Did Brenda Leyland Have the Right to Due Process ?

[jassi]

They did Kizzy but imo when the police failed to hand out quickly enough the retribution the compilers so obviously craved they handed it to Sky news.

Well when you've spent all that time and effort compiling these dossiers, to have it discarded is just not good enough, is it? Vindication of your actions is what you want

What really amazes me is why they bothered accumulating all the information.
It clearly didn't achieve what they wanted - prosecution, and rather backfired on them.

[Brietta]

No one knows the pressures suffered by an individual which leads them to despair of their lives and give up by ending it all.

We know from the evidence presented at her inquest that Brenda Leyland had previously attempted suicide; we know that on this occasion her attempt was successful; what we cannot know is what exactly was going through her mind when she went out and purchased the means of ending her life.

As an aside ... she had 'friends' on twitter.  Did any perhaps contact her either with support when she was 'outed' or condemnation for not making a better case?
Or was this fragile and perhaps desperately lonely woman ignored.

Martin Brunt (who did not know her medical history) did speak with her and she spoke with her son (who did know her medical history) who thought she was devastated by being headline news ... but neither man ~ or the neighbour with whom she made arrangements for the care of her cat ~ had an inkling of the action she would take later.

Did Brenda Leyland have the right to due process?
I sincerely think she did.

Why didn't she take it? 
Wasn't her son a lawyer who could have advised her of the best course of action to take in the circumstances?

Something which has been conspicuously absent from this whole internet fest is any comment from Brenda Leyland's family.
There has been no public statement of outrage or any attempt to take legal action against anyone associated with either compiling the hate dossier or anyone revealing her role in the now more than eleven year continual internet onslaught directed at the McCann family.

I think respect for Brenda Leyland's family is sadly lacking by those turning an incredibly sad and troubled woman into an icon for the hatred that burns in their hearts which refuses to allow her to rest in the peace she didn't have in her life.

[John]

I think we have all learned a valuable lesson from the incident and the repercussions which followed and that is not to interfere in what is really an issue which must be decided by the police and ultimately the CPS or its devolved equivalents.  I'm sure we can all agree that trial by media is totally unacceptable?

[John]

No one knows the pressures suffered by an individual which leads them to despair of their lives and give up by ending it all.

We know from the evidence presented at her inquest that Brenda Leyland had previously attempted suicide; we know that on this occasion her attempt was successful; what we cannot know is what exactly was going through her mind when she went out and purchased the means of ending her life.

As an aside ... she had 'friends' on twitter.  Did any perhaps contact her either with support when she was 'outed' or condemnation for not making a better case?
Or was this fragile and perhaps desperately lonely woman ignored.

Martin Brunt (who did not know her medical history) did speak with her and she spoke with her son (who did know her medical history) who thought she was devastated by being headline news ... but neither man ~ or the neighbour with whom she made arrangements for the care of her cat ~ had an inkling of the action she would take later.

Did Brenda Leyland have the right to due process?
I sincerely think she did.

Why didn't she take it? 
Wasn't her son a lawyer who could have advised her of the best course of action to take in the circumstances?

Something which has been conspicuously absent from this whole internet fest is any comment from Brenda Leyland's family.
There has been no public statement of outrage or any attempt to take legal action against anyone associated with either compiling the hate dossier or anyone revealing her role in the now more than eleven year continual internet onslaught directed at the McCann family.

I think respect for Brenda Leyland's family is sadly lacking by those turning an incredibly sad and troubled woman into an icon for the hatred that burns in their hearts which refuses to allow her to rest in the peace she didn't have in her life.

All the more reason he should not have done what he did. Hopefully a lesson learned but unfortunately a hard one for some.

[Brietta]

All the more reason he should not have done what he did. Hopefully a lesson learned but unfortunately a hard one for some.

He was doing his job, John, in the time honoured way rolling news is covered.
There are those who would perhaps revel in the notoriety (apparently you were no-one unless you were named in the dossier).   

If individuals devote their lives to joining a very active hate campaign against named individuals without realising how easy it is to be 'outed' there should be some means of warning them that this is not the case.

I have no doubt Brenda Leland's easy exposure made a few think twice about their internet use ... particularly those who have chosen to 'anonymously' pursue a different abuse target from the McCann family.
Some of whom have committed suicide as a result of suffering such abuse.

The legislation is already in existence to combat internet misuse ... it just isn't being used.

[Lace]

All the supporters here who have been accused of taking part in the dossier seem appalled at the suggestion even though they are also anonymous here and would not be exposed by admitting it. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the actions taken is it ?

I'm not appalled at the suggestion.

They stay anonymous so that crazy abuse threatening morons don't take revenge.

[jassi]

I'm not appalled at the suggestion.

They stay anonymous so that crazy abuse threatening morons don't take revenge.

But were quite happy to behave as   'crazy abuse threatening morons' in the first place.
Perhaps they should have thought about potential consequences before unleashing their ire on others

[G-Unit]

Judging by the comments on this thread no-one has learned anything from what happened imo. I get the impression that if people feel the police and the law don't deal with what IN THEIR OPINION is criminal behaviour then it's OK to use other methods to deal with these 'criminals'.

That includes informing the media and then letting them do as they think fit; after all, it wasn't the fault of the 'concerned citizens' if the media chose to doorstep one of these 'criminals' and broadcast the results, was it.

When tragic consequences follow, it's no-one's fault either because none of them knew they were pursuing a vulnerable person, did they?

Talk about passing the buck!

[Alice Purjorick]

Does behaviour have to be criminal before it is deemed wrong?

Best if it is.
So what are you proposing as an alternative?.
I don't think you would actually like the alternative unless you were on the dispensing end.
But in those circumstances "might is right" and your "might" may not hold sway.

You do sound like an adolescent in a 1950s/1960s dance hall.

[Lace]

I think we have all learned a valuable lesson from the incident and the repercussions which followed and that is not to interfere in what is really an issue which must be decided by the police and ultimately the CPS or its devolved equivalents.  I'm sure we can all agree that trial by media is totally unacceptable?

Trial by media is what started it all John.   People decided the McCann's were guilty and took it upon themselves to try them on media like a pack of crazy mediaeval witches.   Not satisfied with posts proclaiming the McCann's were guilty they formed groups where they met to stir up hatred for the family, then the threats about what should happen to them to get to the 'truth' as they called it.

Still it goes on to this day.

[Lace]

Judging by the comments on this thread no-one has learned anything from what happened imo. I get the impression that if people feel the police and the law don't deal with what IN THEIR OPINION is criminal behaviour then it's OK to use other methods to deal with these 'criminals'.

That includes informing the media and then letting them do as they think fit; after all, it wasn't the fault of the 'concerned citizens' if the media chose to doorstep one of these 'criminals' and broadcast the results, was it.

When tragic consequences follow, it's no-one's fault either because none of them knew they were pursuing a vulnerable person, did they?

Talk about passing the buck!

No nothing has been learned you're right,  they are still at it.

They decided the McCann's were criminals and make it their right to abuse and threaten the family.

Is that ok with you?

[Alice Purjorick]

But were quite happy to behave as   'crazy abuse threatening morons' in the first place.
Perhaps they should have thought about potential consequences before unleashing their ire on others

May the gods preserve us from the zealots.

[Erngath]

Best if it is.
So what are you proposing as an alternative?.
I don't think you would actually like the alternative unless you were on the dispensing end.
But in those circumstances "might is right" and your "might" may not hold sway.

You do sound like an adolescent in a 1950s/1960s dance hall.

If someone has an elderly parent whom they only visit  or contact once or twice a year, then in my opinion that is wrong but not criminal.

If someone skips their place in a queue by barging in front, then in my opinion that is wrong but not criminal.

If a partner cheats on their wife or husband then in my opinion that is wrong but not criminal

If someone posts hate on social media then in my opinion that is wrong and should be a crime.

I do wonder why you feel the need to add sneering personal remarks to other posters.

[Alice Purjorick]

If someone has an elderly parent whom they only visit  or contact once or twice a year, then in my opinion that is wrong but not criminal.

If someone skips their place in a queue by barging in front, then in my opinion that is wrong but not criminal.

If a partner cheats on their wife or husband then in my opinion that is wrong but not criminal

If someone posts hate on social media then in my opinion that is wrong and should be a crime.

I do wonder why you feel the need to add sneering personal remarks to other posters.

See my post.
Your post is living proof you like to dispense not to receive.
QED

[Sunny]

Sorry John I disagree,   the dossier compiler/s did what they thought was right,  they were worried about consequences,   Martin Brunt then [knowing who BL was as she had put her name on the internet]  confronted her about the tweets she and the group she was in were posting on the internet.   Now I am sorry but journalists confront people in this way all the time,  they don't go out and take their life over it.   Are you saying that citizens shouldn't gather information together if they think something bad was going to happen?   What about the boy who tweeted he was going to kill?  His fellow pupils ignored it thinking he was just a weirdo,  he went on to kill how do you think those children feel?   Do you think they are thinking 'if only'.    BL decided to take her own life,  she had attempted it before,  no one is to blame IMO

A few points Lace regarding your post. 

1)the dossier compiler/s did what they thought was right - How would you know if you were not at least aware of the dossier prior to it going to Sky etc.

2) Martin Brunt then [knowing who BL was as she had put her name on the internet]  - NO her name was not "all on the internet" in connection with sweepyface. It took a few other supporters to find out who she is and I have read the thread on how they found her. Martin Brunt was given her full name and that she lived in Leicester(shire)

3) Now I am sorry but journalists confront people in this way all the time,  they don't go out and take their life over it.  - They may confont people all the time but generally not right outside their house and give it a full rolling news every 30 minutes or so, plus the other media screaming TROLL at Brenda Leyland.

4) What about the boy who tweeted he was going to kill?  His fellow pupils ignored it thinking he was just a weirdo,  he went on to kill how do you think those children feel?   - So you think going to the media would save a person's life or wouldn't it be better to go straight to the police and bypass the outing of the person who made the tweets until after they were arrested.

5) BL decided to take her own life,  she had attempted it before,  no one is to blame IMO - you would say that wouldn't you.