Repeat offender Raymond Carl Butler had initially denied the offences, but on the day of his trial, changed his pleas to guilty.
The 61-year-old admitted possessing three indecent images, found on devices at his home.
Magistrates sentenced him to six months custody, suspended for two years, and put him under supervision for two years.
He was also made the subject of a Sexual Harm Prevention Order for 10 years, and ordered to pay £1,460 prosecution costs.
Prosecuting advocate Barry Swain told the court that, in October 2023, information was received from the North West Regional Organised Crime Unit, relating to Butler.
He was said to have been expressing a sexual interest in children on an adult website.
Butler had a profile on the site, calling himself ‘Harshdegrader2’.
A profile with the same name was also found on another adult website called.
Butler was arrested and a search of devices at his home found three indecent images.
They were assessed using the Copine scale, which measures the severity of images from one to five, with five being the most severe.
Two images were graded at level one and one at level two.
When interviewed Butler attempted to mitigate, saying that he had been role playing as a ‘submissive’ on one of the adult websites, and other people may have posted in the chat group of the site.
He confirmed that no-one else had access to his devices but denied that he had tried to hide the images by using a cleaning program, around six minutes after accessing them.
Mr Swain said that the images found had shown one naked girl aged between 11 and 13, and another aged between 13 and 15.
Another showed a child aged between 12 and 14 naked from the waist down.
The court heard that Butler, who lives at Walpole Avenue, had previous convictions for similar offences in 2011 and 2014.
And in 2017, he breached the requirements of the Sex Offences Prevention Order by working in the same building as a mother and toddler group.
Defence advocate Victoria Watterson said that her client was aware of the seriousness of his latest offences.
She said that Butler was a lonely and isolated man, unable to work due to his ostracization from society.
Ms Watterson said that a package of interventions had been put forward by probation, and the Sex Offender Treatment Programme had shifted focus since the last time Butler had been involved with it.
The advocate submitted a character reference for her client, which she said described him as a trustworthy person, who had engaged in voluntary work.
Ms Watterson went on to say that there had been a low number of images found, and that they had been assessed as in low categories.
She added that Butler would not oppose a new Sexual Harm Prevention Order being imposed.
Magistrates ordered the defendant to pay the costs at a rate of £10 per week, deducted from benefits.