WILLIAM NOLSON SHIPLEY PENSIONER ESCAPES JAIL AFTER SEXUAL ABUSE CASE

In a case that has shocked the community of Shipley, William Nolson, a 76-year-old man, narrowly avoided imprisonment after admitting to serious sexual offenses committed over three decades ago. The incident, which took place during the 1970s, involved Nolson abusing a young girl repeatedly, with the abuse leaving a lasting impact on the victim, who chose to remain anonymous for legal reasons.

During the proceedings at Bradford Crown Court, it was revealed that Nolson, residing on Cunliffe Lane in Esholt, Shipley, pleaded guilty last week to five counts of indecent assault and one charge of indecency with a child. Despite his guilty plea, Nolson's case took a complex turn when he later sought to withdraw his admissions, creating a tense and difficult sentencing process for the court.

On the day of sentencing, Judge Jonathan Durham Hall QC considered the possibility of sending Nolson to prison for four years. However, after listening to the victim’s plea, who earnestly asked the judge not to imprison Nolson, the judge decided to impose a more lenient sentence. Nolson was sentenced to two years in prison, suspended for two years, meaning he will not serve time immediately but remains under strict supervision.

In addition to the suspended sentence, Nolson will be subject to a Sexual Offences Prevention Order and is required to register as a sex offender for the remainder of his life. The court heard harrowing details of the abuse, including Nolson’s repeated assaults and his manipulative behavior, where he told the young girl he loved her and suggested he was preparing her for marriage. Nolson was described as a violent and controlling individual who later developed issues with alcohol.

Judge Durham Hall criticized Nolson for his inconsistent stance regarding the allegations, highlighting his initial guilty plea followed by attempts to withdraw it. The judge questioned Nolson directly, asking, “Did you commit these offences?” to which Nolson responded simply, “Yes.” The judge then expressed frustration over Nolson’s contradictory statements, especially his denial to the probation officer, asking, “Why on earth did you tell the probation officer that you denied everything that had happened?” Nolson’s response was uncertain, stating, “I don’t know, sir. I don’t know how to answer that.”

The judge acknowledged the difficulty of the case, describing it as “as difficult a sentencing exercise as anyone could possibly imagine.” Ultimately, the decision to avoid immediate imprisonment was heavily influenced by the victim’s plea, with the judge stating, “It is simply because that woman who you so sordidly abused has begged me not to send you to prison that I will not do so today. Because of her and because she doesn’t want you to go to prison I will spare you today.”

Stephen Couch, representing Nolson, highlighted the pensioner’s poor health, both mentally and physically, noting that Nolson, who walks with the aid of two sticks, had endured a difficult few days in custody on remand. Couch emphasized that even a short sentence could be life-threatening for Nolson, who is already in fragile health. He also pointed out that Nolson was in a troubled state at the time of the offenses, battling alcohol issues and emotional distress. Couch expressed that Nolson now feels remorseful and is struggling to come to terms with his actions, describing his psychological confrontation with his past as “a very difficult task.”