on by perverts. I am very grateful to all those who put themselves out to make sure justice was served on this particular individual.

Coco - it's very easy to condemn the childs mother from the comfort of a home pc. However, as has been explained very clearly on this forum, the Guv was a very persuasive character. He managed to convince rational, intelligent people to part with large sums of money on non-existant ventures. Some of these individuals are pilots who, as a race, are not reknowned for being easily separated from their cash. Imagine how easily a mother, desparate for a cure for her sick child, could be persuaded by such a man!

One thing to bear in mind is that research has shown, in the majority of child abuse cases, the offender was either known or related to the victim. It's not just the strangers we should be telling the kids to avoid.

There appears to be some misunderstanding/misconception of what 'Life' particularly in the case of the Guv is/means;

The Guv was sentanced to 'Life with a tariff he should serve minimum 6 years' - in practical terms and as detailed in the recent Appeal hearing this means that the authorities do not have to give automatic parole and/or release as with a standard sentance (which is what Guv appealed for his to be revised to).

He will serve a minimum of 6 years and then only be released when the authorities consider him fit to be so...which could be 8 years, 10 years and on, they can keep him in as long as they see fit...after he is eventually released he will be on permenant licence and control/supervision from the authorities...not allowed to leave the country etc. and should he do anything wrong whatsoever he will be back in prison i.e. 'Life' means life - his appeal clearly indicated that they consider he will remain a risk to offend again and this is why his sentance was not reduced to an ordinary custodial sentance with automatic parole and free and clear once released.