UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: DCI on March 20, 2015, 10:17:32 AM
-
http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Brenda-Leyland-inquest-death-McCann-Twitter-troll/story-26194050-detail/story.html (http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Brenda-Leyland-inquest-death-McCann-Twitter-troll/story-26194050-detail/story.html)
Brenda Leyland: Full inquest into death of 'McCann Twitter troll' begins today
By Yasmin_Duffin | Posted: March 20, 2015
The full inquest into the death of a woman who is believed to have sent abusive tweets about the parents of missing youngster Madeleine McCann is due to start today at Leicester Coroner's Court.
Brenda Katheryn Gabrielle Leyland, 63, of Burton Overy, was found dead in a hotel room in Enderby, on Saturday, October 4.
She was named on national television as an internet 'troll' two days earlier, accused of targeting Kate and Gerry McCann with vile messages on Twitter.
It was then that Ms Leyland was confronted on national TV by Sky News presenter Martin Brunt regarding the accusations.
Shortly after, Ms Leyland left her home and rented a room at the Leicester Marriott Hotel, where she was found dead.
READ: 'TWITTER TROLL' BRENDA LEYLAND FOUND DEAD IN HOTEL ROOM
At a pre-inquest review at Leicester town hall in December, coroner Catherine Mason said Mr Brunt and Jonathan Levy, director of news gathering operations at Sky News, would be giving evidence.
Mrs Mason did add that none of the witnesses called to give evidence will have any criminal action taken against them.
Sergeant Kevin Taylor, of Braunstone police station, was the first officer on the scene and found Ms Leyland's body.
Giving evidence at the pre-inquest review, he said her body had been taken to Leicester Royal Infirmary on Sunday and formally identified by family member Michael Leyland.
Mrs Mason asked if foul play had been involved in Ms Leyland's death, to which Sgt Taylor replied: "There did not appear to be. No."
The cause of death is not yet known.
Ms Leyland's tweets included accusations that Mr and Mrs McCann, of Rothley, were involved in their daughter's disappearance.
Posting on Twitter, using the Twitter handle @Sweepyface, her messages included: "I 'hate' cruelty, liars, those who profit from another's tragedy, ergo my 'hate for Kate and Gerry' is justified."
Another post read: "To Kate and Gerry, you will be hated by millions for the rest of your miserable, evil, conniving lives, have a nice day!"
The inquest will also hear from Ben Leyland, one of Ms Leyland's sons.
The inquest will not feature a jury.
863
-
A tweet from someone in the court :
'It was a complex set of chemical results in her blood, which confuses the precise cause of death #mccann #brendaleyland
10:35am - 20 Mar 15'
-
A tweet from someone in the court :
'It was a complex set of chemical results in her blood, which confuses the precise cause of death #mccann #brendaleyland
10:35am - 20 Mar 15'
was she poisoned???
-
Police confirm no criminal tweets sent from @sweepyface Twitter acct prior to 29 Sept.
-
Police confirm no criminal tweets sent from @sweepyface Twitter acct prior to 29 Sept.
well thats really good!!!
-
Inquest to begin into death of 'internet troll' accused of abusing Madeleine McCanns' parents
(http://i.imgur.com/eG38XPQ.gif?1)
By Victoria Ward
Published 20 March 2015
Two journalists will be called as witnesses at inquest of Brenda Leyland
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03062/leylandSon_3062962b.jpg)
Brenda Leyland pictured with her son Ben. He has posted online "I love you, mum. I will miss you forever."
Two Sky News journalists will give evidence today at an inquest into the death of an alleged internet "troll" accused of abusing the parents of Madeleine McCann.
Crime correspondent Martin Brunt and head of newsgathering Jonathan Levy will be called as witnesses into the death of Brenda Leyland.
The 63-year-old's body was found in a hotel room in Leicester last October, two days after she featured in a Sky News report exposing online abuse directed at Kate and Gerry McCann.
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03062/Brenda-Leyland_3062815c.jpg)
She had faced widespread condemnation after being exposed for posting thousands of messages on Twitter attacking the McCanns, whose daughter Madeleine disappeared in Portugal in 2007.
Tweets from the @sweepyface account had said that the McCanns should suffer “for the rest of their miserable lives”.
Mrs Leyland, a mother-of-two from Burton Overy, Leicestershire, was asked by Mr Brunt why she was attacking the couple and responded that she was “entitled to”.
She was informed that she had been reported to the police and that officers were considering an apparent campaign of abuse against the couple by her and other online “trolls”.
She responded that was “fair enough”.
Mr Brunt said he had later been invited into Mrs Leyland’s home, where she told him she had questions for the McCanns but hoped she had not broken the law.
Police officers, a toxicologist and a doctor are also due to give evidence at the one-day hearing, held by Leicester coroner Catherine Mason at Leicester Town Hall.
A pre-inquest hearing heard that no one was facing any criminal action over Mrs Leyland's.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11484562/Inquest-to-begin-into-death-of-internet-troll-accused-of-abusing-Madeleine-McCanns-parents.html
-
how does it feel now mcann supporters brenda made no threats according to police and she was hounded to her death??
-
how does it feel now mcann supporters brenda made no threats according to police and she was hounded to her death??
just 50 abusive texts each day but not threatening...still a nasty piece of work
-
Let's keep comments constructive please.
-
As expected 8(8-))
natalie charlesworth @nataliecharlesw 56 secs56 seconds ago
Psychiatrist now testifying, says she had a mental health condition...#brendaleyland #mccann
-
As expected 8(8-))
natalie charlesworth @nataliecharlesw 56 secs56 seconds ago
Psychiatrist now testifying, says she had a mental health condition...#brendaleyland #mccann
Which makes the targeting of her even more abhorrent.
-
Let's keep comments constructive please.
sorry i had to vent my anger at those who hounded a women to death police said she broke no laws
-
Which makes the targeting of her even more abhorrent.
Was Brenda's mental health condition obvious when she was tweeting? Personally, I'd say so, and I think it's obvious in many of those who spend all day every day tweeting bile about one subject.
-
sorry i had to vent my anger at those who hounded a women to death police said she broke no laws
And a woman apparently with mental health problems.
-
And a woman apparently with mental health problems.
that makes it even worse.... and martin brunt is too coward to say who released the dossier it proves one thing though police said brendas opinion was not criminal so the mcanns nor supporters should never ever mention what we write again it is a opinion which is not against the law it is not hounding or stalking it is having a opinion
-
Was Brenda's mental health condition obvious when she was tweeting? Personally, I'd say so, and I think it's obvious in many of those who spend all day every day tweeting bile about one subject.
Thankfully Alfie your opinion carries no more weight that those of the rest of us.
-
Which makes the targeting of her even more abhorrent.
Did you know she suffered mental problems? No, neither did Brunt, so no targeting someone with mental illness. Nice try though!
-
Thankfully Alfie your opinion carries no more weight that those of the rest of us.
i think the police have given brenda justice those of us who do not live on the mcanns every word already knew that she did nothing wrong
-
Did you know she suffered mental problems? No, neither did Brunt, so no targeting someone with mental illness. Nice try though!
But according to the faithful it was obvious from her tweets.
-
And a woman apparently with mental health problems.
Why do someone's personal circumstances have to be considered when they are using anonymity to pedal their abuse?
-
Why do someone's personal circumstances have to be considered when they are using anonymity to pedal their abuse?
brendas tweets were found legal and not abusive it was her opinion
-
Are we to presume that anyone suffering from Mental Health Problems may do and say exactly as they please?
-
well brendas tweets were found not abusive so get used to it
I think the term used was Not Criminal. Her Tweets were abusive.
-
I think the term used was Not Criminal. Her Tweets were abusive.
do you justify what mcann supporters and martin brunt did to brenda?? martin even today refused to revel who gave him brendas info
-
But according to the faithful it was obvious from her tweets.
Well if the unfaithful knew, why didn't they try and help her. Instead of egging her on so much, things may have been different. So trying to blame either side for her demise is ridiculous.
-
do you justify what mcann supporters and martin brunt did to brenda?? martin even today refused to revel who gave him brendas info
Nothing criminal was done to Brenda by anyone other than herself.
-
do you justify what mcann supporters and martin brunt did to brenda?? martin even today refused to revel who gave him brendas info
Do you condone what Brenda's supporters did to Brenda?
-
Nothing criminal was done to Brenda by anyone other than herself.
she was driven to sucide by people tweeting her abusive tweets for having a opinion about the mcanns do you justify that??
-
Do you condone what Brenda's supporters did to Brenda?
im not like you i dont spend my days stalking every word that people say
-
she was driven to sucide by people tweeting her abusive tweets for having a opinion about the mcanns do you justify that??
Live by the sword, die by the sword, Carly.
-
But according to the faithful it was obvious from her tweets.
I am "The Faithful" now am I?? Am I Martin Brunt too?
-
But according to the faithful it was obvious from her tweets.
When you look at Brenda's tweets Faithlilly is it obvious to you that she was suffering from a mental illness? Honest answer now, please.
-
she was driven to sucide by people tweeting her abusive tweets for having a opinion about the mcanns do you justify that??
If she hadn't tweeted abusive tweets in the first place, none of this would have happened, would it. Who was it that tweeted and named Brenda, which was picked up by the Times. Brunt never named her it was one of her so called Twitter friends.
-
Was Brenda's mental health condition obvious when she was tweeting? Personally, I'd say so, and I think it's obvious in many of those who spend all day every day tweeting bile about one subject.
If that was the case Alfred, don't you think Sky News and Martin Brunt should have been more aware of the risks of doorstepping a woman with such a condition?
My own view is that a complaint had been made in a dossier and as such, it should have been left to the police to deal with it.
-
http://www.itv.com/news/central/update/2015-03-20/alleged-internet-troll-said-im-entitled-to-over-abuse-tweets/ (http://www.itv.com/news/central/update/2015-03-20/alleged-internet-troll-said-im-entitled-to-over-abuse-tweets/)
Alleged internet troll on abuse tweets: 'I'm entitled to'
Sky News reporter Martin Brunt has told the Brenda Leyland inquest that he traced her from a police dossier using basic Internet search techniques.
He and a cameraman waited outside her house and approached her. When Brunt asked her why she was saying things about the McCanns she replied "I'm entitled to."
After the confrontation on camera Brunt stayed in Burton Overy to get shots.
He approached her again later same day and she invited him in for an off camera chat.
Brunt told the inquest Leyland told him she tweeted about McCanns because she had concerns about fundraising.
She seemed relaxed - I offered her the opportunity to do a full interview but she declined. I told Brenda Leyland we would use the "engagement" we'd had outside on camera.....she seemed to accept that. After our meeting Leyland told me over the phone, prior to the news item being aired 'oh I have thought about ending it all but I'm feeling better now - I've had a drink and I've spoken to my son in LA.' I was devastated to find out that Brenda Leyland was dead."
– MARTIN BRUNT, SKY NEWS REPORTER
-
The inquest has resumed in Leicester into the death of an alleged internet troll, Brenda Leyland, who was found dead in a hotel room shortly after she had been challenged by a Sky News reported on-air, about her online attacks against the parents of Madeleine McCann.
The inquest has heard toxicology reports on the body of Brenda Leyland indicated she had consumed alcohol and anti-depressants.
The inquest continues.
=======
Police evidence at inquest into alleged internet troll death
A police sergeant has told the inquest into her death that Brenda Leyland had spent the last days of her life looking online about suicide methods.
Brenda Leyland was 63 and lived at Burton Overy in Leicestershire.
Her family are not at the inquest but several "supporters" are in the public gallery.
-
If that was the case Alfred, don't you think Sky News and Martin Brunt should have been more aware of the risks of doorstepping a woman with such a condition?
My own view is that a complaint had been made in a dossier and as such, it should have been left to the police to deal with it.
totally agree john but this is what happens when people take the law into their own hands
-
Let's face it, Sky News were simply looking for a cheap but visually stirring story when they decided to doorstep Brenda Leyland. They got it but at what a price?
I wonder if a civil action will ensue, I suppose it depends on the coroner?
-
Brenda was subjected to abuse from her Twitter Friends. That must have been devastating in her fragile state of mind.
-
The Coroner has recorded a verdict of suicide in the death of 63 year-old Brenda Leyland from Burton Overy in Leicestershire.
She was found dead in a hotel room after consuming drugs and alcohol, two days after being confronted on Sky News as an alleged poster of internet hate messages about the parents of Madeleine McCann.
http://www.itv.com/news/central/story/2015-03-20/inquest-resumes-into-the-death-of-alleged-internet-troll/ (http://www.itv.com/news/central/story/2015-03-20/inquest-resumes-into-the-death-of-alleged-internet-troll/)
-
Let's face it, Sky News were simply looking for a cheap but visually stirring story when they decided to doorstep Brenda Leyland. They got it but at what a price?
I wonder if a civil action will ensue, I suppose it depends on the coroner?
couldnt brendas sons sue sky news and the mcann supporters who did the dossier in the first place?
-
Why do someone's personal circumstances have to be considered when they are using anonymity to pedal their abuse?
Consensus appears to reflect that it can be assumed that daily obsessive pejorative tweeting castigating others can be considered a sign of severe mental illness.
-
Let's face it, Sky News were simply looking for a cheap but visually stirring story when they decided to doorstep Brenda Leyland. They got it but at what a price?
I wonder if a civil action will ensue, I suppose it depends on the coroner?
I don't think so, nothing to do with the coroner if her family want to or are already taking action.
But you're right, it was just cheap TV to Sky and wouldn't have happened at all if the Pistorious trial had been on.
-
Breakingnews Breakingnews Breakingnews Breakingnews
Being reported on Sky now. That's it over, the verdict is suicide.
The police revealed that she had two cans of helium.Searches on devices were about helium and suicide. She had alcohol, drugs and helium in bloodscreen.
Her son said she had a history of mental illness and had threatened suicide in past. She had convo with son, who thought Sky report had contributed.
She told Brunt on phone that she felt much better and he thought she had just made a throwaway remark.
Psychiatrist said no-one speaking to her would have known about her history of mental illness.
-
I don't think so, nothing to do with the coroner if her family want to or are already taking action.
But you're right, it was just cheap TV to Sky and wouldn't have happened at all if the Pistorious trial had been on.
news channnels love stuff like this
-
Brenda was subjected to abuse from her Twitter Friends. That must have been devastating in her fragile state of mind.
If anything tipped the balance I think that the attacks from people she thought were her friends would be enough to do it.
-
technically since brenda killed herself over threats/bullying when martin brunt already knew she was possibly not well would that make it invoulentary manslaughter for sky/martin brunt/the mcann supporters dossier?
-
technically since brenda killed herself over threats/bullying when martin brunt already knew she was possibly not well would that make it invoulentary manslaughter for sky/martin brunt/the mcann supporters dossier?
She had threatened suicide in the past, was that Brunts fault?
-
Breakingnews Breakingnews Breakingnews Breakingnews
Being reported on Sky now. That's it over, the verdict is suicide.
The police revealed that she had two cans of helium.Searches on devices were about helium and suicide. She had alcohol, drugs and helium in bloodscreen.
Her son said she had a history of mental illness and had threatened suicide in past. She had convo with son, who thought Sky report had contributed.
She told Brunt on phone that she felt much better and he thought she had just made a throwaway remark.
Psychiatrist said no-one speaking to her would have known about her history of mental illness.
The psychiatrist has confirmed that no-one ... for example Martin Brunt ... would have known about her diagnosis.
Time to lay off the man now??
-
So no mention by the coroner regarding the "sceptics" dossier on the McCann supporters then?
-
The psychiatrist has confirmed that no-one ... for example Martin Brunt ... would have known about her diagnosis.
Time to lay off the man now??
Doubt it. This is not a good day for Sky News.
-
and which two people are responsible for Madeleine's predicament alfred ?
You are clearly discontented with the result of the inquest into Mrs Leyland's death ... and we don't know if more than two people are involved in Madeleine's "predicament" as Scotland Yard have been interviewing considerably more than that number ... but time perhaps to get on with things and await the result of your next verdict of interest.
-
Doubt it. This is not a good day for Sky News.
the mcann supporters are stiill trying to justify it
-
Doubt it. This is not a good day for Sky News.
It has been an absolutely rotten time for Martin Brunt who along with the family of the deceased, at least one son, are the individuals most affected by this episode.
It will not impinge in the slightest on Sky News ... and it remains to be seen now that the Coroner's verdict is in what else may be unleashed into the public domain.
-
the mcann supporters are stiill trying to justify it
Yep, they ought to be as critical of Sky News as anyone.
-
technically since brenda killed herself over threats/bullying when martin brunt already knew she was possibly not well would that make it invoulentary manslaughter for sky/martin brunt/the mcann supporters dossier?
You appear to have conveniently missed this comment:
Psychiatrist said no-one speaking to her would have known about her history of mental illness.
unquote
And that includes Martin Brunt.
For all you know it was being turned on and abused by her so called Twitter friends which could have caused her to kill herself. I wonder how they feel now - knowing they turned their backs on her in her hour of need?
-
It has been an absolutely rotten time for Martin Brunt who along with the family of the deceased, at least one son, are the individuals most affected by this episode.
It will not impinge in the slightest on Sky News ... and it remains to be seen now that the Coroner's verdict is in what else may be unleashed into the public domain.
Unleashed by whom?
-
Unleashed by whom?
Isn't there an important documentary due to be released shortly?
-
It has been an absolutely rotten time for Martin Brunt who along with the family of the deceased, at least one son, are the individuals most affected by this episode.
It will not impinge in the slightest on Sky News ... and it remains to be seen now that the Coroner's verdict is in what else may be unleashed into the public domain.
Exactly. Did Brenda concider her sons. Even though estranged from one, who's birthday it was the day she committed suicide. I'm sure he would find this a horrid thing to do to him.
-
Isn't there an important documentary due to be released shortly?
Oh yes, I wonder if the producer was in court today?
-
Isn't there an important documentary due to be released shortly?
&%+((£ Another Channel 5 one?
Or you mean Sonia's?
-
It was the expected verdict.
A news organization confronted a woman who was clearly mentally unstable on the back of a false statement, that she was under police investigation.
So where do you place the blame ?
&%+((£
-
&%+((£ Another Channel 5 one?
Or you mean Sonia's?
Sonia's.
-
Disappointed ?
Hardly.
It was the expected verdict.
A news organization confronted a woman who was clearly mentally unstable on the back of a false statement, that she was under police investigation.
So where do you place the blame ?
&%+((£
No one is to blame, but Brenda. And it wasn't clear she was mentally unstable.You appear to have conveniently missed this comment:
Psychiatrist said no-one speaking to her would have known about her history of mental illness.
unquote
And that includes Martin Brunt.
For all you know it was being turned on and abused by her so called Twitter friends which could have caused her to kill herself. I wonder how they feel now - knowing they turned their backs on her in her hour of need?
-
It was the expected verdict.
A news organization confronted a woman who was clearly mentally unstable on the back of a false statement, that she was under police investigation.
So where do you place the blame ?
&%+((£
i place the blame on the mcann supporters who took the law into their own hands on behalf of the mcanns none of them can ever claim anyone hounds the mcanns ever again
-
Isn't there an important documentary due to be released shortly?
Now that the verdict is in we should be home and dry for all to be revealed ... that was what was promised, I believe.
-
Now that the verdict is in we should be home and dry for all to be revealed ... that was what was promised, I believe.
so exactly as predicted...suicide...history of mental illness...no criticism of Brunt or the dossier compilers
-
so exactly as predicted...suicide...history of mental illness...no criticism of Brunt or the dossier compilers
You seem to leave out the fact that the police said that her tweets were not criminal.
-
Now that the verdict is in we should be home and dry for all to be revealed ... that was what was promised, I believe.
It may be interesting....some tweeters are not accepting the suicide verdict.
I see that Pat Brown also declared yesterday her cessation of blogging on the MM case.
-
You seem to leave out the fact that the police said that her tweets were not criminal.
exactly so she was stalked and harrased for nothing and it led to her death
-
You seem to leave out the fact that the police said that her tweets were not criminal.
I have never suggested her tweets were criminal...abusive...yes....
having said that I would like to see the exact police statement...it is possible that her tweets could have amounted to harassment...which is a criminal offence
-
No one is to blame, but Brenda. And it wasn't clear she was mentally unstable.
Sky pursued her on a false premise.
Namely she was being investigated by the police.
I just noticed on 'sky news', are referring to her as an 'alleged internet troll'.
Then apologize to her family.
Well, is 'brunt' an internet troll ?
-
Sky pursued her on a false premise.
Namely she was being investigated by the police.
I just noticed on 'sky news', are referring to her as an 'alleged internet troll'.
Then apologize to her family.
Well, is 'brunt' an internet troll ?
i would say he is wouldnt you?
-
i would say he is wouldnt you?
Well, why not.
it's all a matter of perspective.
-
It may be interesting....some tweeters are not accepting the suicide verdict.
I see that Pat Brown also declared yesterday her cessation of blogging on the MM case.
Didn't she do that at least once before, Misty?
It is not surprising that the conspiracy theorists are manufacturing a new myth by questioning the coroner's verdict ... as usual the real victims are ignored and sadly there will be no rest for the Leyland family because of their obsessions.
Do they do it on purpose or are they really so insensitive they can't let that family get on with their lives as they should have been able to after today?
-
brenda told martin brunt on the phone after the interview she was sucidal why didnt the coward phone someone and get her help??
-
http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Brenda-Leyland-inquest-McCann-Twitter-troll/story-26205016-detail/story.html
more follows apparently.
-
brenda told martin brunt on the phone after the interview she was sucidal why didnt the coward phone someone and get her help??
This is not true.
-
This is not true.
my word it is
The Sky News presenter who confronted 'Twitter troll' Brenda Leyland has spoken at her inquest of his "devastation" after finding out she had taken her own life days after she had told him she had thought about "ending it all".
Martin Brunt has spoken at the full inquest into Ms Leyland's death, which has been taking place today at the Town Hall, in Leicester.
Ms Leyland took was found dead in a Leicester hotel room on October 4.
Her death came after Mr Brunt had confronted her about abusive tweets she had sent to the Gerry and Kate McCann, following the disappearance of their daughter, Madeline.
Mr Brunt confronted Ms Leyland on September 29.
He told the inquest how he and a cameraman waited outside her home in Burton Overy for three hours, waiting for Ms Leyland to appear.
When Ms Leyland came out of her house, he approached her, along with the cameraman and asked her: "Why are you using your Twitter account to attack the McCanns?"
He told how she initially turned away and then turned back and said: "I'm entitled to".
The following day, on October 1, Mr Brunt called Ms Leyland to tell her the footage would be broadcast.
During the phone call, Ms Leyland said to Mr Brunt: "I have been thinking about ending it all but I'm feeling better now."
Mr Brunt told the inquest how he thought this was just a "throwaway comment".
Coroner Catherine Mason today recorded a verdict of suicide.
Ms Leyland died from a helium overdose.
More follows
-
just to ease your denial here it is in this link
http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Brenda-Leyland-inquest-McCann-Twitter-troll/story-26205016-detail/story.html
-
Didn't she do that at least once before, Misty?
It is not surprising that the conspiracy theorists are manufacturing a new myth by questioning the coroner's verdict ... as usual the real victims are ignored and sadly there will be no rest for the Leyland family because of their obsessions.
Do they do it on purpose or are they really so insensitive they can't let that family get on with their lives as they should have been able to after today?
PB did cease posting for a while previously, but this seems to be as final as Morais.
Sadly, Brietta, I think that Brenda's family were getting on with their own lives well before her demise. It is a sad indictment of today's society that, on the face of it, she had no-one to support her through her last suicidal inclination.
-
just to ease your denial here it is in this link
http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Brenda-Leyland-inquest-McCann-Twitter-troll/story-26205016-detail/story.html
"During the phone call, Ms Leyland said to Mr Brunt: "I have been thinking about ending it all but I'm feeling better now."
Mr Brunt told the inquest how he thought this was just a "throwaway comment".
-
"During the phone call, Ms Leyland said to Mr Brunt: "I have been thinking about ending it all but I'm feeling better now."
Mr Brunt told the inquest how he thought this was just a "throwaway comment".
well if someone told me they were thinking about commiting sucide i would of got them the help they needed why didnt he?? there is no excuse none
-
well if someone told me they were thinking about commiting sucide i would of got them the help they needed why didnt he?? there is no excuse none
Why didn't her friends offer help, instead of making nasty tweets to her, after she was approached by Brunt
-
"During the phone call, Ms Leyland said to Mr Brunt: "I have been thinking about ending it all but I'm feeling better now."
Mr Brunt told the inquest how he thought this was just a "throwaway comment".
Why are you spinning for them?
-
"During the phone call, Ms Leyland said to Mr Brunt: "I have been thinking about ending it all but I'm feeling better now."
Mr Brunt told the inquest how he thought this was just a "throwaway comment".
A rather convenient excuse.
He was warned.
He ignored the warning.
-
A rather convenient excuse.
He was warned.
He ignored the warning.
and now a women is dead yet eleanor went on the defence and said it wasnt true
-
Why are you spinning for them?
good? she said it wasnt true but it is
-
Poulton was at court, apparently as strident and shrieky as usual.
-
"I have no doubt in my mind that the panic and fear that I heard in her voice after the Sky News interview was the final straw that pushed my mum to do what she did.
"She was broken, destroyed. "
8(8-))
-
The inquest heard that between November 2013 and September 2014, Mrs Leyland had sent 2,210 tweets and retweets from the Twitter account @sweepyface, of which 19 per cent related to the McCanns.
Detective Sergeant Steven Hutchings, from Leicestershire Police, confirmed that none of the tweets concerned amounted to a criminal offence.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11485538/Sky-News-reporter-devastated-at-death-of-McCann-Twitter-troll.html
-
"I have no doubt in my mind that the panic and fear that I heard in her voice after the Sky News interview was the final straw that pushed my mum to do what she did.
"She was broken, destroyed. "
8(8-))
yet mcann supporters think what martin did was a good thing to do
-
yet mcann supporters think what martin did was a good thing to do
And you think what you do is a good thing to do.
-
It's a good job kate and Gerry are made of sterner stuff because the amount of abuse they have suffered form posters online...including Brenda ...has been appalling
-
"The team at Sky News followed its editorial guidelines and pursued a story in a responsible manner that we believed was** firmly in the public interest," the statement said.
http://news.sky.com/story/1449183/alleged-mccann-trolls-death-was-suicide
**.In Kate & Gerry's best interests.
-
The inquest heard that between November 2013 and September 2014, Mrs Leyland had sent 2,210 tweets and retweets from the Twitter account @sweepyface, of which 19 per cent related to the McCanns.
Detective Sergeant Steven Hutchings, from Leicestershire Police, confirmed that none of the tweets concerned amounted to a criminal offence.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11485538/Sky-News-reporter-devastated-at-death-of-McCann-Twitter-troll.html
So cutting to the chase: a "high calibre news reporter" sat for three hours outside the house of a mentally disturbed woman, who in 10 months had made ca 500 tweets about the McCanns none of which constituted a criminal offence, waiting for her to come out and interview her. Interview her about what? one might ask. I wonder what he does for an encore?
-
It's a good job kate and Gerry are made of sterner stuff because the amount of abuse they have suffered form posters online...including Brenda ...has been appalling
Brenda didn't abuse them.
If she had it surely would have been harassment, & thus..... a criminal offence.
Detective Sergeant Steven Hutchings, from Leicestershire Police, confirmed that none of the tweets concerned amounted to a criminal offence.
-
So cutting to the chase: a "high calibre news reporter" sat for three hours outside the house of a mentally disturbed woman, who in 10 months had mad ca 500 tweets about the McCanns none of which constituted a criminal offence, waiting for her to come out and interview her. Interview her about what? one might ask. I wonder he does for an encore?
he was also told by brenda she was suicidal and he did nothing
-
So cutting to the chase: a "high calibre news reporter" sat for three hours outside the house of a mentally disturbed woman, who in 10 months had made ca 500 tweets about the McCanns none of which constituted a criminal offence, waiting for her to come out and interview her. Interview her about what? one might ask. I wonder what he does for an encore?
he was doing his job...and for an encore he will continue to do his job
-
By Ashish Joshi, Sky News Correspondent
A Leicester coroner has concluded a woman found dead days after she featured in a Sky News report into online trolling took her own life.
Brenda Leyland was found dead in a Leicester hotel room in October 2014.
An inquest into her death at Leicester's Coroners Court heard witness testimony from a toxicologist, two police officers, Mrs Leyland's former psychiatrist and two Sky News employees.
A written statement from Mrs Leyland's youngest son, Benjamin, was read to the court.
He said: "I have no doubt in my mind that the panic and fear that I heard in her voice after the Sky News interview was the final straw that pushed my mum to do what she did.
"She was broken, destroyed. "
Mr Leyland, who lives in America, described his mother as a woman who "felt it hard to connect with people".
He wrote: "She struggled with depression. She had undergone psychiatric treatment and medicated for anxiety. The court was also told that there had been a previous suicide attempt."
Sky News' Crime Correspondent Martin Brunt who challenged Brenda Leyland about her alleged online trolling in a report for the channel, said he had talked to Mrs Leyland on the telephone after the report was televised.
He said: "I asked her how she was and she said 'Oh, I had thought about ending it all but I'm feeling better, I've had a drink I've spoken to my son who has told me I've been a silly, stupid women."
Mr Brunt was asked by Coroner Catherine Mason if he thought it was a throwaway line.
He replied: "Yes".
Detective Sergeant Steven Hutchings told the court that Mrs Leyland had posted more than 2,000 tweets under the name Sweepyface.
Of these, 424 mentioned Gerry and Kate McCann. The couple's three-year-old daughter Madeleine was taken from the family's Portugal holiday apartment in 2007.
In recording a verdict of suicide, the coroner said: "I'm satisfied although Mrs Leyland had a mental health history, that others would not necessarily have known that she was suffering from mental health (problems).
"She had mentioned wanting to take her own life but then dismissed it. I don't think it could have been known to anybody that there was a definite intention for her to take her own life."
A Sky News statement issued after the coroner's verdict said the broadcaster was confident that no editorial guidelines were breached.
"The team at Sky News followed its editorial guidelines and pursued a story in a responsible manner that we believed was firmly in the public interest," the statement said.
"Brenda Leyland's tragic death highlights the unforeseeable human impact that the stories we pursue can have, and Sky News would like to extend its sincere condolences to her family."
-
he was doing his job...and for an encore he will continue to do his job
And what did his news piece achieve?
People still 'troll' the McCanns, a copper has said it isn't even criminal to do so & a mental woman has topped herself.
Brilliant.
-
And what did his news piece achieve?
People still 'troll' the McCanns, a copper has said it isn't even criminal to do so & a mental woman has topped herself.
Brilliant.
wasnt GA doing his job too yet the mcanns and mcann supports depise him and wish him dead?
-
Isn't freedom of speech a wonderful thing!
-
Well Sky did the nation and the world a real service in exposing a major threat to society as we know it. 424 tweets that did not constitute a criminal offence; like wow man.
Looking at some of the antics on here now one feels akin to The Bishop of Buckingham*.
*That is worth every point I am awarded @)(++(*
-
wasnt GA doing his job too yet the mcanns and mcann supports depise him and wish him dead?
You really need to stop spreading lies Carly!!
-
Well Sky did the nation and the world a real service in exposing a major threat to society as we know it. 424 tweets that did not constitute a criminal offence; like wow man.
Looking at some of the antics on here now one feels akin to The Bishop of Buckingham*.
*That is worth every point I am awarded @)(++(*
8@??)( they love martin brunt dont they
-
By Ashish Joshi, Sky News Correspondent
A Leicester coroner has concluded a woman found dead days after she featured in a Sky News report into online trolling took her own life.
Brenda Leyland was found dead in a Leicester hotel room in October 2014.
An inquest into her death at Leicester's Coroners Court heard witness testimony from a toxicologist, two police officers, Mrs Leyland's former psychiatrist and two Sky News employees.
A written statement from Mrs Leyland's youngest son, Benjamin, was read to the court.
He said: "I have no doubt in my mind that the panic and fear that I heard in her voice after the Sky News interview was the final straw that pushed my mum to do what she did.
"She was broken, destroyed. "
Mr Leyland, who lives in America, described his mother as a woman who "felt it hard to connect with people".
He wrote: "She struggled with depression. She had undergone psychiatric treatment and medicated for anxiety. The court was also told that there had been a previous suicide attempt."
Sky News' Crime Correspondent Martin Brunt who challenged Brenda Leyland about her alleged online trolling in a report for the channel, said he had talked to Mrs Leyland on the telephone after the report was televised.
He said: "I asked her how she was and she said 'Oh, I had thought about ending it all but I'm feeling better, I've had a drink I've spoken to my son who has told me I've been a silly, stupid women."
Mr Brunt was asked by Coroner Catherine Mason if he thought it was a throwaway line.
He replied: "Yes".
Detective Sergeant Steven Hutchings told the court that Mrs Leyland had posted more than 2,000 tweets under the name Sweepyface.
Of these, 424 mentioned Gerry and Kate McCann. The couple's three-year-old daughter Madeleine was taken from the family's Portugal holiday apartment in 2007.
In recording a verdict of suicide, the coroner said: "I'm satisfied although Mrs Leyland had a mental health history, that others would not necessarily have known that she was suffering from mental health (problems).
"She had mentioned wanting to take her own life but then dismissed it. I don't think it could have been known to anybody that there was a definite intention for her to take her own life."
A Sky News statement issued after the coroner's verdict said the broadcaster was confident that no editorial guidelines were breached.
"The team at Sky News followed its editorial guidelines and pursued a story in a responsible manner that we believed was firmly in the public interest," the statement said.
"Brenda Leyland's tragic death highlights the unforeseeable human impact that the stories we pursue can have, and Sky News would like to extend its sincere condolences to her family."
She would still be alive , if not for the indifference and interference of sky news.
For every action, there is a reaction.
-
She would still be alive , if not for the indifference and interference of sky news.
For every action, there is a reaction.
It's no good exercising your right to an opinion if you can't deal with the response.
-
Well Sky did the nation and the world a real service in exposing a major threat to society as we know it. 424 tweets that did not constitute a criminal offence; like wow man.
Looking at some of the antics on here now one feels akin to The Bishop of Buckingham*.
*That is worth every point I am awarded @)(++(*
Woman uses social media, hold the front page!
-
Woman uses social media, hold the front page!
next thing it will be illegal to go to the toliet!!!
-
next thing it will be illegal to go to the toliet!!!
It is, ask George Michael.
-
It's no good exercising your right to an opinion if you can't deal with the response.
The response is correct.
It's time you wake up to reality.
-
The response is correct.
It's time you wake up to reality.
BL exercised her right to freedom of speech - in public.
Media responded.
What is your problem with that?
-
BL exercised her right to freedom of speech - in public.
Media responded.
What is your problem with that?
They claimed she was being investigated by the police.
She wasn't.
Sky LIED.
-
They claimed she was being investigated by the police.
She wasn't.
Sky LIED.
anything to protect the mcanns i noticed today of all days sky said they were sorry as if!!!
-
They claimed she was being investigated by the police.
She wasn't.
Sky LIED.
The police must have investigated her comments to have declared at the inquest that none were deemed to be criminal - thus it seems Sky did not lie.
-
wasnt GA doing his job too yet the mcanns and mcann supports depise him and wish him dead?
he was doing his job but he was crap at it
-
It's no good exercising your right to an opinion if you can't deal with the response.
A person should be able to exercise their right to an opinion without being branded an "evil troll" when the police didn't consider their tweets as criminal.
-
A person should be able to exercise their right to an opinion without being branded an "evil troll" when the police didn't consider their tweets as criminal.
oh didnt you know it is ok to have a opinion as long as you live in a fantasy world and adore the mcanns like they are royals
-
The police must have investigated her comments to have declared at the inquest that none were deemed to be criminal - thus it seems Sky did not lie.
You are wrong on that.
The police already admitted that she wasn't being investigated.
Whatever happened, was after her death.
-
It's quite risible to see the indignation here from some posters re the death of Brenda. For more than seven years the attacks on the McCanns have been a disgrace but as Brenda said...I'm entitled to....
Now suddenly Brenda...the abuser...becomes the victim in some eyes..and anyone who criticises her is evil..absolutely hysterical
-
You are wrong on that.
The police already admitted that she wasn't being investigated.
Whatever happened, was after her death.
So are you saying that no dossier of sceptics comments, including BL's, had been handed to the police?
-
It's quite risible to see the indignation here from some posters re the death of Brenda. For more than seven years the attacks on the McCanns have been a disgrace but as Brenda said...I'm entitled to....
Now suddenly Brenda...the abuser...becomes the victim in some eyes..and anyone who criticises her is evil..absolutely hysterical
She didn't abuse the McCanns, stop spreading lies.
-
It's quite risible to see the indignation here from some posters re the death of Brenda. For more than seven years the attacks on the McCanns have been a disgrace but as Brenda said...I'm entitled to....
Now suddenly Brenda...the abuser...becomes the victim in some eyes..and anyone who criticises her is evil..absolutely hysterical
Madeleine was a victim of her parents stupidity and arrogance.
Brenda was a victim of sky's arrogance after taking the law into their own hands without any justification, than 'seeking a headline'.
-
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5390.0
-
So are you saying that no dossier of sceptics comments, including BL's, had been handed to the police?
Ah you mean the not so anonymous cowards.
That does not mean she was being investigated.
-
You know, Brenda could always have tossed her hair, stated "no comment" and slammed the car door in Brunt's face when doorstepped. She chose not to. She courted Sky.
-
So are you saying that no dossier of sceptics comments, including BL's, had been handed to the police?
The police probably looked at the dossier, filed it away as there was nothing criminal in the comments. Then the dossier compilers were upset because they didn't get the response they expected and then handed it over to Sky News to get their victim.
-
The police probably looked at the dossier, filed it away as there was nothing criminal in the comments. Then the dossier compilers were upset because they didn't get the response they expected and then handed it over to Sky News to get their victim.
absolutely nothing wrong with that...often when the police are powerless to act...naming and shaming of people carrying out abusive behaviour is the next best thing...quite often stops it
-
The police probably looked at the dossier, filed it away as there was nothing criminal in the comments. Then the dossier compilers were upset because they didn't get the response they expected and then handed it over to Sky News to get their victim.
So Brunt has a file containing some pretty awful tweets from several folk and he selected BL & her "innocuous" comments to investigate?
-
absolutely nothing wrong with that...often when the police are powerless to act...naming and shaming of people carrying out abusive behaviour is the next best thing...quite often stops it
Who did she abuse?
Not Kate & Gerry, obviously, because abuse is criminal, isn't it?...... & Brenda commited no offence.
-
absolutely nothing wrong with that...often when the police are powerless to act...naming and shaming of people carrying out abusive behaviour is the next best thing...quite often stops it
So you agree with vigil[ censored word]m or maybe even lynching, that's effective isn't it?
-
It's quite risible to see the indignation here from some posters re the death of Brenda. For more than seven years the attacks on the McCanns have been a disgrace but as Brenda said...I'm entitled to....
Now suddenly Brenda...the abuser...becomes the victim in some eyes..and anyone who criticises her is evil..absolutely hysterical
Mate, selecting just one person for exposure was pure vigil[ censored word]m.
The truth is they and their allies were angry, and that's not responsible broadcasting.
-
Who did she abuse?
Not Kate & Gerry, obviously, because abuse is criminal, isn't it?...... & Brenda commited no offence.
also gerry and kate dont do social media they dont pay attention to it??
-
So Brunt has a file containing some pretty awful tweets from several folk and he selected BL & her "innocuous" comments to investigate?
The police didn't find them criminal! When are you going to understand that?
-
It's quite risible to see the indignation here from some posters re the death of Brenda. For more than seven years the attacks on the McCanns have been a disgrace but as Brenda said...I'm entitled to....
Now suddenly Brenda...the abuser...becomes the victim in some eyes..and anyone who criticises her is evil..absolutely hysterical
What is risible is the number of posts on here by the clairfrigginvoyant complaining about the unfortunate woman having made more than 4000 abusive posts against the McCanns it being internet abuse it is criminal etc etc and when push comes to shove it's only 424 tweets none of which were considered to be a criminal offence.
Oh dear !
-
The police didn't find them criminal! When are you going to understand that?
They'll ignore it all the way.
Read the old thread.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5390.0
Grossly offensive according to Brietta, that's how bleedin clever she is.
-
"I have no doubt in my mind that the panic and fear that I heard in her voice after the Sky News interview was the final straw that pushed my mum to do what she did.
"She was broken, destroyed. "
8(8-))
So why didn't her son get her help at that point? - or tell her to hop on a plane and go and stay with him for a while? The fact that instead - he told her she had been a ''silly stupid woman'' would seem to indicate that he also had no idea that suicide was on the agenda. To blame Martin Brunt for not knowing - when her own son - who I presume knew her history - didn't have a clue - is out of order IMO.
-
Mate, selecting just one person for exposure was pure vigil[ censored word]m.
The truth is they and their allies were angry, and that's not responsible broadcasting.
How do you know what the truth is ........IMO Brenda deserved to be exposed
-
The police didn't find them criminal! When are you going to understand that?
Probably about the 35th of Octember ?>)()<
-
Probably about the 35th of Octember ?>)()<
they live in a fair bit of denial
-
What is risible is the number of posts on here by the clairfrigginvoyant complaining about the unfortunate woman having made more than 4000 abusive posts against the McCanns it being internet abuse it is criminal etc etc and when push comes to shove it's only 424 tweets none of which were considered to be a criminal offence.
Oh dear !
I haven't seen anyone claim the tweets were criminal...abusive...yes...and that's bad enough
-
It's a good job kate and Gerry are made of sterner stuff because the amount of abuse they have suffered form posters online...including Brenda ...has been appalling
The cumulative effect of which cannot be underestimated ... day in ... day out ... every single day for nearly eight years now. How is one to know which are posted by 'harmless' idiots and which are posted by psychopaths intent on carrying out on-line threats?
There is not a single member posting on this forum who would be able to contemplate suffering from such an onslaught although some of us appreciate a little of what it may be like.
-
The police didn't find them criminal! When are you going to understand that?
BL's tweets or all of them?
Please provide a cite if you are claiming the police have looked at the complete dossier & no charges will be forthcoming.
-
So why didn't her son get her help at that point? - or tell her to hop on a plane and go and stay with him for a while? The fact that instead - he told her she had been a ''silly stupid woman'' would seem to indicate that he also had no idea that suicide was on the agenda. To blame Martin Brunt for not knowing - when her own son - who I presume knew her history - didn't have a clue - is out of order IMO.
How do you know he didn't say get on a plane? But what can you really do when you're thousands of miles away? I've been in enough similar situations myself to know there's often little you can do when you're in the same town, never mind another continent.
You're assuming things, Benice.
-
Was that the coroner's conclusion?
As far as has been reported, suicide, but we anna got the whole report yet. It may or may not reveal more.
I will wait before rushing to judgement.
After all the thousands of abusive tweets boiled down to only 424 that could not be considered a criminal offence. That's as funny as Redwood greasing Tannerman The Abductor.
IMO of course.
-
So you agree with vigil[ censored word]m or maybe even lynching, that's effective isn't it?
What does the media in Portugal do every time it gives Goncalo Amaral a platform to spout his "doubts"? How is that different to what Sky did re: Brenda? I'd say being accused on national TV of hiding your child's body is somewhat more serious than being accused of being an internet troll - I trust you are sickened by the PT media's complicity in accusing innocent people who have not been found guilty of any crime?
-
How do you know what the truth is ........IMO Brenda deserved to be exposed
Only if you simultaneously exposed others. She was not a leader - everyone acknowledges this.
If MB had exposed numerous people he wouldn't have had time to sit outside Brenda's house all day, and she wouldn't have been on Sky News every 15 minutes all through the day. She wouldn't have found herself public enemy #1 in the newspapers either.
But it wouldn't have been dirt cheap sensational TV for Sky News then.
-
How do you know he didn't say get on a plane? What can you do when you're thousands of miles away? I've been in enough similar situations myself to know there's often little you can do when you're in the same town, never mind another continent.
You're assuming things, Benice.
He could have made a phone call or two if he was concerned about her - to her doctor maybe - or to a friend? I don't believe he would have told her she'd been stupid and silly if he had any anxiety about what she might do.
-
I haven't seen anyone claim the tweets were criminal...abusive...yes...and that's bad enough
I have.....
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5390.90
-
He could have made a phone call or two if he was concerned about her - to her doctor maybe - or to a friend? I don't believe he would have told her she'd been stupid and silly if he had any anxiety about what she might do.
He may have made phone calls. Who says he told her she'd been stupid and silly?
-
.....and here aswell.
Lord SugarGeverifieerd account @Lord_Sugar
If the McCanns are not on Twitter, question must be asked who pointed out to media the so called trolling of the McCanns by Brenda Leyland
Now that is a very good question.
is it not the duty of the public to report a crime
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5390.210
-
So why didn't her son get her help at that point? - or tell her to hop on a plane and go and stay with him for a while? The fact that instead - he told her she had been a ''silly stupid woman'' would seem to indicate that he also had no idea that suicide was on the agenda. To blame Martin Brunt for not knowing - when her own son - who I presume knew her history - didn't have a clue - is out of order IMO.
You have summed the situation up entirely. We do not know how Brenda Leyland interpreted her son's criticism of her actions ... "silly stupid woman" ... perhaps she took it as further rejection following on from the adverse criticism of her by her on line 'friends'.
However, knowing her and knowing her medical history ... why didn't the alarm bells ring if he was concerned by hearing the tone of her voice ... was there absolutely no-one he could phone in the UK to pop in and give her support?
-
http://coroners.leicester.gov.uk/search-inquests/?entryid78=582748&q=0~LEYLAND~
Case No:
2686/14
Name of Deceased:
LEYLAND, Brenda Kathryn Gabrielle
Gender
Female
Date of Birth:09/06/1951
Age:
63yrs
Town
Burton Overy, Leicestershire
Medical Cause of Death
1a. Asphyxia
1b. Inhalation of helium
2. Citalopram toxicity
Circumstances
Brenda Leyland was found deceased in a hotel room at the Marriott Hotel, Leicester on the 4th October 2014. She had recently been upset by public exposure in the media and had been researching ways to end her life.
Inquest Status
Held
Date Inquest Open08/10/2014
Hearing Date20/03/2015
Hearing Time
10.00
Type of Hearing
Final ( HMC Mrs C.E.Mason ).
Date Inquest Closed20/03/2015
Conclusion
Suicide.
-
He may have made phone calls. Who says he told her she'd been stupid and silly?
[/b]
See below - (in blue)
By Ashish Joshi, Sky News Correspondent
A Leicester coroner has concluded a woman found dead days after she featured in a Sky News report into online trolling took her own life.
Brenda Leyland was found dead in a Leicester hotel room in October 2014.
An inquest into her death at Leicester's Coroners Court heard witness testimony from a toxicologist, two police officers, Mrs Leyland's former psychiatrist and two Sky News employees.
A written statement from Mrs Leyland's youngest son, Benjamin, was read to the court.
He said: "I have no doubt in my mind that the panic and fear that I heard in her voice after the Sky News interview was the final straw that pushed my mum to do what she did.
"She was broken, destroyed. "
Mr Leyland, who lives in America, described his mother as a woman who "felt it hard to connect with people".
He wrote: "She struggled with depression. She had undergone psychiatric treatment and medicated for anxiety. The court was also told that there had been a previous suicide attempt."
Sky News' Crime Correspondent Martin Brunt who challenged Brenda Leyland about her alleged online trolling in a report for the channel, said he had talked to Mrs Leyland on the telephone after the report was televised.
He said: "I asked her how she was and she said 'Oh, I had thought about ending it all but I'm feeling better, I've had a drink I've spoken to my son who has told me I've been a silly, stupid women."
Mr Brunt was asked by Coroner Catherine Mason if he thought it was a throwaway line.
He replied: "Yes".
Detective Sergeant Steven Hutchings told the court that Mrs Leyland had posted more than 2,000 tweets under the name Sweepyface.
Of these, 424 mentioned Gerry and Kate McCann. The couple's three-year-old daughter Madeleine was taken from the family's Portugal holiday apartment in 2007.
In recording a verdict of suicide, the coroner said: "I'm satisfied although Mrs Leyland had a mental health history, that others would not necessarily have known that she was suffering from mental health (problems).
"She had mentioned wanting to take her own life but then dismissed it. I don't think it could have been known to anybody that there was a definite intention for her to take her own life."
A Sky News statement issued after the coroner's verdict said the broadcaster was confident that no editorial guidelines were breached.
"The team at Sky News followed its editorial guidelines and pursued a story in a responsible manner that we believed was firmly in the public interest," the statement said.
"Brenda Leyland's tragic death highlights the unforeseeable human impact that the stories we pursue can have, and Sky News would like to extend its sincere condolences to her family."
-
The cumulative effect of which cannot be underestimated ... day in ... day out ... every single day for nearly eight years now. How is one to know which are posted by 'harmless' idiots and which are posted by psychopaths intent on carrying out on-line threats?
There is not a single member posting on this forum who would be able to contemplate suffering from such an onslaught although some of us appreciate a little of what it may be like.
Don't read it.
Simples!
-
You have summed the situation up entirely. We do not know how Brenda Leyland interpreted her son's criticism of her actions ... "silly stupid woman" ... perhaps she took it as further rejection following on from the adverse criticism of her by her on line 'friends'.
However, knowing her and knowing her medical history ... why didn't the alarm bells ring if he was concerned by hearing the tone of her voice ... was there absolutely no-one he could phone in the UK to pop in and give her support?
Maybe he did, and maybe they couldn't find her. She was in a hotel remember, and it happened quickly (less than 24 hrs after Brenda was in the newspapers).
-
What I don't get is if Martin Brunt is the Big Bad Wolf in all of this why was Brenda confiding in him after the event? Did he call her to check she was OK?
-
[/b]
See below - (in blue)
By Ashish Joshi, Sky News Correspondent
A Leicester coroner has concluded a woman found dead days after she featured in a Sky News report into online trolling took her own life.
Brenda Leyland was found dead in a Leicester hotel room in October 2014.
An inquest into her death at Leicester's Coroners Court heard witness testimony from a toxicologist, two police officers, Mrs Leyland's former psychiatrist and two Sky News employees.
A written statement from Mrs Leyland's youngest son, Benjamin, was read to the court.
He said: "I have no doubt in my mind that the panic and fear that I heard in her voice after the Sky News interview was the final straw that pushed my mum to do what she did.
"She was broken, destroyed. "
Mr Leyland, who lives in America, described his mother as a woman who "felt it hard to connect with people".
He wrote: "She struggled with depression. She had undergone psychiatric treatment and medicated for anxiety. The court was also told that there had been a previous suicide attempt."
Sky News' Crime Correspondent Martin Brunt who challenged Brenda Leyland about her alleged online trolling in a report for the channel, said he had talked to Mrs Leyland on the telephone after the report was televised.
He said: "I asked her how she was and she said 'Oh, I had thought about ending it all but I'm feeling better, I've had a drink I've spoken to my son who has told me I've been a silly, stupid women."
Mr Brunt was asked by Coroner Catherine Mason if he thought it was a throwaway line.
He replied: "Yes".
Detective Sergeant Steven Hutchings told the court that Mrs Leyland had posted more than 2,000 tweets under the name Sweepyface.
Of these, 424 mentioned Gerry and Kate McCann. The couple's three-year-old daughter Madeleine was taken from the family's Portugal holiday apartment in 2007.
In recording a verdict of suicide, the coroner said: "I'm satisfied although Mrs Leyland had a mental health history, that others would not necessarily have known that she was suffering from mental health (problems).
"She had mentioned wanting to take her own life but then dismissed it. I don't think it could have been known to anybody that there was a definite intention for her to take her own life."
A Sky News statement issued after the coroner's verdict said the broadcaster was confident that no editorial guidelines were breached.
"The team at Sky News followed its editorial guidelines and pursued a story in a responsible manner that we believed was firmly in the public interest," the statement said.
"Brenda Leyland's tragic death highlights the unforeseeable human impact that the stories we pursue can have, and Sky News would like to extend its sincere condolences to her family."
&%&£(+ That's from a 3rd party.
-
Jerry Lawton @JerryLawton · 31m 31 minutes ago
Police: Mrs Leyland's tweets were not criminal but some messages she was sent by trolls after her TV exposure still under investigation
-
[/b]
See below - (in blue)
By Ashish Joshi, Sky News Correspondent
A Leicester coroner has concluded a woman found dead days after she featured in a Sky News report into online trolling took her own life.
Brenda Leyland was found dead in a Leicester hotel room in October 2014.
An inquest into her death at Leicester's Coroners Court heard witness testimony from a toxicologist, two police officers, Mrs Leyland's former psychiatrist and two Sky News employees.
A written statement from Mrs Leyland's youngest son, Benjamin, was read to the court.
He said: "I have no doubt in my mind that the panic and fear that I heard in her voice after the Sky News interview was the final straw that pushed my mum to do what she did.
"She was broken, destroyed. "
Mr Leyland, who lives in America, described his mother as a woman who "felt it hard to connect with people".
He wrote: "She struggled with depression. She had undergone psychiatric treatment and medicated for anxiety. The court was also told that there had been a previous suicide attempt."
Sky News' Crime Correspondent Martin Brunt who challenged Brenda Leyland about her alleged online trolling in a report for the channel, said he had talked to Mrs Leyland on the telephone after the report was televised.
He said: "I asked her how she was and she said 'Oh, I had thought about ending it all but I'm feeling better, I've had a drink I've spoken to my son who has told me I've been a silly, stupid women."
Mr Brunt was asked by Coroner Catherine Mason if he thought it was a throwaway line.
He replied: "Yes".
Detective Sergeant Steven Hutchings told the court that Mrs Leyland had posted more than 2,000 tweets under the name Sweepyface.
Of these, 424 mentioned Gerry and Kate McCann. The couple's three-year-old daughter Madeleine was taken from the family's Portugal holiday apartment in 2007.
In recording a verdict of suicide, the coroner said: "I'm satisfied although Mrs Leyland had a mental health history, that others would not necessarily have known that she was suffering from mental health (problems).
"She had mentioned wanting to take her own life but then dismissed it. I don't think it could have been known to anybody that there was a definite intention for her to take her own life."
A Sky News statement issued after the coroner's verdict said the broadcaster was confident that no editorial guidelines were breached.
"The team at Sky News followed its editorial guidelines and pursued a story in a responsible manner that we believed was firmly in the public interest," the statement said.
"Brenda Leyland's tragic death highlights the unforeseeable human impact that the stories we pursue can have, and Sky News would like to extend its sincere condolences to her family."
Did Mr Leyland omit from his letter to the court that he had had a telephone conversation with his mother?
-
Maybe he did, and maybe they couldn't find her. She was in a hotel remember, and it happened quickly (less than 24 hrs after Brenda was in the newspapers).
If that was the case don't you think he would have mentioned his efforts on his mother's behalf?
-
Don't read it.
Simples!
they love the drama of it all
-
Jerry Lawton @JerryLawton · 31m 31 minutes ago
Police: Mrs Leyland's tweets were not criminal but some messages she was sent by trolls after her TV exposure still under investigation
That'll be the decent kind folk who pray for the McCanns who were going to rape her to death, I'd imagine.
-
&%&£(+ That's from a 3rd party.
What are the penalties for lying to the Coroner in Court?
-
If that was the case don't you think he would have mentioned his efforts on his mother's behalf?
Coroners don't necessarily make all information public or read aloud every word of statements, so he may have said more than the court heard.
-
That'll be the decent kind folk who pray for the McCanns who were going to rape her to death, I'd imagine.
thats them
-
Coroners don't necessarily make all information public or read aloud every word of statements, so he may have said more than the court heard.
I'm sure all will be revealed in the fullness of time.
-
&%&£(+ That's from a 3rd party.
It's a direct quote from Martin Brunt's evidence to the court.
I'm disappointed in you Lyall. I really didn't have you down as one of those sceptics who believe without question anything said which suits their agenda, but deals with anything said that doesn't suit it - by immediately questioning the speaker's veracity. (If that is what you are doing. Apols if I've got that wrong.)
Surely if Martin Brunt had wanted to lie - he would have omitted to tell the Inquest about BL's 'ending it all' comments to him altogether?
-
Coroner Catherine Mason said “all proper guidelines” had been followed by Sky News in their coverage of the story and gave a conclusion of suicide.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-sky-news-journalist-5371486#ICID=sharebar_twitter
-
Coroner Catherine Mason said “all proper guidelines” had been followed by Sky News in their coverage of the story and gave a conclusion of suicide.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-sky-news-journalist-5371486#ICID=sharebar_twitter
Yes, & Sky said the story was 'in the public interest'
Woman uses twitter.
That's worth dying for.
-
Coroner Catherine Mason said “all proper guidelines” had been followed by Sky News in their coverage of the story and gave a conclusion of suicide.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-sky-news-journalist-5371486#ICID=sharebar_twitter
This bit is inaccurate "An inquest into Mrs Leyland’s death was told she sent more than 400 tweets related to the tragic case in just 10 months - more than one a day." All Brenda's tweets concerned the case directly or indirectly.
-
Yes, & Sky said the story was 'in the public interest'
Woman uses twitter.
That's worth dying for.
One of your more puerile remarks ... Brenda Leyland committed suicide ... whether or not you think that is worth dying for ... that is the choice she made, no-one made it for her.
-
Alfie seems to have the bit between his teeth about how right and brilliant he is.
Having got bored I trolled trawled through the first dozen pages or so of this thread. So to shine lights from under the bushel [which is always amusing with hindsight] we have in no particular order but bear in mind the lady only made 424 tweets against the McCanns none of which tweets constituted a criminal offence.
Davel October 31st 2014
Brenda Leyland deserved to be outed by Brunt..IMO...she chose to spend all day tweeting abuse towards the mccanns...she brought it on herself
Jean-Pierre Nov 2nd 2014
And confusion and bafflement that she had such an incredible secret obsession. 4500. That is four and half thousand tweets about a family she did not know.
And yours truly never having been known to backward in coming forward:
31st Oct 2014.
The coroner is duty bound to investigate circumstances surrounding the death and give a verdict and report. A coroners inquest is carried out in the public interest. The real point I was driving at is whether or not that investigation into the circumstances will be a) as minimal as some would have or b) as far reaching as others would have. My view is that the coroner will do what she is obliged to do under the law and I would not bet on how far it will go because I don't have the information she will have so second guessing whilst the oxygen of life for a forum like this is in real terms a somewhat fruitless exercise. IMHO of course.
Then let's add this from the latest BBC report
None of the messages sent by Mrs Leyland were directed personally at the McCanns, who have "no significant presence" on social media.
Before the cohorts of the faithful get on their high horses I am just quoting from "sauces" @)(++(*
Anyone with a brain will know exactly what I am doing and it is neither defending Brenda Leyland nor castigating Drs McCann 8(>((
Say no more!
-
Alfie seems to have the bit between his teeth about how right and brilliant he is.
Having got bored I trolled trawled through the first dozen pages or so of this thread. So to shine lights from under the bushel [which is always amusing with hindsight] we have in no particular order but bear in mind the lady only made 424 tweets against the McCanns none of which tweets constituted a criminal offence.
Davel October 31st 2014
Brenda Leyland deserved to be outed by Brunt..IMO...she chose to spend all day tweeting abuse towards the mccanns...she brought it on herself
Jean-Pierre Nov 2nd 2014
And confusion and bafflement that she had such an incredible secret obsession. 4500. That is four and half thousand tweets about a family she did not know.
And yours truly never having been known to backward in coming forward:
31st Oct 2014.
The coroner is duty bound to investigate circumstances surrounding the death and give a verdict and report. A coroners inquest is carried out in the public interest. The real point I was driving at is whether or not that investigation into the circumstances will be a) as minimal as some would have or b) as far reaching as others would have. My view is that the coroner will do what she is obliged to do under the law and I would not bet on how far it will go because I don't have the information she will have so second guessing whilst the oxygen of life for a forum like this is in real terms a somewhat fruitless exercise. IMHO of course.
Then let's add this from the latest BBC report
None of the messages sent by Mrs Leyland were directed personally at the McCanns, who have "no significant presence" on social media.
Before the cohorts of the faithful get on their high horses I am just quoting from "sauces" @)(++(*
Anyone with a brain will know exactly what I am doing and it is neither defending Brenda Leyland nor castigating Drs McCann 8(>((
Say no more!
I have seen enough of Brenda's tweets to feel comfortable criticising her.... tweets were personally directed at the McCanns but not to them...perhaps the BEEB have been misquoted
-
It's a direct quote from Martin Brunt's evidence to the court.
I'm disappointed in you Lyall. I really didn't have you down as one of those sceptics who believe without question anything said which suits their agenda, but deals with anything said that doesn't suit it - by immediately questioning the speaker's veracity. (If that is what you are doing. Apols if I've got that wrong.)
Surely if Martin Brunt had wanted to lie - he would have omitted to tell the Inquest about BL's 'ending it all' comments to him altogether?
It lacks context, and if it was said to MB it still doesn't prove it was said to BL. That's what I mean.
It's not a massive point anyway, a few words from a conversation aren't much use in summarising the entire conversation or conversations are they.
-
Alfie seems to have the bit between his teeth about how right and brilliant he is.
Having got bored I trolled trawled through the first dozen pages or so of this thread. So to shine lights from under the bushel [which is always amusing with hindsight] we have in no particular order but bear in mind the lady only made 424 tweets against the McCanns none of which tweets constituted a criminal offence.
Davel October 31st 2014
Brenda Leyland deserved to be outed by Brunt..IMO...she chose to spend all day tweeting abuse towards the mccanns...she brought it on herself
Jean-Pierre Nov 2nd 2014
And confusion and bafflement that she had such an incredible secret obsession. 4500. That is four and half thousand tweets about a family she did not know.
And yours truly never having been known to backward in coming forward:
31st Oct 2014.
The coroner is duty bound to investigate circumstances surrounding the death and give a verdict and report. A coroners inquest is carried out in the public interest. The real point I was driving at is whether or not that investigation into the circumstances will be a) as minimal as some would have or b) as far reaching as others would have. My view is that the coroner will do what she is obliged to do under the law and I would not bet on how far it will go because I don't have the information she will have so second guessing whilst the oxygen of life for a forum like this is in real terms a somewhat fruitless exercise. IMHO of course.
Then let's add this from the latest BBC report
None of the messages sent by Mrs Leyland were directed personally at the McCanns, who have "no significant presence" on social media.
Before the cohorts of the faithful get on their high horses I am just quoting from "sauces" @)(++(*
Anyone with a brain will know exactly what I am doing and it is neither defending Brenda Leyland nor castigating Drs McCann 8(>((
Say no more!
Apart from the 423 tweets which mention the McCanns by name what were the rest of her tweets about? Sunshine and flowers?
-
Maybe he did, and maybe they couldn't find her. She was in a hotel remember, and it happened quickly (less than 24 hrs after Brenda was in the newspapers).
No Lyall, it wasn't less than 24 hours. It was 4 days after the report.
An inquest into the death of 'Twitter troll' Brenda Leyland, who sent abusive messages to the family of Madeleine McCann, has found that she overdosed on helium days after she was confronted by a Sky News reporter about the tweets.
The full inquest into the death of Brenda Kathryn Gabrielle Leyland was held in Leicester's town hall today after she was found dead in a room at the Marriott Hotel, in Enderby, on October 4, 2014.
The 63-year-old, of Burton Overy was found in the room "lying on her back", next to an iPad and two helium cannisters.
Sergeant Kevin Taylor, who now works at Loughborough police station, but was based at Braunstone at the time, was the first officer on the scene and found Ms Leyland's body.
He told the inquest that on the iPad found in the room with Ms Leyland, a website was open, which detailed how somebody could take their life using helium.
Coroner Catherine Mason asked Sgt Taylor whether the scene in the bedroom "mirrored the instructions that could be seen on the iPad screen" to which Sgt Taylor replied: "Yes".
Sgt Taylor also confirmed he was "completely satisfied" that no third party was involved and it was "all planned by herself".
There was no suicide note found in the hotel room or Ms Leyland's home.
The inquest heard that Ms Leyland had been "researching how to take her own life" from September 30 until October 2 on her laptop and iPad.
Her death came after she had been "publicly exposed" by Sky News on September 30, when she was confronted by presenter Martin Brunt about the abusive tweets she had sent to Gerry and Kate McCann.
From November 13 until September 29, Ms Leyland posted or re-tweeted more than 400 tweets, using the Twitter handle @Sweepyface directly mentioning the McCanns.
Mr Brunt told how he and a cameraman waited outside Ms Leyland's home for three hours before she came outside and they approached her, after he had received a dossier containing the tweets from Ms Leyland.
When Mr Brunt asked Ms Leyland why she was using her Twitter account to attack the McCanns, she said: "I'm entitled to."
Mr Brunt then said to her "are you aware that your tweets are within a dossier that has been passed to Scotland Yard," to which Ms Leyland replied: "That's fair enough".
Later in the day, Mr Brunt said Ms Leyland invited him into her home, where they spoke but she refused to be filmed.
Mr Brunt said: "She acknowledged that she was @Sweepyface and said she probably wouldn't Tweet again."
Mr Brunt told Ms Leyland that he would keep Ms Leyland informed as to when the footage of her outside her home would be broadcast.
The following day, on October 1, Mr Brunt said Ms Leyland told him on the phone that she had "thought about ending it all".
"I said I'd call her and I did," said Mr Brunt.
"When I asked her whether she was OK, she said she's thought about ending it all but had then had a drink and spoken to her son in Los Angeles and she was feeling better."
Mr Brunt told the inquest that he believed her comments about "ending it" to be a "throwaway remark".
He said he was "devastated" upon hearing the news that Ms Leyland had died.
During the inquest, it was confirmed that a criminal offence had not taken place with regards to Ms Leyland's tweets.
It was also confirmed that after consideration the journalist had not committed a criminal offence.
Concluding the inquest Mrs Mason said the cause of death was "suicide" by "inhalation of helium".
Mrs Mason said: "Ms Leyland had recently been upset by public exposure by the media.
"I am in no doubt that Ms Leyland planned this and carried out all the planning."
A statement read out from Ms Leyland's youngest son Ben Leyland, said: "I have no doubt in my mind that the panic and fear heard in her voice when she confided in me after the Sky News interview was the final straw that pushed my mum into doing what she did.
"She was broken, a wreck and completely destroyed by what had occurred".
Psychologist, Doctor Kajetan Zakrzewski, who had previously consulted Ms Leyland told the inquest that she had "reoccurring depression" and "unstable emotional personality traits".
Read more: http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Brenda-Leyland-inquest-McCann-Twitter-troll/story-26206590-detail/story.html#ixzz3Ux5CXSFj (http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Brenda-Leyland-inquest-McCann-Twitter-troll/story-26206590-detail/story.html#ixzz3Ux5CXSFj)
Follow us: @Leicester_Merc on Twitter | leicestermercury on Facebook
-
Virtually every single one of Brenda's tweets mentions #McCann so it is somewhat puzzling that the coroner concluded that only 424 were against the McCanns. In their own way they were ALL against the McCanns and / or their supporters.
-
2 days after the TV reports, DCI. One day after the newspaper articles that followed TV. The confrontation was on the 29th, but not broadcast until the 2nd.
-
2 days after the TV reports, DCI. One day after the newspaper articles that followed TV. The confrontation was on the 29th, but not broadcast until the 2nd.
OK but still not less than 24 hours.
Seems she was already upset by a neighbour.
Before the Sky News approach, she had been upset by a “fractious” dispute with a neighbour over an issue concerning a wall.
-
Apart from the 423 tweets which mention the McCanns by name what were the rest of her tweets about? Sunshine and flowers?
I was just going by what Mr Policeman reportedly said in the Coroners Court with respect to tweets against Drs McCann.
Now if you know better than he who am I to argue?
-
This isn't how it was first reported either. In the Mail:
'I said I hoped I hadn't ruined her day, and she said I hadn't ruined her day - but her life.'
-
I was just going by what Mr Policeman reportedly said in the Coroners Court with respect to tweets against Drs McCann.
Now if you know better than he who am I to argue?
I would argue that Mr Policeman perhaps didn't fully comprehend fully the context of many of Brenda's tweets or what she was tweeting about. After all, to the outsider the #McCann tag is like some sort of horrific online Bedlam, hard to follow, and full of very peculiar IDs and personalities, tweeting bile and gibberish to one another.
-
Virtually every single one of Brenda's tweets mentions #McCann so it is somewhat puzzling that the coroner concluded that only 424 were against the McCanns. In their own way they were ALL against the McCanns and / or their supporters.
Mr McCann said he had not read the Sweepyface tweets...
"We do not have any significant presence on social media or online and I've got grave concerns about our children as they grow up and start to access the internet in an unsupervised capacity.
"People are threatening to kidnap our children, people are threatening violence against Kate and myself."
http://news.sky.com/story/1346687/gerry-mccann-says-make-example-of-web-trolls
...Not Brenda though, she did nothing wrong.
-
I'm sure all will be revealed in the fullness of time.
From the Mail:
"On October 2, I was aware the story had broken. I tried to contact my mother without success, I discussed with my dad and brothers going round to check she was OK."
-
I would argue that Mr Policeman perhaps didn't fully comprehend fully the context of many of Brenda's tweets or what she was tweeting about. After all, to the outsider the #McCann tag is like some sort of horrific online Bedlam, hard to follow, and full of very peculiar IDs and personalities, tweeting bile and gibberish to one another.
Ah! the thrust of your argument is that poor old plod botched the job he had been given?
Any ideas what else the police and coroners officer may have botched in this inquest?
*&*%£
-
Ah! the thrust of your argument is that poor old plod botched the job he had been given?
Any ideas what else the police and coroners officer may have botched in this inquest?
*&*%£
perhaps the policeman couldn't give a toss and hadn't researched it too much...to him...a depressed woman commits suicide...he needs to be dealing with all those murderers and terrorists we have been hearing about
-
perhaps the policeman couldn't give a toss and hadn't researched it too much...to him...a depressed woman commits suicide...he needs to be dealing with all those murderers and terrorists we have been hearing about
Or finding Maddie.
-
Or finding Maddie.
Indeed.
Not 'JOB DONE' then.
-
Ah! the thrust of your argument is that poor old plod botched the job he had been given?
Any ideas what else the police and coroners officer may have botched in this inquest?
*&*%£
Botched is not the word I used.
-
The BBC headline on the interactive service, says all about the media in this case.
' McCann 'troll' suicide '
The standard of the media is truly reflected, in a real grieving family.
-
Botched is not the word I used.
OK then Slippery Alf, the cop who gave evidence said 424 tweets in a ten month period that were "against the McCanns" for want of a better expression. You suggest it is more. Why do you disbelieve the policeman who gave evidence?
-
OK then Slippery Alf, the cop who gave evidence said 424 tweets in a ten month period that were "against the McCanns" for want of a better expression. You suggest it is more. Why do you disbelieve the policeman who gave evidence?
Against the mccanns ..for want of a better expression..everything is open to interpretation...you however see everything in black and white....there is no black and white
-
I love the way the way they all huddle together.
When I was a lot younger I read a book entitled Fate is the Hunter by Ernest K Gann a pioneer in commercial flight. The work starts with a quotation which is rather apposite when one looks at the current posts by the faithful.
As near as I can remember it is:
There is a raven in the eastern sea called Yitai (dull head). This dullhead cannot fly very high and seems rather stupid. It hops only a short distance and nestles close with others of its kind. In going forward it dare not lead in going back it dare not lag behind.................. well I can't be arsed with the rest I am sure you get the picture.
8(>((
-
I love the way the way they all huddle together.
When I was a lot younger I read a book entitled Fate is the Hunter by Ernest K Gann a pioneer in commercial flight. The work starts with a quotation which is rather apposite when one looks at the current posts by the faithful.
As near as I can remember it is:
There is a raven in the eastern sea called Yitai (dull head). This dullhead cannot fly very high and seems rather stupid. It hops only a short distance and nestles close with others of its kind. In going forward it dare not lead in going back it dare not lag behind.................. well I can't be arsed with the rest I am sure you get the picture.
8(>((
We get the picture...but it isn't the one you thought you had painted
-
Now we know Brenda had mental problems. When I suggested this months and months ago my post was deleted. Now we also know it was not only depression but also a personality disorder.
This case has united lots of lonely people who otherwise had no friends but interest in Madeleine's case has provided them with 'new friends'.
-
Now we know Brenda had mental problems. When I suggested this months and months ago my post was deleted. Now we also know it was not only depression but also a personality disorder.
This case has united lots of lonely people who otherwise had no friends but interest in Madeleine's case has provided them with 'new friends'.
well because of certian people who only care about the mcanns a lonley women couldnt go on how sad
-
well because of certian people who only care about the mcanns a lonley women couldnt go on how sad
Couldn't go on doing what exactly?
It seems her life was filled only with the McCanns stories and she spent her days writing tweets about the McCanns. Even her Christmas Day, if I remember well..
-
well because of certian people who only care about the mcanns a lonley women couldnt go on how sad
Brenda Leyland was a well educated intelligent woman who enjoyed a middle class lifestyle. She made her own choices and no-one is to blame either for the state of her health or for her death ... as the coroner made very clear today.
Just because you do not like the coroner's verdict ... is no reason to make accusations which quite frankly are verging on the absurd.
Some of the posts you have made on this thread today are way beyond what can be considered reasonable.
-
OK then Slippery Alf, the cop who gave evidence said 424 tweets in a ten month period that were "against the McCanns" for want of a better expression. You suggest it is more. Why do you disbelieve the policeman who gave evidence?
Because I can read and have access to the entire pitiful catalogue of Sweepface's tweets, as do you. Many of those tweets may not look like attacks on the McCanns and / or their family and supporters to the uninitiated (eg the policeman who gave evidence), but to those who have been following this case closely for years it's very evident that there were way more than 424 tweets aimed at the McCanns. I don't expect you to agree, you seldom do.
-
I love the way the way they all huddle together.
When I was a lot younger I read a book entitled Fate is the Hunter by Ernest K Gann a pioneer in commercial flight. The work starts with a quotation which is rather apposite when one looks at the current posts by the faithful.
As near as I can remember it is:
There is a raven in the eastern sea called Yitai (dull head). This dullhead cannot fly very high and seems rather stupid. It hops only a short distance and nestles close with others of its kind. In going forward it dare not lead in going back it dare not lag behind.................. well I can't be arsed with the rest I am sure you get the picture.
8(>((
You are such an intilekshul. I love the way you lord it over us huddled sheep with your pompous pronouncements, vast knowledge of absolutely everything, with an apposite quotation for every occasion, you truly are a marvel.
-
Couldn't go on doing what exactly?
It seems her life was filled only with the McCanns stories and she spent her days writing tweets about the McCanns. Even her Christmas Day, if I remember well..
and you dont find that sad??? mcann supporters are so cold
-
You are such an intilekshul. I love the way you lord it over us huddled sheep with your pompous pronouncements, vast knowledge of absolutely everything, with an apposite quotation for every occasion, you truly are a marvel.
I know Alfie. My rubbish does not have to be up to much to outclass the opposition on here.
Maybe you should you try to up your game rather than try to trash everyone who don't agree with you?
Or maybe the faithful should try to not make themselves such easy targets?
-
I know Alfie. My rubbish does not have to be up to much to outclass the opposition on here.
Maybe you should you try to up your game rather than try to trash everyone who don't agree with you?
Or maybe the faithful should try to not make themselves such easy targets?
its been a bad day for then police have said none of brendas tweets were in anyway illegal so therefore anyone tweeting about the mcanns or talking about them on forums are doing nothing wrong
-
and you dont find that sad??? mcann supporters are so cold
You are aware that you are obsessed with the 'supporters'.. This is a criminal case, not a football match.
Of course it is sad that someone has decided to end their life. McCanns are not to blame for Brenda's destiny. They weren't even aware that Brenda existed. Same as they are not aware about me and you.
-
You are such an intilekshul. I love the way you lord it over us huddled sheep with your pompous pronouncements, vast knowledge of absolutely everything, with an apposite quotation for every occasion, you truly are a marvel.
And witty with it 8((()*/
-
its been a bad day for then police have said none of brendas tweets were in anyway illegal so therefore anyone tweeting about the mcanns or talking about them on forums are doing nothing wrong
I don't follow your logic, Carly.
Are you saying that if, e.g., X had not been indicted for robbing a bank, that no bank robbery occurred?
-
I would like to see the exact statement made by the police officer..In general police don't decide what amounts to criminal action courts do...and I am not convinced Brenda made only 400 or so tweets
-
I would like to see the exact statement made by the police officer..In general police don't decide what amounts to criminal action courts do...and I am not convinced Brenda made only 400 or so tweets
No, nor am I. Apart from attacking McCann Supporters and witnesses, that is.
-
No, nor am I. Apart from attacking McCann Supporters and witnesses, that is.
It really doesn't matter how many tweets she tweeted. What does matter is that none of them constituted a criminal offence.
-
It really doesn't matter how many tweets she tweeted. What does matter is that none of them constituted a criminal offence.
I don't think that has ever been decided...do you have the exact quote made by the police at the inquest
-
I don't think that has ever been decided...do you have the exact quote made by the police at the inquest
If I posted it davel would you believe it ?
-
If I posted it davel would you believe it ?
believe what
-
believe what
The quote.
This is from the inquest report of Ramdomleigh, a rabid supporter :
First witness to be heard is Sgt Hutchinson he's not the officer who attended the hotel though he's been investigating @sweepyface twitter activity and whether a crime was committed. Sgt Hutchinson concludes that, no crime was committed. This I found confusing, did he mean in relation to @sweepyface twitter activity only and NOT everything that was contained in dossier?
-
The quote.
This is from the inquest report of Ramdomleigh, a rabid supporter :
First witness to be heard is Sgt Hutchinson he's not the officer who attended the hotel though he's been investigating @sweepyface twitter activity and whether a crime was committed. Sgt Hutchinson concludes that, no crime was committed. This I found confusing, did he mean in relation to @sweepyface twitter activity only and NOT everything that was contained in dossier?
so you don't have a direct quote from the police officer...an officer who we are led to believe says sweepyface only made just over 400 tweets when there is a site that claims it has her 4000 plus tweets...that's why I would like to know exactly what he said
-
'Detective Sergeant Steven Hutchings, from Leicestershire Police, confirmed that none of the tweets concerned amounted to a criminal offence.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11485538/Sky-News-reporter-devastated-at-death-of-McCann-Twitter-troll.html
She did nothing wrong dave.
Get over it.
-
The inquest heard between November 2013 and September 2014, using the Twitter ID @sweepyface, she had tweeted or retweeted 2,210 posts, of which 424 mentioned the McCanns. Her tweets did not constitute a criminal offence, the inquest heard.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/mar/20/sky-news-mccann-brenda-leyland
-
The inquest heard between November 2013 and September 2014, using the Twitter ID @sweepyface, she had tweeted or retweeted 2,210 posts, of which 424 mentioned the McCanns. Her tweets did not constitute a criminal offence, the inquest heard.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/mar/20/sky-news-mccann-brenda-leyland
I was just about to post that.
No doubt dave will continue doubting, he knows best about everything dontcha know.
-
so you don't have a direct quote from the police officer...an officer who we are led to believe says sweepyface only made just over 400 tweets when there is a site that claims it has her 4000 plus tweets...that's why I would like to know exactly what he said
You have been told by both sceptic's and the faithful NO CRIMINAL OFFENSE WAS PERPETRATED.
This is beginning to look more and more like you trying to assuage your conscience davel. Have you been justifying to yourself a certain course of action by believing that you were punishing a criminal act ?
-
'Detective Sergeant Steven Hutchings, from Leicestershire Police, confirmed that none of the tweets concerned amounted to a criminal offence.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11485538/Sky-News-reporter-devastated-at-death-of-McCann-Twitter-troll.html
She did nothing wrong dave.
Get over it.
Still no direct quote.....I think her posts were abusive...that's wrong in my book but no doubt perfectly acceptable to you...
In the same article he also said....
The inquest heard that between November 2013 and September 2014, Mrs Leyland had sent 2,210 tweets and retweets from the Twitter account @sweepyface, of which 19 per cent related to the McCanns.
Tweets from the account had said that the McCanns should suffer “for the rest of their miserable lives”.
As her tweeting started in 2010, the 4500 figure seems correct
-
You have been told by both sceptic's and the faithful NO CRIMINAL OFFENSE WAS PERPETRATED.
This is beginning to look more and more like you trying to assuage your conscience davel. Have you been justifying to yourself a certain course of action by believing that you were punishing a criminal act ?
I couldn't care whether they were criminal or not... they were a disgrace... Brenda was a victim of mental illness from what we have heard....if the tweets were as a result of her illness then I have sympathy for her but it could be she was just plain nasty
-
I was just about to post that.
No doubt dave will continue doubting, he knows best about everything dontcha know.
It don't matter a rats ass what he thinks or posts it's what was recorded at the inquest that will count and as the media are pretty consistent on what that was .......
-
It don't matter a rats ass what he thinks or posts it's what was recorded at the inquest that will count and as the media are pretty consistent on what that was .......
Where is the 'fingers in the ears' smiley when you need it ! @)(++(*
-
The McCanns, they have told us, don't read Twitter and Mrs Leyland, as far as we are aware, had no direct contact with with them so how can she be accused of harassing them ?
you need to read the relevant legislation...whether the mccanns read it or not they were being harassed...it's impossible to justify her behaviour...she was wrong to do what she did...people need to understand that
Except they weren't though, were they dave. No offence.
-
Except they weren't though, were they dave. No offence.
still no quote
-
still no quote
She commited no offence, dave.
End of.
-
Except they weren't though, were they dave. No offence.
just because the likes of dave dont like what we write about the mcanns it doesnt make it illegal and the court made that clear yesterday
-
No, nor am I. Apart from attacking McCann Supporters and witnesses, that is.
That has been two way process.
and if you are being affair, you will admit that.
-
just because the likes of dave dont like what we write about the mcanns it doesnt make it illegal and the court made that clear yesterday
no they didn't and everyone apart from you realises that
-
Still no direct quote.....I think her posts were abusive...that's wrong in my book but no doubt perfectly acceptable to you...
In the same article he also said....
The inquest heard that between November 2013 and September 2014, Mrs Leyland had sent 2,210 tweets and retweets from the Twitter account @sweepyface, of which 19 per cent related to the McCanns.
Tweets from the account had said that the McCanns should suffer “for the rest of their miserable lives”.
As her tweeting started in 2010, the 4500 figure seems correct
Cite please. 8(0(*
-
I couldn't care whether they were criminal or not... they were a disgrace... Brenda was a victim of mental illness from what we have heard....if the tweets were as a result of her illness then I have sympathy for her but it could be she was just plain nasty
As are many mccann supporter tweets and 'comments' elsewhere.
Or do they beneath your radar ?
-
Cite please. 8(0(*
http://www.buzzfeed.com/patricksmith/read-the-deleted-tweets-brenda-leyland-sent-the-mccanns#.miJrWyZxa
-
As are many mccann supporter tweets and 'comments' elsewhere.
Or do they beneath your radar ?
I don't condone either side
-
http://www.buzzfeed.com/patricksmith/read-the-deleted-tweets-brenda-leyland-sent-the-mccanns#.miJrWyZxa
Total please.
That link seems to bye rather random.
-
You attacked what she said.
the police said brendas tweets were not against the law so that means ALL of our opinions about the mcanns are npt either we are allowed to say what we like doesnt matter if the mcanns or supporters dont like it %£&)**#
-
In ten months, she sent or retweeted 424 posts directly related to the McCann's.
Her son also said his mother displayed ‘erratic and sometimes vicious behaviour’ and could alienate those close to her.
-
In ten months, she sent or retweeted 424 posts directly related to the McCann's.
Her son also said his mother displayed ‘erratic and sometimes vicious behaviour’ and could alienate those close to her.
Then your conscience is clear DCI.
-
In ten months, she sent or retweeted 424 posts directly related to the McCann's.
Her son also said his mother displayed ‘erratic and sometimes vicious behaviour’ and could alienate those close to her.
However, not to the McCann's.
Let's face it, we have been told the McCann's pay no attention to social media.
-
Then your conscience is clear DCI.
It is, can you say the same about yours?
-
It is, can you say the same about yours?
Absolutely.
I'm glad to say I have no one's death on my conscience.
-
Absolutely.
I'm glad to say I have no one's death on my conscience.
Nor do I. What are you implying?
-
It doesn't matter a rat's ass what is recorded.....nothing will come from the inquest despite posters here thinking Brunt might face criminal charges...the dossier compilers were about to be exposed and tried for murder...talk about detached from reality. The result was exactly as I predicted...Davel right again
I don't think you mean that! The consensus of the media is that it was recorded Ms Leyland made 424 tweets against the Drs McCann and none constituted a criminal offence. Quite a long way from some of the rantings in the first 20 pages of this thread yourself included.
-
I don't think you mean that! The consensus of the media is that it was recorded Ms Leyland made 424 tweets against the Drs McCann and none constituted a criminal offence. Quite a long way from some of the rantings in the first 20 pages of this thread yourself included.
Indeed.
Some people have a vivid imagination.
-
I don't think you mean that! The consensus of the media is that it was recorded Ms Leyland made 424 tweets against the Drs McCann and none constituted a criminal offence. Quite a long way from some of the rantings in the first 20 pages of this thread yourself included.
424 in 10 months, I presume for just 2014.. The other 4,000 odd over 3 years.
-
424 in 10 months, I presume for just 2014.. The other 4,000 odd over 3 years.
Have you read all her tweets ?
-
Have you read all her tweets ?
Wouldn't you have to before you can include them in a dossier ?
-
I don't think you mean that! The consensus of the media is that it was recorded Ms Leyland made 424 tweets against the Drs McCann and none constituted a criminal offence. Quite a long way from some of the rantings in the first 20 pages of this thread yourself included.
With respect Alice when did media reports get everything absolutely correct?
You and I know that they are a guide to events ... but they are not Gospel ... and so often when official papers are published, the reporter's account can be found wanting.
In Scotland the PF decides what will and will not be prosecuted ... In England I believe it is the CPS?? So let's wait and see what happens.
-
I don't think you mean that! The consensus of the media is that it was recorded Ms Leyland made 424 tweets against the Drs McCann and none constituted a criminal offence. Quite a long way from some of the rantings in the first 20 pages of this thread yourself included.
Yes I do mean that...it is of no importance...right or wrong...the moving finger writes and having written moves on...I think it was Lou Reed who said that...it will be tomorrows chip paper...not sure who said that..
The 20 pages are destined for the bin too
-
Wouldn't you have to before you can include them in a dossier ?
No I just copied and pasted them
-
I don't think you mean that! The consensus of the media is that it was recorded Ms Leyland made 424 tweets against the Drs McCann and none constituted a criminal offence. Quite a long way from some of the rantings in the first 20 pages of this thread yourself included.
I posted this on 26th Oct......5 months ago
there were lots of events in BL's life that caused her suicide
Pretty well bang on don't you think
-
I feel like I am having to teach a child...the police gave a figure from 2012 to present day...Brenda started tweeting in 2010
December 21 2010, apparently.
-
December 21 2010, apparently.
She tweeted three times in 2010, twice in 2011, twice in 2012. Disappeared from February 2012 reappeared and started tweeting re Mccanns 30th October 2013. Seems most of those tweets were in one year.
According to BS list.
-
'She tweeted three times in 2010, twice in 2011, twice in 2012.'
Gosh, 7 tweets in 3 years!
Harrassment if ever there were.
-
the police said brendas tweets were not against the law so that means ALL of our opinions about the mcanns are npt either we are allowed to say what we like doesnt matter if the mcanns or supporters dont like it %£&)**#
But that works both ways Carly. By the same token it doesn't matter whether you don't like what 'supporters' say about the McCanns as - according to you - if it's not against the law people can say what they like about them whether other people (such as yourself) like it or not.
So perhaps you should stop slagging off 'supporters' for simply doing what you yourself are now telling us is absolutely fine for everyone to do. i.e. voicing an opinion on the McCanns - whether you like that opinion or not.
To do otherwise would make you appear more than a tad hypocritical imo.
-
I don't think you mean that! The consensus of the media is that it was recorded Ms Leyland made 424 tweets against the Drs McCann and none constituted a criminal offence. Quite a long way from some of the rantings in the first 20 pages of this thread yourself included.
The consensus of the media is that Brenda was a troll
-
'She tweeted three times in 2010, twice in 2011, twice in 2012.'
Gosh, 7 tweets in 3 years!
Harrassment if ever there were.
Once is too often WS ! Don't you know the McCanns have children, aunties, second cousins twice removed 8()(((@# What if they happened upon her tweets while looking for an appropriate bible quotation ? Have you no heart ?????? 8()(((@# 8()(((@# 8()(((@#
-
Once is too often WS ! Don't you know the McCanns have children, aunties, second cousins twice removed 8()(((@# What if they happened upon her tweets while looking for an appropriate bible quotation ? Have you no heart ?????? 8()(((@# 8()(((@# 8()(((@#
@)(++(*
-
'She tweeted three times in 2010, twice in 2011, twice in 2012.'
Gosh, 7 tweets in 3 years!
Harrassment if ever there were.
Yes, do you know where she was for 20 months? By the way those tweets were not McCann related.
So her 4600 posts were made in just under one year.
-
Brenda is championed as a "sceptic" martyr, whose tweeting history, let's face it, ain't all that different from many of the other "well-respected" sceptics who use twitter to promulgate their beliefs. Why is it, do you think, that Brenda's son was so shocked and dismayed when he read his mother's 4000+ tweets? What was it about them that caused HIM distress?
-
Brenda is championed as a "sceptic" martyr, whose tweeting history, let's face it, ain't all that different from many of the other "well-respected" sceptics who use twitter to promulgate their beliefs. Why is it, do you think, that Brenda's son as so shocked and dismayed when he read his mother's 4000+ tweets? What was it about them that caused HIM distress?
Where?
When?
-
not when there are people like Brenda ...spreading and encouraging hatred
When did she do that?
-
not when there are people like Brenda ...spreading and encouraging hatred
There are McCann supporters who have did done exactly that.
When do you criticize them.
She was threatened as well.
-
There are McCann supporters who have did done exactly that.
When do you criticize them.
She was threatened as well.
First... I haven't seen it..Brenda is well publicised..second Brenda could have walked away..the twins can't
-
First... I haven't seen it..Brenda is well publicised..second Brenda could have walked away..the twins can't
Of course you haven't.
Even though examples have been given on this forum before, and are widely available on the net.
&%&£(+ &%&£(+ &%&£(+
-
Of course you haven't.
Even though examples have been given on this forum before, and are widely available on the net.
&%&£(+ &%&£(+ &%&£(+
There is a massive difference between abusing a virtual person and a real person...simple
-
There is a massive difference between abusing a virtual person and a real person...simple
yoiu are very strange there are real people on a computer what is wrong with you seriously??? brenda was a real person and was hounded to her death
-
yoiu are very strange there are real people on a computer what is wrong with you seriously??? brenda was a real person and was hounded to her death
I don't think I can explain it any simpler
-
are posters here seriously saying that Brenda Leyland "only" made 400 odd tweets? Really?
-
are posters here seriously saying that Brenda Leyland "only" made 400 odd tweets? Really?
Only 400 of her tweets directly mentioned Kate and/or Gerry McCann.
-
Only 400 of her tweets directly mentioned Kate and/or Gerry McCann.
and police had no problem with her tweets so she broke no laws
-
By name? Ah I see.
Well lets look at what she was doing on new years eve 2013:
None of these tweets mention the McCanns by name, but all relate to the case.
The problem is that Brenda Leyland apparently could not live with the social stigma attached to what she had been doing, and chose to take her own life. Incredibly sad but it was at her own hand.
These would mean nothing to anyone not au fait with the lexicon.
For example ... there is no one on this thread who doesn't get the inference here ..."Okay so lets have the Parish that the priest is in charge of, because it would appear he has been on a long Sabbatical...???" ... in October 2013 I would not have had a clue.
So do the police have the time to learn and understand #mccann language?
-
j-P, why would the police officer be interested in the tweets that didn't mention the McCanns?
-
j-P, why would the police officer be interested in the tweets that didn't mention the McCanns?
the fact is every single one of her tweets mentioned #mccann
-
Anyone any views on why it was that Brenda's son was so shocked and dismayed when he read his mother's 4000+ tweets? What was it about them that caused HIM distress?
-
Unless someone presses charges against the person/s who is/are harassing and causing them distress, there would be no charge to answer, would there?
Also.. someone not knowing the seriousness of the accusations they were making on their tweets, due to a mental health issue could hardly be held accountable IMO.
-
Mentally ill or not BL knew fine well what she was doing and what she was tweeting imo,her words to mr brunt (i'm entitled )
-
Mentally ill or not BL knew fine well what she was doing and what she was tweeting imo,her words to mr brunt (i'm entitled )
You may well be correct, Pinkblossoms, but since she was no longer in a position to be questioned about her reasons for the tweets against the McCann family, we will never know for sure, why she done it.
It was not the way a respected lady would normally behave, of that I am sure.
Of course it will continue to be discussed, but a little sensitivity, would not go astray. It is early days still.
-
If Madeleine is ever found alive & re-united with her family, what do you suppose her opinion will be of the British public?
-
If Madeleine is ever found alive & re-united with her family, what do you suppose her opinion will be of the British public?
British public on the whole or those against her family?
-
British public on the whole or those against her family?
A bit of both, I suppose. Those against her family, those who have allowed the lies & abuse to continue unchecked, those who have profited from her plight, etc.
-
A bit of both, I suppose. Those against her family, those who have allowed the lies & abuse to continue unchecked, those who have profited from her plight, etc.
Oh dear! What a confused little girl she would be. However being back with her family would help her overcome the pain that many things would cause her.
-
Mentally ill or not BL knew fine well what she was doing and what she was tweeting imo,her words to mr brunt (i'm entitled )
"Entitled to post her opinion" might have been what she meant by that, perhaps..............within the law, as others do?
-
"Entitled to post her opinion" might have been what she meant by that, perhaps..............within the law, as others do?
I see the 'B' blog last night, firmly placed the blame for Brenda's death where it belongs.
and that person will have to live with what he's done, as will the organization behind him.
-
I see the 'B' blog last night, firmly placed the blame for Brenda's death where it belongs.
and that person will have to live with what he's done, as will the organization behind him.
I wouldn't lose any sleep if I was Brunt and I doubt if he will
-
I see (as predicted) the Coroner is now getting it in the neck in some quarters because the Inquest didn't go how some sceptics wanted it to. Apparently she is just a puppet who chose to sit on the fence!
Pathetic - but so predictable.
-
I see the 'B' blog last night, firmly placed the blame for Brenda's death where it belongs.
and that person will have to live with what he's done, as will the organization behind him.
So what, in your opinion, should have happened?
Should Brenda Leyland have been entirely immune from any critisism, and free to say whatever she wanted?
-
I see (as predicted) the Coroner is now getting it in the neck in some quarters because the Inquest didn't go how some sceptics wanted it to. Apparently she is just a puppet who chose to sit on the fence!
Pathetic - but so predictable.
The coroner did what she was paid to do no more no less.
Conspiracy theory nutters abound on both sides of the fence some crazier than others. Mostly they don't have the brains or good grace to acknowledge that which is a plain as a pikestaff should it fly in the face of their preconceived ideas.
It ever was thus and ever more shall be so; why be surprised?
-
The coroner did what she was paid to do no more no less.
Conspiracy theory nutters abound on both sides of the fence some crazier than others. Mostly they don't have the brains or good grace to acknowledge that which is a plain as a pikestaff should it fly in the face of their preconceived ideas.
It ever was thus and ever more shall be so; why be surprised?
good to see I was pretty well spot on
-
I wouldn't lose any sleep if I was Brunt and I doubt if he will
Of course, you wouldn't lose any sleep because you and Brunt are obviously two people with no conscience.
-
Of course, you wouldn't lose any sleep because you and Brunt are obviously two people with no conscience.
and you obviously have very poor judgement...Brunt is not to blame...Brenda had a history of mental illness...so who was to blame for her previous attempt...her son...her husband
-
good to see I was pretty well spot on
You weren't. You thought the day being her son's birthday was no coincidence. Did the coroner say a word to support your theory?
-
You weren't. You thought the day being her son's birthday was no coincidence. Did the coroner say a word to support your theory?
I was...I said she would have a history of mental illness....I said Brunt would not be criticised...I said the dossier compilers would not be criticised...it may well be that her sons birthday was pertinent
-
just a reminder from october
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/son-madeleine-mccann-troll-defends-4393728
The grieving son of a woman who took her own life after being branded a troll says “no-one has a clue” what she was really like.
Churchgoing Brenda Leyland tweeted 4,220 times about the McCann family over the disappearance of their three-year-old daughter, Madeline, in 2007.
The divorcee’s messages accused Madeleine’s parents Gerry and Kate, both 46, of neglect and a cover-up over the disappearance of their daughter in Praia da Luz, Portugal.
The 63-year-old was found dead at a Leicestershire hotel - days after she was confronted outside her home by Sky News.
Brenda's younger son Ben, 20, a musician, was last night preparing to fly home from Los Angeles, where he is studying.
He told reporters yesterday: “I’m not engaging. None of you have any clue about my mother or her legacy.”
Ben had earlier paid tribute to his mother, writing on Twitter: “I am love and I am light, thanks to you.
"I love you mum and I will miss you forever.”
Brenda, of Burton Overy, Leics, had two sons from her marriage. She was said to be estranged from her eldest boy Dan.
She used her @sweepyface Twitter handle to rail against Gerry and Kate McCann, both 46, about their conduct following the disappearance of their daughter while on holiday in Praia da Luz, Portugal, in 2007.
AFP/Getty
Most of the 4,500 tweets sent from her account were about the McCann case and she had accused the parents of profiting from their daughter’s disappearance as well as objecting to their frequent media appearances.
Hundreds of people have called for justice for a woman who was found dead after writing abusive messages on Twitter about the parents of Madeleine McCann.
Social media users have formed a group on Facebook demanding that a public enquiry be opened into the death of Brenda.
Some Twitter users said there was "little abusive about her tweets" while others suggested she had been unfairly singled out by the media.
Brenda – who had reportedly attended Goldsmith’s at the University of London - was approached at her home by Sky News reporter Martin Brunt last week about her online comments, but defended herself, saying “I’m entitled to do that”.
Before her body was found on Saturday, neighbours said they had not seen her since Thursday and one warned the Leicester Mercury newspaper they were “worried for her safety”.
Brenda’s Facebook page shows she had a keen passion for animals, frequently posting photos of dogs and cats, as well as pictures of her entry into a local scarecrow competition last year.
In June 2012 she posted an album of pictures with Ben from when she paid a visit to him in Los Angeles.
Police confirmed they attended the hotel on Saturday and found the body of a woman. The incident is not being treated as suspicious.
Police were probing a dossier of vile tweets targeting the parents of Madeleine, who has never been found after disappearing aged 3 during a family holiday in Portugal in May 2007.
Ben Leyland/Facebook
Ben Leyland's Facebook page
Kate and Gerry have been subjected to disgusting attacks by trolls, some of whom have suggested the couple be tortured of killed.
The dossier, which includes 80 tweets, Facebook posts and forum messages, was handed to the Metropolitan Police by members of the public who feared for the McCann's safety.
One message board comment reportedly said: "These 2 [the McCanns] should burn in hell."
Sky News said other posts in the dossier included:"I hope that the McCanns are living in total misery" and "I want to see them smashed up the back of a bus or trampled by horses".
Some messages were said to have been directed at Madeleine's younger siblings, now aged nine.
The posts were gathered by people who are concerned about the abuse.
One campaigner, who did not wish to be named, told Sky News: "We're very worried that it's only going to take somebody to act out of some of these discussions, some of the threats that have been made, and we couldn't live with ourselves if that happened and we had done nothing."
PA Madeleine McCann, as British police returned to Portugal
The material is being assessed by officers who are liaising with prosecutors and the missing girl's family.
The McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell said the couple – who have nine-year-old twins Sean and Amelie –were aware of the news. He added: “Kate and Gerry will not be saying anything. It is entirely a matter for the police.”
Mrs Leyland’s neighbours in Burton Overy, Leics, became concerned about the “good, friendly” god-fearing woman after she was unveiled as a troll.
She disappeared in her 4x4 and had not been seen since.
One resident said: “While I wouldn’t condone what Brenda is accused of doing I am worried for her safety, she has apparently fled the village.”
Locals were shocked by Mrs Leyland’s online profile.
One man said: “She’s a lovely woman and a good friend. She’s a churchgoer.” Another said: “She’s an educated woman. She should know better."
A Scotland Yard spokesman said: "We can confirm we received a letter and documentation on September 9 which was passed to officers from Operation Grange. They are assessing its contents and consulting with the CPS and the McCann family."
Operation Grange is the name for the Metropolitan Police's involvement in the search for Madeleine.
She went missing in Portugal when aged three in May 2007.
So-called trolling is a mounting problem for the authorities.
Last year Scotland Yard said around 1,500 additional crimes linked to internet abuse were being reported to the force each year
-
You weren't. You thought the day being her son's birthday was no coincidence. Did the coroner say a word to support your theory?
It is not a coroner's job to determine WHY someone was killed/committed suicide.
-
The latest 'B' Blog places this case into the right context with the blame placed fairly where it belongs.
I wonder how brunt can look at himself in the mirror every day with a clear conscience, knowing what he did triggered Brenda Leyland's death.
-
A bit of both, I suppose. Those against her family, those who have allowed the lies & abuse to continue unchecked, those who have profited from her plight, etc.
You mean such as Summers and Swan ?
As to the mccanns, they made their bed, now they have to lie in it.
It is Madeleine you should have sympathy for, not those who left her and her siblings by themselves.
-
So what, in your opinion, should have happened?
Should Brenda Leyland have been entirely immune from any critisism, and free to say whatever she wanted?
She has committed no offense.
She was not directly communicating to the mccanns.
What part of that, don't you understand ?
-
I wouldn't lose any sleep if I was Brunt and I doubt if he will
Look at the photo on the 'B' Blog.
Can you therefore explain why he disappeared from Skt TV for several weeks after her death ?
-
She has committed no offense.
She was not directly communicating to the mccanns.
What part of that, don't you understand ?
Do you think she would have directly communicated with The McCanns if she could have done?
-
Do you think she would have directly communicated with The McCanns if she could have done?
On that Eleanor, I don't know.
A lot of people will say things on there as blank statements, letting out their innermost thoughts it seems.
However, when it comes to the crunch, if it comes to directly communicating to people they attack, most will shy away.
It is best to steer away from social media, unless you use it to broadcast charitable causes or the equivalent, as i have occasionally done.
-
I was...I said she would have a history of mental illness....I said Brunt would not be criticised...I said the dossier compilers would not be criticised...it may well be that her sons birthday was pertinent
Of course, the fact that her face was shown on television every 15 minutes, her identity given out and called a vile troll (which wasn't true) in all the newspapers, feeling isolated, totally helpless and with no means to defend herself had nothing to do with it. You'll do anything to excuse the bast*rds who went after her and pushed her over the edge, won't you?
She was to be sacrificed by the MSM. It was a lynching of someone who was not even being investigated, as the police said that she did nothing criminal. An example had to be made but it backfired.
-
Of course, the fact that her face was shown on television every 15 minutes, her identity given out and called a vile troll (which wasn't true) in all the newspapers, feeling isolated, totally helpless and with no means to defend herself had nothing to do with it. You'll do anything to excuse the bast*rds who went after her and pushed her over the edge, won't you?
She was to be sacrificed by the MSM. It was a lynching of someone who was not even being investigated, as the police said that she did nothing criminal. An example had to be made but it backfired.
Excellent post Montclair. 8@??)( 8@??)( 8@??)(
-
The latest 'B' Blog places this case into the right context with the blame placed fairly where it belongs.
I wonder how brunt can look at himself in the mirror every day with a clear conscience, knowing what he did triggered Brenda Leyland's death.
BL told him it had been a pleasure to meet him. Would you say that to someone who'd just put you on the path to suicide?
Martin Brunt has nothing to reproach himself for - as BL herself obviously didn't have anything against him.
But I do wonder what her twitter 'friends' who turned on her with such venom think of themselves now - when they remember back to how badly they treated her.
-
Brenda Leyland has to have been Investigated for The Police to say that she had not committed a Criminal Offence.
Whether or not she committed a Moral Offence is another matter.
-
Brenda Leyland has to have been Investigated for The Police to say that she had not committed a Criminal Offence.
Whether or not she committed a Moral Offence is another matter.
After her death.
That is known already.
-
BL told him it had been a pleasure to meet him. Would you say that to someone who'd just put you on the path to suicide?
Martin Brunt has nothing to reproach himself for - as BL herself obviously didn't have anything against him.
But I do wonder what her twitter 'friends' who turned on her with such venom think of themselves now - when they remember back to how badly they treated her.
Why don't you give the full quote of what she said.
You can evade the issue all you want.
Brunt and Sky were vigilantes, using the dossier, compiled by cowards who try to hide behind anonymity themselves (oh the irony of that), to pursue a woman who hadn't committed a crime.
Enough said.
-
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/11082550_344230445765577_2213160795514636147_n.jpg?oh=ff544bd460b765dd493d5748baf8ad21&oe=5579ABEB&__gda__=1437339226_01f7713354fa152682e9c35754a5a6aa)
-
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/11082550_344230445765577_2213160795514636147_n.jpg?oh=ff544bd460b765dd493d5748baf8ad21&oe=5579ABEB&__gda__=1437339226_01f7713354fa152682e9c35754a5a6aa)
However, he had no problem exposing Brenda Leyland.
Now why is that ?
-
After her death.
That is known already.
Are you saying that The Police who had the dossier before her death, hadn't actually looked into it?
-
Why don't you give the full quote of what she said.
You can evade the issue all you want.
Brunt and Sky were vigilantes, using the dossier, compiled by cowards who try to hide behind anonymity themselves (oh the irony of that), to pursue a woman who hadn't committed a crime.
Enough said.
Carry on deluding yourself that the coroner didn't know what she talking about and neither did her psychiatrist or her son - who even after talking to her still had no idea of what she was going to do. IIRC her son was looking into getting her legal advice.
The ongoing attempts to blame Martin Brunt - a complete stranger - for not suspecting what her own family didn't suspect are ridiculous - not to mention desperate.
Handing evidence of possible lawbreaking to the police is not a crime. IIRC another dossier was handed in from sceptics. Are they cowards too in your eyes Stephen?
-
It seems fairly clear that the police reported to the coroner that Ms Leyland made 424 tweets against the Drs McCann none of which was a criminal offence.
Ms Leyland committed suicide by asphyxiation using helium not long after being "doorstepped" by Martin Brunt.
We don't have access to the full coroners report yet, indeed if there is to be narrative at all.
That's about it in a nut shell. What else is there to discuss?
-
It seems fairly clear that the police reported to the coroner that Ms Leyland made 424 tweets against the Drs McCann none of which was a criminal offence.
Ms Leyland committed suicide by asphyxiation using helium not long after being "doorstepped" by Martin Brunt.
We don't have access to the full coroners report yet, indeed if there is to be narrative at all.
That's about it in a nut shell. What else is there to discuss?
The inquest verdict is in ... now it is my opinion that it is of concern only to Brenda Leyland's family and any real friends she may have had who have been left to pick up the pieces.
They never knew her 'Sweepyface' persona.
-
However, he had no problem exposing Brenda Leyland.
Now why is that ?
Who may have had a vested interest in exposing her?
-
She never committed any offence.
That is a matter of record.
-
I apologize if the reported inquest details have already been posted. I will let you decide on how accurate they are.
I notice that Sonia Poulton was there too.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Brenda_Leyland.htm
-
I apologize if the reported inquest details have already been posted. I will let you decide on how accurate they are.
I notice that Sonia Poulton was there too.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Brenda_Leyland.htm
Reading her son's statement made me feel so sad. Here was a woman hounded to her death for the simple reason that she didn't believe the McCanns.
-
I apologize if the reported inquest details have already been posted. I will let you decide on how accurate they are.
I notice that Sonia Poulton was there too.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Brenda_Leyland.htm
Thanks Anna. Reading that some people should definitely be feeling foolish/embarrassed for what they wrote about Brenda's son here and elsewhere.
-
I don't believe the McCanns, either, but I don't take my disbelief to extremes that she did.
-
Grim reading 8(8-)) RIP.
-
Thanks Anna. Reading that some people should definitely be feeling foolish/embarrassed for what they wrote about Brenda's son here and elsewhere.
Why? Unless I've missed something - I've never read a word of criticism about her son - or any of her family. Only sympathy.
-
Where in the court findings does it mention Brenda Leyland had “mental problems” ?
Which is what certain parties are inferring. &%+((£
-
Where in the court findings does it mention Brenda Leyland had “mental problems” ?
Which is what certain parties are inferring. &%+((£
Dr Z - Consultant Psychiatrist (he was not treating Brenda at the time of her death, but had seen her as a patient many years ago)
Brenda did have a mental health condition of recurrent depression and certain unstable emotional personality traits. He understood they were lifelong conditions. It would not be obvious to others that she had a mental health condition. She was a very private person with complex psychological endowment. She had very contrasting emotions and conversations.
-
Dr Z - Consultant Psychiatrist (he was not treating Brenda at the time of her death, but had seen her as a patient many years ago)
Brenda did have a mental health condition of recurrent depression and certain unstable emotional personality traits. He understood they were lifelong conditions. It would not be obvious to others that she had a mental health condition. She was a very private person with complex psychological endowment. She had very contrasting emotions and conversations.
Key phrase 'many years ago'
How 'many years ago' was that.
'Lifelong condition' is a very vague phrase.
-
I apologize if the reported inquest details have already been posted. I will let you decide on how accurate they are.
I notice that Sonia Poulton was there too.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Brenda_Leyland.htm
Thanks, Anna. Does anyone know who wrote that report?
-
Key phrase 'many years ago'
How 'many years ago' was that.
'Lifelong condition' is a very vague phrase.
You asked "Where in the court findings does it mention Brenda Leyland had “mental problems” ?"
The court report from Dr Z was quite clear.
And yet you still seem to have difficulty in accepting simple statements of fact without interminable wriggling.
-
Key phrase 'many years ago'
How 'many years ago' was that.
'Lifelong condition' is a very vague phrase.
Clinical depression is a horrible illness and is no respecter of persons ... Brenda Leyland didn't quite see the world as other people do ... and people suffering the condition can take their own lives for what most would consider trivial reasons or for no discernible reason at all.
-
Clinical depression is a horrible illness and is no respecter of persons ... Brenda Leyland didn't quite see the world as other people do ... and people suffering the condition can take their own lives for what most would consider trivial reasons or for no discernible reason at all.
I doubt that what Brenda Leyland went through was "trivial". Even someone with no mental problems would find it difficult to be treated like she was by the MSM.
-
I doubt that what Brenda Leyland went through was "trivial". Even someone with no mental problems would find it difficult to be treated like she was by the MSM.
I assume you extend the same assessment to the treatment Kate & Gerry received from Sr Amaral & the Portuguese press.
-
There is no evidence the police or the dossier compiler gave BL's details to Sky. Any implication, however, that McCann supporters or the police were responsible for hounding her provides plenty of great material for a documentary.
-
There is no evidence the police or the dossier compiler gave BL's details to Sky. Any implication, however, that McCann supporters or the police were responsible for hounding her provides plenty of great material for a documentary.
No evidence? as in people told lies to the coroner? Oh...So there was no dossier, no police present, nothing. OK thanks for that.
-
No evidence? as in people told lies to the coroner? Oh...So there was no dossier, no police present, nothing. OK thanks for that.
There was a dossier, the police were in court confirming BL's tweets were not deemed criminal......but who was the source Brunt would not reveal?
-
and here is what Benice refused to show earlier in regard to martin brunt.
" I said I hoped I hadn't ruined her day, and she said I hadn't ruined her day but her life"
I hadn't seen that quote before but it says much.
My own view on what occurred is very simple. If Brunt and Sky News were truly interested in Brenda, her activities and her views, then they could have approached her off camera and discussed them with some decency. As it was they were only looking for a bit of juicy video to air while embarrassing her and putting her on the spot like they have done with many others. And people still wonder why he disappeared from the screens for several weeks. I bet he doesn't repeat that particular shambles any time soon.
The sad truth about all this is, had Brunt not did what he did, she would probably still be alive today. So the question must be, who is to blame for Brenda's death?
http://www.solicitorsjournal.com/comment/those-who-drive-others-suicide-must-be-held-accountable
-
Here is what Benice refused to show earlier in regard to martin brunt.
" I said I hoped I hadn't ruined her day, and she said I hadn't ruined her day but her life"
Not true. Martin Brunt never said Brenda Leyland told him he had ruined her life.
Quote
Mr Brunt, a respected veteran journalist, said he ended the conversation by telling her: “I hope I have not ruined your day”.
She replied: “I don’t know yet if you have ruined my day or my life."
Unquote
Not the same thing at all by a long chalk. Stop telling fibs.
-
Not true. Martin Brunt never said Brenda Leyland told him he had ruined her life.
Quote
Mr Brunt, a respected veteran journalist, said he ended the conversation by telling her: “I hope I have not ruined your day”.
She replied: “I don’t know yet if you have ruined my day or my life."
Unquote
Not the same thing at all by a long chalk. Stop telling fibs.
Obviously he ruined her life. So who pays the piper?
-
Not true. Martin Brunt never said Brenda Leyland told him he had ruined her life.
Quote
Mr Brunt, a respected veteran journalist, said he ended the conversation by telling her: “I hope I have not ruined your day”.
She replied: “I don’t know yet if you have ruined my day or my life."
Unquote
Not the same thing at all by a long chalk. Stop telling fibs.
Her life is over.
-
Obviously he ruined her life. So who pays the piper?
Only if you hold him responsible for her online activities. IMO he was a 'consequence' of those activities - not the cause. BL was the cause. And if her online behaviour was because of a mental condition then MB was not responsible for that either. How could he be? He didn't know her.
On the other hand her family did know her and also knew about her previous suicide attempt. I don't see anyone holding them responsible, which IMO they most certainly are not - in any way shape or form - but if you want to relieve BL of all responsibility for her own actions and choices and offload it onto someone else, then IMO Martin Brunt doesn't qualify. He was just doing his job.
-
There was a dossier, the police were in court confirming BL's tweets were not deemed criminal......but who was the source Brunt would not reveal?
Confused .com...?
Never mind the who is Brunt protecting; we need to know the WHY. Now that is newsworthy Why protect one and not the other?
I Always hated Sky, Murdoch and his vile Media empire.
-
Only if you hold him responsible for her online activities. IMO he was a 'consequence' of those activities - not the cause. BL was the cause. And if her online behaviour was because of a mental condition then MB was not responsible for that either. How could he be? He didn't know her.
On the other hand her family did know her and also knew about her previous suicide attempt. I don't see anyone holding them responsible, which IMO they most certainly are not - in any way shape or form - but if you want to relieve BL of all responsibility for her own actions and choices and offload it onto someone else, then IMO Martin Brunt doesn't qualify. He was just doing his job.
Her online 'activity' may have been distasteful to some, but what business is that of you or Bruntys for that matter, and what has it got to do with Sky news? was it, is it news worthy No!
He is a disgrace to try and weazle out of his part he played; and HE DID PLAY A MAJOR PART. Because he told her lies about a dossier with the police! That must have terrified her. He is a worthless, two bit hack, who is unrepentant- he should have had the decency to apologize to her family!
I think the police should now be involved as there is a law to cover for such incidences. Bullying which leads to suicide?
-
Her online 'activity' may have been distasteful to some, but what business is that of you or Bruntys for that matter, and what has it got to do with Sky news? was it, is it news worthy No!
He is a disgrace to try and weazle out of his part he played; and HE DID PLAY A MAJOR PART. Because he told her lies about a dossier with the police! That must have terrified her. He is a worthless, two bit hack, who is unrepentant- he should have had the decency to apologize to her family!
I think the police should now be involved as there is a law to cover for such incidences. Bullying which leads to suicide?
It's as much my business as it is your business - or anyone else who reads stuff which has been posted in public for the public to read.
What lies did he tell her?
-
Perhaps it was just a slow news day. Mind you it had to have been bleedin' slow to stopped to want to put out a news flash about a 63 year old woman making 424 tweets about people she didn't know.
-
It's as much my business as it is your business - or anyone else who reads stuff which has been posted in public for the public to read.
What lies did he tell her?
Well guess what, I don't make it my business to scurry through peoples twitter rants and run to the police. You make it your business because you have an agenda, Brunty did it because he was told to; McCanns name make money for the Murdoch empire dontcha know. and for the Mccanns there is no such thing as bad publicity especially if it is 'free' What, and you thought it was out of a sense of duty to grieving parents oh dearie me.
Brenda was led to believe she was being investigated by the police...the straw that broke the camels back!
-
Well guess what, I don't make it my business to scurry through peoples twitter rants and run to the police. You make it your business because you have an agenda, Brunty did it because he was told to; McCanns name make money for the Murdoch empire dontcha know. and for the Mccanns there is no such thing as bad publicity especially if it is 'free' What, and you thought it was out of a sense of duty to grieving parents oh dearie me.
Brenda was led to believe she was being investigated by the police...the straw that broke the camels back!
and as i said usally clinical depression and anxiety go together imagine how terrified brenda was she was probably having panic attacks/anxiety attacks and couldnt take anymore
-
Well guess what, I don't make it my business to scurry through peoples twitter rants and run to the police. You make it your business because you have an agenda, Brunty did it because he was told to; McCanns name make money for the Murdoch empire dontcha know. and for the Mccanns there is no such thing as bad publicity especially if it is 'free' What, and you thought it was out of a sense of duty to grieving parents oh dearie me.
Brenda was led to believe she was being investigated by the police...the straw that broke the camels back!
Wow - some wild assumptions there! Actually I don't do twitter - and have only looked at it since the BL case. Having now looked I can see why members of the public would be concerned for the McCann family's safety. There are some seriously disturbed people on there IMO.
Brunt did not lie to her as you claimed. The posts in the dossier were being investigated by the police. They included her posts. IIRC her comment to that truthful information was... 'Fair enough'.
I couldn't care less about the Murdoch empire and I don't particularly like reporters either. That includes Martin Brunt. However that doesn't mean I have to agree with him being blamed for something for which - as the Coroner stated - no-one could be held responsible. Perhaps you think the Coroner had an agenda too.
-
Wow - some wild assumptions there! Actually I don't do twitter - and have only looked at it since the BL case. Having now looked I can see why members of the public would be concerned for the McCann family's safety. There are some seriously disturbed people on there IMO.
Brunt did not lie to her as you claimed. The posts in the dossier were being investigated by the police. They included her posts. IIRC her comment to that truthful information was... 'Fair enough'.
I couldn't care less about the Murdoch empire and I don't particularly like reporters either. That includes Martin Brunt. However that doesn't mean I have to agree with him being blamed for something for which - as the Coroner stated - no-one could be held responsible. Perhaps you think the Coroner had an agenda too.
No wild assumptions, you said it was your business. You made it your business you said! OK. Go get em.
The police were NOT investigating Brenda for her twitters. The dossier was handed to NSY who looked at it then threw it at local police, who did nothing SO THEN it went to Brunty. It went to brunty because the police were not interested.And someone wanted to punish her. Simples!
Just because some people make threats and are disgusting on these social media sites you have no right to try and make out everyone who disagrees with McCanns are guilty of these crimes.
I don't know if the coroner had an agenda or not, she ruled on the information given to her by Brunt who may or may not have told the truth, that is how these things work.
-
No wild assumptions, you said it was your business. You made it your business you said! OK. Go get em.
The police were NOT investigating Brenda for her twitters. The dossier was handed to NSY who looked at it then threw it at local police, who did nothing SO THEN it went to Brunty. It went to brunty because the police were not interested.And someone wanted to punish her. Simples!
Just because some people make threats and are disgusting on these social media sites you have no right to try and make out everyone who disagrees with McCanns are guilty of these crimes.
I don't know if the coroner had an agenda or not, she ruled on the information given to her by Brunt who may or may not have told the truth, that is how these things work.
I have never even hinted that everyone who disagrees with the McCanns are guilty of the disgusting crimes committed on social media sites. In fact I have said there is no comparison between people with genuine doubts and people who post their poison on Twitter. They are poles apart. So stop telling lies.
How could the police state to the Inquest that Brenda Leylands twitters did not break the law if they hadn't first investigated them? That makes no sense.
We have no idea what the police may or may not have done regarding the dossier. No news doesn't necessarily mean no action will be taken in the future.
We shall have to wait and see.
-
It's Ok to agree that Brunt was trying to provoke Brenda to make it 'better TV', Benice, because that's the truth we can all see from the video.
It is true he was "just doing his job" (I said so myself on October 2nd) but the job is producing dramatic, sensational TV. Cheap sensational TV too in this instance.
It's not journalism. It's show business/reality TV.
To me that business is undefendable.
Every time they do something iike what they did to Brenda they take a risk, and they know it's a risk. There's no point denying that because the Jacintha Saldanha inquest took place just a few days before Sky News decided to do their 'investigation' into 'trolls'.
They gambled, and all for the sake of cheap, sensational TV. How can you defend that?
-
It's Ok to agree that Brunt was trying to provoke Brenda to make it 'better TV', Benice, because that's the truth we can all see from the video.
It is true he was "just doing his job" (I said so myself on October 2nd) but the job is producing dramatic, sensational TV. Cheap sensational TV too in this instance.
It's not journalism. It's show business/reality TV.
To me that business is undefendable.
Every time they do something iike what they did to Brenda they take a risk, and they know it's a risk. There's no point denying that because the Jacintha Saldanha inquest took place just a few days before Sky News decided to do their 'investigation' into 'trolls'.
They gambled, and all for the sake of cheap, sensational TV. How can you defend that?
But that's your opinion not mine Lyall.
'Trolling' is a problem on the internet - which causes distress to many people - and so far from what I can see Twitter and FB have done very little to stem it. However, people are now beginning to be prosecuted because it is a crime. Prosecutions are drawing more attention to it as a problem - and so it will be reported on by the media.
I saw nothing cheap or sensationalist in Martin Brunts approach to BL. He did everything right from what I could see.
It was nothing to do with 'show business' IMO. The internet is massive! and it was a news story on a growing problem related to it which affects people's lives. Why would anyone be surprised or shocked that the subject is now being reported on and discussed in news programmes - as a valid news item?
-
But that's your opinion not mine Lyall.
'Trolling' is a problem on the internet - which causes distress to many people - and so far from what I can see Twitter and FB have done very little to stem it. However, people are now beginning to be prosecuted because it is a crime. Prosecutions are drawing more attention to it as a problem - and so it will be reported on by the media.
I saw nothing cheap or sensationalist in Martin Brunts approach to BL. He did everything right from what I could see.
It was nothing to do with 'show business' IMO. The internet is massive! and it was a news story on a growing problem related to it which affects people's lives. Why would anyone be surprised or shocked that the subject is now being reported on and discussed in news programmes - as a valid news item?
Benice Brenda told Brunt she had been thinking of committing suicide. After that how could anything he did other than pulling the whole report be deemed 'right' ?
-
Benice Brenda told Brunt she had been thinking of committing suicide. After that how could anything he did other than pulling the whole report be deemed 'right' ?
As usual you are taking a few words out of context to alter the meaning. BLs 'suicide' remark was followed by an assurance that that was something she had thought of but was now feeling better having spoken to her son ec. etc. IOW she no longer felt like that. That would be the impression anyone would get from ALL of her remarks.
Telling her son that she now felt 'cheerier' would have the same affect on him IMO.
IIRC her conversation with Martin Brunt lasted about 10 mins ending with her saying it had been a pleasure to meet him. You may think he should have picked out a few words from a whole conversation and ignored the rest of it - but fortunately the Coroner understood that the overall impression he got from the whole conversation was what counted. The conversation was not confrontational or angry - it was amicable - and he could have no clue from her demeanour of what was going to happen.
Anyone can make a case against anybody about anything by extracting a few words out of context and pretending they were the only words spoken.
You do it all the time.
-
Benice Brenda told Brunt she had been thinking of committing suicide. After that how could anything he did other than pulling the whole report be deemed 'right' ?
very easily...unfortunately Brenda brought all this onto herself. I wonder what Brenda would have tweeted if Kate had committed suicide. Brenda wasn't the cyber warrior you thought...she seems to have been a very unhappy person with many demons
-
very easily...unfortunately Brenda brought all this onto herself. I wonder what Brenda would have tweeted if Kate had committed suicide. Brenda wasn't the cyber warrior you thought...she seems to have been a very unhappy person with many demons
The proverbial bystander with the table leg shot by the police.
-
As usual you are taking a few words out of context to alter the meaning. BLs 'suicide' remark was followed by an assurance that that was something she had thought of but was now feeling better having spoken to her son ec. etc. IOW she no longer felt like that. That would be the impression anyone would get from ALL of her remarks.
Telling her son that she now felt 'cheerier' would have the same affect on him IMO.
IIRC her conversation with Martin Brunt lasted about 10 mins ending with her saying it had been a pleasure to meet him. You may think he should have picked out a few words from a whole conversation and ignored the rest of it - but fortunately the Coroner understood that the overall impression he got from the whole conversation was what counted. The conversation was not confrontational or angry - it was amicable - and he could have no clue from her demeanour of what was going to happen.
Anyone can make a case against anybody about anything by extracting a few words out of context and pretending they were the only words spoken.
You do it all the time.
It is my understanding that Brenda Leyland spoke to Martin Brunt using the contact number he had given her.
I think it is probable that he has such a clear recollection of exactly what was said because the conversation was recorded. In my opinion that would be good journalist practice.
Two points arise from that.
( i) in the knowledge a recording could be asked for at any time he is hardly likely to misquote
(ii) should anyone misquote or hound him they may well find themselves on the receiving end of a writ
-
very easily...unfortunately Brenda brought all this onto herself. I wonder what Brenda would have tweeted if Kate had committed suicide. Brenda wasn't the cyber warrior you thought...she seems to have been a very unhappy person with many demons
If Brenda brought this all onto herself, then the McCanns brought it all onto themselves and deserve what they get.
-
If Brenda brought this all onto herself, then the McCanns brought it all onto themselves and deserve what they get.
OK ... so that applies to Madeleine McCann as well. Thank you for verifying that opinion.
-
If Brenda brought this all onto herself, then the McCanns brought it all onto themselves and deserve what they get.
Where do you draw the line Montlair?
Should Brenda Leyland have been entitled to say whatever she wanted with no possibility of ever been called on to account for her "tweets"?
What were her rights in this context?
Were the compliers of the dossier entitled to bring the matter to the attention of the police?
Were the compliers of the dossier entitled to bring the matter to the attention of the press?
Were the press entitled to question someone over their twitter history?
Where do you draw the line between freedome of the press and freedom of the individual?
-
Where do you draw the line Montlair?
Should Brenda Leyland have been entitled to say whatever she wanted with no possibility of ever been called on to account for her "tweets"?
What were her rights in this context?
Were the compliers of the dossier entitled to bring the matter to the attention of the police?
Were the compliers of the dossier entitled to bring the matter to the attention of the press?
Were the press entitled to question someone over their twitter history?
Where do you draw the line between freedome of the press and freedom of the individual?
...and what about the rights of Brenda to privacy, when the dossier compilers thought they were and would keep their anonymity ?
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sd1as4
-
OK ... so that applies to Madeleine McCann as well. Thank you for verifying that opinion.
The McCanns are responsible for what happened to their daughter. Madeleine is not responsible for what happened to herself and she is not responsible for being left alone. You always seem to bring up Madeleine as if we were criticising her when we criticise her negligent parents.
Remember, AT BEST, the McCanns caused their daughter's disappearance due to their negligence by leaving her and her siblings alone.
-
The McCanns are responsible for what happened to their daughter. Madeleine is not responsible for what happened to herself and she is not responsible for being left alone. You always seem to bring up Madeleine as if we were criticising her when we criticise her negligent parents.
Remember, AT BEST, the McCanns caused their daughter's disappearance due to their negligence by leaving her and her siblings alone.
8@??)( 8@??)( 8@??)(
-
...and what about the rights of Brenda to privacy, when the dossier compilers thought they were and would keep their anonymity ?
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sd1as4
Stephen - did Brenda Leyland contact Brunt on Twitter at any time?
-
Stephen - did Brenda Leyland contact Brunt on Twitter at any time?
As far as I know, yes she did.
However, never the mccanns.
Since they of course never use social media, do they ? &%+((£
-
Wandering Off Topic again.
-
But that's your opinion not mine Lyall.
'Trolling' is a problem on the internet - which causes distress to many people - and so far from what I can see Twitter and FB have done very little to stem it. However, people are now beginning to be prosecuted because it is a crime. Prosecutions are drawing more attention to it as a problem - and so it will be reported on by the media.
I saw nothing cheap or sensationalist in Martin Brunts approach to BL. He did everything right from what I could see.
It was nothing to do with 'show business' IMO. The internet is massive! and it was a news story on a growing problem related to it which affects people's lives. Why would anyone be surprised or shocked that the subject is now being reported on and discussed in news programmes - as a valid news item?
And they could have run it without the sensationalism of exposing someone. They had a programme with JG, S&S, Anon woman and the tweets. Journalism is running with that, and not taking a risk with exposing someone.
Sensational TV is deliberately gambling by exposing an individual (because they knew very well what would happen - they knew she'd be all over the newspapers, and named).
-
As far as I know, yes she did.
However, never the mccanns.
Since they of course never use social media, do they ? &%+((£
So it was a two way communication between Leyland and Brunt? How was her condidentialty breached, in that case?
To take your second point - do you believe that only communications directly to the "targets" are covered by the relevant laws? E.g would a comment made on social media about an individual be potentially actionable if not received by the "target"?
-
So it was a two way communication between Leyland and Brunt? How was her condidentialty breached, in that case?
To take your second point - do you believe that only communications directly to the "targets" are covered by the relevant laws? E.g would a comment made on social media about an individual be potentially actionable if not received by the "target"?
Who initiated that contact ?
Second, why did brunt and sky news need to go to her home address ?
and as another reminder, Brenda breached and broke no laws.
-
People on the extreme end appear to be continually grumbling that MSM are hiding the "truth" and concocting ways of getting more MSM attention. Yet, when they are offered a voice, they tend to back down... why?
I watched a debate-style programme on "trolling" not long ago. A few points that I found interesting were that self-confessed trolls didn't agree on the term and that they all disagreed (whether that was because they were on TV or not, I have no idea) with RIP-page trolling and generally heaping misery on people already suffering.
Another point was from a researcher who said that social media is manna from heaven for the MSM (I presume she meant tabloid media, although she didn't specify). My understanding of that is that they feed off each other.
-
People on the extreme end appear to be continually grumbling that MSM are hiding the "truth" and concocting ways of getting more MSM attention. Yet, when they are offered a voice, they tend to back down... why?
I watched a debate-style programme on "trolling" not long ago. A few points that I found interesting were that self-confessed trolls didn't agree on the term and that they all disagreed (whether that was because they were on TV or not, I have no idea) with RIP-page trolling and generally heaping misery on people already suffering.
Another point was from a researcher who said that social media is manna from heaven for the MSM (I presume she meant tabloid media, although she didn't specify). My understanding of that is that they feed off each other.
Well Carana, why don't the dossier compilers openly declare who they are ?
Or are they too scared to face up to the consequences of their actions ?
-
The McCanns are responsible for what happened to their daughter. Madeleine is not responsible for what happened to herself and she is not responsible for being left alone. You always seem to bring up Madeleine as if we were criticising her when we criticise her negligent parents.
Remember, AT BEST, the McCanns caused their daughter's disappearance due to their negligence by leaving her and her siblings alone.
The McCann's did not cause Madeleine McCann's disappearance ... the person who took her did. That is the person who has been below the radar for nearly eight years now in the camp of those who have dedicated an immeasurable amount of time denigrating her parents.
I have seen absolutely no evidence that the 'truth seekers' are actually interested in the truth being ascertained; unfortunately that is the environment in which Brenda Leyland was encouraged to contribute her comments to with the attendant result on her frail state of health.
-
The McCann's did not cause Madeleine McCann's disappearance ... the person who took her did. That is the person who has been below the radar for nearly eight years now in the camp of those who have dedicated an immeasurable amount of time denigrating her parents.
I have seen absolutely no evidence that the 'truth seekers' are actually interested in the truth being ascertained; unfortunately that is the environment in which Brenda Leyland was encouraged to contribute her comments to with the attendant result on her frail state of health.
You do not know who removed Madeleine from the apartment.
The police don't know that either.
-
The McCann's did not cause Madeleine McCann's disappearance ... the person who took her did. That is the person who has been below the radar for nearly eight years now in the camp of those who have dedicated an immeasurable amount of time denigrating her parents.
I have seen absolutely no evidence that the 'truth seekers' are actually interested in the truth being ascertained; unfortunately that is the environment in which Brenda Leyland was encouraged to contribute her comments to with the attendant result on her frail state of health.
How do you know the McCanns are not responsible? You can't possibly know imo - unless you know them personally? It's an unsolved case with hardly any evidence...there could be any number of possibilities... You can cite the words of SY if you wish, but they may or may not be being frank with the public... I'm.not saying this because I believe the McCanns did it rather no one here is any the wiser then being ignorant of the truth...
-
Who initiated that contact ?
Second, why did brunt and sky news need to go to her home address ?
and as another reminder, Brenda breached and broke no laws.
It looks as though Brenda sent him a message 29th September.
She had already been "tweeting" Jim Gamble some days before.
-
How do you know the McCanns are not responsible? You can't possibly know imo - unless you know them personally? It's an unsolved case with hardly any evidence...there could be any number of possibilities... You can cite the words of SY if you wish, but they may or may not be being frank with the public... I'm.not saying this because I believe the McCanns did it rather no one here is any the wiser then being ignorant of the truth...
Well spotted lordpookles ... like everyone else pontificating on Madeleine McCann's case ... I know nothing of the circumstances of her disappearance.
However, common sense would dictate that an investigation taking place in Portugal with everything that entails is following evidence which has taken it to Portugal.
If the evidence had taken them to Rothley or anywhere else in Britain for that matter - the investigation would be focused on Britain.
If the Portuguese evidence which led to the reopening of the case had led them to Britain ... the letters of request would be heading in this direction and not to Portugal.
-
It looks as though Brenda sent him a message 29th September.
She had already been "tweeting" Jim Gamble some days before.
I heard that started with brunt following her.
As to gamble, having seen some of his 'tweets'.....
-
As usual you are taking a few words out of context to alter the meaning. BLs 'suicide' remark was followed by an assurance that that was something she had thought of but was now feeling better having spoken to her son ec. etc. IOW she no longer felt like that. That would be the impression anyone would get from ALL of her remarks.
Telling her son that she now felt 'cheerier' would have the same affect on him IMO.
IIRC her conversation with Martin Brunt lasted about 10 mins ending with her saying it had been a pleasure to meet him. You may think he should have picked out a few words from a whole conversation and ignored the rest of it - but fortunately the Coroner understood that the overall impression he got from the whole conversation was what counted. The conversation was not confrontational or angry - it was amicable - and he could have no clue from her demeanour of what was going to happen.
Anyone can make a case against anybody about anything by extracting a few words out of context and pretending they were the only words spoken.
You do it all the time.
It is not the coroner's job to make moral judgements. Brunt was aware that Brenda had felt suicidal. Let's put it in context. Imagine Kate McCann had told a journalist that due to an article they were going to publish she had been feeling suicidal that afternoon but felt somewhat better that night. The article is published and Kate commits suicide as a result. Be honest, would you think the journalist was morally right to publish his article ?
-
It is not the coroner's job to make moral judgements. Brunt was aware that Brenda had felt suicidal. Let's put it in context. Imagine Kate McCann had told a journalist that due to an article they were going to publish she had been feeling suicidal that afternoon but felt somewhat better that night. The article is published and Kate commits suicide as a result. Be honest, would you think the journalist was morally right to publish his article ?
@)(++(* The activities of the 8 year long online hate mob, Gonc Amaral and his cronies, not to mention the MSM have all driven Kate McCann to the brink of despair in recent years and do I see you giving a damn about her mental state? Do I heck as like!
-
@)(++(* The activities of the 8 year long online hate mob, Gonc Amaral and his cronies, not to mention the MSM have all driven Kate McCann to the brink of despair in recent years and do I see you giving a damn about her mental state? Do I heck as like!
Cite?
-
It is not the coroner's job to make moral judgements. Brunt was aware that Brenda had felt suicidal. Let's put it in context. Imagine Kate McCann had told a journalist that due to an article they were going to publish she had been feeling suicidal that afternoon but felt somewhat better that night. The article is published and Kate commits suicide as a result. Be honest, would you think the journalist was morally right to publish his article ?
So if I am approached by the press who are going to run a story that may be detrimental to me...I simply say...I feel like committing suicide...and the press cancel the article...simple
-
Cite?
Cite for what?
-
@)(++(* The activities of the 8 year long online hate mob, Gonc Amaral and his cronies, not to mention the MSM have all driven Kate McCann to the brink of despair in recent years and do I see you giving a damn about her mental state? Do I heck as like!
What 'mental state' is that Alfred ?
-
What 'mental state' is that Alfred ?
You've never lost a child in any circumstance have you, Stephen? No-one who ever had whatever the circumstances would ask such a stupid question.
-
What 'mental state' is that Alfred ?
Kate's mental state, whatever it may have been in following the ordeal of being publicly accused of causing her own child's death and hiding the body, by the likes of the online mob, Amaral and the MSM. What sort of mental state do you reckon she was in Stephen? Happy? Relaxed? Optimistic?
-
Kate's mental state, whatever it may have been in following the ordeal of being publicly accused of causing her own child's death and hiding the body, by the likes of the online mob, Amaral and the MSM. What sort of mental state do you reckon she was in Stephen? Happy? Relaxed? Optimistic?
There doesn't appear to be any medical evidence of any mental issues?
-
There doesn't appear to be any medical evidence of any mental issues?
That's OK then, I'm sure her mental state was just tickety boo (despite the testimony of those who know her best testifying in a court of law to the contrary and her own testimony at the Leveson Enquiry) I'm sure that the experiences she went through of being accused publicly were positively life-affirming and fill her with warm happy thoughts when she recalls them now.
-
If Sky Media is such an evil institution may one ask why "sceptic" heroine and doorstepping darling Sonia Poulton continues to take their cash to appear on their chat shows? Has the woman no principles whatsoever?
-
If Sky Media is such an evil institution may one ask why "sceptic" heroine and doorstepping darling Sonia Poulton continues to take their cash to appear on their chat shows? Has the woman no principles whatsoever?
You'd have to ask her that Alfie.
-
You'd have to ask her that Alfie.
What? and risk her tracking me down to the ends of the earth to point her furry grey muffler at me?! No thanks!
-
You've never lost a child in any circumstance have you, Stephen? No-one who ever had whatever the circumstances would ask such a stupid question.
So you have then ?
However, I would never been as stupid as the mccanns were, and I'm not talking about hindsight.
It's common sense not to leave little children by themselves and unprotected for extended periods.
-
You've never lost a child in any circumstance have you, Stephen? No-one who ever had whatever the circumstances would ask such a stupid question.
and who is responsible for her 'mental state' ?
-
You are wandering Off Topic again.
-
Here's a thought.
Kate Mccann had 'suicidal thoughts'.
She received aid from Pike I have heard and probably from other sources as well .
What help did Brenda get when she had suicidal thoughts ???
Did brunt and sky ever think about that, even for one second ???
-
Here's a thought.
Kate Mccann had 'suicidal thoughts'.
She received aid from Pike I have heard and probably from other sources as well .
What help did Brenda get when she had suicidal thoughts ???
Did brunt and sky ever think about that, even for one second ???
There is a NHS Crisis Line you can ring if you are under the care of the Mental Health team.
-
It is not the coroner's job to make moral judgements. Brunt was aware that Brenda had felt suicidal. Let's put it in context. Imagine Kate McCann had told a journalist that due to an article they were going to publish she had been feeling suicidal that afternoon but felt somewhat better that night. The article is published and Kate commits suicide as a result. Be honest, would you think the journalist was morally right to publish his article ?
The coroner didn't make a moral judgment IMO. She made an intelligent judgement based on all of the evidence presented to the court - not just selective little bits of it taken out of context - which is what you are now doing IMO.
-
and who is responsible for her 'mental state' ?
People like you.
-
People like you.
I thought it was something to do with Madeleine's disappearance?
-
People like you.
No benice.
What a predictably naff response
i'm not the one who left her children by themselves unnecessarily, and who now has the tax payer paying for an investigation which should never have happened in the first place, and is the result of parental neglect.
We are also constantly reminded that the mccanns don't use social media, aren't we. &%+((£
You could not make the irony of that up.
However, in the case of Brenda.
Just remind me what has happened to her benice ?
-
There is a NHS Crisis Line you can ring if you are under the care of the Mental Health team.
Only suitable if you 'feel' suicidal. However, no use if you are compelled to do it by your state of mind. No one can stop you if you plan it properly, and Brenda Planned it properly.
She had progressed from 'feeling suicidal' to being compelled by her thoughts to carry it out.
I believe, Brunt was the last straw!
It takes a lot of courage to plan self execution and carry it out, I say courage as a rational mind would think. However, self execution is carried out by an irrational mind. 'tortured soul' for better way of describing it.
-
Only suitable if you 'feel' suicidal. However, no use if you are compelled to do it by your state of mind. No one can stop you if you plan it properly, and Brenda Planned it properly.
She had progressed from 'feeling suicidal' to being compelled by her thoughts to carry it out.
I believe, Brunt was the last straw!
It takes a lot of courage to plan self execution and carry it out, I say courage as a rational mind would think. However, self execution is carried out by an irrational mind. 'tortured soul' for better way of describing it.
I am deeply saddened by BL's decision and I agree taking one's own life is never a light or easy decision. It requires a degree of courage.
I am just grateful that neither Gerry nor Kate have gone down the same route ...
-
Here is Faithlilly's current signature line in all its ungrammatical glory. It's an unattributed quote and Faithlily has ignored my question asking who wrote it, but that is by the by:
"The McCann supporters and all else who played their part in this seedy affair, needed to silence this lady. The consequences of their attempts to do so, resulting in the loss of her life. Will this bother these type of people? Not a jot! Some have no conscience, no moral compass."
According to Faithlilly this quote references the McCann supporters who "hounded Brenda to death". I would like to know by name (forum ID or twitter handle will do) exactly who allegedly hounded Brenda to death and what means they allegedly used to achieve their aim.
-
Here is Faithlilly's current signature line in all its ungrammatical glory. It's an unattributed quote and Faithlily has ignored my question asking who wrote it, but that is by the by:
According to Faithlilly this quote references the McCann supporters who "hounded Brenda to death". I would like to know by name (forum ID or twitter handle will do) exactly who allegedly hounded Brenda to death and what means they allegedly used to achieve their aim.
Quote
"The McCann supporters and all else who played their part in this seedy affair, needed to silence this lady. The consequences of their attempts to do so, resulting in the loss of her life. Will this bother these type of people? Not a jot! Some have no conscience, no moral compass." end Quote
I definitely think that one comes under the umbrella of ... "Put Up or Change Your Signature".
-
Here is Faithlilly's current signature line in all its ungrammatical glory. It's an unattributed quote and Faithlily has ignored my question asking who wrote it, but that is by the by:
According to Faithlilly this quote references the McCann supporters who "hounded Brenda to death". I would like to know by name (forum ID or twitter handle will do) exactly who allegedly hounded Brenda to death and what means they allegedly used to achieve their aim.
She's changed it slightly.
http://l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com/Intelligent__Loving.html
-
She's changed it slightly.
http://l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com/Intelligent__Loving.html
Oh dear, what a pitiful (and appallingly badly written) rant that was. Didn't really say who these evil McCann supporters were who "hounded a woman to her death", nor how they actually achieved this though.
-
She's changed it slightly.
http://l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com/Intelligent__Loving.html
Oh well ... I suppose it takes all kinds. Bad and bad enough for one disturbed person to batter her keyboard to get that bile out of her system (I skimmed it ... actually impossible to seriously read it) but for someone else to QUOTE from it and think it is exemplary is decidedly bizarre.
-
Oh well ... I suppose it takes all kinds. Bad and bad enough for one disturbed person to batter her keyboard to get that bile out of her system (I skimmed it ... actually impossible to seriously read it) but for someone else to QUOTE from it and think it is exemplary is decidedly bizarre.
Sometimes the visceral quality of a statement is far more important than its grammatical correctness.
-
Sometimes the visceral quality of a statement is far more important than its grammatical correctness.
If it comforts you to think so. I think grammatical correctness is the very least of it's hang ups, but interesting you display such idiosyncratic taste in what you read and enjoy. The Sun appears positively 'intillekssul' by comparison.
-
Here is Faithlilly's current signature line in all its ungrammatical glory. It's an unattributed quote and Faithlily has ignored my question asking who wrote it, but that is by the by:
According to Faithlilly this quote references the McCann supporters who "hounded Brenda to death". I would like to know by name (forum ID or twitter handle will do) exactly who allegedly hounded Brenda to death and what means they allegedly used to achieve their aim.
Are there any tweets directed against BL?
-
She's changed it slightly.
http://l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com/Intelligent__Loving.html
Lest we forget, those persons online, vile vigilantes, who compiled a file of names of persons who THEY decided were to be punished (NOT the police)...
Isn't the usual form to pass evidence on to the police and let them make the judgement?
-
faithlilly, would you kindly answer my question regarding which McCann supporters hounded BL to death, and how they actually achieved this.
-
Oh dear, what a pitiful (and appallingly badly written) rant that was. Didn't really say who these evil McCann supporters were who "hounded a woman to her death", nor how they actually achieved this though.
@)(++(*
-
Sometimes the visceral quality of a statement is far more important than its grammatical correctness.
Sometimes the truthfulness of a statement is more important than the visceral quality, in fact I'd say that unless you're in the business of writing frothing propaganda, it nearly always is more important.
-
If it comforts you to think so. I think grammatical correctness is the very least of it's hang ups, but interesting you display such idiosyncratic taste in what you read and enjoy. The Sun appears positively 'intillekssul' by comparison.
I supose to some the Sun is intellectual and more importantly, credible.
Afraid that someone is not me. Apologies for being so discerning.
-
Sometimes the truthfulness of a statement is more important than the visceral quality, in fact I'd say that unless you're in the business of writing frothing propaganda, it nearly always is more important.
I'm sure you're correct. Where propoganda' concerned you certainly know your stuff.
-
I'm sure you're correct. Where propoganda' concerned you certainly know your stuff.
we know how to recognise it having had plenty of practice on this forum...first poster makes a claim as a fact and then is unable to substantiate it...
-
I supose to some the Sun is intellectual and more importantly, credible.
Afraid that someone is not me. Apologies for being so discerning.
No need at all to apologise ... I'm sure an antonym might have fitted better ... but as long as you are happy with yourself, who am I to judge.
-
No need at all to apologise ... I'm sure an antonym might have fitted better ... but as long as you are happy with yourself, who am I to judge.
No one at all Brietta ?{)(**
-
I am sure all will be revealed in the no-holds-barred documentary "The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann". We will be told who Brunt's sources were, why Sky sensationalised the doorstepping of BL on a par with 9/11 and allegations that her inquest was a whitewash. No-one would want to deny the producer her moment of glory.
Somewhere in the "unmasking" frenzy, there may just be time to mention Madeleine - the real victim.
-
The fact is quite simple...for the doubters the truth simply isn't good enough
-
indeed !
A pros guilty conscience catches up with her....
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 10m10 minutes ago
Ok so after being the only pro #McCann who attended Brenda's inquest OPENLY, my thoughts on the whole tragedy have changed.
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 9m9 minutes ago
So I'm putting my thoughts out there and then saying farewell to this tag forever #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 4m4 minutes ago
Having sat through the inquest and listening to what must have been a harrowing last few hours for Brenda I'm now of the opinion #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 2m2 minutes ago
the "dossier" should never have been handed over to sky news and Brenda certainly should NEVER have been named by Brunt's source #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 1m1 minute ago
However I've absolutely no problem with the dossier being handed over to SY for them to decide if anything criminal by anybody #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 1m1 minute ago
Had taken place #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 5m5 minutes ago
Ultimately it's my opinion that there would have been a different outcome had sky news never been given the dossier and BL NAMED #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 3m3 minutes ago
#RIPBrendaLeyland
I'll continue to support Madeleine and her family but never again on #McCann
-
indeed !
A [ censored word ] guilty conscience catches up with her....
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 10m10 minutes ago
Ok so after being the only pro #McCann who attended Brenda's inquest OPENLY, my thoughts on the whole tragedy have changed.
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 9m9 minutes ago
So I'm putting my thoughts out there and then saying farewell to this tag forever #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 4m4 minutes ago
Having sat through the inquest and listening to what must have been a harrowing last few hours for Brenda I'm now of the opinion #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 2m2 minutes ago
the "dossier" should never have been handed over to sky news and Brenda certainly should NEVER have been named by Brunt's source #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 1m1 minute ago
However I've absolutely no problem with the dossier being handed over to SY for them to decide if anything criminal by anybody #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 1m1 minute ago
Had taken place #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 5m5 minutes ago
Ultimately it's my opinion that there would have been a different outcome had sky news never been given the dossier and BL NAMED #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 3m3 minutes ago
#RIPBrendaLeyland
I'll continue to support Madeleine and her family but never again on #McCann
Well said 8@??)(
-
Well said 8@??)(
it pleases me that a mcann supporter admits what they did to brenda was sick...
-
indeed !
A [ censored word ] guilty conscience catches up with her....
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 10m10 minutes ago
Ok so after being the only pro #McCann who attended Brenda's inquest OPENLY, my thoughts on the whole tragedy have changed.
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 9m9 minutes ago
So I'm putting my thoughts out there and then saying farewell to this tag forever #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 4m4 minutes ago
Having sat through the inquest and listening to what must have been a harrowing last few hours for Brenda I'm now of the opinion #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 2m2 minutes ago
the "dossier" should never have been handed over to sky news and Brenda certainly should NEVER have been named by Brunt's source #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 1m1 minute ago
However I've absolutely no problem with the dossier being handed over to SY for them to decide if anything criminal by anybody #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 1m1 minute ago
Had taken place #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 5m5 minutes ago
Ultimately it's my opinion that there would have been a different outcome had sky news never been given the dossier and BL NAMED #McCann
Irisheyes smiling @LoveRandomleigh 3m3 minutes ago
#RIPBrendaLeyland
I'll continue to support Madeleine and her family but never again on #McCann
AND THE REASON BEING.
Re: Accosted by Sonia Poulton (http://stopthemyths.info/viewtopic.php?f=149&t=7566&sid=8a991439c42b56b306efc1440b9d90cc&start=50#p277670)[
by Randomleigh (http://stopthemyths.info/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=379) » Mon Mar 23, 2015 5:11 pm
It was important for me to stress my current circumstances because, unlike what happened with Brenda Leyland, Sonia Poulton and her gang of trolls are now baying for blood. They're being everything they've WRONGLY accused Brunt and McCann supporters of being, disgusting bullies. I'm no longer giving them the satisfaction and my days on hash tag McCann are officially over. By being there only gives them the ammunition they want. It's unjust because it's important that these morons are challenged when they tweet disgusting lies, photoshopped images etc, against Madeleine and her family and also because I tweeted lots of awareness for Madeleine and her family.
I won't be sorry to be disassociating myself with the utter pond life that frequent that tag though, in fact I'm certain I'm going to feel all the better for it. The way in which they continue to disrespect the McCann family and now Brenda Leyland and her family, is utterly appalling.
-
AND THE REASON BEING.
Re: Accosted by Sonia Poulton (http://stopthemyths.info/viewtopic.php?f=149&t=7566&sid=8a991439c42b56b306efc1440b9d90cc&start=50#p277670)[
by Randomleigh (http://stopthemyths.info/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=379) » Mon Mar 23, 2015 5:11 pm
It was important for me to stress my current circumstances because, unlike what happened with Brenda Leyland, Sonia Poulton and her gang of trolls are now baying for blood. They're being everything they've WRONGLY accused Brunt and McCann supporters of being, disgusting bullies. I'm no longer giving them the satisfaction and my days on hash tag McCann are officially over. By being there only gives them the ammunition they want. It's unjust because it's important that these morons are challenged when they tweet disgusting lies, photoshopped images etc, against Madeleine and her family and also because I tweeted lots of awareness for Madeleine and her family.
I won't be sorry to be disassociating myself with the utter pond life that frequent that tag though, in fact I'm certain I'm going to feel all the better for it. The way in which they continue to disrespect the McCann family and now Brenda Leyland and her family, is utterly appalling.
Well that's not what she says in her tweets DCI.
-
AND THE REASON BEING.
Re: Accosted by Sonia Poulton (http://stopthemyths.info/viewtopic.php?f=149&t=7566&sid=8a991439c42b56b306efc1440b9d90cc&start=50#p277670)[
by Randomleigh (http://stopthemyths.info/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=379) » Mon Mar 23, 2015 5:11 pm
It was important for me to stress my current circumstances because, unlike what happened with Brenda Leyland, Sonia Poulton and her gang of trolls are now baying for blood. They're being everything they've WRONGLY accused Brunt and McCann supporters of being, disgusting bullies. I'm no longer giving them the satisfaction and my days on hash tag McCann are officially over. By being there only gives them the ammunition they want. It's unjust because it's important that these morons are challenged when they tweet disgusting lies, photoshopped images etc, against Madeleine and her family and also because I tweeted lots of awareness for Madeleine and her family.
I won't be sorry to be disassociating myself with the utter pond life that frequent that tag though, in fact I'm certain I'm going to feel all the better for it. The way in which they continue to disrespect the McCann family and now Brenda Leyland and her family, is utterly appalling.
Thanks for that link, DCI.
So in some quarters it is considered "appropriate" to accost a member of the public who was attending an inquest ... as she had every right to do ... can someone explain to me in what way that is showing respect either for the law of the land or for the dead??
**snip
by Randomleigh » Mon Mar 23, 2015 3:42 pm
When Sonia Poulton accosted me, I'm calling it accosted because that's an accurate description of what happened, she didnt identify herself, she waved her arms around ( a lot) and started to spit out vile lies and false accusations at me
"so Randomleigh what have you got to say for yourself, here to laugh at Brenda Leyland , you who claimed to be a police officer, one of those reponsible for the hounding of Brenda"
Not one single words of what she screeched is actually TRUE!!
If she were a proper investigative journalist she would have known that. Instead she's gathered her information, without checking it, from some of the biggest nut jobs ever to disgrace twitter and decided it must be "true".
When Martin Brunt asked his question to Brenda Leyland about using her twitter account to attack the McCanns, he got a response, not a denial, Brenda stated "I'm entitled to do that".
-
Brenda was an online troll suffering from mental health problems. Attempts to portray her as some sort of victim are risible
-
Thanks for that link, DCI.
So in some quarters it is considered "appropriate" to accost a member of the public who was attending an inquest ... as she had every right to do ... can someone explain to me in what way that is showing respect either for the law of the land or for the dead??
**snip
Disgraceful behaviour IMO.
Also I wonder if the BL supporter who was warned twice by the Coroner's Clerk during the proceedings about her disrespectful behaviour - and told she would be removed if it continued - is going to feature in Poulton's documentary?
Thank goodness none of BL's family were there to witness such atrocious behaviour from Poulton and her chums - as IMO they would have been horrified.
-
Brenda was an online troll suffering from mental health problems. Attempts to portray her as some sort of victim are risible
She was a victim and she most deffo did not fit the definition of an online troll. A victim of an over zealous news organisation who believe they can do whatever they like to get a story. Only yesterday I witnessed another of their so called reporters in the form of Alex Crawford taking liberties with a woman carrying a baby outside a Nigerian polling station. She is an ignorant bitch imo. Likewise that clown Brunt who hounded a weak woman to her death because she dared espouse her views on twitter.
Attacks on fellow members of this forum are not permitted, if you have a problem take it up with an admin.
-
Brenda was an online troll suffering from mental health problems. Attempts to portray her as some sort of victim are risible
&%&£(+
Give it a rest mate.
-
&%&£(+
Give it a rest mate.
It's a shame someone didn't tell brenda to give it a rest instead og encouraging her to carry on trolling.
She might still be here then
-
Davel should think before he posts that dribble. Brenda Leyland would still be alive today but for Sky News. What I want to know is what is her family going to do about it??
It's a shame someone didn't tell brenda to give it a rest instead og encouraging her to carry on trolling.
She might still be here then
For the last time Davel, she wasn't a troll, she was a twitter user!!!
-
She was a victim. A victim of an over zealous news organisation who believe they can do whatever they like to get a story. Only yesterday I witnessed another of their so called reporters in the form of Alex Crawford taking liberties with a woman carrying a baby outside a Nigerian polling station. She is an ignorant bitch imo. Likewise that clown Brunt who hounded a weak woman to her death because she dared espouse her views on twitter.
Attacks on fellow members of this forum are not permitted, if you have a problem take it up with an admin.
We obviously have different ideas of the meaning of ''hounding'' Angelo.
IMO 'hounding' is the relentless harrassment and/or stalking' of another person. I saw none of that from Martin Brunt - in fact for a reporter his behaviour was exemplary IMO - and in no way could be interpreted as 'hounding'.
BL certainly didn't look as if she felt she was being hounded by Brunt. Quite the opposite IMO. Do you invite someone who is 'hounding' you into your home? I think not. That would make no sense.
It would appear that the Coroner thought the same.
-
Davel should think before he posts that dribble. Brenda Leyland would still be alive today but for Sky News. What I want to know is what is her family going to do about it??
For the last time Davel, she wasn't a troll, she was a twitter user!!!
She was a troll IMO...have you seen her tweets
-
She was a troll IMO...have you seen her tweets
since when does having your own opinion make you a troll? no one has to think the same and no one has the right to dictate what others think or feel
-
She was a victim and she most deffo did not fit the definition of an online troll. A victim of an over zealous news organisation who believe they can do whatever they like to get a story. Only yesterday I witnessed another of their so called reporters in the form of Alex Crawford taking liberties with a woman carrying a baby outside a Nigerian polling station. She is an ignorant bitch imo. Likewise that clown Brunt who hounded a weak woman to her death because she dared espouse her views on twitter.
Attacks on fellow members of this forum are not permitted, if you have a problem take it up with an admin.
Brenda brought all her problems onto herself...there is no one else to blame apart from herself
-
Davel should think before he posts that dribble. Brenda Leyland would still be alive today but for Sky News. What I want to know is what is her family going to do about it??
For the last time Davel, she wasn't a troll, she was a twitter user!!!
Does a responsible tweeter accuse another tweeter of being a prostitute, fat and ugly and cheer at the prospect of them losing their job because of an online campaign to ruin their livelihood? To my mind, those are the actions of a troll.
-
She was a troll IMO...have you seen her tweets
As usual your interpretation is wrong. She expressed her views which she was entitled to do. Might I remind you it is not known what happened to Maddie and Leicestershire Police have confirmed she committed no crime.
-
since when does having your own opinion make you a troll? no one has to think the same and no one has the right to dictate what others think or feel
and no one has the right to dictate to me what I think and feel ...including you...if Brenda was a troll in my opinion am I not entitled to post such
-
Does a responsible tweeter accuse another tweeter of being a prostitute, fat and ugly and cheer at the prospect of them losing their job because of an online campaign to ruin their livelihood? To my mind, those are the actions of a troll.
That's twitter I'm afraid Alfred. Unless you are a regular user like me you wouldn't know that but there you go, you learn something every day mate. Twitter users can block abusive users, its as simple as that.
-
As usual your interpretation is wrong. She expressed her views which she was entitled to do. Might I remind you it is not known what happened to Maddie and Leicestershire Police have confirmed she committed no crime.
and I am expressing mine..she was not a nice person who brought all her problems onto herself....I'm sure you will support me Angelo in expressing my opinion
-
There certainly seems to be some sympathy on this board for the view that certain McCann supporters hounded Brenda to her death, but why the reluctance to examine the evidence I wonder?
-
That's twitter I'm afraid Alfred. Unless you are a regular user like me you wouldn't know that but there you go, you learn something every day mate. Twitter users can block abusive users, its as simple as that.
calling someone a prostitute is not expressing an opinion..it is being abusive...Brenda was abusive
-
That's twitter I'm afraid Alfred. Unless you are a regular user like me you wouldn't know that but there you go, you learn something every day mate. Twitter users can block abusive users, its as simple as that.
So you agree Brenda was abusive? Well that's a step in the right direction I suppose...
-
and I am expressing mine..she was not a nice person who brought all her problems onto herself....I'm sure you will support me Angelo in expressing my opinion
Absolutely, I will support anyone's right to express an opinion and that included Brenda. What I don't agree with is expressing such an opinion in an abusive way because that detracts from their credibility. That is why I found Kate McCanns use of the phrase "f.....g tosser...f.....g tosser" directed at a Portuguese detective in her book to be so obnoxious. I will add too that opinion must be based on hard facts and evidence. There is no place here for opinion based purely on speculation or bias.
-
Absolutely, I will support anyone's right to express an opinion and that included Brenda. What I don't agree with is expressing such an opinion in an abusive way because that detracts from their credibility. That is why I found Kate McCanns use of the phrase "f.....g tosser...f.....g tosser" directed at a Portuguese detective in her book to be so obnoxious.
LOL, are you the same Angelo who just referred to some female reporter as "an ignorant bitch" on this very forum? And the difference is...?
-
So you agree Brenda was abusive? Well that's a step in the right direction I suppose...
She was but then there are few who post anywhere who don't resort to abuse in various guises at some time or other.
-
Brenda brought all her problems onto herself...there is no one else to blame apart from herself
you might say the same about the mcanns they left their children alone maddie would be alive and well if they didnt
-
LOL, are you the same Angelo who just referred to some female reporter as "an ignorant bitch" on this very forum? And the difference is...?
Because she is!! Did you see the report?
-
Because she is!! Did you see the report?
@)(++(* So it's OK to call someone an ignorant bitch but not OK to call someone an effing tosser, because YOU say so, I've heard it all now!
-
deleted
-
She was but then there are few who post anywhere who don't resort to abuse in various guises at some time or other.
i will never apoloigise for my views brenda like most people was angry at the mcanns lack of childcare she had every right to voice it as did GA and anyone else
-
the crux of this whole 8 year matter is the mcanns were terrible parents and because they were considered well classed they got away with their behaviour
-
@)(++(* So it's OK to call someone an ignorant bitch but not OK to call someone an effing tosser, because YOU say so, I've heard it all now!
A big difference.
I removed your comment about contacting admin since they aren't online at the moment. No doubt one will respond to you in due course.
-
A big difference.
I removed your comment about contacting admin since they aren't online at the moment. No doubt one will respond to you in due course.
Explain to a fool like me then why it is OK to call someone an ignorant bitch but not OK to call someone a f..king tosser.
-
the crux of this whole 8 year matetr is the mcanns were terrible parents and because they were well classed they got away with their behaviour
Had it been a pair of factory workers from some backwater it would have been treated very differently.
-
the crux of this whole 8 year matter is the mcanns were terrible parents and because they were considered well classed they got away with their behaviour
The crux of the matter is that eight years ago a little girl ... Madeleine McCann ... went missing from her bed and hasn't been seen since.
-
Had it been a pair of factory workers from some backwater it would have been treated very differently.
exactly yet mcann supporters dont understand that?? the mcanns were treated very well actully why do they deny that gerry and kate have responsibility into what did happen to maddie? brenda would be alive and well now so would maddie without their actions
-
Had it been a pair of factory workers from some backwater it would have been treated very differently.
For this to be demonstrably true you would need to give examples of different treatment meted out to working class parents of missing toddlers, or of children who were left unattended whilst on holiday.
-
For this to be demonstrably true you would need to give examples of different treatment meted out to working class parents of missing toddlers, or of children who were left unattended whilst on holiday.
how about this alfie??
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11498123/Arrests-for-leaving-kids-home-alone-made-every-day.html
Arrests for leaving kids home alone made every day
Cases involved children aged from just a few weeks to 14 years old
A sad child stares out of the window
Favouritism is more common than parents like to accept Photo: Janine Wiedel Photolibrary / Alamy
By Camila Turner
7:00AM GMT 27 Mar 2015
A parent is arrested every day on suspicion of leaving one or more of their children at home alone, new figures reveal.
At least 105 mothers and fathers faced criminal investigations for leaving their offspring unsupervised in the final three months of last year, research by the Press Association has revealed.
Cases involved children aged from just a few weeks to 14 years old.
The law does not specify an age at which parents can leave children alone, but those who do can be arrested and prosecuted for cruelty and neglect if it places them at risk.
Figures provided by police forces in England and Wales following Freedom of Information (FoI) requests showed that 30 of those arrested were released without further action, 24 accepted a police caution and 19 were charged.
In other cases, investigations were ongoing or details of how suspects were dealt with were not available.
The issue of whether, at what age and for how long parents should leave children alone for has repeatedly sparked controversy.
High-profile cases range from parents arrested after leaving children for a few minutes to a mother who was given a suspended sentence after she left her children at home while she flew to Australia for several weeks.
Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming, who has called on the Government to provide clarity over the issue, said it was difficult to comment on whether police actions covered by the FoI responses were reasonable without knowing the circumstances of individual cases but described the findings as "important research".
"Parents often get confused by what is happening," he said.
"The government claims that the judgment as to whether it is right to leave a child home alone is made by the parents. However, in fact the judgment is made by the police and local council workers.
"Potentially, someone who leaves a baby in a car seat in a petrol station could face prosecution. Similarly, whereas an eight-year old can be sent to go swimming or to the park on their own, they are not allowed to stay at home (alone). There does need to be more clarity on this.
didnt the mcanns leave 3 kids alone??
-
Explain to a fool like me then why it is OK to call someone an ignorant bitch but not OK to call someone a f.....g tosser.
Very simply, my comment wasn't engineered in order to sell a book! 8(0(*
Back on topic before Ellie gets the whip out.
-
On topic please. TY
-
At least now it is agreed that Brenda was not just expressing an opinion but she was abusive...a step in the right direction
-
At least now it is agreed that Brenda was not just expressing an opinion but she was abusive...a step in the right direction
who said that?? i and many others dont think brenda was abusive you dont speak for everybody davel
-
We've yet to establish the veracity of the claim on here that some McCann supporters hounded BL to her death. It is clear from the Coroner that this was not given as a contributing factor to BL's death, so could we please now examine the evidence for the claim that has been made on this forum, or agree that there is no basis for this claim?
-
We've yet to establish the veracity of the claim on here that some McCann supporters hounded BL to her death. It is clear from the Coroner that this was not given as a contributing factor to BL's death, so could we please now examine the evidence for the claim that has been made on this forum, or agree that there is no basis for this claim?
Feel free 8)--))
-
Feel free 8)--))
8)-))) if mcann supporters tweets were not abusive to brenda either are our posts to the mcanns goes both ways right??
-
Feel free 8)--))
I didn't make the claim, Faithlilly did.
-
I didn't make the claim, Faithlilly did.
I know, but its you who seem to be obsessed by it.
-
I didn't make the claim, Faithlilly did.
Ho hum !
-
If SP was the one who provided Brunt with BL's details, how will the sceptics feel then?
-
I know, but its you who seem to be obsessed by it.
Do you think McCann supporters hounded BL to her death?
-
If SP was the one who provided Brunt with BL's details, how will the sceptics feel then?
Personally I'd be just as appalled.
-
Personally I'd be just as appalled.
So you'd say, in those circumstances, that it wasn't McCann supporters who were responsible for BL being hounded to death?
-
We've yet to establish the veracity of the claim on here that some McCann supporters hounded BL to her death. It is clear from the Coroner that this was not given as a contributing factor to BL's death, so could we please now examine the evidence for the claim that has been made on this forum, or agree that there is no basis for this claim?
Have you read the tweets which were sent directly to Brenda on twitter after Brunts visit? You obviously haven't seen them or choose to ignore them, which one is it Alfie mate?
-
It will be interesting to see if the allegedly contrite McCann supporter who appeared at BL's inquest will now receive the vilification in SP's documentary as previously promised, or will this latest turn of events require some hasty re-editing?
-
Have you read the tweets which were sent directly to Brenda on twitter after Brunts visit? You obviously haven't seen them or choose to ignore them, which one is it Alfie mate?
i would say denial alfie denys things alot
-
Have you read the tweets which were sent directly to Brenda on twitter after Brunts visit? You obviously haven't seen them or choose to ignore them, which one is it Alfie mate?
Have they been reproduced on here? I don't do twitter so I may have missed them if not. I was under the impression however that BL did not access twitter at all after Brunt's interview, so have I got that wrong? Do you hold these tweeters responsible for driving BL to her death Angelo?
-
Have you read the tweets which were sent directly to Brenda on twitter after Brunts visit? You obviously haven't seen them or choose to ignore them, which one is it Alfie mate?
i have seen the horrible things tweeted to brenda they were worse then anyone has ever said about the mcanns
-
Have you read the tweets which were sent directly to Brenda on twitter after Brunts visit? You obviously haven't seen them or choose to ignore them, which one is it Alfie mate?
You do realise Brenda extremely abusive to other posters herself..she was not a victim..she was a willing participant ...
-
Have they been reproduced on here? I don't do twitter so I may have missed them if not. I was under the impression however that BL did not access twitter at all after Brunt's interview, so have I got that wrong? Do you hold these tweeters responsible for driving BL to her death Angelo?
what about the ones before her death alfie do you grasp that THEY were the ones that sent her over the edge?
-
i have seen the horrible things tweeted to brenda they were worse then anyone has ever said about the mcanns
no worse than what Brenda was teeting to others
-
i have seen the horrible things tweeted to brenda they were worse then anyone has ever said about the mcanns
Are you referringo the ones by someone called "rainne@dirndllass" Carly?
And do you think this is a "mccann supporter" or just a (true) random troll?
-
Have they been reproduced on here? I don't do twitter so I may have missed them if not. I was under the impression however that BL did not access twitter at all after Brunt's interview, so have I got that wrong? Do you hold these tweeters responsible for driving BL to her death Angelo?
LAST TWEET
516701467390926850|Mon Sep 29 21:30:04 +0000 2014|@siamesey #mccann and she closed account quick as a flash.
The tweets after she closed her account are mainly from sceptics. One calling someone a C***.
http://greptweet.com/u/sweepyface/sweepyface.txt
http://www.buzzfeed.com/patricksmith/read-the-deleted-tweets-brenda-leyland-sent-the-mccanns#.fkqDa4d7y
-
Are you referringo the ones by someone called "rainne@dirndllass" Carly?
And do you think this is a "mccann supporter" or just a (true) random troll?
Oh yes, I've heard about this tweeter. I believe they never once appeared on the #McCann tag until BL's outing on Sky, am I right? And this is the McCann supporter that apparently hounded BL to her death is it?
-
Have you read the tweets which were sent directly to Brenda on twitter after Brunts visit? You obviously haven't seen them or choose to ignore them, which one is it Alfie mate?
Are you referring to the tweets by an individual called "rainne@drindllass" Angelo?
-
Oh yes, I've heard about this tweeter. I believe they never once appeared on the #McCann tag until BL's outing on Sky, am I right? And this is the McCann supporter that apparently hounded BL to her death is it?
Aside from the brief awful rant concerning sweepyface once that story broke, there was one other McCann-related tweet by her, back in June 2014. That seems to be it since March 2010.
477466224620605441|Fri Jun 13 15:03:13 +0000 2014|out of all these cases,this one has stayed on my heart and mind.I pray they find out where she is http://news.msn.com/world/mccann-searches-turn-up-no-evidence-uk-police#tscptmt
The rest of her tweets were rants about other topics that came to her attention, many of which were obscene, racist or anti whatever took her fancy.
-
Perhaps a sleeper just brought out for special occesions 8(0(*
-
Perhaps a sleeper just brought out for special occesions 8(0(*
With no tweets (aside from one general supportive tweet about Madeleine) in 4 and a half years? Judging by her rants on every topic she encountered, she was no sleeping beauty.
-
Perhaps a sleeper just brought out for special occesions 8(0(*
Or perhaps just a common or garden troll indulging in a favourite pastime. Did you not read the tweeting history of this individual? Is this the only example of "MCann supporters hounding BL to her death" then?
-
Or perhaps just a common or garden troll indulging in a favourite pastime. Did you not read the tweeting history of this individual? Is the only example of "MCann supporters hounding BL to her death" then?
Why should I want to ? - I don't do tweets
-
Why should I want to ? - I don't do tweets
Sure, make unfounded accusations without acquainting yourself with the facts, that seems par for the course...
-
Sure, make unfounded accusations without acquainting yourself with the facts, that seems par for the course...
So who am I accusing of what & why are you so bothered?
-
So who am I accusing of what & why are you so bothered?
Perhaps a sleeper just brought out for special occesions 8(0(*
You wrote the above did you not? The implication is clear is it not? Or are you just posting rubbish you don't really believe to pass the time?
-
You wrote the above did you not? The implication is clear is it not? Or are you just posting rubbish you don't really believe to pass the time?
You didn't really answer my question, merely posted mild abuse.
-
You didn't really answer my question, merely posted mild abuse.
You appear to be accusing a McCann supporter of holding a sleeper account held in reserve until BL's exposure on Sky in order to then use it to abuse her in the most horrible way. You made this assumption without knowing anything whatsoever about this twitter account's previous posting history. Why am I bothered? Because false accusations based on zero evidence and ignorance bother me, crazy I know. I hope that answers your queries satisfactorily.
-
You appear to be accusing a McCann supporter of holding a sleeper account held in reserve until BL's exposure on Sky in order to then use it to abuse her in the most horrible way. You made this assumption without knowing anything whatsoever about this twitter account's previous posting history. Why am I bothered? Because false accusations based on zero evidence and ignorance bother me, crazy I know. I hope that answers your queries satisfactorily.
Thank you. So much pleasanter to be polite.
-
Al this nastiness is one of the reasons Brenda is dead...all the lies posted is one of the reasons Brenda is dead. Brenda thought it was acceptable to be abusive to the McCanns and other posters because the abuse is so widespread...that has contributed to her death
-
Thank you. So much pleasanter to be polite.
What is polite about your posts?
-
Thank you. So much pleasanter to be polite.
Just for you, Jassi. And Angelo. And Carly.
Here is the twitter posting history of the individual you hold up as an example of an "ardent McCann supporter" Rainne@drindllass.
http://greptweet.com/u/dirndllass/dirndllass.txt
I suggest that this actually a good example of a "troll" - seems to be horribly abusive on an equal opportunities basis. 8(8-))
-
What is polite about your posts?
Do I regularly abuse and insult people?
-
Do I regularly abuse and insult people?
There is nothing polite about making unfounded accusations, or being snide IMO.
-
There is nothing polite about making unfounded accusations, or being snide IMO.
He's onto you Davel.... *&*%£
-
He's onto you Davel.... *&*%£
@)(++(*
-
Al this nastiness is one of the reasons Brenda is dead...all the lies posted is one of the reasons Brenda is dead. Brenda thought it was acceptable to be abusive to the McCanns and other posters because the abuse is so widespread...that has contributed to her death
So, you still think that it is her fault? BTW, even if you do not want to believe it, the police found nothing criminal in her tweets. Many of you would like to see an 11th commandant: "Thou shall not criticise in any way the McCanns" or you will face dire consequences, death included. The McCanns have tried so hard to silence any criticism or facts that might put them in a bad light, but when people have used the MSM to their advantage as the have done, they must take the bad with the good, especially when they ask for people's money.
-
So, you still think that it is her fault? BTW, even if you do not want to believe it, the police found nothing criminal in her tweets. Many of you would like to see an 11th commandant: "Thou shall not criticise in any way the McCanns" or you will face dire consequences, death included. The McCanns have tried so hard to silence any criticism or facts that might put them in a bad light, but when people have used the MSM to their advantage as the have done, they must take the bad with the good, especially when they ask for people's money.
Yes I still think it's her own fault
-
So, you still think that it is her fault? BTW, even if you do not want to believe it, the police found nothing criminal in her tweets. Many of you would like to see an 11th commandant: "Thou shall not criticise in any way the McCanns" or you will face dire consequences, death included. The McCanns have tried so hard to silence any criticism or facts that might put them in a bad light, but when people have used the MSM to their advantage as the have done, they must take the bad with the good, especially when they ask for people's money.
You just don't get it do you. It's nothing to do with people criticizing the McCanns - it's people telling cruel lies, perpetrating myths and spreading disinformation about an innocent family which people find so appalling.
The only people the McCanns have ever objected to are those who blatently libel them. Why anyone should find it strange that they would object to being libelled is incomprehensible.
-
If SP was the one who provided Brunt with BL's details, how will the sceptics feel then?
You seem to believe that "sceptics" are somehow a cohesive mass with a single opinion.
Think again.
If Poulton passed the dossier to Brunt she should be H*****d********q*******d preferably at Tyburn along with any other vigilante types that can be rounded up, "pour encourager les autres". ["in england, it is good, from time to time, to kill an admiral, to encourage the others". Msr. Voltaire].
In my slightly right wing opinion of course.
-
You just don't get it do you. It's nothing to do with people criticizing the McCanns - it's people telling cruel lies, perpetrating myths and spreading disinformation about an innocent family which people find so appalling.
The only people the McCanns have ever objected to are those who blatently libel them. Why anyone should find it strange that they would object to being libelled is incomprehensible.
You don't get it at all, do you?. The McCanns are afraid of the truth! It's the couple and their followers who perpetrate myths and spread disinformation. The worst for them was when they found out that the police files were to be made public. They wrongly believed that they were going to be the only ones to have access to the police files and that they would be able to control any information given to the public. That must have been a huge shock for them.
-
Quite surprising and cheering that such a young democracy has that degree of openness. ?{)(**
-
You seem to believe that "sceptics" are somehow a cohesive mass with a single opinion.
Think again.
If Poulton passed the dossier to Brunt she should be H*****d********q*******d preferably at Tyburn along with any other vigilante types that can be rounded up, "pour encourager les autres". ["in england, it is good, from time to time, to kill an admiral, to encourage the others". Msr. Voltaire].
In my slightly right wing opinion of course.
In your slightly right wing opinion would you be of the same opinion of whoever tipped off the BBC about the police raid on Cliff Richard's penthouse last year, as a 'for example'?
-
In your slightly right wing opinion would you be of the same opinion of whoever tipped off the BBC about the police raid on Cliff Richard's penthouse last year, as a 'for example'?
I don't see the point of the question but I object in principle to secret societies and vigil[ censored word]m.
Work it out for yourself.
If you believe in a free for all try the acid test, then you may not be so keen.
-
I don't see the point of the question but I object in principle to secret societies and vigil[ censored word]m.
Work it out for yourself.
If you believe in a free for all try the acid test, then you may not be so keen.
Well the objection of many "sceptics" to the events surrounding BL's death is that someone tipped off the media, rather than simply letting the police get on with their investigation privately. Ironically many of these objecting "sceptics" absolutely revelled in the media coverage of the police raid on Cliff Richard's house. I just wondered if you always objected in principle to the media being tipped off regarding police investigations, or only when it suits you to?
-
Well the objection of many "sceptics" to the events surrounding BL's death is that someone tipped off the media, rather than simply letting the police get on with their investigation privately. Ironically many of these objecting "sceptics" absolutely revelled in the media coverage of the police raid on Cliff Richard's house. I just wondered if you always objected in principle to the media being tipped off regarding police investigations, or only when it suits you to?
I am not "many of the sceptics". What they do is their business what I do is mine. If you are daft enough to believe that "sceptics" are a cohesive coordinated mass then more fool you.
I object to secret societies and vigil[ censored word]m that seems to me to state my position quite succinctly; if you fail to understand what it means that is of no concern to me.
-
I am not "many of the sceptics". What they do is their business what I do is mine. If you are daft enough to believe that "sceptics" are a cohesive coordinated mass then more fool you.
I object to secret societies and vigil[ censored word]m that seems to me to state my position quite succinctly; if you fail to understand what it means that is of no concern to me.
I know you are not "many of the sceptics" - that is why I asked you for YOUR view. The fact that you keep fudging your answer iwith reference to secret societies and vigilantes is a bit odd IMO. I didn't mention secret societies or vigilantes.
-
I know you are not "many of the sceptics" - that is why I asked you for YOUR view. The fact that you keep fudging your answer iwith reference to secret societies and vigilantes is a bit odd IMO. I didn't mention secret societies or vigilantes.
You seem to be making one hell of a meal out of something which is so simple.
-
You seem to be making one hell of a meal out of something which is so simple.
I asked you a simple question which you have refused to answer, just the usual state of affairs where you are concerned.
-
You don't get it at all, do you?. The McCanns are afraid of the truth! It's the couple and their followers who perpetrate myths and spread disinformation. The worst for them was when they found out that the police files were to be made public. They wrongly believed that they were going to be the only ones to have access to the police files and that they would be able to control any information given to the public. That must have been a huge shock for them.
Montclair, this doesn't sound quite like you.
Whether people agree or not about the files being uploaded to the Internet for hoi polloi to read as opposed to being made accessible to people with a legitimate interest, including accredited journalists bound by a code of ethics, or not... that happened in 2008.
-
I asked you a simple question which you have refused to answer, just the usual state of affairs where you are concerned.
I posted in response to a post by misty. You butted in rabbiting about Cliff Richard and later mithering that you had not mentioned vigil[ censored word]m; I had however in my original post. My position is plain; that you wish to turn it into something else or feign lack of understanding to further your own ends is your problem not mine.
Which bit of "I object to secret societies and vigil[ censored word]m" is taxing your brain so much?
-
I posted in response to a post by misty. You butted in rabbiting about Cliff Richard and later mithering that you had not mentioned vigil[ censored word]m; I had however in my original post. My position is plain; that you wish to turn it into something else or feign lack of understanding to further your own ends is your problem not mine.
Which bit of "I object to secret societies and vigil[ censored word]m" is taxing your brain so much?
The nature of forums is that they are conversational, involving more than two people (usually) and hence discussion is not always linear. You've made your position very clear concerning secret societies and vigilantes, time to move the conversation on now, so how about answering my question, or is that too much to ask?
-
You don't get it at all, do you?. The McCanns are afraid of the truth! It's the couple and their followers who perpetrate myths and spread disinformation. The worst for them was when they found out that the police files were to be made public. They wrongly believed that they were going to be the only ones to have access to the police files and that they would be able to control any information given to the public. That must have been a huge shock for them.
It was certainly a huge shock to the witnesses whose personal details Levy hadn't bothered to redact.
-
We appear to have slipped Off Topic. Can we please try and slip back on again. Thank you.
-
The nature of forums is that they are conversational, involving more than two people (usually) and hence discussion is not always linear. You've made your position very clear concerning secret societies and vigilantes, time to move the conversation on now, so how about answering my question, or is that too much to ask?
I have answered it. It is not my fault you cannot work it out.
-
It was certainly a huge shock to the witnesses whose personal details Levy hadn't bothered to redact.
Do you really believe that Levy wrote the PJ files? You do realise that they were given out by court officials to the persons who requested them? Such strange ideas some people have here.
-
Do you really believe that Levy wrote the PJ files? You do realise that they were given out by court officials to the persons who requested them? Such strange ideas some people have here.
Perhaps the only reason the Portuguese never prosecuted him was because what he put on the internet was not a true copy of the real files. Just a thought.
-
Do you really believe that Levy wrote the PJ files? You do realise that they were given out by court officials to the persons who requested them? Such strange ideas some people have here.
Indeed there are some exceedingly strange ideas held by some people and propagated day and daily on social media behind what some think of as a mask of anonymity. None so strange as #mccann.
Brenda Leyland as we now know was a fragile person caught up in this nonsense who suddenly found Brenda Leyland and not Sweepyface in the full media spotlight.
Now it is no-one's business but her that of her family and it will be their decision what to do with it.
If they believe there is a case to be made against Sky News they are perfectly capable of initiating that; if they wish to resume the normal lives of relative obscurity they had before they were dragged into the public domain by circumstances beyond their control that is what should happen.
However, yet again circumstances beyond their control are in control of their lives ... #mccann will see to that.
-
I have answered it. It is not my fault you cannot work it out.
So you're against any form of leaking stories to the press about potential crimes being investigated? Just so's we're one hundred percent clear.
-
So you're against any form of leaking stories to the press about potential crimes being investigated? Just so's we're one hundred percent clear.
Pretty much.
The press have no place in law enforcement. If someone suspects a crime has been committed it should be reported it to the agency which has responsibility and power to do something about it.The last time I looked that was the cops not the press. If you believe a free for all is a better proposition that's up to you.
-
Indeed there are some exceedingly strange ideas held by some people and propagated day and daily on social media behind what some think of as a mask of anonymity. None so strange as #mccann.
Brenda Leyland as we now know was a fragile person caught up in this nonsense who suddenly found Brenda Leyland and not Sweepyface in the full media spotlight.
Now it is no-one's business but her that of her family and it will be their decision what to do with it.
If they believe there is a case to be made against Sky News they are perfectly capable of initiating that; if they wish to resume the normal lives of relative obscurity they had before they were dragged into the public domain by circumstances beyond their control that is what should happen.
However, yet again circumstances beyond their control are in control of their lives ... #mccann will see to that.
&%+((£ Did that answer Montclair's question? Do you think Levy or the translators or both acted mischievously?
-
Pretty much.
The press have no place in law enforcement. If someone suspects a crime has been committed it should be reported it to the agency which has responsibility and power to do something about it.The last time I looked that was the cops not the press. If you believe a free for all is a better proposition that's up to you.
surely a free press helps prevent cover ups
-
&%+((£ Did that answer Montclair's question? Do you think Levy or the translators or both acted mischievously?
Sadly, I do. Especially Levy.
-
surely a free press helps prevent cover ups
That was not the argument.
Do you believe law enforcement should be left up to all and sundry according to their prejudices?
Do you believe all crime should be reported to the press on the basis they are straight and the cops are bent?
Proper investigative journalism has its place but that was not the topic under discussion.
-
&%+((£ Did that answer Montclair's question? Do you think Levy or the translators or both acted mischievously?
I haven't a clue what the motivation of the individuals you mention may have been there are others far more qualified than I who can give first hand information on the character of the main player.
**snip
"The conclusion that I arrived is that this man exhibits a pattern of systematic lies, of compulsive nature, he is someone who is a fantasist, a megalomaniac and without any doubts a pathological liar."
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id71.html
-
Sadly, I do. Especially Levy.
That goes without saying.
But after all this time do you have any examples to support your claim?
-
That goes without saying.
But after all this time do you have any examples to support your claim?
I don't have the time or the patience to prove what everyone knows to be true. Ask Joana Morais. She knows what he was up to.
-
I don't have the time or the patience to prove what everyone knows to be true. Ask Joana Morais. She knows what he was up to.
She doesn't say the English translations can't be trusted.
I'm not bothered about Levy.
-
I haven't a clue what the motivation of the individuals you mention may have been there are others far more qualified than I who can give first hand information on the character of the main player.
**snip
"The conclusion that I arrived is that this man exhibits a pattern of systematic lies, of compulsive nature, he is someone who is a fantasist, a megalomaniac and without any doubts a pathological liar."
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id71.html
And that was written by a committed McCann Sceptic!
-
A lone voice perhaps: I don't think that anyone altered the files.
There have been translation errors and bits missed out, since corrected when in dispute and have been pointed out, but I really doubt that they were deliberate.
There are also pages on mccannpjfiles which aren't in fact file documents. Sometimes these are labelled as not from the original files, sometimes not. There are also one or two misleading titles, such as "blood spatters", referring to the photos marking DNA (of no specified origin and including the DNA of one of the cops) of the living-room wall.
The selective use of parts of the files by bloggers and forums seems to be a different issue.
-
Thanks Carana ?{)(**
-
She doesn't say the English translations can't be trusted.
I'm not bothered about Levy.
Not bothered by the horrendous damage Levy did? I am.
-
A lone voice perhaps: I don't think that anyone altered the files.
There have been translation errors and bits missed out, since corrected when in dispute and have been pointed out, but I really doubt that they were deliberate.
There are also pages on mccannpjfiles which aren't in fact file documents. Sometimes these are labelled as not from the original files, sometimes not. There are also one or two misleading titles, such as "blood spatters", referring to the photos marking DNA (of no specified origin and including the DNA of one of the cops) of the living-room wall.
The selective use of parts of the files by bloggers and forums seems to be a different issue.
This comment is probably more to the point.
-
A lone voice perhaps: I don't think that anyone altered the files.
There have been translation errors and bits missed out, since corrected when in dispute and have been pointed out, but I really doubt that they were deliberate.
There are also pages on mccannpjfiles which aren't in fact file documents. Sometimes these are labelled as not from the original files, sometimes not. There are also one or two misleading titles, such as "blood spatters", referring to the photos marking DNA (of no specified origin and including the DNA of one of the cops) of the living-room wall.
The selective use of parts of the files by bloggers and forums seems to be a different issue.
8((()*/
-
If Brenda hadn't tweeted 50 abusive posts a day she may still be alive
, the police said that none of her tweets were criminal! There was no reason for her to die. Expressing her opinion and not believing the McCanns are not crimes punishable by death.
-
, the police said that none of her tweets were criminal! There was no reason for her to die. Expressing her opinion and not believing the McCanns are not crimes punishable by death.
they were abusive...she decided to spend her time being abusive to the McCanns. She had already attempted suicide...so what caused that...she had a history of mental illness....that's why she committed suicide
-
Sadly, I do. Especially Levy.
AFAIK, the McCanns paid £ 100.000,-- to have the police files translated and if you think that the files available on the internet are not kosher you can always ask them to make theirs available for others to read. It seems that the parents have never complained about the translations on the internet.
ETA: The files available on internet that I read are not translated by Levy.
-
8((()*/
There may still be errors of translation. The original of the statement from the woman who left her apartment with her OH and passed by 5A, for example. "Prédio" has been translated as apartment, when it apparently means building, unless someone can confirm that that is not the case.
-
they were abusive...she decided to spend her time being abusive to the McCanns. She had already attempted suicide...so what caused that...she had a history of mental illness....that's why she committed suicide
In your desperation to excuse any kind of interference by those who compiled the dossier and those who doorstepped Brenda, you want us to believe that she just woke up one morning, out of the blue, thinking: "I must kill myself." No catalyst, no cause and effect.
-
There may still be errors of translation. The original of the statement from the woman who left her apartment with her OH and passed by 5A, for example. "Prédio" has been translated as apartment, when it apparently means building, unless someone can confirm that that is not the case.
The woman's apartment was obviously located in the "prédio" or building.
-
, the police said that none of her tweets were criminal! There was no reason for her to die. Expressing her opinion and not believing the McCanns are not crimes punishable by death.
You know that ... I know that ... unfortunately a person whose balance of mind is disturbed doesn't rationalise situations as we might.
-
In your desperation to excuse any kind of interference by those who compiled the dossier and those who doorstepped Brenda, you want us to believe that she just woke up one morning, out of the blue, thinking: "I must kill myself." No catalyst, no cause and effect.
Sometimes there is no obvious "catalyst, no cause and effect" for suicide.
-
Sometimes there is no obvious "catalyst, no cause and effect" for suicide.
What was her state of mind when she tried to commit suicide before?
Was this a cry for help, but went too far?
-
In your desperation to excuse any kind of interference by those who compiled the dossier and those who doorstepped Brenda, you want us to believe that she just woke up one morning, out of the blue, thinking: "I must kill myself." No catalyst, no cause and effect.
people have endured much more than Brenda and not committed suicide.....Brenda was mentally ill...that's why she committed suicide...it wasn't Brunt's fault
-
they were abusive...she decided to spend her time being abusive to the McCanns. She had already attempted suicide...so what caused that...she had a history of mental illness....that's why she committed suicide
No, the coroner did clearly state what happened to her the previous week contributed.
So you are wasting your time with your rhetoric.
-
No, the coroner did clearly state what happened to her the previous week contributed.
So you are wasting your time.
no I am not..a sane person would not have committed suicide...Christopher Jeffries,,,arrested for the murder of Joanna Yates did not commit suicide. Brenda suffered from mental illness...that's why she committed suicide
-
AFAIK, the McCanns paid £ 100.000,-- to have the police files translated and if you think that the files available on the internet are not kosher you can always ask them to make theirs available for others to read. It seems that the parents have never complained about the translations on the internet.
ETA: The files available on internet that I read are not translated by Levy.
The fact that the the Drs McCann employed professional translators in the translation of the original is indicative that the speedily carried out translations by volunteers were not considered fit for purpose.
-
people have endured much more than Brenda and not committed suicide.....Brenda was mentally ill...that's why she committed suicide...it wasn't Brunt's fault
Mr "I never called her mentally ill" davel calls her mentally ill.
Quelle surprise!
-
no I am not..a sane person would not have committed suicide...Christopher Jeffries,,,arrested for the murder of Joanna Yates did not commit suicide. Brenda suffered from mental illness...that's why she committed suicide
So now she was insane too?
Please do stop your vendetta against a deceased person.
Nobody is supporting what you're saying about her here - doesn't tell tell you something!
-
So now she was insane too?
Please do stop your vendetta against a deceased person.
Nobody is supporting what you're saying about her here - doesn't tell tell you something!
Brenda Leyland was mentally unbalanced. Anyone who commits suicide, or even tries to is mentally unbalanced. And she had tried to before. What triggered that? Something must have done. And it won't have been Martin Brunt.
I don't know why she spent so much of her life pursuing a vendetta against The McCanns, but it was hardly healthy.
-
So now she was insane too?
Please do stop your vendetta against a deceased person.
Nobody is supporting what you're saying about her here - doesn't tell tell you something!
There is no vendetta here against Brenda. If you have ever suffered from any form of mental illness as opposed to physical illness, you would understand that behavioural thoughts & patterns alter. Problems are magnified, and what a "normal, rational person" can cope with, a clinically depressed person cannot. Sometimes that results in suicide - the irreversible choice of alleviating suffering.
-
There is no vendetta here against Brenda. If you have ever suffered from any form of mental illness as opposed to physical illness, you would understand that behavioural thoughts & patterns alter. Problems are magnified, and what a "normal, rational person" can cope with, a clinically depressed person cannot. Sometimes that results in suicide - the irreversible choice of alleviating suffering.
Depression isn't "mental illness", and those using Citalopram do not have "mental illness" either.
-
Brenda Leyland was mentally unbalanced. Anyone who commits suicide, or even tries to is mentally unbalanced. And she had tried to before. What triggered that? Something must have done. And it won't have been Martin Brunt.
I don't know why she spent so much of her life pursuing a vendetta against The McCanns, but it was hardly healthy.
I definitely echo your second sentence. There are posters - here, twitter, facebook, anywhere - who are rational in their discussing of topics or cases (any case, not just this one), and there are those who are clearly irrational.
Irrationality online doesn't equate to insanity or "mental illness" though.
-
I definitely echo your second sentence. There are posters - here, twitter, facebook, anywhere - who are rational in their discussing of topics or cases (any case, not just this one), and there are those who are clearly irrational.
Irrationality online doesn't equate to insanity or "mental illness" though.
What does it equate to?
-
Depression isn't "mental illness", and those using Citalopram do not have "mental illness" either.
Depression is a mental illness. If it isn't what is it?
-
What does it equate to?
Just irrationality, but there are obviously degrees of it. No way was Brenda anywhere near the most irrational of those discussing this case.
-
Depression is a mental illness. If it isn't what is it?
I'm not a doctor, it depends on diagnosis I guess. But people using the term "mental illness" may be using it mischievously.
-
I'm not a doctor, it depends on diagnosis I guess. But people using the term "mental illness" may be using it mischievously.
Clinical depression can be treated and controlled with medication, it most certainly is an illness and a serious one at that. Anyone trying to minimise the impact and seriousness of depression clearly has little understanding of how debilitating it can be. It can destroy lives and often does. One of my colleagues threw himself under a train when in his mid-20s. On the outside he was a successful young man with a beautiful fiancé and everything to live for. No one had an inkling of what lay on the inside however.
-
Depression isn't "mental illness", and those using Citalopram do not have "mental illness" either.
Clinical depression falls within the boundaries of mental health and is an illness. Citalopram is often used as a relatively safe means of raising deficiencies of certain neurotransmitters produced in the brain, the lack of which apparently a cause of depression. Citalopram can also be used to treat other physical symptoms.
As someone who has had cause to deal with mental health issues, I can assure you that clinical depression is indeed a "mental illness" so please do not pretend you know better.
-
Clinical depression can be treated and controlled with medication, it most certainly is an illness and a serious one at that. Anyone trying to minimise the impact and seriousness of depression clearly has little understanding of how debilitating it can be. It can destroy lives and often does. One of my colleagues threw himself under a train when in his mid-20s. On the outside he was a successful young man with a beautiful fiancé and everything to live for. No one had an inkling of what lay on the inside however.
Don't pretend you don't know what I mean by saying some people will describe people as "mentally ill" to abuse/smear them.
I'm not a doc but know all about depression/treatment thanks. Who doesn't? Everyone has had experience of it through either their family, friends, or themselves.
Ask people being treated for depression if they appreciate being called "mentally ill".
-
I'm not a doctor, it depends on diagnosis I guess. But people using the term "mental illness" may be using it mischievously.
The coroner, her son and physiciatrist used the term.
-
Don't pretend you don't know what I mean by saying some people will describe people as "mentally ill" to abuse/smear them.
I'm not a doc but know all about depression/treatment thanks. Who doesn't? Everyone has had experience of it through either their family, friends, or themselves.
Ask people being treated for depression if they appreciate being called "mentally ill".
Oh right, so now we're not allowed to call people with a mental illness "mentally ill". I do beg your pardon. Brenda had a mental illness but she was not mentally ill, hope that's cleared that up.
-
Don't pretend you don't know what I mean by saying some people will describe people as "mentally ill" to abuse/smear them.
I'm not a doc but know all about depression/treatment thanks. Who doesn't? Everyone has had experience of it through either their family, friends, or themselves.
Ask people being treated for depression if they appreciate being called "mentally ill".
Brenda had received treatment from a psychiatrist. Most people suffering from depression are treated by their GP. Brenda had already tried to commit suicide. I think saying that she had suffered from mental illness is quite accurate...perhaps you don't like the truth and want to pretend her death was all Brunt's fault..it wasn't.
-
Brenda had received treatment from a psychiatrist. Most people suffering from depression are treated by their GP. Brenda had already tried to commit suicide. I think saying that she had suffered from mental illness is quite accurate...perhaps you don't like the truth and want to pretend her death was all Brunt's fault..it wasn't.
No mate, I have no agenda. The action they took was idiotic and commercial, not criminal (assuming nothing occurred that we don't know about).
-
Don't pretend you don't know what I mean by saying some people will describe people as "mentally ill" to abuse/smear them.
I'm not a doc but know all about depression/treatment thanks. Who doesn't? Everyone has had experience of it through either their family, friends, or themselves.
Ask people being treated for depression if they appreciate being called "mentally ill".
I'm surprised to hear you say that Lyall - I thought the days when mental illness carried a stigma were long gone. I certainly don't think any of our members would use it as a form of abuse - or to smear a person.
-
I'm surprised to hear you say that Lyall - I thought the days when mental illness carried a stigma were long gone. I certainly don't think any of our members would use it as a form of abuse - or to smear a person.
?>)()< Glad to hear it. I wouldn't expect it from rational peeps, and most of us here are rational.
-
Those who keep insisting that Brenda Leyland was mentally ill want to to get the idea over that anyone who doubts the McCanns must be mentally ill. Otherwise they would accept the fairy tale.
-
Those who keep insisting that Brenda Leyland was mentally ill want to to get the idea over that anyone who doubts the McCanns must be mentally ill. Otherwise they would accept the fairy tale.
The coroner insisted she was mentally ill.
Her son insisted she was mentally ill.
Her Phsyciatrist insisted she was mentally ill.
I don't think any of the above had any doubts or support the McCanns. Did they accept the fairy tale.
-
The coroner insisted she was mentally ill.
Her son insisted she was mentally ill.
Her Phsyciatrist insisted she was mentally ill.
I don't think any of the above had any doubts or support the McCanns. Did they accept the fairy tale.
You can provide quotes from all three people saying that I presume?
No need to go looking because I know you can't find them stating any such thing so bluntly, and certainly not her son.
Have you not been following discussion following the Germanwings plane crash? People are being urged to not call even the allegedly murdering pilot mentally ill or anything so crude, because it stigmatises or risks stigmatising all those suffering from depression.
It's the exact same issue as our comparatively tiny debate here.
-
You can provide quotes from all three people saying that I presume?
No need to go looking because I know you can't find them stating any such thing so bluntly, and certainly not her son.
Have you not been following discussion following the Germanwings plane crash? People are being urged to not call even the allegedly murdering pilot mentally ill or anything so crude, because it stigmatises or risks stigmatising all those suffering from depression.
It's the exact same issue as our comparatively tiny debate here.
Took me about two minutes for the first one ...
**snip
'I got an email from mum on Wednesday saying she felt "cheerier".
'My mum has always struggled with depression and has undergone therapy and psychiatric treatment.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3004290/Sky-TV-reporter-devastated-suicide-McCann-
-
Davel and others have, on more than one occasion, accused posters here of being mentally ill. on account of being a 'sceptic' That is a fact. and I have complained about it. It has also been mentioned that sceptics have low intellegence, by the 'supporters'. It ony proves they have no argument.
Being diagnosed as 'mentally ill' does not necessarlity mean you suffer from depression. It could be someone has psychotic tendancies, is a psychopath, has varying degrees of schizophrenia, and many other ailments, or more complex mental health conditions.
Some drugs used to treat Depression are used to treat physical symptoms, as it may be deemed the physical symptoms are a result of stress, anxiety, depression.
To call someone who has a mental health condition'mentally ill' is disgraceful and cruel. to call someone who does not have a MH condition is bullying and pathetic.
-
Took me about two minutes for the first one ...
**snip
'I got an email from mum on Wednesday saying she felt "cheerier".
'My mum has always struggled with depression and has undergone therapy and psychiatric treatment.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3004290/Sky-TV-reporter-devastated-suicide-McCann-
&%+((£ I know I need new glasses but where do the words mentally ill appear in those sentences?
-
You can provide quotes from all three people saying that I presume?
No need to go looking because I know you can't find them stating any such thing so bluntly, and certainly not her son.
Have you not been following discussion following the Germanwings plane crash? People are being urged to not call even the allegedly murdering pilot mentally ill or anything so crude, because it stigmatises or risks stigmatising all those suffering from depression.
It's the exact same issue as our comparatively tiny debate here.
can you provide a quote for that
-
You can provide quotes from all three people saying that I presume?
No need to go looking because I know you can't find them stating any such thing so bluntly, and certainly not her son.
Have you not been following discussion following the Germanwings plane crash? People are being urged to not call even the allegedly murdering pilot mentally ill or anything so crude, because it stigmatises or risks stigmatising all those suffering from depression.
It's the exact same issue as our comparatively tiny debate here.
I think stigmatising mental illness is not to discuss it openly as if it were something shameful ... in my younger day cancer was rarely discussed and then only in whispers.
I think the problem with Brenda Leyland's mental illness is not that it stigmatises her ... it is because it goes a long part of the way to explaining her behaviour, even her suicide, leaving little credibility to the attempt at blaming and smearing Martin Brunt.
-
Took me about two minutes for the first one ...
**snip
'I got an email from mum on Wednesday saying she felt "cheerier".
'My mum has always struggled with depression and has undergone therapy and psychiatric treatment.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3004290/Sky-TV-reporter-devastated-suicide-McCann-
not the same quotes at all..in fact QUITE DIFFERENT.
"The coroner insisted she was mentally ill.
Her son insisted she was mentally ill.
Her Phsyciatrist insisted she was mentally ill"
-
&%+((£ I know I need new glasses but where do the words mentally ill appear in those sentences?
I doubt if she was receiving psychiatric treatment for an ingrowing toenail ... obviously you know better.
-
Davel and others have, on more than one occasion, accused posters here of being mentally ill. on account of being a 'sceptic' That is a fact. and I have complained about it. It has also been mentioned that sceptics have low intellegence, by the 'supporters'. It ony proves they have no argument.
Being diagnosed as 'mentally ill' does not necessarlity mean you suffer from depression. It could be someone has psychotic tendancies, is a psychopath, has varying degrees of schizophrenia, and many other ailments, or more complex mental health conditions.
Some drugs used to treat Depression are used to treat physical symptoms, as it may be deemed the physical symptoms are a result of stress, anxiety, depression.
To call someone who has a mental health condition'mentally ill' is disgraceful and cruel. to call someone who does not have a MH condition is bullying and pathetic.
Calling someone who has a mental illness mentally ill is medically correct....nothing cruel about it
-
Diagnosed depression is generally considered a mental disorder or illness. Unless it is diagnosed it would be considered being a bit low.
-
I think stigmatising mental illness is not to discuss it openly as if it were something shameful ... in my younger day cancer was rarely discussed and then only in whispers.
I think the problem with Brenda Leyland's mental illness is not that it stigmatises her ... it is because it goes a long part of the way to explaining her behaviour, even her suicide, leaving little credibility to the attempt at blaming and smearing Martin Brunt.
That is exactly the point...al blame must be put on Brunt,,,where realistically it seems Brenda was a suicide waiting to happen.
-
I doubt if she was receiving psychiatric treatment for an ingrowing toenail ... obviously you know better.
We're talking about people being crude (at best - ideological at worst) by using the term "mentally ill". As Miss Taken says it's both crude and abusive to be summarising someone's condition with those two words.
-
Brenda's mental state at the time of her death has not been established, other than her death was suicide.
It should also be noted, that no one knows why Brenda was having therapy and Psychiatirc input. there are many reasons,
Being physically/menatally abused as a child, death of a family member/friend/losing a job, getting divorced, abusinve partner /husband/ a rape victim or child abuse victim.
-
We're talking about people being crude (at best - ideological at worst) by using the term "mentally ill". As Miss Taken says it's both crude and abusive to be summarising someone's condition with those two words.
as someone with clinical depression and severe anxiety i dont conside rmyself to be mentally ill either do anyone else i know my medications control it as does seeing a therapist peoples ignorance is why people try and hide depression
-
We're talking about people being crude (at best - ideological at worst) by using the term "mentally ill". As Miss Taken says it's both crude and abusive to be summarising someone's condition with those two words.
It is not crude...it's the correct term...Brenda on the other hand used some very crude language
-
as someone with clinical depression and severe anxiety i dont conside rmyself to be mentally ill either do anyone else i know my medications control it as does seeing a therapist peoples ignorance is why people try and hide depression
8((()*/ Well said Carly.
-
as someone with clinical depression and severe anxiety i dont conside rmyself to be mentally ill either do anyone else i know my medications control it as does seeing a therapist peoples ignorance is why people try and hide depression
You don't consider yourself to be mentally but your doctor might
-
Brenda's mental state at the time of her death has not been established, other than her death was suicide.
It should also be noted, that no one knows why Brenda was having therapy and Psychiatirc input. there are many reasons,
Being physically/menatally abused as a child, death of a family member/friend/losing a job, getting divorced, abusinve partner /husband/ a rape victim or child abuse victim.
Brenda had a history of mental illness.....fact
-
I think stigmatising mental illness is not to discuss it openly as if it were something shameful ... in my younger day cancer was rarely discussed and then only in whispers.
I think the problem with Brenda Leyland's mental illness is not that it stigmatises her ... it is because it goes a long part of the way to explaining her behaviour, even her suicide, leaving little credibility to the attempt at blaming and smearing Martin Brunt.
I hope for her estranged son's sake that her suicide was connected to mental illness. If not then it makes the fact that she chose to do it on his birthday horribly cruel IMO.
Mental illness does at least give some mitigation for her actions and may bring him a little comfort.
-
Definition
By Mayo Clinic Staff
Mental illness refers to a wide range of mental health conditions — disorders that affect your mood, thinking and behavior. Examples of mental illness include depression, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, eating disorders and addictive behaviors.
-
8((()*/ Well said Carly.
you are welcome brenda wasnt mentally ill either she had a opinion that wasnt what some people believe to be politically correct and she was harrased for it in life and still is being in death shameful really isnt it
-
It is not crude...it's the correct term...Brenda on the other hand used some very crude language
I do not agree with Brenda's style of twitter, I did not feel she was any worse than some supporters, she certainly didn't deserve to die a tortured soul, Brunt played a major part as did the dossier compiler.
-
Well whatever. Brenda tweeted 424 times against the McCanns non of which constituted a criminal offence.
-
you are welcome brenda wasnt mentally ill either she had a opinion that wasnt what some people believe to be politically correct and she was harrased for it in life and still is being in death shameful really isnt it
I think so. It's revealing that some of the same people who criticise others for misquoting or cherry picking from articles do exactly the same thing themselves with the articles that covered Brenda's inquest.
-
I do not agree with Brenda's style of twitter, I did not feel she was any worse than some supporters, she certianly didn't deserve to die a tortured soul, Brunt played a major part as did the dossier compiler.
I'm merely giving my opinion as to why Brenda committed suicide ...a long history of mental illness is the major cause of her suicide...
-
Well whatever. Brenda tweeted 424 times against the McCanns non of which constituted a criminal offence.
what difference does that make...they were certainly abusive...
-
I'm merely giving my opinion as to why Brenda committed suicide ...a long history of mental illness is the major cause of her suicide...
Your opinion is neither here nor there, the coroner has given her opinion and she said what happened to Brenda that week contributed.
How much it did you can't know, I can't and neither can the coroner.
-
Your opinion is neither here nor there, the coroner has given her opinion and she said what happened to Brenda that week contributed.
How much it did you can't know, I can't and neither can the coroner.
it only takes one thing to put someone over the edge
-
Your opinion is neither here nor there, the coroner has given her opinion and she said what happened to Brenda that week contributed.
How much it did you can't know, I can't and neither can the coroner.
My opinion is a valid as any other on here....Brunt was a mere straw added to the camels back...the heavy load was already there...isn't that what her son said?....or is his opinion of no importancce
-
it only takes one thing to put someone over the edge
Only if you are at the edge..as Brenda obviously was
-
My opinion is a valid as any other on here....Brunt was a mere straw added to the camels back...the heavy load was already there...isn't that what her son said?....or is his opinion of no importancce
No that isn't what her son said.
-
No that isn't what her son said.
imagine being shown worldwide accused of trolling for having a opinion that would put anybody over the edge
-
imagine being shown worldwide accused of trolling for having a opinion that would put anybody over the edge
It might very well, if you realised that what you were doing was morally wrong and you were unhappy that people who knew a different persona knew about it.
Why would doing something you believed was right and just push you over the edge ... unless you knew it wasn't?
-
You can provide quotes from all three people saying that I presume?
No need to go looking because I know you can't find them stating any such thing so bluntly, and certainly not her son.
Have you not been following discussion following the Germanwings plane crash? People are being urged to not call even the allegedly murdering pilot mentally ill or anything so crude, because it stigmatises or risks stigmatising all those suffering from depression.
It's the exact same issue as our comparatively tiny debate here.
Mrs Leyland’s youngest son, Ben, disclosed that his mother had previously suffered with mental illness.
In a statement read to the coroner, he described his attempts to contact her in the wake of the report being broadcast on Sky.
“My mother had always struggled with depression and was prone to anxiety and physical health issues she had been told were effectively untreatable,” he said.
“There is no doubt in my mind that the Sky News interview was the final straw that pushed her to do what she did.”
-
imagine being shown worldwide accused of trolling for having a opinion that would put anybody over the edge
It might Carly. Perhaps people didn't appreciate before this happened just how shocking it could be. It never crossed my mind seeing the video that this might happen, even though you could see clearly how shocked Brenda was. Hopefully after this in future they'll not be so reckless.
-
Mrs Leyland’s youngest son, Ben, disclosed that his mother had previously suffered with mental illness.
In a statement read to the coroner, he described his attempts to contact her in the wake of the report being broadcast on Sky.
“My mother had always struggled with depression and was prone to anxiety and physical health issues she had been told were effectively untreatable,” he said.
“There is no doubt in my mind that the Sky News interview was the final straw that pushed her to do what she did.”
That's a headine written by a journalist (or someone in the office), not a direct quotation.
-
It might Carly. Perhaps people didn't appreciate before this happened just how shocking it could be. But it never crossed my mind seeing the video that this might happen, even though you could see clearly how shocked Brenda was. Hopefully after this in future they'll not be so reckless.
People with depression usually act tough but are very fragile its a self preservation mode. Most people in my life don't know I have it only my close friends and family. I'm more open about it now than I used to be though.
-
Like a flock of vultures picking over a corpse.
I have done that one before and the mods didn't like it; but the thread goes on and on and on and bleedin' on.
Tune in next week.
-
People with depression usually act tough but are very fragile its a self preservation mode. Most people in my life don't know I have it only my close friends and family. I'm more open about it now than I used to be though.
It beats me why they can't just agree that Sky News were reckless. They have I think achieved the opposite of what they intended so why would people be supporting what they did?
-
It beats me why they can't just agree that Sky News were reckless. They have I think achieved the opposite of what they intended so why would people be supporting what they did?
maybe because they know deep in their hearts if they had not taken the law into their own hands for a family they dont even know or do they????) brenda would still be alive?? i would be ashamed if my online internet actions caused a women to kiill herself im sure most would
-
There really doesn't appear to be much of a stigma attached to classifying mental disorders of varying types and degrees as mental illness.
There is absolutely nothing pejorative about it as is understood by most people.
**snip
Mental disorder
A mental disorder, also called a mental illness or psychiatric disorder, is a mental or behavioural pattern or anomaly that causes either suffering or an impaired ability to function in ordinary life (disability), and which is not a developmental or social norm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_disorder
**snip
Dark thoughts: why mental illness is on the rise in academia
http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2014/mar/06/mental-health-academics-growing-problem-pressure-university
**snip
The Epidemic of Mental Illness: Why?
Marcia Angell
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/jun/23/epidemic-mental-illness-why/
**snip
Recover
Your Self-esteem, Your Identity, Your Self-worth, Your Dreams, Your Pride, Your Dignity, and a Meaningful Life
Each year we serve in excess of 700 adults in Licking/Knox counties who experience serious and persistent mental illness, including schizophrenia, bi-polar disorders, clinical depression, and panic and anxiety disorders. Without these services and support, many of our members would reside in a state psychiatric institution or other restrictive living environment.
http://www.themainplace.org/?gclid=Cj0KEQjw6OOoBRDP9uG4oqzUv7kBEiQA0sRYBIc7_3WFLv3N2rRNmucuC7axRmmGB52Zex0m0XIA9hwaAsFO8P8HAQ
-
maybe because they know deep in their hearts if they had not taken the law into their own hands for a family they dont even know or do they????) brenda would still be alive?? i would be ashamed if my online internet actions caused a women to kiill herself im sure most would
I think Sky News may have done what they did with or without the information Brunt had in his hands, Carly. It was no secret that they were already well aware of what was happening online with this case, and almost all discussion is public anyway (and quickly locatable).
I'm sure nobody could have or did force Sky News producers to do what they did. It was their decision. I'm not comfortable with blaming individuals, but clearly that huge organisation ought to have been more responsible imo.
-
I think Sky News may have done what they did with or without the information Brunt had in his hands, Carly. It was no secret that they were already well aware of what was happening online with this case, and almost all discussion is public.
I'm sure nobody could have or did force Sky News producers to do what they did. It was their decision. I'm not comfortable with blaming individuals, but clearly that huge organisation ought to have been more responsible imo.
Hindsight with it's 20-20 vision is a wonderful thing - and it's so easy to be wise after the event.
I agree with the Coroner that no-one who didn't know about BL's mental state or her mental history could have been expected to foresee her suicide.
Even her own family - who did know - had no idea what she was going to to. That says it all for me.
-
Hindsight with it's 20-20 vision is a wonderful thing - and it's so easy to be wise after the event.
I agree with the Coroner that no-one who didn't know about BL's mental state or her mental history could have been expected to foresee her suicide.
Even her own family - who did know - had no idea what she was going to to. That says it all for me.
But you can't criticise the way they did it? Singling out one person? 'Trolling' is a massive issue for the online world, that's much discussed - singling out just one person to be all over the newspapers as the public face of all internet 'trolling' is not responsible. It is sensationalist - Brunt could easily have done the item, without the sensationalist expose of just one person, and without the dramatic anonymous woman bit as well (that served no purpose other than sensationalism either).
You don't criticise this? A serious piece about 'trolling' could have been done easily with JG/S&S, without the need to expose someone (accent on one).
-
But you can't criticise the way they did it? Singling out one person? 'Trolling' is a massive issue for the online world, that's much discussed - singling out just one person to be all over the newspapers as the public face of all internet 'trolling' is not responsible. It is sensationalist - Brunt could easily have done the item, without the sensationalist expose of just one person, and without the dramatic anonymous woman bit as well (that served no purpose other than sensationalism either).
You don't criticise this? A serious piece about 'trolling' could have been done easily with JG/S&S, without the need to expose someone (accent on one).
A "serious piece" had already been done in 2013, including a TV programme.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415122/Twitter-troll-unmasked-Father-Britains-vilest-internet-trolls-exposed-posting-sick-jokes-Hillsborough-disaster.html
And maybe, just maybe, if this guy had been prosecuted for posts far more offensive than BL's, others would have thought twice about what they were writing.
http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/did-Old-Holborn-escape-prosecution/story-19982134-detail/story.html
-
Like a flock of vultures picking over a corpse.
I have done that one before and the mods didn't like it; but the thread goes on and on and on and bleedin' on.
Tune in next week.
surely that's how you could describe this whole forum...and all the others dedicated to harassing the McCanns
-
No that isn't what her son said.
A direct quote from her son...
There is no doubt in my mind that the Sky News interview was the final straw that pushed her to do what she did.”
This proves Brenda was already at the edge.....The idea that Brunt hounded her to her death is just another myth created by the sceptics who want to believe that the McCanns are responsible for just about everything
-
surely that's how you could describe this whole forum...and all the others dedicated to harassing the McCanns
I'm sure that you would love to make doubting and questioning the McCanns a criminal act.
-
A "serious piece" had already been done in 2013, including a TV programme.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415122/Twitter-troll-unmasked-Father-Britains-vilest-internet-trolls-exposed-posting-sick-jokes-Hillsborough-disaster.html
And maybe, just maybe, if this guy had been prosecuted for posts far more offensive than BL's, others would have thought twice about what they were writing.
http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/did-Old-Holborn-escape-prosecution/story-19982134-detail/story.html
Absolutely correct, Misty.
It has been my opinion for some time that had some of the nastier elements indulging themselves in abusing innocent people been prosecuted, others who believed they were "entitled" to follow suit - such as Brenda Leyland - might have thought twice about what they were doing.
In the McCann case that could have been accomplished with ease ... unless publishing obscene photo shopped images - obscene poems etc are within the law, as seemed to be the case with issuing threats.
The Law on Freedom of Speech ... according to Old Holburn
"There is no case to answer", says the nice man at the Criminal Prosecution Service.
Quite right too.
This is a battle that needed to be had and I'm glad that I tested the new Social Media Free Speech guidelines to destruction.
I make no disguise of my wish to live in a society where I may speak freely and am comforted that I still have the right to upset a few grief city victim whores who wish to impose their version of the written word upon the rest of us. Tough luck, guys, I won't be silenced.
You have every right to be offended, and in return, I have every right to offend you – officially. So keep your endless screen shots, your faux outrage on behalf of others, your death threats, your endless reporting to the police and your indignation to yourself.
If you don't like what I write, don't bother reading it, don't follow me on Twitter and don't send my family and work colleagues death threats – just ignore me.
And be thankful that now you too have the right to offend whomsoever you choose.
Now, where's the champagne?
Read more: http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/did-Old-Holborn-escape-prosecution/story-19982134-detail/story.html#ixzz3Vx3HhJZ6
-
surely that's how you could describe this whole forum...and all the others dedicated to harassing the McCanns
The thread title is "Brenda Leyland. Coroner's Court reconvenes on 20 March 2015".
It convened on 20th March the coroner came to a conclusion line drawn. Yet here we are eleven days later all the medical experts on this forum ( @)(++(*) rabbiting ineffectually about it. Job jobbed time to derig the cranes and f*** o** offsite to the butty wagon.
-
I'm sure that you would love to make doubting and questioning the McCanns a criminal act.
Perhaps a more informative route for Sky News and Martin Brunt to have gone down once the dossier was in their hands was to question the police as to exactly what they intended to do with the information contained within it and how far their investigation had progressed.
I think the McCann family has a right to expect the same protection you or I would expect from the law of the land ... and I would expect an eight year campaign of harassment and libel to be investigated if directed at me ... wouldn't you expect the same?
No ... of course you wouldn't ... wouldn't bother you in the slightest.
-
Absolutely correct, Misty.
It has been my opinion for some time that had some of the nastier elements indulging themselves in abusing innocent people been prosecuted, others who believed they were "entitled" to follow suit - such as Brenda Leyland - might have thought twice about what they were doing.
In the McCann case that could have been accomplished with ease ... unless publishing obscene photo shopped images - obscene poems etc are within the law, as seemed to be the case with issuing threats.
The Law on Freedom of Speech ... according to Old Holburn
"There is no case to answer", says the nice man at the Criminal Prosecution Service.
Quite right too.
This is a battle that needed to be had and I'm glad that I tested the new Social Media Free Speech guidelines to destruction.
I make no disguise of my wish to live in a society where I may speak freely and am comforted that I still have the right to upset a few grief city victim whores who wish to impose their version of the written word upon the rest of us. Tough luck, guys, I won't be silenced.
You have every right to be offended, and in return, I have every right to offend you – officially. So keep your endless screen shots, your faux outrage on behalf of others, your death threats, your endless reporting to the police and your indignation to yourself.
If you don't like what I write, don't bother reading it, don't follow me on Twitter and don't send my family and work colleagues death threats – just ignore me.
And be thankful that now you too have the right to offend whomsoever you choose.
Now, where's the champagne?
Read more: http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/did-Old-Holborn-escape-prosecution/story-19982134-detail/story.html#ixzz3Vx3HhJZ6
8@??)( Well said that man !
-
Absolutely correct, Misty.
It has been my opinion for some time that had some of the nastier elements indulging themselves in abusing innocent people been prosecuted, others who believed they were "entitled" to follow suit - such as Brenda Leyland - might have thought twice about what they were doing.
In the McCann case that could have been accomplished with ease ... unless publishing obscene photo shopped images - obscene poems etc are within the law, as seemed to be the case with issuing threats.
The Law on Freedom of Speech ... according to Old Holburn
"There is no case to answer", says the nice man at the Criminal Prosecution Service.
Quite right too.
This is a battle that needed to be had and I'm glad that I tested the new Social Media Free Speech guidelines to destruction.
I make no disguise of my wish to live in a society where I may speak freely and am comforted that I still have the right to upset a few grief city victim whores who wish to impose their version of the written word upon the rest of us. Tough luck, guys, I won't be silenced.
You have every right to be offended, and in return, I have every right to offend you – officially. So keep your endless screen shots, your faux outrage on behalf of others, your death threats, your endless reporting to the police and your indignation to yourself.
If you don't like what I write, don't bother reading it, don't follow me on Twitter and don't send my family and work colleagues death threats – just ignore me.
And be thankful that now you too have the right to offend whomsoever you choose.
Now, where's the champagne?
Read more: http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/did-Old-Holborn-escape-prosecution/story-19982134-detail/story.html#ixzz3Vx3HhJZ6
What a murky bit of the internet you must frequent.
-
What a murky bit of the internet you must frequent.
Sigh ... the murkiness lies in the souls of those who see fit to post such obscenities, and in those who applaud, share and t(w)itter over them.
Glad we have agreement on that, although "murky" is too kind an adjective to use for them.
-
Sigh ... the murkiness lies in the souls of those who see fit to post such obscenities, and in those who applaud, share and t(w)itter over them.
Glad we have agreement on that, although "murky" is too kind an adjective to use for them.
So tell me Brietta who decides what is obscene and what is not ?
-
Sigh ... the murkiness lies in the souls of those who see fit to post such obscenities, and in those who applaud, share and t(w)itter over them.
Glad we have agreement on that, although "murky" is too kind an adjective to use for them.
Oh yes, I consider that sort of thing quite unnecessary.
I prefer light-hearted jibes that take the piss out of them , like that series about a wicked queen and a pink jester that ran for a while.
-
Oh yes, I consider that sort of thing quite unnecessary.
I prefer light-hearted jibes that take the piss out of them , like that series about a wicked queen and a pink jester that ran for a while.
And there's the rub jassi. What you may not be offended by others may. So who decides ?
-
Some people seem to positively enjoy being offended.
-
Some people seem to positively enjoy being offended.
So why should Sky News have thought that Sweepyface was any different to Old Holborn?
-
So tell me Brietta who decides what is obscene and what is not ?
I think the rest of the article addresses the subject further;
"It's not enough for the messages just to be offensive," said the 30-year-old lawyer of four years.
"It has to be indecent or so grossly offensive as to be criminal or which conveys a threat, or which is false, provided there is an intention to cause distress or anxiety to the recipient; that is what they have to look at.
The CPS, in conjunction with prosecuting guidelines, said that while some messages were considered "offensive and distasteful" it determined they were not so grossly offensive as to be criminal.
The guidelines warn prosecutors to be cautious before bringing charges under Section One of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 and Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003, striking a balance between freedom of speech and the public interest.
Guidelines ask prosecutors, while warning that "banter" and "jokes" are commonplace online, only to take action if the messages are "more than" shocking or disturbing, satirical and are more than the expression of "unfashionable" opinion. Guilty defendants can face six months in prison.
Read more: http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/did-Old-Holborn-escape-prosecution/story-19982134-detail/story.html#ixzz3VxQ7FOJf
Follow us: @Essex_Chronicle on Twitter | essexchronicle on Facebook
-
Oh yes, I consider that sort of thing quite unnecessary.
I prefer light-hearted jibes that take the piss out of them , like that series about a wicked queen and a pink jester that ran for a while.
I bow to your superior knowledge of light hearted jibes that take the piss out of people and anything else that takes your fancy ... I just wonder why you find it acceptable to have a preference for any parody featuring the parents and family of a missing child.
You evidence great sensitivity on behalf of Brenda Leyland ... had Kate McCann committed suicide as a result of eight years of cyber attacks ... including light hearted jibes ... that would be OK then?
-
So why should Sky News have thought that Sweepyface was any different to Old Holborn?
Precisely ... Old Holburn: Circa 2013 ~ Sweepyface: Circa 2014 ... why would they differentiate?
-
I bow to your superior knowledge of light hearted jibes that take the piss out of people and anything else that takes your fancy ... I just wonder why you find it acceptable to have a preference for any parody featuring the parents and family of a missing child.
You evidence great sensitivity on behalf of Brenda Leyland ... had Kate McCann committed suicide as a result of eight years of cyber attacks ... including light hearted jibes ... that would be OK then?
Brenda Leyland was doorstepped and vilified every 15 minutes on nationwide TV. Has that ever happened to Kate McCann ?
-
I bow to your superior knowledge of light hearted jibes that take the piss out of people and anything else that takes your fancy ... I just wonder why you find it acceptable to have a preference for any parody featuring the parents and family of a missing child.
You evidence great sensitivity on behalf of Brenda Leyland ... had Kate McCann committed suicide as a result of eight years of cyber attacks ... including light hearted jibes ... that would be OK then?
You do me an injustice - I have written nothing for or against Mrs Leyland. Indeed, I had never heard of the woman until her death was reported and have not joined in the clamour over thecase.
-
Brenda Leyland was doorstepped and vilified every 15 minutes on nationwide TV. Has that ever happened to Kate McCann ?
Define "vilified".
-
Some people seem to positively enjoy being offended.
The Lord Advocate in Scotland appears to have taken this on board when considering legislation to cover as many eventualities as possible while respecting the principle of Freedom of Speech.
Those who assert that right should really remember that with it comes responsibility; and having read these guidelines much of what I have seen written about the McCann family would warrant complaint to Police Scotland and the PF.
I think we will see more prosecutions, and not before time.
Social media prosecution guidelines set out by Crown Office
4 December 2014
From the section Scotland
Prosecutors have set out new guidelines on whether messages posted on social media should be treated as a crime.
Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland said the test was simple: "If it would be illegal to say it on the street, it is illegal to say it online."
The Crown Office said it would not pursue satirical or mildly offensive humour or provocative statements
But it promised a "robust" response to hate crime, stalking or credible threats of violence.
The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service has previously sought clarity on where the legal boundary lies in such matters.
The guidelines state that communications should be considered for prosecution if they:
~specifically target an individual or group and are considered to be hate crime, domestic abuse, or stalking
~constitute credible threats of violence to the person, damage to property or to incite public disorder
~may amount to a breach of a court order or contravene legislation making it a criminal offence to release or publish
information relating to proceedings
~do not fall into the above categories but are nonetheless considered to be grossly offensive, indecent or obscene or
involve the communication of false information about an individual or group which results in adverse consequences
The Lord Advocate said the aim was not to deny freedom of speech, but the law would target internet trolls posting sectarian, homophobic or violent messages or pictures.
In an interview with the BBC's Good Morning Scotland programme, the Lord Advocate was asked how "grossly offensive" could be defined when it could be seen as relative.
He replied: "The guidance sets out that it would not include, for example, humour, satirical comment, which is part of the democratic debate, so there's guidance to prosecutors as to what's not included.
"It doesn't include offensive comment because we recognise that, in a democratic society, with use of social media you can have offensive comment which wouldn't be criminal but it's really the category above the high bar grossly offensive which has a significant effect on the recipient of the comment.
"We've all seen on the media reports of what you described, internet trolls, where this kind of comment, grossly offensive comment, is sent out to directly wound and has quite a significant effect."
He added: "There's very detailed guidance of all the factors that prosecutors will take into account when they assess whether or not to raise criminal proceedings in relation to grossly offensive comments posted on social media."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-30309411
-
You do me an injustice - I have written nothing for or against Mrs Leyland. Indeed, I had never heard of the woman until her death was reported and have not joined in the clamour over thecase.
Do forgive the assumption that your comments on a thread about Brenda Leyland and the Coroner's Court indicates an interest in the subject under discussion.
-
Do forgive the assumption that your comments on a thread about Brenda Leyland and the Coroner's Court indicates an interest in the subject under discussion.
Of course I have an interest but I see no need to discuss the merits or otherwise of Mrs Leyland's activities, a person I had never heard of until after the event.
I have no problem with the verdict that the Coroner came to, but am quite happy to comment as and when I consider it appropriate.
-
Of course I have an interest but I see no need to discuss the merits or otherwise of Mrs Leyland's activities, a person I had never heard of until after the event.
I have no problem with the verdict that the Coroner came to, but am quite happy to comment as and when I consider it appropriate.
As is your right on a discussion forum ... but one must confess to progressing from being mystified about your comments on this particular thread to the dawning of a certain clarification regarding them.
-
A "serious piece" had already been done in 2013, including a TV programme.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415122/Twitter-troll-unmasked-Father-Britains-vilest-internet-trolls-exposed-posting-sick-jokes-Hillsborough-disaster.html
And maybe, just maybe, if this guy had been prosecuted for posts far more offensive than BL's, others would have thought twice about what they were writing.
http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/did-Old-Holborn-escape-prosecution/story-19982134-detail/story.html
But later, speaking at the wheel of his battered Toyota vehicle, gap-toothed Ambridge said: ‘I am there to upset the apple cart. It is a form of entertainment. Trolling is like putting a fishing line in a shoal of fish and seeing what you can get.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415122/Twitter-troll-unmasked-Father-Britains-vilest-internet-trolls-exposed-posting-sick-jokes-Hillsborough-disaster.html#ixzz3Vxkcp6Kx
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Where are the limits? Some people on here appear to be offended that someone suffering from depression is described as having a "mental illness".
Would these same people object to Old Holborn's unfettered sense of entitlement to free speech?
If not, why not, and where do or should limits be?
I've seen one of his tweets about Kate... it's of a highly offensive sexual nature. I wonder what his wife and kids think?
Beyond what is considered to be within the limits of moderated forums (and what is considered within limits depends on the rules, willingness and time constraints of moderators to try to keep on top of comments), some social media platforms are still fairly anarchic.
-
But later, speaking at the wheel of his battered Toyota vehicle, gap-toothed Ambridge said: ‘I am there to upset the apple cart. It is a form of entertainment. Trolling is like putting a fishing line in a shoal of fish and seeing what you can get.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415122/Twitter-troll-unmasked-Father-Britains-vilest-internet-trolls-exposed-posting-sick-jokes-Hillsborough-disaster.html#ixzz3Vxkcp6Kx
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Where are the limits? Some people on here appear to be offended that someone suffering from depression is described as having a "mental illness".
Would these same people object to Old Holborn's unfettered sense of entitlement to free speech?
If not, why not, and where do or should limits be?
I've seen one of his tweets about Kate... it's of a highly offensive sexual nature. I wonder what his wife and kids think?
Beyond what is considered to be within the limits of moderated forums (and what is considered within limits depends on the rules, willingness and time constraints of moderators to try to keep on top of comments), some social media platforms are still fairly anarchic.
If it is as bad as you say, I'm surprised that it hasn't already been taken further.
-
Of course I have an interest but I see no need to discuss the merits or otherwise of Mrs Leyland's activities, a person I had never heard of until after the event.
I have no problem with the verdict that the Coroner came to, but am quite happy to comment as and when I consider it appropriate.
Nor I but some folk seem irritated that it was only 424 tweets against the McCanns and not 4000 plus, and that none was considered to be a criminal offence.
-
If it is as bad as you say, I'm surprised that it hasn't already been taken further.
It's phrased hypothetically and therefore may pass under the legal radar. I doubt that even the resident WUM shock jock here would go that far.
-
Brenda Leyland was doorstepped and vilified every 15 minutes on nationwide TV. Has that ever happened to Kate McCann ?
Brenda's national exposure was as nothing compared to the international negative exposure on TV and in the papers (not to mention the internet!) experienced by both McCanns, especially during the month of September 2007. What short memories some people have.
-
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/internet-troll-who-branded-innocent-5433295
I assume the "sceptics" defending Brenda's actions would also defend this man's right to free speech? He accused a teacher of being a paedophile, she accused someone she believed to be a children's nanny of being a prostitute, really is there any difference in principle?
-
Obviously a difference in that this man was prosecuted and convicted.
-
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/internet-troll-who-branded-innocent-5433295
I assume the "sceptics" defending Brenda's actions would also defend this man's right to free speech? He accused a teacher of being a paedophile, she accused someone she believed to be a children's nanny of being a prostitute, really is there any difference in principle?
This man broke the law, Brenda Leyland didn't. That my dear Alfie is the difference.
-
This man broke the law, Brenda Leyland didn't. That my dear Alfie is the difference.
There is a rather obvious thought that springs to mind which might have made the difference.
-
This man broke the law, Brenda Leyland didn't. That my dear Alfie is the difference.
Didn't they both do the same thing though?
-
There is a rather obvious thought that springs to mind which might have made the difference.
I note that this troll also had mental health issues.
-
The Lord Advocate in Scotland appears to have taken this on board when considering legislation to cover as many eventualities as possible while respecting the principle of Freedom of Speech.
Those who assert that right should really remember that with it comes responsibility; and having read these guidelines much of what I have seen written about the McCann family would warrant complaint to Police Scotland and the PF.
I think we will see more prosecutions, and not before time.
Social media prosecution guidelines set out by Crown Office
4 December 2014
From the section Scotland
Prosecutors have set out new guidelines on whether messages posted on social media should be treated as a crime.
Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland said the test was simple: "If it would be illegal to say it on the street, it is illegal to say it online."
The Crown Office said it would not pursue satirical or mildly offensive humour or provocative statements
But it promised a "robust" response to hate crime, stalking or credible threats of violence.
The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service has previously sought clarity on where the legal boundary lies in such matters.
The guidelines state that communications should be considered for prosecution if they:
~specifically target an individual or group and are considered to be hate crime, domestic abuse, or stalking
~constitute credible threats of violence to the person, damage to property or to incite public disorder
~may amount to a breach of a court order or contravene legislation making it a criminal offence to release or publish
information relating to proceedings
~do not fall into the above categories but are nonetheless considered to be grossly offensive, indecent or obscene or
involve the communication of false information about an individual or group which results in adverse consequences
The Lord Advocate said the aim was not to deny freedom of speech, but the law would target internet trolls posting sectarian, homophobic or violent messages or pictures.
In an interview with the BBC's Good Morning Scotland programme, the Lord Advocate was asked how "grossly offensive" could be defined when it could be seen as relative.
He replied: "The guidance sets out that it would not include, for example, humour, satirical comment, which is part of the democratic debate, so there's guidance to prosecutors as to what's not included.
"It doesn't include offensive comment because we recognise that, in a democratic society, with use of social media you can have offensive comment which wouldn't be criminal but it's really the category above the high bar grossly offensive which has a significant effect on the recipient of the comment.
"We've all seen on the media reports of what you described, internet trolls, where this kind of comment, grossly offensive comment, is sent out to directly wound and has quite a significant effect."
He added: "There's very detailed guidance of all the factors that prosecutors will take into account when they assess whether or not to raise criminal proceedings in relation to grossly offensive comments posted on social media."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-30309411
So what in your opinion does it really mean?
-
So what in your opinion does it really mean?
"If it would be illegal to say it on the street, it is illegal to say it online."
-
The question would remain though - what would be considered illegal on the street ?
-
The question would remain though - what would be considered illegal on the street ?
It seems to be clear on what is not included.
-
The question would remain though - what would be considered illegal on the street ?
Would it or should it be legal to inform an employer that one of their employees was a prostitute, if in fact she wasn't?
-
Would seem to me to be a bit petty to complain about someone having a second job.
-
Would seem to me to be a bit petty to complain about someone having a second job.
You're having a laugh I presume.
-
Would seem to me to be a bit petty to complain about someone having a second job.
@)(++(*
-
Didn't they both do the same thing though?
Not according to the law.
-
Not according to the law.
The law never got a chance to catch up with Brenda. Did they or did they not do the same thing? The clear answer is yes, wriggle as much as you like.
-
The law never got a chance to catch up with Brenda. Did they or did they not do the same thing? The clear answer is yes, wriggle as much as you like.
They had enough time had she committed an offence, which apparently she hadn't.
Maybe the law considered as she had committed no offence there was no reason to pursue her.
Why all the excitement? It's all done and dusted.
-
They had enough time had she committed an offence, which apparently she hadn't.
Maybe the law considered as she had committed no offence there was no reason to pursue her.
Why all the excitement? It's all done and dusted.
Perhaps you can tell us what is the difference between falsely claiming that a teacher is a paedophile and falsely claiming that a nanny is a prostitute? If the police decided one was illegal and the other not, perhaps you could give a reason why that might be?
-
You're having a laugh I presume.
Just a harmless little bit of wumming I think.
-
Brenda's national exposure was as nothing compared to the international negative exposure on TV and in the papers (not to mention the internet!) experienced by both McCanns, especially during the month of September 2007. What short memories some people have.
The McCanns courted media exposure and had a PR man behind them to organise everything and to protect them, so they could hardly complain. Everything was planned, such as photo shoots, interviews, walkabouts with the twins, etc. Not to forget the trips to Rome, Fátima, Washington D.C., Morocco, Germany, Holland. They courted the press so that they could get their story out and when you do that you have to accept criticism and disbelief.
As for the month of September, the parents were considered suspects by the police of hiding their daughter's body and simulating an abduction. Did you expect the media not to mention this aspect, so as not to upset the McCanns?
-
The McCanns courted media exposure and had a PR man behind them to organise everything and to protect them, so they could hardly complain. Everything was planned, such as photo shoots, interviews, walkabouts with the twins, etc. Not to forget the trips to Rome, Fátima, Washington D.C., Morocco, Germany, Holland. They courted the press so that they could get their story out and when you do that you have to accept criticism and disbelief.
As for the month of September, the parents were considered suspects by the police of hiding their daughter's body and simulating an abduction. Did you expect the media not to mention this aspect, so as not to upset the McCanns?
Alipio Ribeiro, the Policia Judiciaria's national director, has said he believes the decision to make the McCanns "arguidos" last September was taken too quickly and without thorough enough assessment.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-511974/Police-chief-We-quick-make-Gerry-Kate-arguidos.html#ixzz3VyrAsDNJ
The purpose of the McCanns media exposure was on behalf of the missing child ... Madeleine Beth McCann.
It appears that they may have been made arguidos too hastily ... but it certainly worked as far as dragging their name through the mud was concerned.
-
The McCanns courted media exposure and had a PR man behind them to organise everything and to protect them, so they could hardly complain. Everything was planned, such as photo shoots, interviews, walkabouts with the twins, etc. Not to forget the trips to Rome, Fátima, Washington D.C., Morocco, Germany, Holland. They courted the press so that they could get their story out and when you do that you have to accept criticism and disbelief.
As for the month of September, the parents were considered suspects by the police of hiding their daughter's body and simulating an abduction. Did you expect the media not to mention this aspect, so as not to upset the McCanns?
Is that all the Worldwide Media did then, in your view - simply report the facts? No vilification? No smears? No lies? If so you're at odds with the findings of the Leveson Enquiry.
-
Perhaps you can tell us what is the difference between falsely claiming that a teacher is a paedophile and falsely claiming that a nanny is a prostitute? If the police decided one was illegal and the other not, perhaps you could give a reason why that might be?
No!
Don't ask me ask the cops and/or CPS. It will save time and you will have a definitive answer.
-
No!
Don't ask me ask the cops and/or CPS. It will save time and you will have a definitive answer.
Why would I ask them when you are the resident know-it-all? @)(++(* You are sufficiently opinionated to at least be able to venture some theoretical reason why the two may be different in the eyes of the law, surely?
-
They had enough time had she committed an offence, which apparently she hadn't.
Maybe the law considered as she had committed no offence there was no reason to pursue her.
Why all the excitement? It's all done and dusted.
More likely to me..as she was dead.. the law decided not to persue her
-
Alipio Ribeiro, the Policia Judiciaria's national director, has said he believes the decision to make the McCanns "arguidos" last September was taken too quickly and without thorough enough assessment.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-511974/Police-chief-We-quick-make-Gerry-Kate-arguidos.html#ixzz3VyrAsDNJ (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-511974/Police-chief-We-quick-make-Gerry-Kate-arguidos.html#ixzz3VyrAsDNJ)
The purpose of the McCanns media exposure was on behalf of the missing child ... Madeleine Beth McCann.
It appears that they may have been made arguidos too hastily ... but it certainly worked as far as dragging their name through the mud was concerned.
Amaral knew the Penal Process Code, was changing. It was enforced on the 15th of September 2007, 5 days after they were made Arguido's.
-
The McCanns courted media exposure and had a PR man behind them to organise everything and to protect them, so they could hardly complain. Everything was planned, such as photo shoots, interviews, walkabouts with the twins, etc. Not to forget the trips to Rome, Fátima, Washington D.C., Morocco, Germany, Holland. They courted the press so that they could get their story out and when you do that you have to accept criticism and disbelief.
As for the month of September, the parents were considered suspects by the police of hiding their daughter's body and simulating an abduction. Did you expect the media not to mention this aspect, so as not to upset the McCanns?
Seeing as the archiving report said there was no evidence against the McCanns the fact that the police considered them suspects even though there was no evidence makes the police look proper charlies(not hebdo)...and explains why a proper police force has taken over the investigation
-
Seeing as the archiving report said there was no evidence against the McCanns the fact that the police considered them suspects even though there was no evidence makes the police look proper charlies(not hebdo)...and explains why a proper police force has taken over the investigation
You do remember that the British police were involved in the original investigation and they suggested Mark Harrison and he then suggested Martin Grime? Can't blame it all on the Portuguese.
You can't say that there was NO evidence. There was evidence, just not enough and when Gonçalo Amaral was taken off the case, no effort was made to investigate leads. It had already been decided to shelve the case.
-
You do remember that the British police were involved in the original investigation and they suggested Mark Harrison and he then suggested Martin Grime? Can't blame it all on the Portuguese.
You can't say that there was NO evidence. There was evidence, just not enough and when Gonçalo Amaral was taken off the case, no effort was made to investigate leads. It had already been decided to shelve the case.
I.ve got no problem with Harrison or the dog's...the UK police said...quite properly...investigate the parents...the Portuguese decided to go further and tried to pin the crime on the parents. The archiving report was quite clear...basically clearing the parents of any involvement based on the available evidence
-
You do remember that the British police were involved in the original investigation and they suggested Mark Harrison and he then suggested Martin Grime? Can't blame it all on the Portuguese.
You can't say that there was NO evidence. There was evidence, just not enough and when Gonçalo Amaral was taken off the case, no effort was made to investigate leads. It had already been decided to shelve the case.
The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.
You might want to read the extract from the archiving report
-
Is that all the Worldwide Media did then, in your view - simply report the facts? No vilification? No smears? No lies? If so you're at odds with the findings of the Leveson Enquiry.
The press on a whole treated them with kid gloves: Kate posing on the steps of the apartment holding cuddle cat, giving dozens of interviews and photo shoots. No criticism of their parenting and if any UK journalist expressed in any way doubts, they were immediately silenced. The McCanns were presented to the world as perfect parents with a perfect family.
As for their efforts to keep Madeleine in the public eye, it doesn't seem to have worked in getting her back after 8 years, has it? The Leveson enquiry was taken in by their sob stories when the McCanns hadn't even been hacked, so yes I am at odds with the findings of the enquiry.
-
The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.
You might want to read the extract from the archiving report
You want to believe the fairy tale that the parents were exonerated? Fine, that's your problem but according to Portuguese law they have not been cleared. Ponto final.
-
The press on a whole treated them with kid gloves: Kate posing on the steps of the apartment holding cuddle cat, giving dozens of interviews and photo shoots. No criticism of their parenting and if any UK journalist expressed in any way doubts, they were immediately silenced. The McCanns were presented to the world as perfect parents with a perfect family.
As for their efforts to keep Madeleine in the public eye, it doesn't seem to have worked in getting her back after 8 years, has it? The Leveson enquiry was taken in by their sob stories when the McCanns hadn't even been hacked, so yes I am at odds with the findings of the enquiry.
Of course you would be, because you're thoroughly biased against the couple.
IIRC: you are of the belief than when one newspaper reported "Maddie Sold By Hard Up McCanns" that this was a truthful report. What hope has anyone got discussing the case sensibly with individuals such as yourself who hold such opinions?
-
The press on a whole treated them with kid gloves: Kate posing on the steps of the apartment holding cuddle cat, giving dozens of interviews and photo shoots. No criticism of their parenting and if any UK journalist expressed in any way doubts, they were immediately silenced. The McCanns were presented to the world as perfect parents with a perfect family.
As for their efforts to keep Madeleine in the public eye, it doesn't seem to have worked in getting her back after 8 years, has it? The Leveson enquiry was taken in by their sob stories when the McCanns hadn't even been hacked, so yes I am at odds with the findings of the enquiry.
You seem very bitter and angry towards the McCanns...shame this forum is moderated ...you could really tell us what you think of them then...and we could all have a good laugh
-
Perhaps you can tell us what is the difference between falsely claiming that a teacher is a paedophile and falsely claiming that a nanny is a prostitute? If the police decided one was illegal and the other not, perhaps you could give a reason why that might be?
I thought the 'nanny' wasn't a nanny after all.
-
The press on a whole treated them with kid gloves: Kate posing on the steps of the apartment holding cuddle cat, giving dozens of interviews and photo shoots. No criticism of their parenting and if any UK journalist expressed in any way doubts, they were immediately silenced. The McCanns were presented to the world as perfect parents with a perfect family.
As for their efforts to keep Madeleine in the public eye, it doesn't seem to have worked in getting her back after 8 years, has it? The Leveson enquiry was taken in by their sob stories when the McCanns hadn't even been hacked, so yes I am at odds with the findings of the enquiry.
Other victims represented in the Leveson inquiry hadn't been hacked... Do you have issue with those people as well, or just the McCanns?
-
I thought the 'nanny' wasn't a nanny after all.
She wasn't, but that is beside the point. Brenda mentioned the real nanny by name and claimed she was a prostitute. So how does that differ from mentioning a teacher by name and calling him a paedophile?
-
She wasn't, but that is beside the point. Brenda mentioned the real nanny by name and claimed she was a prostitute. So how does that differ from mentioning a teacher by name and calling him a paedophile?
Ask the police/CPS.
-
Ask the police/CPS.
I'm asking you. The fact is, you can't answer because, plainly, they are exactly the same thing in principle.
-
You want to believe the fairy tale that the parents were exonerated? Fine, that's your problem but according to Portuguese law they have not been cleared. Ponto final.
It's seem sit's your problem and is making you very angry...they haven't been cleared because they have never been charged with anything
-
I thought the 'nanny' wasn't a nanny after all.
So in your opinion, that makes her vile comments, to someone she thought was the nanny ok then. &%+((£
-
Seeing as the archiving report said there was no evidence against the McCanns the fact that the police considered them suspects even though there was no evidence makes the police look proper charlies(not hebdo)...and explains why a proper police force has taken over the investigation
Is this the same force which is potentially implicated in the paedophile scandal, where members of the force allegedly covered up horrendous crimes ?
-
I'm asking you. The fact is, you can't answer because, plainly, they are exactly the same thing in principle.
Obviously they are not because the people who actually know what they are talking about say they are not. You might not like it. It may not fit your agenda but there you go.
-
So in your opinion, that makes her vile comments, to someone she thought was the nanny ok then. &%+((£
I think she probably gave what she received.
-
You want to believe the fairy tale that the parents were exonerated? Fine, that's your problem but according to Portuguese law they have not been cleared. Ponto final.
I'm grateful to Jean-Pierre for pointing out that it is a fairy-tail that the McCanns have been exonerated.
To be exonerated, you first have to be charged and tried.
The McCanns were never charged.
-
Obviously they are not because the people who actually know what they are talking about say they are not. You might not like it. It may not fit your agenda but there you go.
Rubbish. If the woman who Brenda tweeted at really had been the nanny and she'd gone to the police it would I believe very likely have led to harassment charges. In fact, it's not too late for the nanny to press charges against the others involved, should she so choose, and assuming she knows about how her name has been dragged through the mud by those creeps on twitter. That seems to be the only difference to me - the person besmirched by twitter trolls is the only person in a position to get the police to act. Brenda and pals' actions were no different to those of the troll in today's papers, they were simply fortunate that they got the wrong person (as they usually do!)
-
Of course you would be, because you're thoroughly biased against the couple.
IIRC: you are of the belief than when one newspaper reported "Maddie Sold By Hard Up McCanns" that this was a truthful report. What hope has anyone got discussing the case sensibly with individuals such as yourself who hold such opinions?
and you are 100% biased in their favour,
-
Rubbish. If the woman who Brenda tweeted at really had been the nanny and she'd gone to the police it would I believe very likely have led to harassment charges. In fact, it's not too late for the nanny to press charges against the others involved, should she so choose, and assuming she knows about how her name has been dragged through the mud by those creeps on twitter. That seems to be the only difference to me - the person besmirched by twitter trolls is the only person in a position to get the police to act. Brenda and pals' actions were no different to those of the troll in today's papers, they were simply fortunate that they got the wrong person (as they usually do!)
I imagine that is usually the case, unless you have lots of 'friends' to compile a dossier for you.
-
I imagine that is usually the case, unless you have lots of 'friends' to compile a dossier for you.
Indeed.
The dossier compilers who wanted anonymity for themselves, but were quite happy to throw Brenda to the wolves, since she was an easy target.
-
I imagine that is usually the case, unless you have lots of 'friends' to compile a dossier for you.
You're wrong there aren't you? The police have not acted on the dossier, and almost certainly never will.
-
Of course you would be, because you're thoroughly biased against the couple.
IIRC: you are of the belief than when one newspaper reported "Maddie Sold By Hard Up McCanns" that this was a truthful report. What hope has anyone got discussing the case sensibly with individuals such as yourself who hold such opinions?
I think the Evening Standard one of ... Corpse in McCann Car ... may be considered "treating them with kid gloves".
Thank goodness the reporting was so kind, goodness knows what would have been said if they had 'had it in for them!!'
-
Why would I ask them when you are the resident know-it-all? @)(++(* You are sufficiently opinionated to at least be able to venture some theoretical reason why the two may be different in the eyes of the law, surely?
Yes
Yes
No
-
I think the Evening Standard one of ... Corpse in McCann Car ... may be considered "treating them with kid gloves".
Thank goodness the reporting was so kind, goodness knows what would have been said if they had 'had it in for them!!'
Another 'truthful' headline by Montclair's standards - you see, the McCanns both sold Maddie cos they were hard up AND took her corpse for a ride in the hire car. This is the logic we're dealing with here.
-
Yes
Yes
No
Purjorick stumped. Disappointing.
-
Another 'truthful' headline by Montclair's standards - you see, the McCanns both sold Maddie cos they were hard up AND took her corpse for a ride in the hire car. This is the logic we're dealing with here.
It was a truthful headline because there was cadaver smell in the car.
-
Purjorick stumped. Disappointing.
Why?
-
Why?
Probably because he thought he'd dug a nice little trap and you choose to ignore it @)(++(*
-
It was a truthful headline because there was cadaver smell in the car.
Actually there was not.
Eddie was never deployed in the vehicle.
-
Actually there was not.
Eddie was never deployed in the vehicle.
Is correct.
And he reacted to Gerry's blood.
-
Probably because he thought he'd dug a nice little trap and you choose to ignore it @)(++(*
He should have taken the sign down or used brushwood. LOATD. 8(>((
-
Why?
because I was looking forward to your lecture, I like to learn from the Master.
-
It was a truthful headline because there was cadaver smell in the car.
See what I mean? <<<insert rolleyes
-
Alipio Ribeiro, the Policia Judiciaria's national director, has said he believes the decision to make the McCanns "arguidos" last September was taken too quickly and without thorough enough assessment.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-511974/Police-chief-We-quick-make-Gerry-Kate-arguidos.html#ixzz3VyrAsDNJ
The purpose of the McCanns media exposure was on behalf of the missing child ... Madeleine Beth McCann.
It appears that they may have been made arguidos too hastily ... but it certainly worked as far as dragging their name through the mud was concerned.
According to the Final Report the time was right legally to make the McCanns arguido. The problem is that people assumed that meant they were guilty and it clearly says that is not what it meant;
As judicially stressed in the sentence dated 06.10.1990 by the then Judge of the Police Court of Lisbon. "The authority that directs the inquiry is not free to postpone the moment when a witness passes into arguido status (…) if diligences are being performed, which are destined to prove her imputation, that affect her personally
Therefore, under the light of interpretation of the elements that constituted the process at that date, there is no doubt whatsoever concerning the legitimacy and legality of their constitution as arguidos, as it is also certain that any investigation has its own dynamics and the continuous flow of elements into the files may alter the situation, as it has, and no judgment or presumption of guilt can be extracted from such a process act.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id136.html
-
The McCanns were made arguidos not because of evidence against them but because the PJ considered them suspects...arguido status is similar to being cautioned in the uk...prior to this none of their statements could be used against them
-
According to the Final Report the time was right legally to make the McCanns arguido. The problem is that people assumed that meant they were guilty and it clearly says that is not what it meant;
As judicially stressed in the sentence dated 06.10.1990 by the then Judge of the Police Court of Lisbon. "The authority that directs the inquiry is not free to postpone the moment when a witness passes into arguido status (…) if diligences are being performed, which are destined to prove her imputation, that affect her personally
Therefore, under the light of interpretation of the elements that constituted the process at that date, there is no doubt whatsoever concerning the legitimacy and legality of their constitution as arguidos, as it is also certain that any investigation has its own dynamics and the continuous flow of elements into the files may alter the situation, as it has, and no judgment or presumption of guilt can be extracted from such a process act.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id136.html
... and according to the Portuguese press ~ who really should have known better ~ and picked up by British and International press ... the McCann's were suspects
Jornal de Noticias ~ SUSPEITOS
Correio da manhs ~ SUSPEITOS
Dairio de Noticias ~ Pais suspeitios da morte acidental de Madeleine
-
... and according to the Portuguese press ~ who really should have known better ~ and picked up by British and International press ... the McCann's were suspects
Jornal de Noticias ~ SUSPEITOS
Correio da manhs ~ SUSPEITOS
Dairio de Noticias ~ Pais suspeitios da morte acidental de Madeleine
Philomena and Justine themselves leaked, and that's what ignited the frenzy.
-
Philomena and Justine themselves leaked, and that's what ignited the frenzy.
Hmmmm ... I rather thought the SUSPEITOS frenzy was ignited by Dr Kate and Dr Gerry McCann being made arguidos in the case of Madeleine Beth McCann.
-
Hmmmm ... I rather thought the SUSPEITOS frenzy was ignited by Dr Kate and Dr Gerry McCann being made arguidos in the case of Madeleine Beth McCann.
Justine and Philomena told TV that Kate was about to be charged. Nobody else was telling the TV channels that.
Why didn't they just tell the media was arguido really means?
Wheels within wheels, Brietta, and spin within spin.
-
Justine and Philomena told TV that Kate was about to be charged. Nobody else was telling the TV channels that.
Why didn't they just tell the media was arguido really means?
Wheels within wheels, Brietta, and spin within spin.
How many people on here can define arguido without a 20 page discussion? You really believe the McCann family were familiar with the Portuguese legal system at that time?
-
How many people on here can define arguido without a 20 page discussion? You really believe the McCann family were familiar with the Portuguese legal system at that time?
You'll not be surprised to hear I do.
-
You'll not be surprised to hear I do.
Yes, well - it is April Fool's Day now....
-
Yes, well - it is April Fool's Day now....
@)(++(* 8@??)(
-
Justine and Philomena told TV that Kate was about to be charged. Nobody else was telling the TV channels that.
Why didn't they just tell the media was arguido really means?
Wheels within wheels, Brietta, and spin within spin.
Do you SERIOUSLY believe that the MSM simply accepts blindly everything they are told and publishes it without checking any of the facts? Yes, I'm sure you do.
Was it the job of Justine and Philomena to explain a complex legal status to every news editor in the world? In any case, shouldn't the PT media already be VERY familiar with the term "arguido"? IS there any reason why you believe these two individuals would have been "au fait" with the word arguido and its meaning at the time?
-
I somehow doubt that The Portuguese Press were getting their Legal Advice from Philomena. Although I could be wrong, of course.
-
Do you SERIOUSLY believe that the MSM simply accepts blindly everything they are told and publishes it without checking any of the facts? Yes, I'm sure you do.
Was it the job of Justine and Philomena to explain a complex legal status to every news editor in the world? In any case, shouldn't the PT media already be VERY familiar with the term "arguido"? IS there any reason why you believe these two individuals would have been "au fait" with the word arguido and its meaning at the time?
I'm sure there wasn't exept that the McCanns certainly did and, as Kate says in her book, they gave her family the 'green light' to talk to the press on their behalf. If Philomena and company were talking without the requisite knowledge then it can only be the fault of the people who gave them that 'green light'.
-
Do you SERIOUSLY believe that the MSM simply accepts blindly everything they are told and publishes it without checking any of the facts? Yes, I'm sure you do.
Was it the job of Justine and Philomena to explain a complex legal status to every news editor in the world? In any case, shouldn't the PT media already be VERY familiar with the term "arguido"? IS there any reason why you believe these two individuals would have been "au fait" with the word arguido and its meaning at the time?
Some newspapers play it safe and print opposite points of view - one of them must be right.
*&*%£ *&*%£ *&*%£
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/554107/McCanns-will-lose-1m-trial-Portuguese-judge-s-initial-findings-against-Kate-and-Gerry
EXCLUSIVE: ‘McCanns will lose £1m libel trial’ Judge’s initial findings go against couple
Kate and Gerry McCann win court ruling in £1million libel battle against ex-police chief
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/553447/Kate-Gerry-McCann-key-court-victory-libel-battle-Goncalo-Amaral
-
I'm sure there wasn't exept that the McCanns certainly did and, as Kate says in her book, they gave her family the 'green light' to talk to the press on their behalf. If Philomena and company were talking without the requisite knowledge then it can only be the fault of the people who gave them that 'green light'.
@)(++(* Everything is always the McCanns fault isn't it? Priceless.
-
@)(++(* Everything is always the McCanns fault isn't it? Priceless.
So perhaps you'll point out the flaws in my logic then Alfie.
-
Some newspapers play it safe and print opposite points of view - one of them must be right.
*&*%£ *&*%£ *&*%£
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/554107/McCanns-will-lose-1m-trial-Portuguese-judge-s-initial-findings-against-Kate-and-Gerry
EXCLUSIVE: ‘McCanns will lose £1m libel trial’ Judge’s initial findings go against couple
Kate and Gerry McCann win court ruling in £1million libel battle against ex-police chief
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/553447/Kate-Gerry-McCann-key-court-victory-libel-battle-Goncalo-Amaral
The Express has always been "famous" for that. Usually followed a few weeks later by the appropriate leader saying "The Express Was Right Again". @)(++(*
Now where have I heard that before &%+((£
-
The Express has always been "famous" for that. Usually followed a few weeks later by the appropriate leader saying "The Express Was Right Again". @)(++(*
Now where have I heard that before &%+((£
Yes, indeed.
It's not alone in indulging in that party, though.
-
So perhaps you'll point out the flaws in my logic then Alfie.
What logic? You're not demonstrating logic, you're demonstrating yet more anti-McCann slagging. You're blaming the McCanns for the Portuguese press not accurately reporting on their arguido status?? You just could not make it up!! Oh, but I forgot - you are.
-
Do you SERIOUSLY believe that the MSM simply accepts blindly everything they are told and publishes it without checking any of the facts? Yes, I'm sure you do.
Was it the job of Justine and Philomena to explain a complex legal status to every news editor in the world? In any case, shouldn't the PT media already be VERY familiar with the term "arguido"? IS there any reason why you believe these two individuals would have been "au fait" with the word arguido and its meaning at the time?
Alfie, you know very well that in September 2007 our newspapers printed anything. Yes, they did print it.
The 24 hour news channels were always more cautious - in fact on that September day Sky News (Jeremy Thompson and Brunt) said over and over again that nobody was telling them Kate was about to be charged apart from Justine and Philomena.
Nevertheless they played their soundbites repeatedly through the day, and the newspapers printed anything the McCanns or allies told them (as they always did from May 2007 onwards).
-
What logic? You're not demonstrating logic, you're demonstrating yet more anti-McCann slagging. You're blaming the McCanns for the Portuguese press not accurately reporting on their arguido status?? You just could not make it up!! Oh, but I forgot - you are.
You were arguing both Philomena and Justine had no reason to be 'au fait' with the term arguido. I'm claiming that the McCanns certainly were and when giving their representatives ' the green light' to talk to the press they should have made the meaning clear then we wouldn't have had articles like this one :
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/sep/07/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
-
Alfie, you know very well that in September 2007 our newspapers printed anything. Yes, they did print it.
The 24 hour news channels were always more cautious - in fact on that September day Sky News (Jeremy Thompson and Brunt) said over and over again that nobody was telling them Kate was about to be charged apart from Justine and Philomena.
Nevertheless they played their soundbites repeatedly through the day, and the newspapers printed anything the McCanns or allies told them (as they always did from May 2007 onwards).
The media were also repeating the myth of the sinister-sounding 100% DNA match in the car...
-
Alfie, you know very well that in September 2007 our newspapers printed anything. Yes, they did print it.
The 24 hour news channels were always more cautious - in fact on that September day Sky News (Jeremy Thompson and Brunt) said over and over again that nobody was telling them Kate was about to be charged apart from Justine and Philomena.
Nevertheless they played their soundbites repeatedly through the day, and the newspapers printed anything the McCanns or allies told them (as they always did from May 2007 onwards).
So are you claiming that all news pertaining to this case has come from the McCanns or their allies? What utter rubbish. Since when has it been the McCanns' sole responsibility to ensure that the MSM report news on this case accurately? Is it not feasible that Philomena and Justine really did believe Kate was about to be charged? Or do you think they had foreknowledge that this was not going to happen?
-
You were arguing both Philomena and Justine had no reason to be 'au fait' with the term arguido. I'm claiming that the McCanns certainly were and when giving their representatives ' the green light' to talk to the press they should have made the meaning clear then we wouldn't have had articles like this one :
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/sep/07/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
So, at no time had Kate or her family any fears that she was about to be charged, is that what you are claiming?
-
The media were also repeating the myth of the sinister-sounding 100% DNA match in the car...
That was the following week, after the Friday frenzy sparked by McGuinness and Philomena.
-
So are you claiming that all news pertaining to this case has come from the McCanns or their allies? What utter rubbish. Since when has it been the McCanns' sole responsibility to ensure that the MSM report news on this case accurately? Is it not feasible that Philomena and Justine really did believe Kate was about to be charged? Or do you think they had foreknowledge that this was not going to happen?
They clearly wanted the country and watching world to think she was about to be, but to this day nobody else but they (and the McCanns in the book) has ever said it was ever a possibility.
-
Yes, indeed.
It's not alone in indulging in that party, though.
You are probably correct. I just remember The Express as it was the prime example quoted for such antics when I was a student....... "In MXV BC That's a Long Time Ago".
Moral: If the press told me the sun the rose in the east I would not believe it til I had checked it myself with a compass certified by an organisation with UKAS accreditation.
-
So are you claiming that all news pertaining to this case has come from the McCanns or their allies?
I'm saying that from May 4 2007 to this day everything the McCanns wanted them to print has always been printed.
-
They clearly wanted the country and watching world to think she was about to be, but to this day nobody else but they (and the McCanns in the book) has ever said it was ever a possibility.
And what did the McCanns have to gain from giving a false impression that they were about to be charged? Incidentally Justine was talking to the media prior to Kate being taken in for questioning and having the term "arguida" explained to her. So when was she supposed to have briefed Justine about the implications of being made an arguida? And are you seriously telling me that the PJ never thought that charging the McCanns was a possibility? &%+((£
-
I'm saying that from May 4 2007 to this day everything the McCanns wanted them to print has always been printed.
Why have you truncated my post? What about the rest of it? What about the stuff the McCanns didn't or wouldn't have wanted the press to print? Please don't try and give the impression that the McCanns controlled the media -it's an absurd contention.
-
And what did the McCanns have to gain from giving a false impression that they were about to be charged? Incidentally Justine was talking to the media prior to Kate being taken in for questioning and having the term "arguida" explained to her. So when was she supposed to have briefed Justine about the implications of being made an arguida? And are you seriously telling me that the PJ never thought that charging the McCanns was a possibility? &%+((£
Kate was texting Justine from the police station however I'm sure even you wouldn't claim that before going there Kate didn't know from her Portuguese lawyer exactly what arguido meant.
-
That was the following week, after the Friday frenzy sparked by McGuinness and Philomena.
I wasn't sure which day in September you were referring to.
I can't make out the date myself, but Faith kindly posted that Tal & Qual had posted:
"PJ believe that the parents killed Maddie" back on 24 August.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6147.0
Back then, the tabloids had been printing more and more articles heading in that direction for several months. The media frenzy was known, with their increasingly lurid headlines, but not necessarily that the PJ really did believe that the parents had killed her and hence were about to be charged.
At some point, it occurred to them that they were going to be stitched up... but it's feasible that the penny didn't drop until late in the day.
-
And what did the McCanns have to gain from giving a false impression that they were about to be charged? Incidentally Justine was talking to the media prior to Kate being taken in for questioning and having the term "arguida" explained to her. So when was she supposed to have briefed Justine about the implications of being made an arguida? And are you seriously telling me that the PJ never thought that charging the McCanns was a possibility? &%+((£
It's not the PJ's decision is it, but I very much doubt even they thought there was ever a possibility. That's the main thing I hoped GA would tell in his book, but he says nearly nothing about those two days in Portimao police HQ.
The McCanns wanted to leave Portugal, so think of their media briefings/leaks in that context.
-
I wasn't sure which day in September you were referring to.
I can't make out the date myself, but Faith kindly posted that Tal & Qual had posted:
"PJ believe that the parents killed Maddie" back on 24 August.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6147.0
Back then, the tabloids had been printing more and more articles heading in that direction for several months. The media frenzy was known, with their increasingly lurid headlines, but not necessarily that the PJ really did believe that the parents had killed her and hence were about to be charged.
At some point, it occurred to them that they were going to be stitched up... but it's feasible that the penny didn't drop until late in the day.
Kate in her book claims that she knew the PJ suspected them of being involved in their daughter's disappearance around the 8th of August I believe.
-
I wasn't sure which day in September you were referring to.
I can't make out the date myself, but Faith kindly posted that Tal & Qual had posted:
"PJ believe that the parents killed Maddie" back on 24 August.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6147.0
Back then, the tabloids had been printing more and more articles heading in that direction for several months. The media frenzy was known, with their increasingly lurid headlines, but not necessarily that the PJ really did believe that the parents had killed her and hence were about to be charged.
At some point, it occurred to them that they were going to be stitched up... but it's feasible that the penny didn't drop until late in the day.
It was September 7th (second day of questioning) that the media coverage exploded.
Brunt's '100% match' broadcasts were made the following week.
-
Kate was texting Justine from the police station however I'm sure even you wouldn't claim that before going there Kate didn't know from her Portuguese lawyer exactly what arguido meant.
OK, let's say you're right. Kate knew EXACTLY all the ramifications of what being an arguida meant and explained every detail carefully to Philomena and Justine. Where exactly in the details of being an arguida( that her lawyer would have carefully explained to her) is the bit which says: being an arguido does not mean you are likely to be charged with any crime? Was this never a thought that would or should have crossed Kate's mind? Is it perhaps not a thought that may also have crossed the minds of the (at the time presumably anxious, worried, fearful) Philomena and Justine, seeing Kate disappearing into a police station for hours on end? Isn't it fair to say that even without Philomena and Justine's help, that most people in the UK would have jumped to a similar conclusion, on learning that Kate had been taken in for questioning as one of the chief suspects in her daughter's disappearance? Or would you thinking back in September 2007 "oh, it's only routine, she won't be charged, she's only an arguido"?
-
It's not the PJ's decision is it, but I very much doubt even they thought there was ever a possibility. That's the main thing I hoped GA would tell in his book, but he says nearly nothing about those two days in Portimao police HQ.
The McCanns wanted to leave Portugal, so think of their media briefings/leaks in that context.
What, with all the oodles of evidence they had, you know the stuff that has kept people like you "doubting" for the last 8 years? @)(++(*
-
What, with all the oodles of evidence they had, you know the stuff that has kept people like you "doubting" for the last 8 years? @)(++(*
As we all know with the world watching this was no ordinary case 8(0(*
-
As we all know with the world watching this was no ordinary case 8(0(*
Do you not think the PJ had the courage of their convictions then (pardon the pun)? Do you not think that they may have hoped that under hours of cross-questioning that Kate may have confessed and that they could then arrest her?
-
Do you not think the PJ had the courage of their convictions then (pardon the pun)? Do you not think that they may have hoped that under hours of cross-questioning that Kate may have confessed and that they could then arrest her?
Didn't matter then what PJ officers thought, just as it doesn't matter what they or some of them may think now. They do not make those decisions.
-
OK, let's say you're right. Kate knew EXACTLY all the ramifications of what being an arguida meant and explained every detail carefully to Philomena and Justine. Where exactly in the details of being an arguida( that her lawyer would have carefully explained to her) is the bit which says: being an arguido does not mean you are likely to be charged with any crime? Was this never a thought that would or should have crossed Kate's mind? Is it perhaps not a thought that may also have crossed the minds of the (at the time presumably anxious, worried, fearful) Philomena and Justine, seeing Kate disappearing into a police station for hours on end? Isn't it fair to say that even without Philomena and Justine's help, that most people in the UK would have jumped to a similar conclusion, on learning that Kate had been taken in for questioning as one of the chief suspects in her daughter's disappearance? Or would you thinking back in September 2007 "oh, it's only routine, she won't be charged, she's only an arguido"?
Remember that this was the first time she had been questioned alone.
-
Remember that this was the first time she had been questioned alone.
So? How many times do you have to be questioned as an arguido before you can be charged then?
-
It was September 7th (second day of questioning) that the media coverage exploded.
Brunt's '100% match' broadcasts were made the following week.
Reports of 100% match were made on the 9th September in a dossier sent to Jose Cunha de Magalhaes e Meneses.
It was then fed as bait to journalists.
-
Remember that this was the first time she had been questioned alone.
Why didn't the PJ call her for a second formal interview at any point until 6 September?
-
Why didn't the PJ call her for a second formal interview at any point until 6 September?
I don't know but the fact they didn't doesn't support the claim they were 'out to get her'.
-
Seems the 100% claim was deliberately given to press, with a hand from Reiss and friends.
-
Kate was texting Justine from the police station however I'm sure even you wouldn't claim that before going there Kate didn't know from her Portuguese lawyer exactly what arguido meant.
According to this news report (only the Telegraph I know, so probably a load of crap or made up by the McCanns who then forced the Telegraph to report it) dated 7th September 2007
Mrs McCann has been warned by her lawyer Carlos Pinto de Abreu to be prepared for the fact she might now be arrested and charged.
-
Please note that the preceeding discussion will be moved as it is not relevant to the thread title.
-
Seems the 100% claim was deliberately given to press, with a hand from Reiss and friends.
Brunt did make a comment... but I'd rather find the quote first. It may have been in a documentary interview.
I suspect a press-wire (although I didn't personally watch it, someone from the BBC was saying the same thing at the time on a news broadcast). If that's the case, who filed it with the press-wire and which one?
-
According to this news report (only the Telegraph I know, so probably a load of crap or made up by the McCanns who then forced the Telegraph to report it) dated 7th September 2007
Did that lawyer ever confirm anything of what was attributed to him?
-
So? How many times do you have to be questioned as an arguido before you can be charged then?
How many interviews can one fit into an eight month period?
Even more off topic doesn't the eight months expire today for all the arguido ginks that The Met had interviewed by the Portuguese last year?.
-
Brunt did make a comment... but I'd rather find the quote first. It may have been in a documentary interview.
I suspect a press-wire (although I didn't personally watch it, someone from the BBC was saying the same thing at the time on a news broadcast). If that's the case, who filed it with the press-wire and which one?
'Police Match Madeleine DNA To Hire Car'
21:26, UK, Monday 10 September 2007
Portuguese police say they have found firm DNA evidence that the body of Madeleine McCann was in the boot of the family's hire car five weeks after she went missing, sources have told Sky News.
Sky crime correspondent Martin Brunt, speaking from Portimao, said police were "adamant" they had found the most "damning" evidence yet implicating either one or both of the McCanns in their daughter's death.
The evidence came in blood samples returned from the Forensic Science Service in Birmingham.
"Police say it is the most damning evidence that has been returned by the tests," Brunt said.
"It shows, as far as they are concerned, the presence of Madeleine's body in the car five weeks after she disappeared."
He continued: "The evidence suggests very strongly that it was not that her DNA had been transferred from clothing or from a cuddly toy.
"The allegation is that the DNA shows a full match of 99%. According to police, it shows the presence of Madeleine's body in the boot of the family's hire car five weeks after she disappeared."
He said the sample of blood sent to the Forensic Science Service in Birmingham carried three matches of Madeleine's DNA.
Two were partial matches that came from the car and the windowsill of the family's holiday apartment.
The third was the full match from the boot of the car.
Meanwhile, papers outlining any evidence against Gerry and Kate McCann will be passed to the Public Prosecutor in Portugal, probably on Tuesday.
With the couple back in their home in Rothley, Leicestershire, the prosecutor will consider whether to lay any charges.
He will be considering the circumstances surrounding Madeleine's disappearance on May 3, Portuguese police spokesman Olegario Sousa added.
Brunt said the prosecutor had a number of options and may call for more evidence or advise on the investigation.
Family spokesman Brian Kennedy, who is Madeleine's great uncle, said of the family: "They are holding up extremely well."
The Portimao-based prosecutor, Jose Cunha de Magalhaes e Meneses, will look at the DNA evidence as well as the statements given by the McCanns to see if there is a case against the couple.
Chief Inspector Sousa said Portuguese police decided to pass the file on to the prosecutor despite not having all the results from forensic tests being carried out in Birmingham.
The samples were taken from the McCanns' holiday apartment and hire car.
The McCanns have been told they could be called back to Portugal "at any time".
Under Portuguese law the couple could keep their arguido - suspect - status for up to eight months, although the prosecutor could decide to extend that to a year.
Portuguese detectives appear to be working on the theory that Mrs McCann killed her daughter by accident and covered up the death by claiming she was abducted.
According to reports in Portugal, police are to make new searches as part of the investigation.
Only video is Hiehos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3HQ74Rfdbk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3HQ74Rfdbk)
-
Did that lawyer ever confirm anything of what was attributed to him?
Did he ever deny anything of what was attributed to him?
-
Did he ever deny anything of what was attributed to him?
Is he still on the payroll?
-
Is he still on the payroll?
What are you insinuating?
-
What are you insinuating?
Client confidentiality?
-
Client confidentiality?
Do you think that the following statement is unlikely to be true, and if so why?
Mrs McCann has been warned by her lawyer Carlos Pinto de Abreu to be prepared for the fact she might now be arrested and charged.
If you think it is likely to be a lie (based on presumably nothing more that "gut-feel") perhaps you could let me know what advantage such a statement would confer on the McCanns, assuming that you still believe they wanted the world to believe that Kate was about to be charged?
-
Do you think that the following statement is unlikely to be true, and if so why?
If you think it is likely to be a lie (based on presumably nothing more that "gut-feel") perhaps you could let me know what advantage such a statement would confer on the McCanns, assuming that you still believe they wanted the world to believe that Kate was about to be charged?
'Lie' is very crude. This case of all cases has been spun, since the start. So I think it's spin (what the truth is we'll likely never know).
They wanted to leave Portugal, and possibly wanted to have a reason to never go back (at least not while they were 'arguido').
-
How many interviews can one fit into an eight month period?
Even more off topic doesn't the eight months expire today for all the arguido ginks that The Met had interviewed by the Portuguese last year?.
Alice, as the resident oracle perhaps you can tell us whether or not it is possible for an arguido to be arrested and charged after one solitary interview with the police?
-
'Lie' is very crude. This case of all cases has been spun, since the start. So I think it's spin (what the truth is we'll likely never know).
They wanted to leave Portugal, and possibly have a reason never to go back (at least not while they were 'arguido').
And you think that would have played well with the general public do you? "Kate's about to be arrested so that's why we're scarpering pronto"? As opposed to: "Kate is merely an arguido, which is just a formality, blah blah blah, no reason for concern, oh and by the way we're scheduled to leave next week and have been told we're free to go"?
-
A car hired Five Weeks after Madeleine disappeared?
Madeleine had been staying in the appartment for nigh on two weeks?
Where did this rubbish come from? Apart from anything else, of course.
-
"Police say it is the most damning evidence that has been returned by the tests," Brunt said.
Hmmm?
LP held an internal inquiry which was found to be negative concerning leaks. LP knew that the results said no such thing, so what does that leave?
-
And you think that would have played well with the general public do you? "Kate's about to be arrested so that's why we're scarpering pronto"? As opposed to: "Kate is merely an arguido, which is just a formality, blah blah blah, no reason for concern, oh and by the way we're scheduled to leave next week and have been told we're free to go"?
I don't think at that moment they were thinking about "the general public" at all. If McGuinness and Philomena deliberately leaked an exaggerated (at best) story they weren't even thinking about their family back home (everyone remembers the interview Kate's father gave that day).
The general public were very far down the list of priorities at that time.
-
Does anyone know if it is true that Brenda Leyland's family are getting on-line abuse because it appears that to date they have not taken legal action against Sky News or Martin Brunt?
-
"Police say it is the most damning evidence that has been returned by the tests," Brunt said.
Hmmm?
LP held an internal inquiry which was found to be negative concerning leaks. LP knew that the results said no such thing, so what does that leave?
And in the immortal words of Mandy Rice Davis ? 8(0(*
-
Does anyone know if it is true that Brenda Leyland's family are getting on-line abuse because it appears that to date they have not taken legal action against Sky News or Martin Brunt?
Where from?
-
I don't think at that moment they were thinking about "the general public" at all. If McGuinness and Philomena deliberately leaked an exaggerated (at best) story they weren't even thinking about their family back home (everyone remembers the interview Kate's father gave that day).
The general public were very far down the list of priorities at that time.
Take a step back for a moment from this case.
YOU are on holiday with your family... You could be anywhere from Algeria to Zimbabwe on a one-week relaxing, cheap, holiday break.
And somehow one of your kids disappears.
If it had dawned on you - after several frantic months - that you were suspected by the same lead detective of the only other missing child case that he'd ever coordinated, which had led to their long-term incarceration in the absence of any tangible evidence whatsoever, and that you were facing a similar situation in this foreign country, in which you didn't understand the language or the legal system... how would you have reacted?
-
And in the immortal words of Mandy Rice Davis ? 8(0(*
I have no idea who Mandy Rice Davis is. Sorry.
-
Where from?
The internet?
-
Where from?
from a bunch of sceptics
-
Take a step back for a moment from this case.
YOU are on holiday with your family... You could be anywhere from Algeria to Zimbabwe on a one-week relaxing, cheap, holiday break.
And somehow one of your kids disappears.
If it had dawned on you - after several frantic months - that you were suspected by the same lead detective of the only other missing child case that he'd ever coordinated, which had led to their long-term incarceration in the absence of any tangible evidence whatsoever, and that you were facing a similar situation in this foreign country, in which you didn't understand the language or the legal system... how would you have reacted?
Come on Carana, this was one of the most publicised missing child cases in the world at that moment. They were so far from alone they had two Prime Ministers behind them, and all the diplomatic help they could need.
The two cases couldn't be more different.
-
I have no idea who Mandy Rice Davis is. Sorry.
@)(++(* Seriously?
-
I have no idea who Mandy Rice Davis is. Sorry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandy_Rice-Davies
"He would, wouldn't he?"
-
The internet?
&%+((£ It's big!
-
I don't think at that moment they were thinking about "the general public" at all. If McGuinness and Philomena deliberately leaked an exaggerated (at best) story they weren't even thinking about their family back home (everyone remembers the interview Kate's father gave that day).
The general public were very far down the list of priorities at that time.
You have intimated that they spun the story of an imminent charge to the MSM for the purposes of explaining a hasty retreat. So, for whose benefit were they spinning that particular "yarn" then, in your view?
-
Come on Carana, this was one of the most publicised missing child cases in the world at that moment. They were so far from alone they had two Prime Ministers behind them, and all the diplomatic help they could need.
The two cases couldn't be more different.
Are you saying that at no point did the McCanns have any concerns that they may be arrested and charged in connection with the case, and that in their position, neither would you?
-
Reports of 100% match were made on the 9th September in a dossier sent to Jose Cunha de Magalhaes e Meneses.
It was then fed as bait to journalists.
And snapped up by the now infamous Martin Brunt ( of course the faithful wouldn't have licked his blood at that time ).
Good old Mr B does seem to have a thing about dossiers !
-
Are you saying that at no point did the McCanns have any concerns that they may be arrested and charged in connection with the case, and that in their position, neither would you?
Hmm how can anyone answer that? Answer that question and you've solved the case.
But I doubt they had any such fear in September because it would have caused a diplomatic incident.
-
The internet?
Do you have a cite ?
-
You have intimated that they spun the story of an imminent charge to the MSM for the purposes of explaining a hasty retreat. So, for whose benefit were they spinning that particular "yarn" then, in your view?
Their friends in government and media. And probably lawyers.
-
Could we possibly get back On Topic now, please?
-
Do you have a cite ?
It's one of the facebook groups, closed to the public (I'm not a member).
-
Hmm how can anyone answer that? Answer that question and you've solved the case.
But I doubt they had any such fear in September because it would have caused a diplomatic incident.
That is such an idiotic thing to say, really Lyall! If it would have caused a diplomatic incident then why even bother making them arguidos in the first place? I can't believe any rationally-thinking person would seriously think that the McCanns had no worries about being arrested and charged in September, you must believe in some bizarre conspiracy otherwise.
-
Their friends in government and media. And probably lawyers.
Completely nonsensical.
-
That is such an idiotic thing to say, really Lyall! If it would have caused a diplomatic incident then why even bother making them arguidos in the first place? I can't believe any rationally-thinking person would seriously think that the McCanns had no worries about being arrested and charged in September, you must believe in some bizarre conspiracy otherwise.
Because they had to make them arguido legally or they couldn't question them? Remember they never had questioned Kate alone before that week.
It was - as the McCanns have been saying ever since (ever since they got back to the UK anyway) - just a legal formality, so why are you going off message now?
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandy_Rice-Davies
"He would, wouldn't he?"
Thanks.
-
Because they had to make them arguido legally or they couldn't question them? Remember they never had questioned Kate alone before that week.
It was - as the McCanns have been saying ever since (ever since they got back to the UK anyway) - just a legal formality, so why are you going off message now?
Your reasoning is completely nonsensical to me. Why would the PJ even bother to question them formally if they had no plans to charge them because it would cause a "diplomatic incident"?
What are you talking about - going "off message"? That's kind of insulting. It seems to be you who is at odds with yourself. On the one hand you claim the McCanns wanted everyone to believe that they were about to be arrested and charged, and on the other you say the McCanns claim their arguido status was just a legal formality - eh?
-
And snapped up by the now infamous Martin Brunt ( of course the faithful wouldn't have licked his blood at that time ).
Good old Mr B does seem to have a thing about dossiers !
False information Deliberately given to press by Reiss and friends.
-
"Police say it is the most damning evidence that has been returned by the tests," Brunt said.
Hmmm?
LP held an internal inquiry which was found to be negative concerning leaks. LP knew that the results said no such thing, so what does that leave?
LP had an enquiry? Do you have a source, I can't find anything about it. Thanks 8((()*/
-
Your reasoning is completely nonsensical to me. Why would the PJ even bother to question them formally if they had no plans to charge them because it would cause a "diplomatic incident"?
What are you talking about - going "off message"? That's kind of insulting. It seems to be you who is at odds with yourself. On the one hand you claim the McCanns wanted everyone to believe that they were about to be arrested and charged, and on the other you say the McCanns claim their arguido status was just a legal formality - eh?
Yes their message changed once they'd landed back in the UK.
Why would the PJ question them and not just let them go home quietly? Because a child was missing and they're policemen not politicians.
-
Alice, as the resident oracle perhaps you can tell us whether or not it is possible for an arguido to be arrested and charged after one solitary interview with the police?
I haven't a clue I never did Portuguese law. Maybe one of the forum "eagles" [legal rather than Illegal, who are a tribute band] would be better placed to answer they aren't usually backward in coming forward.
Can the English and Welsh police charge someone after only one interview? That might give a clue then again it might not. Just as a punt though I would say that as soon as there is enough evidence for an arrest, bingo and b****r the time or number of interviews. Unless of course there is a convention a bit like three dates and .............. 8((()*/
-
It's one of the facebook groups, closed to the public (I'm not a member).
If you knew, why did you ask? Were you perhaps trying to blow my cover?
-
Yes their message changed once they'd landed back in the UK.
Why would the PJ question them and not just let them go home quietly? Because a child was missing and they're policemen not politicians.
Exactly. That being the case the McCanns had every reason to fear that they may be arrested and charged.
-
It's one of the facebook groups, closed to the public (I'm not a member).
Thanks Lyall.
-
And snapped up by the now infamous Martin Brunt ( of course the faithful wouldn't have licked his blood at that time ).
Good old Mr B does seem to have a thing about dossiers !
Why do you blame Brunt for honestly reporting what was corruptly released by (presumably) the PJ?
-
If you knew, why did you ask? Were you perhaps trying to blow my cover?
If you're undercover in that group why were you asking is is true what they're saying?
-
Why do you blame Brunt for honestly reporting what was corruptly released by (presumably) the PJ?
Now who would have had access to the report sent to Mangalese, by the PJ?
-
Exactly. That being the case the McCanns had every reason to fear that they may be arrested and charged.
As I keep saying the PJ don't charge people. Any personal opinions that may have been held by officers in September 2007 meant nothing.
-
I suppose you would have to start with those who wrote the report and then consider each step in onward transmission
-
As I keep saying the PJ don't charge people. Any personal opinions that may have been held by officers in September 2007 meant nothing.
So you think that feasibly the police could have gathered a load of damning evidence, presented it to whoever charges people in Portugal and they would have said "on yer bike, McCanns go free" and that the McCanns were smug and cosy knowing this to be the case all along? Seriously?
-
So you think that feasibly the police could have gathered a load of damning evidence, presented it to whoever charges people in Portugal and they would have said "on yer bike, McCanns go free" and that the McCanns were smug and cosy knowing this to be the case all along? Seriously?
I'm saying that in this case because of the massive, worldwide publicity they needed a great deal of evidence, and it had to be evidence admissible in the court (dog alerts aren't there and everyone would have known it).
-
Now who would have had access to the report sent to Mangalese, by the PJ?
The McCanns and their aides certainly knew.
-
I'm saying that in this case because of the massive, worldwide publicity they needed a great deal of evidence, and it had to be evidence admissible in the court (dog alerts aren't there and everyone would have known it).
That's actually not what you were saying earlier. Of course no charges should be brought against anyone without strong evidence, that is only right and proper. The McCanns are no different to anyone else - unless you're suggesting that, had they been the Ciprianos for example that any old not-very-good evidence would have been enough to charge them? What you were saying earlier (unless I'm very much mistaken) is that no charges would have been brought against the McCanns as it would have caused a diplomatic incident. That's a very different thing altogether.
-
If you're undercover in that group why were you asking is is true what they're saying?
What on earth do you mean? Do you think I would be daft enough to blow my cover ... maybe I was seeking information or trying to inform?
-
If you're undercover in that group why were you asking is is true what they're saying?
Because she wanted to know if what they were saying is true maybe...?
-
What on earth do you mean? Do you think I would be daft enough to blow my cover ... maybe I was seeking information or trying to inform?
"Trying to inform" is one way of putting it ?{)(**
-
"Trying to inform" is one way of putting it ?{)(**
?>)()<
-
So have I got this right Brietta? Brenda's family are being slagged off online because they don't appear to be suing Sky News? And this slagging off is occurring within a closed "Sceptic" group?
-
The McCanns and their aides certainly knew.
As did Amaral and his aides.
Reiss.
Monday, 14 May 2012
Martin Brunt story “burned out” - A little help from my friends?
On September 10th 2007, in the afternoon, Martin Brunt broke a really big story: quoting “Portuguese police sources”, he said, analysis from the Forensic Science Service found a 100 % DNA match of Madeleine McCann in the Renault Scenic rented by her parents, 5 weeks after she disappeared.
Hours later, at 3:00 am, September 11th (Portuguese time) he started to change his story: instead of referring “Portuguese police sources”, he quoted “Sky News sources” – because around 9:00 pm, the Head of the Portuguese Public Prosecutor (PPO) said, on a TV interview, that Martin Brunt story was completely false, the PPO had already the results from FSS and there was no such thing as 100 % match of Madeleine’s DNA.
At 4:00 am, September 11th, a very uncomfortable and somehow agitated Martin Brunt made one of the best TV moments I ever watched (this link to Sky News files only gives a “Error” message): talking about the story he broke, few hours ago, he admitted that “now, seems it’s burned out”…
I have been searching within several gigabytes of files, trying to retrieve that video (obviously, Sky News deleted it from his site). I am almost sure I have it. Anyway, does anyone have a copy? It was on YouTube, but now vanished.
Also, are there any private companies in UK that record all TV broadcasts and sell those recording to people and/or companies that are looking for a specific piece of news? We have it, in Portugal, I wonder if they exist in UK…
Thank you
http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/martin-brunt-story-burned-out-little.html (http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/martin-brunt-story-burned-out-little.html)
AND
(https://madeleinemccannthetruth.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/reis-email-copy.jpg)
-
That's actually not what you were saying earlier. Of course no charges should be brought against anyone without strong evidence, that is only right and proper. The McCanns are no different to anyone else - unless you're suggesting that, had they been the Ciprianos for example that any old not-very-good evidence would have been enough to charge them? What you were saying earlier (unless I'm very much mistaken) is that no charges would have been brought against the McCanns as it would have caused a diplomatic incident. That's a very different thing altogether.
I'm suggesting in a different case, or different country, the same circumstances, without the glare of worldwide publicity, may indeed have resulted in police/prosecutors being determined to prosecute for something. (Of course that doesn't mean they'd get a conviction.)
But with the world watching it's very difficult, wherever the case occurs.
-
I'm suggesting in a different case, or different country, the same circumstances, without the glare of worldwide publicity, may indeed have resulted in police/prosecutors being determined to prosecute for something. (Of course that doesn't mean they'd get a conviction.)
But with the world watching it's very difficult, wherever the case occurs.
So you're saying pressing charges when it's a high profile case requires a higher degree of solid evidence than if it's a lower profile case..? &%+((£
-
So you're saying pressing charges when it's a high profile case requires a higher degree of solid evidence than if it's a lower profile case..? &%+((£
%£&)**#
-
%£&)**#
Hmm...that's a pretty poor indictment of the legal system. But what you're also saying is that the McCanns were totally relaxed about being made arguidos knowing that no charges could be brought. Well, if that's true, then the ONLY reason why they could be so relaxed is because they knew there was no evidence against them because they knew they played no part in Madeleine's disappearance... ?>)()<
-
As did Amaral and his aides.
Reiss.
Monday, 14 May 2012
Martin Brunt story “burned out” - A little help from my friends?
On September 10th 2007, in the afternoon, Martin Brunt broke a really big story: quoting “Portuguese police sources”, he said, analysis from the Forensic Science Service found a 100 % DNA match of Madeleine McCann in the Renault Scenic rented by her parents, 5 weeks after she disappeared.
Hours later, at 3:00 am, September 11th (Portuguese time) he started to change his story: instead of referring “Portuguese police sources”, he quoted “Sky News sources” – because around 9:00 pm, the Head of the Portuguese Public Prosecutor (PPO) said, on a TV interview, that Martin Brunt story was completely false, the PPO had already the results from FSS and there was no such thing as 100 % match of Madeleine’s DNA.
At 4:00 am, September 11th, a very uncomfortable and somehow agitated Martin Brunt made one of the best TV moments I ever watched (this link to Sky News files only gives a “Error” message): talking about the story he broke, few hours ago, he admitted that “now, seems it’s burned out”…
I have been searching within several gigabytes of files, trying to retrieve that video (obviously, Sky News deleted it from his site). I am almost sure I have it. Anyway, does anyone have a copy? It was on YouTube, but now vanished.
Also, are there any private companies in UK that record all TV broadcasts and sell those recording to people and/or companies that are looking for a specific piece of news? We have it, in Portugal, I wonder if they exist in UK…
Thank you
http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/martin-brunt-story-burned-out-little.html (http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/martin-brunt-story-burned-out-little.html)
AND
(https://madeleinemccannthetruth.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/reis-email-copy.jpg)
Perhaps it's with that video of Gerry discussing the fridge ! 8(0(*
-
So have I got this right Brietta? Brenda's family are being slagged off online because they don't appear to be suing Sky News? And this slagging off is occurring within a closed "Sceptic" group?
I think you could be spot on with that assessment, Alfred, of course I couldn't possibly say.
-
Hmm...that's a pretty poor indictment of the legal system. But what you're also saying is that the McCanns were totally relaxed about being made arguidos knowing that no charges could be brought. Well, if that's true, then the ONLY reason why they could be so relaxed is because they knew there was no evidence against them because they knew they played no part in Madeleine's disappearance... ?>)()<
I didn't say that, I said we don't know the truth behind the "Kate about to be charged" and later the same day "Kate offered a deal" spins.
Spin that was I'm sure, but exactly what went on we don't know.
-
I think you could be spot on with that assessment, Alfred, of course I couldn't possibly say.
Think of them as being on Icke's forum. It will help your sense of perspective.
-
Perhaps it's with that video of Gerry discussing the fridge ! 8(0(*
Surely not a video now??? the old story was that the fridge appeared on Gerry McCann's blog ... shows the calibre of the eejits viewing it that no-one took a screen shot. So I'm afraid the poor old fridge story is just another old myth consigned to wherever old myths are consigned ... but you knew that didn't you.
-
Think of them as being on Icke's forum. It will help your sense of perspective.
Thank you L ... I believe I may have seen one, maybe two there also, difficult to tell when they have the masks off.
My perspective is cool ?>)()< your sense? how's that coming along?
-
Thank you L ... I believe I may have seen one, maybe two there also, difficult to tell when they have the masks off.
My perspective is cool ?>)()< your sense? how's that coming along?
Never better 8((()*/
Seriously though do you bother reading what they say about the case on Icke's? I doubt you do, so why bother with those with just about the same relevance?
-
I think you could be spot on with that assessment, Alfred, of course I couldn't possibly say.
I suppose that if it is within a closed forum, it need be of no concern to anybody other than those in that forum.
-
I didn't say that, I said we don't know the truth behind the "Kate about to be charged" and later the same day "Kate offered a deal" spins.
Spin that was I'm sure, but exactly what went on we don't know.
And yet you can venture no good reason for this alleged spin. If it's of any interest to you to know, it was that week's media coverage that had me pretty convinced I'd got it wrong about the case and that the parents actually had dunnit. Why the McCanns would spin stuff to make even a loyal keyboard chimp such as myself start doubting them god only knows but I'm sure you could come up with a doozy of a reason if you tried hard enough...
-
I suppose that if it is within a closed forum, it need be of no concern to anybody other than those in that forum.
And if Brenda's family start getting slagged off in public and being accused of all sorts then I guess that's just good ol' freedom of speech and all perfectly fine too.
-
And if Brenda's family start getting slagged off in public and being accused of all sorts then I guess that's just good ol' freedom of speech and all perfectly fine too.
What has that got to do with discussions within a closed forum ?
-
And if Brenda's family start getting slagged off in public and being accused of all sorts then I guess that's just good ol' freedom of speech and all perfectly fine too.
a) What do you think any of us can do about it?
b) Why are you broadcasting what they're saying?
-
a) What do you think any of us can do about it?
b) Why are you broadcasting what they're saying?
It is being written about and commented on elsewhere.
-
It is being written about and commented on elsewhere.
Really? Like where?
-
It is being written about and commented on elsewhere.
Where?
-
That place where Whatshisnames Not Admin.
-
That place where Whatshisnames Not Admin.
Would that be 'don't ask me, I just made it up'? @)(++(*
-
That place where Whatshisnames Not Admin.
That place is even more as good as Ickeland. Why bother monitoring? You know they feed off it.
-
Would that be 'don't ask me, I just made it up'? @)(++(*
May be it's on "Ole Eyepatch's Pitch"
-
That place where Whatshisnames Not Admin.
You must have exceedingly good eyesight btw. I can't see anything.
Does "commented on" mean 2 or 3 messages somewhere?
-
Actually, I might have got that wrong. It could be the other place where Marky isn't going down too well.
I got a bit bored this afternoon and went to look for a laugh.
-
a) What do you think any of us can do about it?
b) Why are you broadcasting what they're saying?
Where did I do that?
-
Where did I do that?
By discussing what they're saying you are propagating it. Why?
-
And yet you can venture no good reason for this alleged spin. If it's of any interest to you to know, it was that week's media coverage that had me pretty convinced I'd got it wrong about the case and that the parents actually had dunnit. Why the McCanns would spin stuff to make even a loyal keyboard chimp such as myself start doubting them god only knows but I'm sure you could come up with a doozy of a reason if you tried hard enough...
I gave reasons earlier in the discussion, but you don't agree with them. There's nothing I can say to persuade you.
-
I hadn't noticed this before but Brenda was a fellow member on this forum. She registered as Sweepy on the 5th November 2013. She never posted.
Anyone know why Brenda was forced to leave her home and seek refuge in a hotel?
-
Benice Brenda told Brunt she had been thinking of committing suicide. After that how could anything he did other than pulling the whole report be deemed 'right' ?
My thoughts precisely. Anyone with a titter of wit or a modicum of savvy would have heard alarm bells sounding at that point and not touched the report with a barge pole. Not Sky News though, they were quite prepared to air the altercation at all costs and we all know what that cost turned out to be! Oh no...nobody is to blame but Brenda has a rather hollow sound to it imo.
Take note: If accosted by man from Sky with microphone, say nought and smile broadly!
-
So it was a two way communication between Leyland and Brunt? How was her condidentialty breached, in that case?
To take your second point - do you believe that only communications directly to the "targets" are covered by the relevant laws? E.g would a comment made on social media about an individual be potentially actionable if not received by the "target"?
There was no two-way conversation between Brenda and Brunt prior to the doorstepping. All that happened was that Brenda tweeted him asking a question in connection with the McCann case but he never responded. His appearance outside Brenda's house was both unannounced and a total shock to her.
Who initiated that contact ?
Second, why did brunt and sky news need to go to her home address ?
and as another reminder, Brenda breached and broke no laws.
Typical Sky and Brunt 'sting' operation, makes for exciting TV. Remember he did the same thing with on-the-run pensioner and benefits thief Norman Brennan on the Costa del Sol. Except in Brenda's case she had not been convicted of any crime so Sky were effectively acting as vigilantes. All in all, a pretty poor show!
-
LP had an enquiry? Do you have a source, I can't find anything about it. Thanks 8((()*/
During the investigation the media quoted, who they claimed to be, unnamed
Leicestershire police sources. These comments reported by the media bore little
resemblance to the facts. However, Leicestershire Constabulary did conduct an
enquiry to establish if any police employee could be identified as leaking
information to the media. No such person was identified.
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122145147/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Witness-Statement-of-Chief-Constable-Matthew-Baggott.pdf
-
There was no two-way conversation between Brenda and Brunt prior to the doorstepping. All that happened was that Brenda tweeted him asking a question in connection with the McCann case but he never responded. His appearance outside Brenda's house was both unannounced and a total shock to her.
Typical Sky and Brunt 'sting' operation, makes for exciting TV. Remember he did the same thing with on-the-run pensioner and benefits thief Norman Brennan on the Costa del Sol. Except in Brenda's case she had not been convicted of any crime so Sky were effectively acting as vigilantes. All in all, a pretty poor show!
Indeed, and anyone who says that sky and brunt did not play an active part in Brenda's demise is either incredibly stupid or into massive self-denial.
-
Indeed, and anyone who says that sky and brunt did not play an active part in Brenda's demise is either incredibly stupid or into massive self-denial.
And anyone who thinks Brunt caused Brenda's death is incredibly stupid
-
My thoughts precisely. Anyone with a titter of wit or a modicum of savvy would have heard alarm bells sounding at that point and not touched the report with a barge pole. Not Sky News though, they were quite prepared to air the altercation at all costs and we all know what that cost turned out to be! Oh no...nobody is to blame but Brenda has a rather hollow sound to it imo.
Take note: If accosted by man from Sky with microphone, say nought and smile broadly!
As has been remarked on before, if all you need to do to prevent a news story breaking about youself is to threaten suicide every time then you'd never get to hear about corrupt politicians, perverts, adulterers etc
-
As has been remarked on before, if all you need to do to prevent a news story breaking about youself is to threaten suicide every time then you'd never get to hear about corrupt politicians, perverts, adulterers etc
precisely... this is the stupid world some posters live in
-
Indeed, and anyone who says that sky and brunt did not play an active part in Brenda's demise is either incredibly stupid or into massive self-denial.
There's a lot of denial around here in my opinion.
-
There's a lot of denial around here in my opinion.
Indeed there is.
-
During the investigation the media quoted, who they claimed to be, unnamed
Leicestershire police sources. These comments reported by the media bore little
resemblance to the facts. However, Leicestershire Constabulary did conduct an
enquiry to establish if any police employee could be identified as leaking
information to the media. No such person was identified.
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122145147/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Witness-Statement-of-Chief-Constable-Matthew-Baggott.pdf
Thank you! 8((()*/
-
By discussing what they're saying you are propagating it. Why?
How is it possible to comment on comments made on a closed forum, for goodness sakes? Maybe they are discussing recipes?
-
I hadn't noticed this before but Brenda was a fellow member on this forum. She registered as Sweepy on the 5th November 2013. She never posted.
Anyone know why Brenda was forced to leave her home and seek refuge in a hotel?
It is a pity she didn't start posting here, she might have had a pleasanter internet experience than any one could get from posting short sentences on twitter. In fact she might have had more space to get things well out of her system.
-
It is a pity she didn't start posting here, she might have had a pleasanter internet experience than any one could get from posting short sentences on twitter. In fact she might have had more space to get things well out of her system.
My thought precisely. And she wouldn't have been subjected to any real abuse on here. Nor would she have committed any lasting abuse either.
This is a Community, even if some don't see it as such. Some people don't know how lucky they are to have this Forum.
-
How is it possible to comment on comments made on a closed forum, for goodness sakes? Maybe they are discussing recipes?
Correct me if I am wrong, but in this case did you not give us a precise of what they were discussing?
-
My thoughts precisely. Anyone with a titter of wit or a modicum of savvy would have heard alarm bells sounding at that point and not touched the report with a barge pole. Not Sky News though, they were quite prepared to air the altercation at all costs and we all know what that cost turned out to be! Oh no...nobody is to blame but Brenda has a rather hollow sound to it imo.
Take note: If accosted by man from Sky with microphone, say nought and smile broadly!
Apart from insisting on proper make-up and sympathetic lighting ... I would have no hesitation with giving someone from Sky an interview. I am not ashamed of anything I have said on the internet.
Brenda declined the offer of a more structured interview where she could have negotiated that her face be pixilated and the doorstepping shot not used because it would identify her home.
To gain an insight into her motivations for posting as she had on twitter, in the midst of what was a hot story at the time, I think that might have been accomplished particularly as she had had an amicable conversation with Martin Brunt in her home.
Then hindsight is an exact science ... Martin Brunt who was ignorant of her medical history could not have been expected to think that she intended suicide.
Her son ... who did know her medical history and who had spoken with her did not anticipate her suicide.
Of the successful suicides I have heard about, both those with a history and those without, the majority leave their nearest and dearest baffled as to why.
It is a measure of the FB harpies that they choose to attack Brenda Leyland's family at a time of great trauma.
-
Correct me if I am wrong, but in this case did you not give us a precise of what they were discussing?
Moi? I asked a question.
-
Of course we only have Martin Brunts word of what words were exchanged...and he wouldn't lie...would he?
BL's Son intimated that she was 'shocked' about the events.
She would have been worried that the police were 'investigating her' and that she was going to be vilified on national TV. And then Brunty didn't bother to mention to BL that the police were not taking any action against her, hence why he got involved via a dossier compiled by??? ...well whoever.
BL saw what happened to people who stood up to McCanns...She , like may others must HAVE asked, what makes them so special?
I believe Brunty gave away his intention to vilify Brenda during their convesations,by telling her he was going to 'out her as a troll, she knows what desperate measures the MSM are capable of , and this is what may have drove her over the edge. Was it fear? I believe it was.
-
Moi? I asked a question.
Too which I think Jassi already knew the answer.
-
And anyone who thinks Brunt caused Brenda's death is incredibly stupid
Its what's called a 'contributing factor' in the trade and that's why Sky News had to have a change of underwear, why they went into legal overdrive and why Martin Brunt went off air.
In my view they were damn lucky to get away with being pilloried and vilified.
-
Its what's called a 'contributing factor' in the trade and that's why Sky News had to have a change of underwear, why they went into legal overdrive and why Martin Brunt went off air.
In my view they were damn lucky to get away with being pilloried and vilified.
You can blame Sky till the cows come home. It won't change the fact she made some vile tweets to others.
She asked Brunt to investigate some of some of these facts. He did what she asked.
Martin Brunt went off air, because of the abuse he was receiving from Brenda's so called friends. The ones that named her on Twitter and the Mail picked up.
What do you think of Poulton and friends behaviour at the inquest? That showed caring for Brenda's family, didn't it?
-
You can blame Sky till the cows come home. It won't change the fact she made some vile tweets to others.
She asked Brunt to investigate some of some of these facts. He did what she asked.
Martin Brunt went off air, because of the abuse he was receiving from Brenda's so called friends. The ones that named her on Twitter and the Mail picked up.
What do you think of Poulton and friends behaviour at the inquest? That showed caring for Brenda's family, didn't it?
I do blame them DCI. Not because of what Brenda did but because of what they did. They were underhand and conniving opportunists whose only goal was a cheap stunt. There have been several instances of this sort of behaviour recently from Sky's award winning journalists so one has to wonder what sort of a thuggish organisation it really is?
Leveson was intended to bring some sort of regulation to an industry where its culture, practices and ethics were found wanting following the News International phone hacking scandal. It looks very like the British press have got off the hook yet again!
Brenda asked Brunt to investigate the McCanns but he chose to go after her instead, a soft target who was very unlikely to have the wherewithal or the resources to fight back.
-
I do blame them DCI. Not because of what Brenda did but because of what they did. They were underhand and conniving opportunists whose only goal was a cheap stunt. There have been several instances of this sort of behaviour recently from Sky's award winning journalists so one has to wonder what sort of a thuggish organisation it really is?
Leveson was intended to bring some sort of regulation to an industry where its culture, practices and ethics were found wanting following the News International phone hacking scandal. It looks very like the British press have got off the hook yet again!
The standard of journalism in this country is abysmal. Much of it is cheap gossip or spin.
-
The standard of journalism in this country is abysmal. Much of it is cheap gossip or spin.
Having experienced it first hand G-unit I wholeheartedly agree. The Press are incapable of self regulation and that has been shown on many occasions. The toothless Press Complaints Commission closed on 8 September 2014 and was replaced by the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) in an attempt to persuade the public that their interests were being protected. As has been seen with many government organisations this name change is nothing more than a cynical attempt to con the public into believing that they are being listened to when the truth is so much different.
-
I do blame them DCI. Not because of what Brenda did but because of what they did. They were underhand and conniving opportunists whose only goal was a cheap stunt. There have been several instances of this sort of behaviour recently from Sky's award winning journalists so one has to wonder what sort of a thuggish organisation it really is?
Leveson was intended to bring some sort of regulation to an industry where its culture, practices and ethics were found wanting following the News International phone hacking scandal. It looks very like the British press have got off the hook yet again!
Brenda asked Brunt to investigate the McCanns but he chose to go after her instead, a soft target who was very unlikely to have the wherewithal or the resources to fight back.
His visit didn't bother that much. The same night she tweeted about Brunt.
516694464455528448|Mon Sep 29 21:02:14 +0000 2014|#mccann Just noticed @skymartinbrunt is following me, why Martin won't you investigate some of these facts and show neutrality ?
I believe Brenda, couldn't face the fact, that her family and neighbours found out what she was really like. Not the person she made out to be.
-
His visit didn't bother that much. The same night she tweeted about Brunt.
516694464455528448|Mon Sep 29 21:02:14 +0000 2014|#mccann Just noticed @skymartinbrunt is following me, why Martin won't you investigate some of these facts and show neutrality ?
I believe Brenda, couldn't face the fact, that her family and neighbours found out what she was really like. Not the person she made out to be.
She put a brave face on it certainly but her underlying psychological condition proved too much for her to cope. She needed counselling and not public condemnation. The Press have much to atone for.
-
You can blame Sky till the cows come home. It won't change the fact she made some vile tweets to others.
She asked Brunt to investigate some of some of these facts. He did what she asked.
Martin Brunt went off air, because of the abuse he was receiving from Brenda's so called friends. The ones that named her on Twitter and the Mail picked up.
What do you think of Poulton and friends behaviour at the inquest? That showed caring for Brenda's family, didn't it?
If Martin Brunt had behaved towards BL in the way Poulton and her chums behaved at the inquest - then that would have been a genuine reason for the criticism being levelled at him IMO. However his approach to BL could not have been more opposite to Poulton's aggressive pursuit of a member of the public.
It's noticeable that people who express disgust at Martin Brunt for his actions - have no criticism at all for Poulton - and yet - unlike MB - she behaved in exactly the way they claim to find so obnoxious.
The word 'hyprocritical' hardly seems to cover it.
-
Its what's called a 'contributing factor' in the trade and that's why Sky News had to have a change of underwear, why they went into legal overdrive and why Martin Brunt went off air.
In my view they were damn lucky to get away with being pilloried and vilified.
I've only seen Brunt vilified by a handful on the net...yes Brunt was a contributing factor...but not the cause...the cause was her mental illness
-
If Martin Brunt had behaved towards BL in the way Poulton and her chums behaved at the inquest - then that would have been a genuine reason for the criticism being levelled at him IMO. However his approach to BL could not have been more opposite to Poulton's aggressive pursuit of a member of the public.
It's noticeable that people who express disgust at Martin Brunt for his actions - have no criticism at all for Poulton - and yet - unlike MB - she behaved in exactly the way they claim to find so obnoxious.
The word 'hyprocritical' hardly seems to cover it.
That's not the case Benice, there is no excuse for any of that behaviour by any journalist whether it be Brunt stalking Brenda Leyland or Poulton pouring scorn on others at an inquest. This is why we need real Laws to deal with the Press and not what we have at the moment.
-
I've only seen Brunt vilified by a handful on the net...yes Brunt was a contributing factor...but not the cause...the cause was her mental illness
No davel, according to her son it was Brunt and Sky News' actions which pushed her over the edge. Brenda would most probably be alive today had they not set out to destroy her.
In fact remember this comment in which you claim she had broken the Law? You got that wrong as well!
There is no defence in law that others are worse offenders.....Brenda appears to have broken the law...it was her choice to tweet 60 times a day...no one to blame but Brenda... I don't see the coroner putting the blame on anyone else
-
No davel, according to her son it was Brunt and Sky News' actions which pushed her over the edge.
Then why wait 5 days. How do we know her friend naming her, didn't push her over the edge?
-
Then why wait 5 days. How do we know her friend naming her, didn't push her over the edge?
It all contributed certainly but you have to look at cause and effect. What started the series of events which culminated in her death?
-
It all contributed certainly but you have to look at cause and effect. What started the series of events which culminated in her death?
Her Tweets. According to Bennett, Sky are doing a documentary about [ censored word ]s.
-
It all contributed certainly but you have to look at cause and effect. What started the series of events which culminated in her death?
The sequence of events that culinated in her death started a long time before Brunt even heard of her.
-
That's not the case Benice, there is no excuse for any of that behaviour by any journalist whether it be Brunt stalking Brenda Leyland or Poulton pouring scorn on others at an inquest. This is why we need real Laws to deal with the Press and not what we have at the moment.
I certainly would not describe MB's behaviour as ''stalking'' - in fact for a reporter I thought he was very polite.
When it comes to changes in the law - where do you draw the line?
What about those people who are pounced upon by 'reporters' in programmes like Rogue Traders and the many other progs which expose people for behaving badly towards others. Just like BL many of those people are not guilty of any criminal offence either - just of being heartless unscrupulous bast....ds.
Are all these progs going to end now - on the strength that one of those horrible people might commit suicide when they find out they are going to be publicly exposed?
Should drawing the public's attention to bad behaviour which affects other people's lives be banned for fear that someone might commit suicide along the way?
It's a big subject/problem. I'm not sure what law can be passed to resolve it in a satisfactory way.
In the case of the internet I do think that if the 'owners' of these sites - Twitter for example were held more responsible for what their sites are being used for - and received a few hefty fines, they would not be so quick to turn a blind eye - in the way they appear to at the moment. Maybe that is the area where laws could be strengthened or new laws introduced?
-
All brunt thought about was himself.
After all, why did he disappear from Sky for several weeks ?
-
The standard of journalism in this country is abysmal. Much of it is cheap gossip or spin.
I don't know the exact quotations ... but isn't it a truism that as well as getting the government deserved people also get the press they deserve.
The current vogue in 'reality' TV would appear to reflect that as much as SUN headlines do.
-
I can't help wondering if there was more to it than being exposed by Martin Brunt, she told him she had had a drink and had spoken to her son and that she was feeling better.
Why choose the other son's birthday to end her life?
-
That's not the case Benice, there is no excuse for any of that behaviour by any journalist whether it be Brunt stalking Brenda Leyland or Poulton pouring scorn on others at an inquest. This is why we need real Laws to deal with the Press and not what we have at the moment.
Then Press Freedom is well and truly compromised aided and abetted by those who chose to exercise freedom while abrogating responsibility.
-
Its what's called a 'contributing factor' in the trade and that's why Sky News had to have a change of underwear, why they went into legal overdrive and why Martin Brunt went off air.
In my view they were damn lucky to get away with being pilloried and vilified.
As opposed to what?
-
I don't know the exact quotations ... but isn't it a truism that as well as getting the government deserved people also get the press they deserve.
The current vogue in 'reality' TV would appear to reflect that as much as SUN headlines do.
Sky News have more in common with Reality TV than they do with journalism.
I'm not denying there is a story (or stories) to be had from the unique online discussion of this unique case, but you certainly wouldn't choose Sky News to be the ones to do one seriously. And they didn't.
-
Looks like we may have more media concerning 'trolling' to discuss soon. Interesting.
-
Her Tweets. According to Bennett, Sky are doing a documentary about [ censored word ].
Didn't one of the tweeters, a well known fellow 'freefinker', suggest that Sonia Poulton had been retained by the Murdoch Empire for just that enterprise?
-
Didn't one of the tweeters, a well known fellow 'freefinker', suggest that Sonia Poulton had been retained by the Murdoch Empire for just that enterprise?
Why would they need her? You don't need to be Einstein or be 'undercover' to see the story - it's all public and quickly accessible.
-
Why would they need her? You don't need to be Einstein or be 'undercover' to see the story - it's all public and quickly accessible.
Sorry?? I do not understand. Are you saying that S Poulton is making a troll documentary for Murdoch?
-
Sorry?? I do not understand. Are you saying that S Poulton is making a troll documentary for Murdoch?
You said that. I said: why would they need her?
-
The sequence of events that culinated in her death started a long time before Brunt even heard of her.
The path she was on before Brunt imposed himself on her would not have necessarily led to her death as she was coping with her illness. You have to ask yourself which event changed all that and your answer will inevitably lead to Brunt and Sky News. Their conduct turned a fragile woman into a suicidal wreck.
-
Her Tweets. According to Bennett, Sky are doing a documentary about [ censored word ].
Her tweets didn't kill her.
-
As opposed to what?
A proper police investigation into the conduct of these reporters.
-
Her tweets didn't kill her.
Neither did Martin Brunt.
-
Her tweets didn't kill her.
You didn't ask who killed her. She did that herself . You asked what started the series of events which culminated in her death.
Her tweets started the series of events. Brenda's mask slipped, after she was exposed, and she couldn't cope with it. IMO!
-
Does anyone know - Did Sonia harass Brunt at the inquest?
-
The path she was on before Brunt imposed himself on her would not have necessarily led to her death as she was coping with her illness. You have to ask yourself which event changed all that and your answer will inevitably lead to Brunt and Sky News. Their conduct turned a fragile woman into a suicidal wreck.
she had already tried suicide once...long before brunt
-
Does anyone know - Did Sonia harass Brunt at the inquest?
I doubt it, Misty!
-
she had already tried suicide once...long before brunt
Which other person in this case thought of suicide ?
Fortunately of course, she had back up.
-
Which other person in this case thought of suicide ?
Fortunately of course, she had back up.
And why didn't Brenda?
-
Which other person in this case thought of suicide ?
Fortunately of course, she had back up.
unfortunately it seems Brenda's family had deserted her
-
And why didn't Brenda?
Good question.
She clearly needed it.
-
Good question.
She clearly needed it.
Yes but who knew, she needed it? Sorry but apart from her son, the friends she had, didn't seem to know, so how was anyone else expected to.
-
Neither did Martin Brunt.
So lets see, in your opinion Martin Brunt and Sky News are not responsible for their actions? Actions which led to a woman committing suicide following a most unethical and cowardly challenge to her right to free speech.
-
You didn't ask who killed her. She did that herself . You asked what started the series of events which culminated in her death.
Her tweets started the series of events. Brenda's mask slipped, after she was exposed, and she couldn't cope with it. IMO!
Her tweets weren't responsible for her death but irresponsible journalism was. You can dress it up any way you like but it always comes down to the same thing, had she not been treated in the way she was she would still be alive today.
-
No davel, according to her son it was Brunt and Sky News' actions which pushed her over the edge. Brenda would most probably be alive today had they not set out to destroy her.
In fact remember this comment in which you claim she had broken the Law? You got that wrong as well!
But he only came to that conclusion AFTER she had died. He is talking with the benefit of hindsight. He had no reason to think she was going to commit suicide or surely he would have been ringing Martin Brunt warning him that his mother was suicidal and had made a previous suicide attempt - instead he was looking into obtaining legal help for his mother.
If after talking to his mother and knowing her previous history, she gave him the impression that she was feeling better about things - why should we expect Martin Brunt (who knew nothing of her previous history) to believe any differently after his discussion with her - during which she gave him the same impression.
-
You said that. I said: why would they need her?
8(0(* The Enemy Within?
I think that could be a jolly little wheeze for her, she knows that in real terms the trolls of twitter land are on the whole nonentities and an irrelevance in the world she aspires to inhabit. ie Expendables and door openers.
-
Her tweets weren't responsible for her death but irresponsible journalism was. You can dress it up any way you like but it always comes down to the same thing, had she not been treated in the way she was she would still be alive today.
I didn't say they were. Same applies John. If she hadn't treated people in the way she did, she would still be alive today.
-
AFAIAC...Brenda hounded the McCanns and when she got a taste of her own medicine she couldn't take it...I have no sympathy for her or people like her
-
AFAIAC...Brenda hounded the McCanns and when she got a taste of her own medicine she couldn't take it...I have no sympathy for her or people like her
You don't say. I'm shocked, I had no idea you felt that way.
(The fact you feel the need to keep saying this again and again shows you have a problem)
-
8(0(* The Enemy Within?
I think that could be a jolly little wheeze for her, she knows that in real terms the trolls of twitter land are on the whole nonentities and an irrelevance in the world she aspires to inhabit. ie Expendables and door openers.
Nah, she's not that mad &%&£(+
-
So lets see, in your opinion Martin Brunt and Sky News are not responsible for their actions? Actions which led to a woman committing suicide following a most unethical and cowardly challenge to her right to free speech.
That's your spin on it. You choose to believe that Martin Brunt killed Brenda, the coroner and the police see it differently, as do I. You are entitled to your opinion, as am I.
-
AFAIAC...Brenda hounded the McCanns and when she got a taste of her own medicine she couldn't take it...I have no sympathy for her or people like her
Are the McCanns on Twitter? Did Brenda send them letters? Did Brenda telephone and text them?
If the answer is NO to all of the above then you comment is totally false.
The McCanns most probably never even knew of Brenda's existence until Brunt and Sky News decided to make her national news. The act of hounding is valid only when those hounded are aware of it.
The big difference between Brenda and the McCanns is that the latter invited the Press into their lives and were initially grateful for them. Brenda did not!
-
You don't say. I'm shocked, I had no idea you felt that way.
(The fact you feel the need to keep saying this again and again shows you have a problem)
If posters would stop wrongly blaming Brunt I wouldn't bother posting...it's tiresome but someone has to bring some reason to this thread
-
Nah, she's not that mad &%&£(+
Are you absolutely 8)-))) sure about that?
-
Are the McCanns on Twitter? Did Brenda send them letters? Did Brenda telephone and text them?
If the answer is NO to all of the above then you comment is totally false.
The McCanns most probably never even knew of Brenda's existence until Brunt and Sky News decided to make her national news. The act of hounding is valid only when those hounded are aware of it.
Do you defend Brenda's behaviour?
-
Are the McCanns on Twitter? Did Brenda send them letters? Did Brenda telephone and text them?
If the answer is NO to all of the above then you comment is totally false.
The McCanns most probably never even knew of Brenda's existence until Brunt and Sky News decided to make her national news. The act of hounding is valid only when those hounded are aware of it.
The big difference between Brenda and the McCanns is that the latter invited the Press into their lives and were initially grateful for them. Brenda did not!
In my opinion Brenda was a nasty piece of work who's actions should be condemned...I have zero sympathy for her...
-
In my opinion Brenda was a nasty piece of work who's actions should be condemned...I have zero sympathy for her...
For you, anyone who doubts the McCann fairy tale is automatically a "nasty piece of work".
-
You don't say. I'm shocked, I had no idea you felt that way.
(The fact you feel the need to keep saying this again and again shows you have a problem)
Just the one Mrs Wembley?
-
Do you defend Brenda's behaviour?
Certainly not but neither do I defend an out of control Press. An example which comes to mind is the Daily Mail and Lucy Meadows who was driven to suicide according to the coroner by "sensational and salacious" press coverage. Michael Singleton, coroner for Blackburn, Hyndburn and Rossendale, singled out the Daily Mail as he accused the paper of "ridicule and humiliation" and a "character assassination" of Lucy Meadows, 32, who took her own life in March 2013.
Parallel's can be drawn with Brenda's case.
www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/may/28/lucy-meadows-coroner-press-shame
-
Certainly not but neither do I defend an out of control Press. An example which comes to mind is the Daily Mail and Lucy Meadows who was driven to suicide according to the coroner by "sensational and salacious" press coverage. Michael Singleton, coroner for Blackburn, Hyndburn and Rossendale, singled out the Daily Mail as he accused the paper of "ridicule and humiliation" and a "character assassination" of Lucy Meadows, 32, who took her own life in March 2013.
Parallel's can be drawn with Brenda's case.
www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/may/28/lucy-meadows-coroner-press-shame
If parallels can be drawn...where are they..in what papers
-
In my opinion Brenda was a nasty piece of work who's actions should be condemned...I have zero sympathy for her...
You're prerogative but can you repeat one thing she posted on Twitter for which she has been criticised that has been proven false?
-
You're prerogative but can you repeat one thing she posted on Twitter for which she has been criticised that has been proven false?
statements do not have to be proved false to be offensive or libellous
-
And Brenda Leyland too it would seem.
to take a line from John...has anything I have said about Brenda proven to be false
-
to take a line from John...has anything I have said about Brenda proven to be false
There would seem to be little evidence to suggest she was the nasty piece of work that you have stated is your opinion.
You would appear to have no evidence that her family turned their backs on her other than the press which you excoriate in other instances.
I guess it depends on ones terms of reference.
It seems to me you positively revel in posting thoroughly unpleasant comments about anyone who has has the temerity to question anything to do with the McCanns.
If you really are concerned about people being unpleasant you could set an example to us all by knocking it off.
Now that really would convince us all you were a sincere sort of chap.
-
to take a line from John...has anything I have said about Brenda proven to be false
She broke no laws.
You say she abused the mccanns.
You abuse people who don't believe the mccanns.
-
These things 'appen Mr Rudd (slightly misquoted).
-
There would seem to be little evidence to suggest she was the nasty piece of work that you have stated is your opinion.
You would appear to have no evidence that her family turned their backs on her other than the press which you excoriate in other instances.
I guess it depends on ones terms of reference.
It seems to me you positively revel in posting thoroughly unpleasant comments about anyone who has has the temerity to question anything to do with the McCanns.
If you really are concerned about people being unpleasant you could set an example to us all by knocking it off.
Now that really would convince us all you were a sincere sort of chap.
It isn't the questioning or doubting..it's the abuse that you and others try to pass off as doubting.
I have a real problem with anonymous posters abusing real people...I am not in the slightest bothered about idiots on her insulting Davel...he doesn't exist. We now a facebook page abusing Brenda's family... I suppose you all support that.. I don't...like some on here ..they are a disgrace
-
No. But you might.
Ending the ideological defence of what Sky News did would be the best thing you and allies could do to counter the extremists in the discussion (meaning elsewhere more than here).
-
Ending the ideological defence of what Sky News did would be the best thing you and allies could do to counter the extremists in the discussion (meaning elsewhere more than here).
Do you view the coroner's report and verdict as an ideological defence of Sky News?
-
sky was not to blame... Brenda's mental illness was...stop flogging the dead horse
They were to blame for intervening in a cheap, sensationalist way. But you'd expect nothing better from them.
I don't blame media for intervening, but if they don't do it seriously, if like Sky they just exploit it to make cheap TV, you'll applaud it but they'll actually be making things worse.
-
sky was not to blame... Brenda's mental illness was...stop flogging the dead horse
I agree with davel.
But I am sorry that her mental health was so bad that she could diss the dirt, but stand no criticism herself.
Truly sad that she felt the need to remove herself when she was exposed.
My guess is that some hitherto friends (and relatives) turned their backs on her ... and THAT is the main reason she ended it.
-
Do you view the coroner's report and verdict as an ideological defence of Sky News?
No mate.
-
They were to blame for intervening in a cheap, sensationalist way. But you'd expect nothing better from them.
I don't blame media for intervening, but if they don't do it seriously, if like Sky they just exploit it to make cheap TV, you'll applaud it but they'll actually be making things worse.
why have you not objected in the last seven years re the media exploitation of the McCann case...
-
No mate.
The coroner did not confer blame on anyone for Brenda's death so why do you lambast those of us on here who agree with that conclusion?
-
why have you not objected in the last seven years re the media exploitation of the McCann case...
I'm the one who keeps mentioning the recent horrible tabloid front pages geezer.
-
I'm the one who keeps mentioning the recent horrible tabloid front pages geezer.
Not out of any concern for the McCanns themselves, be honest!!!
-
I'm the one who keeps mentioning the recent horrible tabloid front pages geezer.
only recently...nothing compared to what was happening in the earlier years
-
The coroner did not confer blame on anyone for Brenda's death so why do you lambast those of us on here who agree with that conclusion?
Because what they did, and what you're doing, strengthens the extremists.
-
Not out of any concern for the McCanns themselves, be honest!!!
No, not those two. The rest of their family.
-
The coroner did not confer blame on anyone for Brenda's death so why do you lambast those of us on here who agree with that conclusion?
If the coroner didn't lambast Sky News then she failed to do her job properly. Brenda Leyland committed no crime yet they pushed her over the edge with their sleazy underhand behaviour.
It is nigh time Leveson was implemented and journalists who take things too far face sanctions or prosecution commensurate with their conduct.
-
If the coroner didn't lambast Sky News then she failed to do her job properly. Brenda Leyland committed no crime yet they pushed her over the edge with their sleazy underhand behaviour.
It is nigh time Leveson was implemented and journalists who take things too far face sanctions or prosecution commensurate with their conduct.
Well said Angelo.
Having seen some of the comments made by mccann supporters on this point, it merely reflects the accuracy of my earlier observations.
They ONLY show concern for the mccanns.
-
They were to blame for intervening in a cheap, sensationalist way. But you'd expect nothing better from them.
I don't blame media for intervening, but if they don't do it seriously, if like Sky they just exploit it to make cheap TV, you'll applaud it but they'll actually be making things worse.
The support for Sky is very much the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
-
The support for Sky is very much the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
All sorts of people tweet nasty things. For me, they're all the same, worthy only of being ignored. I find it inexplicable that one group of people spent hours tracking down another group of people and including them in a dossier for the police. Why? Why not just report anything directed at them which they thought was illegal and let the police investigate if necessary?
Somehow Sky got hold of the dossier and decided to take the law into their own hands and pursue and expose one of those in the dossier. While none of those involved are directly to blame for what happened next, their behaviour leaves a lot to be desired in my opinion. May Brenda Leyland rest in peace.
-
All sorts of people tweet nasty things. For me, they're all the same, worthy only of being ignored. I find it inexplicable that one group of people spent hours tracking down another group of people and including them in a dossier for the police. Why? Why not just report anything directed at them which they thought was illegal and let the police investigate if necessary?
Somehow Sky got hold of the dossier and decided to take the law into their own hands and pursue and expose one of those in the dossier. While none of those involved are directly to blame for what happened next, their behaviour leaves a lot to be desired in my opinion. May Brenda Leyland rest in peace.
There are one or two of those on here, who it would seem, spend hours plowing through obscure sites looking for offence, though I'm not suggesting that they belong to the shrouded in mystery dossier compliers.
-
There are one or two of those on here, who it would seem, spend hours plowing through obscure sites looking for offence, though I'm not suggesting that they belong to the shrouded in mystery dossier compliers.
&%+((£
It's all about the two parents.
...............................and nothing else, no matter how much they pretend otherwise.
-
Because what they did, and what you're doing, strengthens the extremists.
What am I doing, apart from agreeing with the coroner? Are you trying to stop me expressing a point of view?
-
There are one or two of those on here, who it would seem, spend hours plowing through obscure sites looking for offence, though I'm not suggesting that they belong to the shrouded in mystery dossier compliers.
There may even be one or two on here %£&)**# who contribute to the worst excesses by posting on these obnoxious sites, Jassie.
They may well have contributed to the content of the dossier.
-
What am I doing, apart from agreeing with the coroner? Are you trying to stop me expressing a point of view?
It seems the Coroner's verdict has been accepted by all but the rump of misfits on the FB page criticising Brenda Leyland's family.
-
Indeed they might. Sad that people have nothing better to do with their time.
-
It seems the Coroner's verdict has been accepted by all but the rump of misfits on the FB page criticising Brenda Leyland's family.
What's it called Brietta?
-
What's it called Brietta?
8(0(* The truth is out there for the seekers, G.
-
It seems the Coroner's verdict has been accepted by all but the rump of misfits on the FB page criticising Brenda Leyland's family.
Not altogether - we already have Angelo suggesting on here that the Coroner didn't do her job properly.
-
It seems the Coroner's verdict has been accepted by all but the rump of misfits on the FB page criticising Brenda Leyland's family.
The coroners verdict was suicide but that does not exonerate those whose hands have blood on them. Journalists are getting away with far too much in this country under the guise of a free press. I say Leveson should be implemented and along with it a new law of criminal responsibility when it comes to suicide by way of press intrusion.
-
The coroners verdict was suicide but that does not exonerate those whose hands have blood on them. Journalists are getting away with far too much in this country under the guise of a free press. I say Leveson should be implemented and along with it a new law of criminal responsibility when it comes to suicide by way of press intrusion.
so you are saying Brunt hasn't been cleared... @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
Not altogether - we already have Angelo suggesting on here that the Coroner didn't do her job properly.
Why dont you quote me in context? What I stated was.....
If the coroner didn't lambast Sky News then she failed to do her job properly. Brenda Leyland committed no crime yet they pushed her over the edge with their sleazy underhand behaviour.
I stated IF!! Has anyone see the full coroners report yet?
-
so you are saying Brunt hasn't been cleared... @)(++(* @)(++(*
Cleared of what? And what's more davel I fail to see whats funny about this sorry saga.
Sky's actions in singling out this woman was at the very least unethical yet they have got away with it. Putting them in the sin bin for a while is just not enough imo.
-
Why dont you quote me in context? What I stated was.....
If the coroner didn't lambast Sky News then she failed to do her job properly. Brenda Leyland committed no crime yet they pushed her over the edge with their sleazy underhand behaviour.
I stated IF!! Has anyone see the full coroners report yet?
The coroner did not lambast Sky News - so I think it was reasonable for me to assume that your opinion of her would be as you stated above i.e. that she didn't do her job properly.
-
Cleared of what? And what's more davel I fail to see whats funny about this sorry saga.
what's funny is you talking about people not being exhonerated...as tough as the coroner did not clear Brunt he must carry some guilt...bit like many posters view of the McCanns. Posters on here have decided Brunt is guilty..he isn't
-
what's funny is you talking about people not being exhonerated...as tough as the coroner did not clear Brunt he must carry some guilt...bit like many posters view of the McCanns. Posters on here have decided Brunt is guilty..he isn't
But he is! Guilty of an apalling lack of empathy and of good judgement but then the appetite for a juicy sleezy story must be overwhelming. I want to see criminal sanctions for journalists who drive people to kill themselves.
-
But he is! Guilty of an apalling lack of empathy and of good judgement but then the appetite for a juicy sleezy story must be overwhelming.
so a bit like Brenda
-
so a bit like Brenda
Was Brenda paid for posting her views which I might add she was perfectly entitled to do?
Can I also add that the Maddie case has not been determined and Brenda did not commit any criminal offence regardless of your own comments to the contrary back in February.
-
Was Brenda paid for posting her views which I might add she was perfectly entitled to do?
Can I also add that the Maddie case has not been determined and Brenda did not commit any criminal offence regardless of your own comments to the contrary back in February.
Nor did Martin Brunt, don't forget that Angelo.
PS: I trust this comment won't get deleted like my others on this thread today!
-
Nor did Martin Brunt, don't forget that Angelo.
PS: I trust this comment won't get deleted like my others on this thread today!
Only off topic and abusive comments are removed.
-
8(0(* The truth is out there for the seekers, G.
I'm not that bothered. I just wondered why people would want to criticise Brenda Leyland's family, that's all.
-
I'm not that bothered. I just wondered why people would want to criticise Brenda Leyland's family, that's all.
From another forum
I'm sorry that I don't post often, so am rather an outsider here, but I am concerned about a FB group which was ostensibly set up in memory of Brenda Leyland and purported to be supportive of her and her family - https://www.facebook.com/groups/523769381091778/?fref=ts
However, since the inquest, which they regard as a put up job and the whole thing a conspiracy, they appear now to be turning against Brenda and, in particular, her family - and in particular Ben. They say that any normal family/son would be shouting the injustice from the rooftops and, because he isn't, then clearly he cannot be who he says he is. They also say that the law firm he purports to work for doesn't exist in Los Angelese - which is true - strangely.
They have a theory, which appears to be popular, that Brenda never existed - the role played by Brenda when confronted by Martin Brunt, was played by Glenda Jackson (for those outside the UK you may not know that Glenda Jackson, a former actress, is a member of parliament in the UK). They are absolutely determined that the whole thing was a McCann conspiracy, to generate support for the grieving parents, and are working to the ends of proving this. Sadly, in the process, they are slagging off Brenda and her family.
I was a member there but have been banned for trying to correct some of their totally inaccurate statements - things which can be proved. It is not a democratic debate going on there - they don't want to hear from anyone who does not go along with their outrageous theories.
I just wondered if anyone here is also a member there and whether they are, consequently, able to inject some sanity into the so-called debate?
I'm sorry, again, but that website has upset me greatly.
-
I'm not that bothered. I just wondered why people would want to criticise Brenda Leyland's family, that's all.
Do we know that they are ?
So far we only have Brietta's word for it.
-
Do we know that they are ?
So far we only have Brietta's word for it.
and now Winjoy who posted the above
-
From another forum
I'm sorry that I don't post often, so am rather an outsider here, but I am concerned about a FB group which was ostensibly set up in memory of Brenda Leyland and purported to be supportive of her and her family - https://www.facebook.com/groups/523769381091778/?fref=ts
However, since the inquest, which they regard as a put up job and the whole thing a conspiracy, they appear now to be turning against Brenda and, in particular, her family - and in particular Ben. They say that any normal family/son would be shouting the injustice from the rooftops and, because he isn't, then clearly he cannot be who he says he is. They also say that the law firm he purports to work for doesn't exist in Los Angelese - which is true - strangely.
They have a theory, which appears to be popular, that Brenda never existed - the role played by Brenda when confronted by Martin Brunt, was played by Glenda Jackson (for those outside the UK you may not know that Glenda Jackson, a former actress, is a member of parliament in the UK). They are absolutely determined that the whole thing was a McCann conspiracy, to generate support for the grieving parents, and are working to the ends of proving this. Sadly, in the process, they are slagging off Brenda and her family.
I was a member there but have been banned for trying to correct some of their totally inaccurate statements - things which can be proved. It is not a democratic debate going on there - they don't want to hear from anyone who does not go along with their outrageous theories.
I just wondered if anyone here is also a member there and whether they are, consequently, able to inject some sanity into the so-called debate?
I'm sorry, again, but that website has upset me greatly.
Glenda? @)(++(*
They're nuts. But that's what facebook's for isn't it: Nut Heaven?
-
Glenda? @)(++(*
They're nuts. But that's what facebook's for isn't it: Nut Heaven?
I'm sure if they dig hard enough & deep enough they will discover that BL was really murdered by the same MI6 agents who disposed of Gareth Williams. The McCanns have that much power, you know.
-
But he is! Guilty of an apalling lack of empathy and of good judgement but then the appetite for a juicy sleezy story must be overwhelming. I want to see criminal sanctions for journalists who drive people to kill themselves.
What was "sleazy" about it from Sweeepyface's point of view, she firmly believed that using twitter in the way she did was acceptible?
Brenda Leyland was perhaps more concerned about neighbours, friends and family and what their opinions might be.
-
so a bit like Brenda
Martin Brunt could have had no idea that such a prolific twitter user was fragile. The horror who left her helpless parents in filth while she squandered money stolen from them on a Spanish frolic bounced back from the publicity without a backward glance.
Why should he have thought Ms Leyland would be any different?
-
what's funny is you talking about people not being exhonerated...as tough as the coroner did not clear Brunt he must carry some guilt...bit like many posters view of the McCanns. Posters on here have decided Brunt is guilty..he isn't
The bottom line remains.
brunt and sky are vigilantes, who went to Leyland on the basis of a lie.
The dossier compilers, clearly cowards to try to hide behind anonymity, afre up there with sky and brunt.
Two days later she was DEAD.
-
Glenda? @)(++(*
They're nuts. But that's what facebook's for isn't it: Nut Heaven?
I so admire your chutzpah but it isn't quite coming off ... and that particular 'nut' heaven is well and truly populated by some very unwell people indeed.
-
Martin Brunt could have had no idea that such a prolific twitter user was fragile. The horror who left her helpless parents in filth while she squandered money stolen from them on a Spanish frolic bounced back from the publicity without a backward glance.
Why should he have thought Ms Leyland would be any different?
&%&£(+ Give it a rest. Smearing a deceased woman is the pits.
But you know that. All's fair for Propagandists.
-
The bottom line remains.
brunt and sky are vigilantes, who went to Leyland on the basis of a lie.
The dossier compilers, clearly cowards to try to hide behind anonymity, afre up there with sky and brunt.
Two days later she was DEAD.
A woman with a previous medical history killed herself with her own hand. As the Coroner ruled ... suicide.
-
The bottom line remains.
brunt and sky are vigilantes, who went to Leyland on the basis of a lie.
The dossier compilers, clearly cowards to try to hide behind anonymity, afre up there with sky and brunt.
Two days later she was DEAD.
What do the sceptics plan to do with their own dossier of supporters' "threatening" tweets?
-
&%&£(+ Give it a rest. Smearing a deceased woman is the pits.
But you know that.
If you see anyone here "smearing" anyone ... please report it to the mods.
Your comment would appear to suggest that you have lost not only the argument, but the plot. Even the odd people posting on their FB page have not "smeared" the deceased woman in question ... all of their spite and venom is directed at her survivors ... rather sums them up none the less.
-
What do the sceptics plan to do with their own dossier of supporters' "threatening" tweets?
Why don't you ask them ? 8)-)))
-
What do the sceptics plan to do with their own dossier of supporters' "threatening" tweets?
Are the supporters planning any other action with their dossier?
-
I so admire your chutzpah but it isn't quite coming off ... and that particular 'nut' heaven is well and truly populated by some very unwell people indeed.
They only people giving them credibility are you guys.
-
Why don't you ask them ? 8)-)))
I just have. 8)--))
-
Are the supporters planning any other action with their dossier?
Perhaps a book...then maybe a film...
-
The bottom line remains.
brunt and sky are vigilantes, who went to Leyland on the basis of a lie.
The dossier compilers, clearly cowards to try to hide behind anonymity, afre up there with sky and brunt.
Two days later she was DEAD.
I think you must search for a more compelling bottom line.
The late Brenda Leyland's tweets were a matter of public record.
What was a matter of public record was drawn to the attention of the police.
What happened thereafter (the coroner made clear) was a consequence of the strictly private and personal choices of Brenda Leyland.
I'm sure we all would have wished for a different and much more positive outcome; not least that BL was still with us and able to enjoy her life.
It wasn't to be ...
-
Only off topic and abusive comments are removed.
Mine were neither.
-
&%&£(+ Give it a rest. Smearing a deceased woman is the pits.
But you know that. All's fair for Propagandists.
How on earth did Brietta's post smear a dead woman?
-
They only people giving them credibility are you guys.
Incredibility more like
-
How on earth did Brietta's post smear a dead woman?
This probably...
"Martin Brunt could have had no idea that such a prolific twitter user was fragile. The horror who left her helpless parents in filth while she squandered money stolen from them on a Spanish frolic bounced back from the publicity without a backward glance.
Why should he have thought Ms Leyland would be any different?"
Brietta does her homework, she is a perfect example of an obbsesionist.. Although we are not privvy to her assocciation with the McCANNS, she certainly hates anyone who dares speak without love in their tone about the McCanns, Read and weep. lets see what dirt we can dig up about the McCanns...hmmmm
There is no empathy for Brenda, or anyone who dares to stand up to the parents.
-
I just have. 8)--))
No you haven't. 8(0(*
-
I think you must search for a more compelling bottom line.
The late Brenda Leyland's tweets were a matter of public record.
What was a matter of public record was drawn to the attention of the police.
What happened thereafter (the coroner made clear) was a consequence of the strictly private and personal choices of Brenda Leyland.
I'm sure we all would have wished for a different and much more positive outcome; not least that BL was still with us and able to enjoy her life.
It wasn't to be ...
That advice can be equally applied to the mccanns, when they decided to leave their children alone and unprotected.
For that Madeleine paid the price.
-
A reminder to all posters on this thread.
The subject of Brenda's suicide (now confirmed by the coroner) is a sensitive one. As such I would appreciate some sensitivity by both sides whilst discussing the various issues it raises.
I know some members are a bit uneasy discussing it but I feel the circumstances of what happened to her are very important and must be debated. Please keep comments respectful and to the point. TY
-
What do the sceptics plan to do with their own dossier of supporters' "threatening" tweets?
Invade somewhere on the strength of it?
-
From another forum
I'm sorry that I don't post often, so am rather an outsider here, but I am concerned about a FB group which was ostensibly set up in memory of Brenda Leyland and purported to be supportive of her and her family - https://www.facebook.com/groups/523769381091778/?fref=ts
However, since the inquest, which they regard as a put up job and the whole thing a conspiracy, they appear now to be turning against Brenda and, in particular, her family - and in particular Ben. They say that any normal family/son would be shouting the injustice from the rooftops and, because he isn't, then clearly he cannot be who he says he is. They also say that the law firm he purports to work for doesn't exist in Los Angelese - which is true - strangely.
They have a theory, which appears to be popular, that Brenda never existed - the role played by Brenda when confronted by Martin Brunt, was played by Glenda Jackson (for those outside the UK you may not know that Glenda Jackson, a former actress, is a member of parliament in the UK). They are absolutely determined that the whole thing was a McCann conspiracy, to generate support for the grieving parents, and are working to the ends of proving this. Sadly, in the process, they are slagging off Brenda and her family.
I was a member there but have been banned for trying to correct some of their totally inaccurate statements - things which can be proved. It is not a democratic debate going on there - they don't want to hear from anyone who does not go along with their outrageous theories.
I just wondered if anyone here is also a member there and whether they are, consequently, able to inject some sanity into the so-called debate?
I'm sorry, again, but that website has upset me greatly.
Can't see anthing, it's a closed group. Thanks anyway. Is the above quote from another closed area?
-
Can't see anthing, it's a closed group. Thanks anyway. Is the above quote from another closed area?
Its from a site called 'Missing Madeleine' A place I visit periodically - no idea if it is a closed site or not.
-
Can't see anthing, it's a closed group. Thanks anyway. Is the above quote from another closed area?
The above quote is not from a closed area. But it does come from someone who was a member of another closed Forum before she was banned for disagreeing with the content.
-
A reminder to all posters on this thread.
The subject of Brenda's suicide (now confirmed by the coroner) is a sensitive one. As such I would appreciate some sensitivity by both sides whilst discussing the various issues it raises.
I know some members are a bit uneasy discussing it but I feel the circumstances of what happened to her are very important and must be debated. Please keep comments respectful and to the point. TY
Kid gloves for Brenda, but be as scathing as you like re the family of a missing child. Sure thing.
-
Its from a site called 'Missing Madeleine' A place I visit periodically - no idea if it is a closed site or not.
Don't you post there, Jassi?
-
Yes, now and again, though I consider this a much superior forum.
-
Can't see anthing, it's a closed group. Thanks anyway. Is the above quote from another closed area?
It isn't a closed group GU. The person seemed quite upset.
"Some wise words, thank you! It just upsets me that a group set up in honour of Brenda has turned so against her and her son in particular - poor man. It's horrible! I've no choice as to whether I stay away unfortunately! But in a free world I would expect free speech - which, at the end of the day, is exactly what Brenda was standing up for. The minute I didn't agree with them - that was it - I was out! They hadn't even heard of Hacked Off! Honestly! And they have convinced themselves that they will 'crack it'!"
-
Kid gloves for Brenda, but be as scathing as you like re the family of a missing child. Sure thing.
Well that would be because she's dead, and you can hardly criticise a FB group for apparently disrespecting Brenda's family and then do the same yourselves by nudge-nudge, wink-wink comparing her to a convicted fraudster (or whatever it was she was convicted for). Can you?
You're saying posters in a far-flung area of the internet ought to be respecting Brenda's family. Well so should you guys.
-
Well that would be because she's dead, and you can hardly criticise a FB group for apparently disrespecting Brenda's family and then do the same yourselves by nudge-nudge, wink-wink comparing her to a convicted fraudster (or whatever it was she was convicted for). Can you?
You're saying posters in a far-flung area of the internet ought to be respecting Brenda's family. Well so should you guys.
so Brunt musn't doorstep Brenda because she's fragile and we mustn't criticise Brenda because she committed suicide...but it's ok to criticise the McCanns...Fortunately you don't make the rules and I will say what I like within the rules of the forum. I certainly will not be anywhere near as abusive as Brenda or use any of the bad language she used
-
Well that would be because she's dead, and you can hardly criticise a FB group for apparently disrespecting Brenda's family and then do the same yourselves by nudge-nudge, wink-wink comparing her to a convicted fraudster (or whatever it was she was convicted for). Can you?
You're saying posters in a far-flung area of the internet ought to be respecting Brenda's family. Well so should you guys.
Perhaps you'd like to show me where and how I have disrespected Brenda or her family?
-
and now Winjoy who posted the above
The group is closed. Do you have any evidence other than a poster's word that this is happening ?
-
The group is closed. Do you have any evidence other than a poster's word that this is happening ?
do you think she is lying
-
do you think she is lying
Not in the least merely asking for confirmation, just as you yourself would.
-
Well, here's a turn up for the books.
Just seen this on amazon.
'Apparently there is a facebook group which maintains that Brenda Leyland never existed and the entire story was a bizarre hoax with the central role of ''Brenda'' being played by 78 year old former transport minister, MP and twice academy award winning actress Glenda Jackson.
I never expected to come across a more ridiculous suggestion than Hotrod's Second Coming, but I have to say this one really takes the biscuit. These people need locking up.'
Now if that is true, what does that say about the mindset of some mccann supporters ?
-
Well, here's a turn up for the books.
Just seen this on amazon.
'Apparently there is a facebook group which maintains that Brenda Leyland never existed and the entire story was a bizarre hoax with the central role of ''Brenda'' being played by 78 year old former transport minister, MP and twice academy award winning actress Glenda Jackson.
I never expected to come across a more ridiculous suggestion than Hotrod's Second Coming, but I have to say this one really takes the biscuit. These people need locking up.'
Now if that is true, what does that say about the mindset of some mccann supporters ?
And why are you attributing that to Mccann supporters?
More likely to be Brendas own side: Ashamed of what she did and trying to minimize the damage.
-
And why are you attributing that to Mccann supporters?
More likely to be Brendas own side: Ashamed of what she did and trying to minimize the damage.
You never know.
Perhaps an attempted April's Fools joke, a day too late, though in poor taste.
-
Well, here's a turn up for the books.
Just seen this on amazon.
'Apparently there is a facebook group which maintains that Brenda Leyland never existed and the entire story was a bizarre hoax with the central role of ''Brenda'' being played by 78 year old former transport minister, MP and twice academy award winning actress Glenda Jackson.
I never expected to come across a more ridiculous suggestion than Hotrod's Second Coming, but I have to say this one really takes the biscuit. These people need locking up.'
Now if that is true, what does that say about the mindset of some mccann supporters ?
I'm told that Amazon is a bit of a "no-go" area for people who do not take a particular stance on Madeleine McCann's vanishing ... no Mods?? so a bit of children let loose in the sweetie shop just like Yahoo ... I believe you are very familiar with the site, so you will have first hand knowledge of the types posting there perhaps.
However the fact that there are total idiots out there who have taken the time to work on taking out their spleen on Brenda Leyland's family does not surprise me in the slightest ... they've had plenty of practice making up all sorts of ridiculous myths about the McCann family, after all.
-
Well, here's a turn up for the books.
Just seen this on amazon.
'Apparently there is a facebook group which maintains that Brenda Leyland never existed and the entire story was a bizarre hoax with the central role of ''Brenda'' being played by 78 year old former transport minister, MP and twice academy award winning actress Glenda Jackson.
I never expected to come across a more ridiculous suggestion than Hotrod's Second Coming, but I have to say this one really takes the biscuit. These people need locking up.'
Now if that is true, what does that say about the mindset of some mccann supporters ?
You should read back before commenting Steve. It was set up by your side in memory of Brenda Leyland.
Distressed MM member:
I'm sorry that I don't post often, so am rather an outsider here, but I am concerned about a FB group which was ostensibly set up in memory of Brenda Leyland and purported to be supportive of her and her family - https://www.facebook.com/groups/523769381091778/?fref=ts
Anna Esse and Astro are on it.
-
I'm told that Amazon is a bit of a "no-go" area for people who do not take a particular stance on Madeleine McCann's vanishing ... no Mods?? so a bit of children let loose in the sweetie shop just like Yahoo ... I believe you are very familiar with the site, so you will have first hand knowledge of the types posting there perhaps.
However the fact that there are total idiots out there who have taken the time to work on taking out their spleen on Brenda Leyland's family does not surprise me in the slightest ... they've had plenty of practice making up all sorts of ridiculous myths about the McCann family, after all.
You are still showing exactly the same disrespect for her family by spreading that groups rubbish around.
-
I am a little concerned about what is happening in the wake of Brenda's demise.
The "Digging for Madeleine" F/B site is now urgently appealing for anyone who lives in Burton Overy to get in touch with Birch. Quite what all this has to do with his own quest is mystifying
.https://www.facebook.com/diggingformadeleinmccann
-
You should read back before commenting Steve. It was set up by your side in memory of Brenda Leyland.
Distressed MM member:
I'm sorry that I don't post often, so am rather an outsider here, but I am concerned about a FB group which was ostensibly set up in memory of Brenda Leyland and purported to be supportive of her and her family - https://www.facebook.com/groups/523769381091778/?fref=ts
Anna Esse and Astro are on it.
DCI why do you persist in posting a Facebook link to a closed group that proves nothing ?
-
I am a little concerned about what is happening in the wake of Brenda's demise.
The "Digging for Madeleine" F/B site is now urgently appealing for anyone who lives in Burton Overy to get in touch with Birch. Quite what all this has to do with his own quest is mystifying
.https://www.facebook.com/diggingformadeleinmccann
Yawn. The man's a hoaxer.
-
Yawn. The man's a hoaxer.
From what I can see, having made frequent checks on what is being posted there, Birch is no longer in control of that site. There have been a few offensive pictures (not of BL) with captions posted, which were quickly removed.
As I said, I am not quite sure why their "cause" wishes to become involved in the BL affair.
All this is clearly not the "legacy" Ben referred to.
-
From what I can see, having made frequent checks on what is being posted there, Birch is no longer in control of that site. There have been a few offensive pictures (not of BL) with captions posted, which were quickly removed.
As I said, I am not quite sure why their "cause" wishes to become involved in the BL affair.
All this is clearly not the "legacy" Ben referred to.
So who is in control of it?
-
You are still showing exactly the same disrespect for her family by spreading that groups rubbish around.
Did you make a similar post to Stephen who has highlighted exactly what her memorial FB group are saying on Amazon?? I haven't seen it. So with no respect at all BUTT OUT with your constant trawling after me and your constant criticism of my posts inclusive of your suggestion I should desist posting altogether.
The people who are disrespecting Brenda Leyland are like minded 'friends' on the FB page set up in her memory but specifically attacking the only family member with whom she maintained an amicable relationship apparently. I doubt she would be appreciative of that.
-
Did you make a similar post to Stephen who has highlighted exactly what her memorial FB group are saying on Amazon?? I haven't seen it. So with no respect at all BUTT OUT with your constant trawling after me and your constant criticism of my posts inclusive of your suggestion I should desist posting altogether.
The people who are disrespecting Brenda Leyland are like minded 'friends' on the FB page set up in her memory but specifically attacking the only family member with whom she maintained an amicable relationship apparently. I doubt she would be appreciative of that.
You and your compadres have zero evidence what is going on inside that group so until you do I think it would be wise not to state something you have no evidence of as fact.
-
So who is in control of it?
I have no idea - but they can't spell.
-
Did you make a similar post to Stephen who has highlighted exactly what her memorial FB group are saying on Amazon?? I haven't seen it. So with no respect at all BUTT OUT with your constant trawling after me and your constant criticism of my posts inclusive of your suggestion I should desist posting altogether.
The people who are disrespecting Brenda Leyland are like minded 'friends' on the FB page set up in her memory but specifically attacking the only family member with whom she maintained an amicable relationship apparently. I doubt she would be appreciative of that.
I doubt it also but I also doubt she appreciated what Sky News did yet you defend that. Your concern now for either BL or her family is transparent nonsense.
I doubt her son is the least bit concerned with the ramblings of a few people online. Why would he be concerned with such trifling irrelevance after all that has happened?
I repeat: the only people giving those few nuts credibility are you guys by spreading what they say and by pretending they are bigger than they really are.
-
so Brunt musn't doorstep Brenda because she's fragile and we mustn't criticise Brenda because she committed suicide...but it's ok to criticise the McCanns...Fortunately you don't make the rules and I will say what I like within the rules of the forum. I certainly will not be anywhere near as abusive as Brenda or use any of the bad language she used
First of all, Brenda did not court the press and only expressed her opinion which is allowed in the UK and as the police stated none of her tweets were considered criminal.
As for the McCanns, they courted the press from the moment their daughter "disappeared" and always put themselves in the limelight at every opportunity, acting as celebrities. Furthermore, they were made arguidos and suspected of hiding Madeleine's body and simulating a crime. Therefore, it's normal that people are going to talk about them and give their opinions positive or negative, especially as the case has not yet been solved.
-
First of all, Brenda did not court the press and only expressed her opinion which is allowed in the UK and as the police stated none of her tweets were considered criminal.
As for the McCanns, they courted the press from the moment their daughter "disappeared" and always put themselves in the limelight at every opportunity, acting as celebrities. Furthermore, they were made arguidos and suspected of hiding Madeleine's body and simulating a crime. Therefore, it's normal that people are going to talk about them and give their opinions positive or negative, especially as the case has not yet been solved.
yes Brenda is allowed her opinion in the Uk...and I'm allowed mine...she was a bitter twisted b****h
-
First of all, Brenda did not court the press and only expressed her opinion which is allowed in the UK and as the police stated none of her tweets were considered criminal.
As for the McCanns, they courted the press from the moment their daughter "disappeared" and always put themselves in the limelight at every opportunity, acting as celebrities. Furthermore, they were made arguidos and suspected of hiding Madeleine's body and simulating a crime. Therefore, it's normal that people are going to talk about them and give their opinions positive or negative, especially as the case has not yet been solved.
What was Brenda's vested interest when she badgered Brunt with her tweets?
-
What was Brenda's vested interest when she badgered Brunt with her tweets?
Why do you make up these things?
-
yes Brenda is allowed her opinion in the Uk...and I'm allowed mine...she was a bitter twisted b****h
And the McCanns are two narcissistic sociopaths driven by hate!
-
And the McCanns are two narcissistic sociopaths driven by hate!
Oh dearie me ... things not going to well it seems. Everyone who is anyone is soooo touchy these days.
-
And the McCanns are two narcissistic sociopaths driven by hate!
But you're not a [ censored word ] and you're only asking questions...yeah right.
-
But you're not a [ censored word ] and you're only asking questions...yeah right.
I ask questions, yes, but that is how I perceive the parents.
-
I ask questions, yes, but that is how I perceive the parents.
Doesn't it puzzle you that the very serious personality disorders which are so obvious to you - have gone completely undetected over so many years by any of the people who actually know the McCanns and/or have spent time with them, i.e. colleagues who have worked alongside them, policemen who have interviewed them, people who have counselled them - to name but a few.
Can you produce even a shred of evidence to support your belief that the McCanns both have serious mental disorders? Wishful thinking doesn't count.
-
Doesn't it puzzle you that the very serious personality disorders which are so obvious to you - have gone completely undetected over so many years by any of the people who actually know the McCanns and/or have spent time with them, i.e. colleagues who have worked alongside them, policemen who have interviewed them, people who have counselled them - to name but a few.
Can you produce even a shred of evidence to support your belief that the McCanns both have serious mental disorders? Wishful thinking doesn't count.
Why would the McCanns need to have serious mental disorders ? Self-preservation is a very keen motivator.
-
Wandering Off Topic again. Sorry to be a perpetual bore, but if you could appreciate the chaos this causes then you wouldn't do it.
Unless you want to make my life difficult, that is.
-
Wandering Off Topic again. Sorry to be a perpetual bore, but if you could appreciate the chaos this causes then you wouldn't do it.
Unless you want to make my life difficult, that is.
Why even bother with all this stuff when you could be eating chocolate. Happy Easter Eleanor.
-
Why even bother with all this stuff when you could be eating chocolate. Happy Easter Eleanor.
Because I care about the integrity of this Forum, and your right to express a reasonable opinion.
PS. I never touch chocolate. It makes me ill. But Happy Easter to you too.
-
Wandering Off Topic again. Sorry to be a perpetual bore, but if you could appreciate the chaos this causes then you wouldn't do it.
Unless you want to make my life difficult, that is.
It is so easy to do, it only takes one poster to make a spurious off-the-cuff comment and off we go at a tangent with everyone following? I find if that happens it is best to look at the thread title and include a relevant comment. With any luck the discussion comes back to being relevant again.
Happy Easter btw.
-
It is so easy to do, it only takes one poster to make a spurious off-the-cuff comment and off we go at a tangent with everyone following? I find if that happens it is best to look at the thread title and include a relevant comment. With any luck the discussion comes back to being relevant again.
Happy Easter btw.
Precisely, John. And not even difficult. It saves the day. And the comment.
I am far less likely to delete a comment if it contains something pertinent to The Thread.
-
Perhaps we could have a special 'Off Topic' topic to deal with this 8)--))
-
Perhaps we could have a special 'Off Topic' topic to deal with this 8)--))
We already have.