Dermot Nottingham sentenced for criminal harassment, suppression breaches

Dermot Nottingham was sentenced in the Auckland District Court yesterday for breaching suppression, and for five counts of criminal harassment.

Internet blogger Dermot Nottingham was sentenced today in the Auckland District Court. Photo / Sam Hurley

The person who has also been harassing me online and through litigation

He was charged in April 2015 – see  the year he was charged, and he and associates of his continued harassing others after that – including me extensively, and others who were and are associated with Your NZ.

And it seems that Nottingham remains unrepentant,

It seems remarkable that he avoided a prison sentence, despite the Crown prosecutor suggesting a four year sentence. He was sentenced to 12 months’ home detention and 100 hours’ community work. Thee prosecutor said an appeal of the sentence would be up to the crown law office.

Nottingham plead not guilty and defended himself, and says he will appeal the conviction. That is no surprise – I need to be cautious at the moment about how much I say, but he is currently attempting what would be the third appeal on costs awarded against him as a result of a failed private prosecution  of me and others.

He is also currently involved in court proceedings with an attempt being made to have him declared bankrupt for failure to pay substantial court costs (I am one creditor).

See:

Also:

I and Allied Press were charged at the same time as Prentice and APN (Herald) but our cases were transferred to where they should have been laid, Dunedin.

NZ Herald has details: Blogger dodges prison over court suppression breaches, harassment campaigns

A blogger described as “malicious and nasty” has narrowly avoided prison after breaching suppression orders in a prominent Auckland court case and leading a prolonged campaign of criminal harassment against five people, including a former MP.

Dermot Gregory Nottingham was sentenced to 12 months’ home detention and 100 hours’ community work today in the Auckland District Court, after what Judge Jonathan Down described as a blatant and contemptuous breach of court orders and an arrogant view of right and wrong.

A jury found Nottingham guilty of five criminal harassment charges and two breaches of court suppression orders following a trial, in which Nottingham represented himself, during April and May.

In 2014, the brothers pleaded guilty to assault, were discharged without conviction and granted permanent name suppression by the High Court.

Just days later, Nottingham wrote his blogs naming the two brothers and publishing photos of them alongside details of the case.

Nottingham said of the breach: “It would seem odd to be punished for supplying information to an overseas website about two killers that received no punishment.”

Even more odd than Nottingham’s denial of doing anything wrong is his attempt to prosecute others for (he alleged) breaching suppression by helping people to search for and find the information he ‘supplied’.

As a result of Nottingham’s disregard for the court’s order, a police detective began investigating the website and found “several campaigns of harassment”.

Some of the five people identified as potential victims had gone to police but were told officers could do nothing, the court heard.

Nottingham’s harassment against his victims, all of whom have permanent name suppression, took place between 2011 and 2015.

And continued after he was charged, against me and others. It wasn’t just him involved, there were others actively involved as well. I won’t name them at this stage, until I find out what is able to be said – but there’s a lot to this story, and it is time it came out.

The blogger’s targets included business people, civil servants, and a former Member of Parliament.

Photos were taken of them and their homes and the allegations published online falsely claimed drug abuse and corruption.

Some long time regulars here will recognise how similar that sounds to what was published online about me and commenters from YourNZ – after Nottingham was charged. It may not have been him doing it, but it was closely associated with him.

Nottingham also made a veiled violent threat against one victim and wrote “two shots to be sure” alongside the person’s name.

One of the victims said they had been stalked and photographed, with their images appearing on the blog page.

I have posted here about veiled threats against me. Photos of me and my house were posted online.

And serious accusations made against me and others were simply made up, false. Some of my family were threatened and implicated in conspiracies. This was all done at least by people associated with or related to Nottingham, and he did have some direct involvement here.

Brian Dickey, Auckland’s crown solicitor, said Nottingham’s harassment was at the high end of the criminal spectrum, calling it “so malicious, so nasty”.

The prosecutor said the offending articles remained on the internet and are displayed prominently when the victims’ names are entered into a Google search.

“He shows absolutely no insight into his offending, no remorse.”

That is remarkable the articles still remain online.

Nottingham had, in part, argued a prison sentence would be manifestly excessive due to his health complications, some of which saw him hospitalised for a week during the trial.

However, Dickey attempted to rebut the claims by arguing Nottingham’s health would improve if he lost some weight.

Dickey also strongly opposed home detention and sought a sentence of up to four years imprisonment.

Nottingham said he never intended to threaten the safety of his victims, but Dickey was concerned he would now simply use someone else’s computer or phone to continue his harassment.

“And our business with Mr Nottingham will continue,” Dickey told Judge Down.

Good. So will mine.

Nottingham tried to ague at trial that his “articles” were covered by freedom of expression rights.

Bullshit. He blatantly broke the law.

And he’s a huge hypocrite. He and his cronies used a ridiculous court order to try and shut me up and shut YourNZ down.  See Court order discharged .

“People have different opinions about what is said in articles,” he said today. “The articles contained words that the jury found offensive … I’m not a bully.”

In my opinion he is a highly vindictive vexatious bullying bastard. I know others have similar opinions of him.

However, Judge Down said the right to free speech or freedom of expression is not a paramount right.

Nottingham, nonetheless, stood by his blogs and said his words remained true and would survive a defamation trial.

He also blamed his victims and said, “if they had been honest … none of this would have occurred”.

He keeps failing to accept any responsibility, and keeps blaming others – I have many examples of this that I hope to be able to reveal at some stage.

The judge the “unique” case showed Nottingham had an abrasive and combative approach to others.

“Mr Nottingham is unlikely to accept what he did was not only unlawful but reprehensible,” he said.

What he was charged for was reprehensible – and there’s a lot more, from my own experience and from what others have told me.

Why no prison sentence? He actually tried to get me imprisoned (December 2015 ‘in prison by Christmas’) because I stood up to his threats and bullying.

Nottingham has indicated he will appeal the jury’s verdicts, while Dickey told the Herald a potential appeal of the sentence would be a decision for the Crown Law Office.

I hope they carefully consider that.

When I get clarification on the status of suppression orders – while he claims free speech for himself Nottingham used courts to shut me up – I may give more detail on this.

In the meantime, no naming (or hinting) of the offending website please, that will be strictly moderated.

Given that Nottingham tried (and failed) to  prosecute the Herald for breaching suppressions (that he breached himself) my assumption is that they have carefully complied with any existing suppression orders in there article.

Still, please take care with what you say, but those of you here who were also targets may feel that some degree of free speech may be appropriate.

Nottingham has threatened me with further prosecutions and legal actions as recently as this year. I will continue to stand up to his bullying, but I will do it prudently.

19 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  July 27, 2018

    The cockroach had a go at me too. Got the contempt he richly deserves.

  2. Ray

     /  July 27, 2018

    Not a nice person*, I am really surprised he didn’t get prison time.
    *Loathsome”

    • Corky

       /  July 27, 2018

      Even if the Crown appeal his sentence, and he receives a jail term on appeal, you can bet it won’t be more than 9 months in minimum security. That equates to 5 months max in real jail time.

  3. Maggy Wassilieff

     /  July 27, 2018

    I can only imagine the precautions you have had to take in your personal life.
    There are some seriously disturbed folks out in blog land who think they have the right to harass, abuse and intrude into other folks’ personal lives.
    Take care.

  4. There are a lot of deranged people out there and I hardly think that home detention is a deterrent to a man like that.

    Wished it was the end of it, but experience with this man says otherwise.

    Stay strong Pete.

    • It’s better than nothing, I suppose, and HD could be deadly dull. I’d rather have it than prison, but for people without my resources, prison might seem more attractive,

      If he breaches any conditions, he may well end up in the ‘big house’.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  July 27, 2018

        Stuck at home he’ll probably get fat, lazy, bitter and twisted and spend all his time on a computer.

        That’ll be a change.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  July 27, 2018

          Won’t it just ? His life will be completely turned around.

          • Gezza

             /  July 27, 2018

            There’s something wired up wrong in the guy’s head.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  July 27, 2018

              Most of us deal with that problem without being a complete dickhead.

            • Gezza

               /  July 27, 2018

              Seriously, from what I’ve learned about that guyI reckon it’s a good bet a full psych evaluation would conclude he’s personality disordered. I could even hazard a layperson’s reasonable guess what the principal diagnoses would be, but I’d better not.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  July 27, 2018

              I would think that that is probable. Nobody would deliberately make themselves so disliked and despised.

  5. High Flying Duck

     /  July 27, 2018

    Where’s three strikes when you need it!

  6. Wet Bus Ticket

     /  July 27, 2018

    Its such a disgrace! So if I criminally harrass around 20 people online and via social media in the vilest manner for around 7 years I will get to stay home, watch TV and order pizza for 12 months? This judgement stinks of Jacinda Ardern directives regarding keeping criminals out of prison!

  7. WMD

     /  July 27, 2018

    Very good news, this has been my sole reason for not commenting here for so long.

    • I understand. Unfortunately that was their aim, to shut up and shut down any holding to account, while claiming immunity. But they dug a big hole, kept digging, and now it’s caving in on them.

      • WMD

         /  July 27, 2018

        Thanks Pete. I’m just so pleased it’s all over.

  8. A good result. I understand that the home D order includes an internet ban. Bet his first thought when he heard that was about finding cunning ways to breach it. Good on you for staunching it out, Pete.

    • The Herald said “Dermot Nottingham was ordered to not possess any devices capable of accessing the internet.”

      But this may not be a total ban. I’m waiting for clarification from the court, because this has a direct impact on ongoing legal communications.