“How can a disgusting paedophile still be allowed to live in such close proximity to potential victims? Short of sticking Richard James Dowing in a field to scare away the crows, he - along with anyone who can condone his actions should be locked up indefinatly. Hear Hear Urbanworrier! What a disgusting revelation to St. Werburghs/Baptist Mills area.”

“His behaviour, between first arrest and sentencing, was a disgrace: going across the road to the Duke, and braying about how he'd been a "naughty boy". Dirty ***** s***.”

“This type of crime is recidivistic, this is just the tip of the iceberg and there is no doubt a whole load more that he has done that we don't know about. Local rumour has it that he has been busy trying to groom local children and has also allegedly raped someone. He needs to leave this close and family orientated community. Rehabilitation doesn't work for this type of deviancy! To quote an example, I am attracted to men and always will be, no amount of 'rehabilitation' will ever change that!! This s***bag is attracted to children - work it out people!!! He will do it again and again...”

“To echo urbanworrier - well done Evening Post for naming and shaming and letting parents and the communiyt know that a monster is living in our neighbourhood. Richard James Downing IT IS TIME TO LEAVE!!!!!!”

“Oops...meant community, and for those who don't know he goes by the nickname Stig!”

“So, according to this logic, men who look at images of violence against women are the same as rapists. Shall we lock up all the men who enjoy certain films or magazines? This kind of crime definitely deserves punishment. People need to realise that to look at pictures is to support those who abuse. I can think of no better punishment than to stay in your own house and have this article published for your community to read. It costs the taxpayer nothing and will make it very difficult for the perpetrator to do anything worse, or repeat the crime. I can understand why local people are shocked and upset - but as this person has not, it appears, hurt any children- I'm sure the police would have thoroughly investigated any such allegations - surely it's better that he gets help for his behaviour, in the hope of stopping that from happening? How exactly are the children in this playgroup in danger? Are the staff in the habit of letting the children talk to men they don't know? Why is a man whose picture has been in the paper more dangerous to children in a park than someone who has not been caught with illegal pictures? Or someone who doesn't bother with pictures and goes straight for the real thing? I can't prove this, but I suspect that many more men than we know about do, or would indulge in this kind of fantasy if they thought they could. This one has been caught, and punished according to the law. He is now living with the consequences.”

“The only reason this man has not been locked up is because those parents affected by him will NOT put their children through the trauma of standing up in court. So, he did get away with more than just looking at videos and images. By your logic, Mr Daydream, men will look at porn and not want sex. This man perpetuated the making of abusive images of children. He contributed to this abuse and all for a w#*k? His victims and their families are living with the consequences and this petty sentence sends out the message that abuse of children is not taken seriously enough. And as far as the nursery goes, if you believe it was only 'images' he was looking at to get his pleasure, then all he has to do is look out of his window to get his jollies. The victims should not be forced to police the local pervert.”

“Shame on you Mr Daydream! Is there something you would like to confess????”

“"I have met this man at a social event. We had the misfortune of meeting this man recently along with his accomplice. He was a tw*t. The sort of man who wears boots with a vest and a felt flower. Being a parent, finding out the true nature of these "people" resulted in nightmares.

I shall NOT be drinking in the Duke as long as they are patrons, particularly on a Wednesday night (this is when their shenanigans are most ripe- a desperate man so uncomfortable in his own skin he needs to impersonate Stewart Lee, presents the Duke with an "ear rape" of drivel and humour equal to that of a "dusty ****" in the form of a "quiz".)

How vulgar, and to think that they are scrounging off the state when they boast of their private educations? I did not want to hear from them how children get off on sitting on the laps of grown ups, even if they taught you that at private school.

It IS time to LEAVE.”

“The judges and the system is what needs locking up kids will never be safe
as long as we follow the puppets what safe guard our children”

“SICK SICK SICK SICK!!”

“@brownrat

What is particularly disturbing is that the comedian you are referring to works in a school! Does he still share Downing's home?”