Investigation into McCann internet trolls launched by police

[Angelo222]

Is there any difference between what Sky News did to Brenda and how investigators doorstep criminals/fraudsters on programmes like Watchdog & Rogue Traders (where matters have not necessarily been reported to the police) ?

Brenda Leyland was not a criminal.

[Angelo222]

Like the people being investigated on the programmes I mentioned - not charged at the time. However, Leics police had been sent a dossier of names & I have yet to see a statement from them confirming that they have investigated the complaint & no charges will be forthcoming against anyone.
If Sky were also sent a copy of the dossier - so what? Is that illegal?

Sending a dossier anonymously renders it without credibility, likewise those faceless idiots behind it.

[Alfred R Jones]

Like the people being investigated on the programmes I mentioned - not charged at the time. However, Leics police had been sent a dossier of names & I have yet to see a statement from them confirming that they have investigated the complaint & no charges will be forthcoming against anyone.
If Sky were also sent a copy of the dossier - so what? Is that illegal?

  What about Crimewatch, in which suspects photographs are broadcast to the entire nation?  None of them has been charged either - perhaps sceptics would like to see this practise banned?  How about the media interest in the man widely assumed to have killed Alice Gross?  Perhaps it was the media attention that drove this man to kill himself - does the media have his blood on their hands too?

[Wonderfulspam]

Sending a dossier anonymously renders it without credibility, likewise those faceless idiots behind it.

Notice how the 'Watching The Trolls' blogger is still hiding away.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:YC6eE02RVacJ:watchingthetrolls.blogspot.com/2011/02/re-mccanns-new-book-its-truthful_09.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

Brave.

[misty]

Brenda Leyland was not a criminal.

She had broken online media laws - is that not a criminal offence? She targeted a family she did not know & made many malicious & untrue remarks about them for all to see,
Please don't turn her into some sort of martyr.

[misty]

Sending a dossier anonymously renders it without credibility, likewise those faceless idiots behind it.

Why does it have no credibility? The contents have been in the public domain for all to see.

[stephen25000]

She had broken online media laws - is that not a criminal offence? She targeted a family she did not know & made many malicious & untrue remarks about them for all to see,
Please don't turn her into some sort of martyr.

Sky News have made her that, because of the lies they told, and then her  unfortunate death after they exposed her to the public.

What she did was wrong, but so was what Sky News did.

Hence Brunt's 'disappearance'.

[Carew]

Crimewatch and similar media involvement in investigations to trace suspects are authorised by the police in order to solve crimes already identified by them.

How can that be compared with unauthorised D.I.Y. targeting as per dossier/press of an individual not similarly sought by the police?

[misty]

Sky News have made her that, because of the lies they told, and then her  unfortunate death after they exposed her to the public.

What she did was wrong, but so was what Sky News did.

Hence Brunt's 'disappearance'.

What lies did Sky news tell? Have you a link to a statement from the police saying the complaint against Brenda & others wasn't/isn't being investigated?

[misty]

Crimewatch and similar media involvement in investigations to trace suspects are authorised by the police in order to solve crimes already identified by them.

How can that be compared with unauthorised D.I.Y. targeting as per dossier/press of an individual not similarly sought by the police?

Is that right? Was Mark Williams Thomas authorised to doorstep paedophiles abroad which he had tracked down?

[Alfred R Jones]

Crimewatch and similar media involvement in investigations to trace suspects are authorised by the police in order to solve crimes already identified by them.

How can that be compared with unauthorised D.I.Y. targeting as per dossier/press of an individual not similarly sought by the police?

Isn't the issue here the effecton a person of being targeted by the media regarding alleged participation in illegal activity before they've even been charged, let alone found guilty?  The principle therefore is the same.

[Angelo222]

Is that right? Was Mark Williams Thomas authorised to doorstep paedophiles abroad which he had tracked down?

There are strict rules surrounding these activities but Brunt seems to have ignored them in the pursuance of what he thought was a juicy story. 

[Alfred R Jones]

There are strict rules surrounding these activities but Brunt seems to have ignored them in the pursuance of what he thought was a juicy story.

  If Brunt has broken rules then he will be punished no doubt. 

[Carew]

Isn't the issue here the effecton a person of being targeted by the media regarding alleged participation in illegal activity before they've even been charged, let alone found guilty?  The principle therefore is the same.

No.

The police, having identified a crime and requesting help from the media in tracing a suspect is not the same in principle as the media targeting and confronting an individual not even identified as a suspect by the police.......... in a "crime" not even identified by them, either.

[misty]

There are strict rules surrounding these activities but Brunt seems to have ignored them in the pursuance of what he thought was a juicy story.

Is there not evidence that she was already contacting Brunt? Who knows, she may have been bombarding him with emails - the content of which couldn't be made public. She was certainly OK about inviting him into her own home - hardly the actions of someone who felt hounded & persecuted (unlike the McCanns)