GARY MCVEIGH'S SHOCKING CRIMES IN MACCLESFIELD: NAPPY FETISH AND CHILD PORNOGRAPHY CASES REVEALED

In a series of disturbing incidents that have rocked the town of Macclesfield, Gary McVeigh, a man with a deeply troubling history, has been at the center of serious criminal proceedings involving child exploitation and fetish-related offenses.

Back in May 2017, McVeigh, aged 39 and residing on Hulley Road in Macclesfield, faced a significant legal setback when his prison sentence was reduced by the Court of Appeal. Originally sentenced to three years for possessing indecent images of children and breaching a sexual offences prevention order (SOPO), his sentence was trimmed to two and a half years after the judges found the original punishment excessive.

The case revealed that McVeigh had long-standing issues with a 'nappy fetish,' a sexual fixation he admitted to a probation officer, claiming that he had been experiencing this fetish since childhood. According to Judge Paul Farrer QC, who presided over the appeal in London's Court, McVeigh confessed that he became 'sexually aroused when wearing them.'

His criminal history includes a 2011 conviction where he was jailed for two years and eight months for possession of indecent images of children. At that time, a sexual offences prevention order was also issued against him, explicitly banning him from possessing nappies or diapers. Despite this, police officers executing a search warrant at his residence on March 24 of the previous year discovered him wearing a nappy. They also uncovered more than 200 indecent images and videos depicting children being sexually abused, including some involving young children being raped.

McVeigh was charged with multiple offenses, including three counts of creating indecent images of children and breaching the terms of the SOPO. His subsequent trial at Chester Crown Court resulted in a three-year sentence—two years for the possession of indecent images and an additional year for violating the court order.

During the sentencing hearing, McVeigh’s legal representative, Peter Malone, argued that the one-year sentence for the breach was excessively harsh, emphasizing that it was his client’s first breach, that he had pleaded guilty, and that he had shown remorse. However, Judge Farrer pointed out that the breach was deliberate and indicative of McVeigh’s inability or unwillingness to resist his fetish. The judge also noted that McVeigh acknowledged in an interview that wearing nappies was a 'gateway' to his other criminal behaviors.

Judge Farrer emphasized that the breach posed a significant risk to the public, stating, “The breach of this order is directly linked to the risk McVeigh presents to the public.” Nonetheless, he acknowledged that it was a first breach and, while serious, did not cause direct harm. After careful consideration, the court decided that the original sentence was too severe and that a more appropriate punishment would have been six months of consecutive imprisonment. Consequently, the appeal was granted, and McVeigh’s total jail time was reduced from three years to two and a half years.

Earlier, in May 2011, McVeigh’s disturbing activities came to light when police uncovered a cache of 9,400 indecent images of babies on his computer. At that time, he was 33 years old and living in Macclesfield. Under the guise of a volunteer with St John Ambulance, he advertised himself as a childminder, but behind this facade, he harbored a sinister obsession with nappies.

He was convicted on 12 charges related to the creation and possession of these images and was sentenced to two years and eight months in prison. The images included posed photographs of children, some of the lowest levels of seriousness, and a video clip which McVeigh admitted he had watched for sexual gratification. Prosecutor Peter Frost described his obsession as beginning in 2003, with McVeigh using internet search terms to find such material, indicating a compulsive and uncontrollable behavior.

His defense, led by Mark Shepherd, acknowledged that McVeigh was aware of the potential consequences of his actions and expressed that he did not know where his obsession might lead if unchecked. The defense also highlighted that McVeigh had the support of members of his church, who expressed willingness to help him seek recovery.

Despite these pleas, Judge Elgan Edwards, the Recorder of Chester, condemned McVeigh’s actions, stating, “He may be religious but he is also a pervert. The word is often undeserved but in this case it is appropriate.” The judge described the case as highly unusual and disturbing, emphasizing the significant risk McVeigh posed to children. As a result, he was permanently barred from working with children and was ordered to sign the sex offenders’ register indefinitely. Additionally, as part of the sexual offences prevention order, McVeigh was prohibited from possessing any nappies or diapers capable of holding human waste, underscoring the severity of his offenses and the measures taken to prevent future harm.