Brenda Leyland found dead in a hotel room.

[Alfred R Jones]

TBH I don't think the two are at all comparable.

The journalist asked their question during a press conference in which the McCanns had agreed to take part. Brenda ( not Barbara ) Leyland was doorstepped and told lies to elicit a response. She was unaware that this was going to happen and did not give her consent to being questioned.

That is the difference.

The net result of the interviewers actions was shock and embarrassment and upset in the interviewees.  Which is worse frankly?  Being challenged about being an  internet troll or being challenged about having something to do with your child's disappearance and possible death?  The ONLY difference that I can see is that in one situation the shame of the accusation was too much to bear.  I'm not getting in an argument with you about this Faithlilly, it's time for some decorum on all sides, so I've said what I think as indeed have you.  We will have to agree to disagree.

[DCI]

The only comment I will make on this sad occasion is this.

Brenda engaged with Brunt, outside her home she then just walked away. Why then did she come back and invite Brunt in to her home.
I wonder how long he was there and what was said in the interview?

Such a shame ending her own life, but who knows what other problems she may have had. RIP Brenda!

[xtina]

responsible to whom?

maddie ...fgs

they left her didn't they...how ever you dress it up ...you do not leave toddlers unattended ..[three of them]...and then sexpect...it all just to be swept away with we....we...i...know she was abducted...

k mcc....should have cooperated in every way possible ....if only the child care .....was the same as that they expect for themselves.....

they had a responsibility to maddie ....they let her down again....

[Brietta]

The onslaught on the McCanns has been organised and unrelenting.

That is … every second of every minute - every minute of every hour – every hour of every day – every day of every week – every week of every month – every month of every year since the year 2007 when their beloved daughter disappeared.
The twins now appear to be ‘legitimate’ targets.  Yet there are those who find no fault with that level of abuse directed at one family.

Not only has it been built on false premises … it is built on false objectives of wanting the truth.

Apparently all anyone has ever wanted are answers … so why has there been no let up on the various campaigns against the McCann family now that we are nearer to answers than at any time since the night of Madeleine’s disappearance … a stage achieved not by the ‘troof seekers’ but by the Drs McCann.

     ::::          ::::          ::::          ::::          ::::          ::::          ::::          ::::          ::::


“Brian Kennedy thought it was outrageous and immediately contacted Kate. He had lots of calls from confused villagers who had received leaflets, asking what was going on. It caused pain, upset and confusion.”

However, Ms Butler, who admits involvement in the leaflet drop, said last night: “We just want the case reopened. We are not out to persecute the McCanns.

“We haven’t harassed them at all, we have leafleted. We are not harassing the McCanns in any way whatsoever. We are not stalking them. We are getting facts out in the public domain.

“If anything, we are helping them by putting the facts out there and attempting to get the case back off the shelf. We are assisting the McCanns.”
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/120885/The-McCanns-stalker

[Carana]

Doorstepping ‘troll’ Brenda Leyland was justified, so let’s not bully Sky’s Martin Brunt - Roy Greenslade

A Sky News journalist has been subjected to an online bashing because he doorstepped a woman accused of “trolling” the parents of Madeleine McCann.

The woman, Brenda Leyland, was later found dead.

We need to pick our way carefully through the farrago of claims, counterclaims and details to make a sensible analysis of competing grievances. First, vastly experienced Sky News crime correspondent Martin Brunt did nothing wrong by knocking on Leyland’s door.

Doorstepping is part of the methodology and culture of journalism, and not just in Britain. The fêted Watergate reporters Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward did just that, as the movie All The President’s Men portrays. It is a necessary part of the verification process that underpins all responsible journalism.

The unusual aspect in the Sky News case is that it took place during a live broadcast. Although Brunt did not reveal Leyland’s identity or the location of her home, her face was, of course,  seen on screen. That’s identification enough.

The case raises ethical problems because the broadcaster could not have known her mental and emotional state. It would surely have been better to have run an edited version rather than carry it live.

That said, the result would not have been very different unless Sky News’s editors had decided, given the time to debate the matter, that it would have been appropriate to pixellate her face.

It is not fair to say that Brunt had stalked or hounded Leyland, as his critics have claimed. He properly reported on Leyland’s vitriolic Twitter campaign against Kate and Gerry McCann. And she told him she was “entitled” to attack them.

Brunt in turn could argue that he was “entitled” to report on her activities. Disclosure is the point of journalism, and the facts of her tweeting are not in dispute. If people insult other people in a public forum, they must accept that they are open to public exposure, even if they use aliases.

It is, of course, fair to defend Leyland’s right to freedom of expression, but  collectively, her tweets — all of which were unpalatable, and some of which I found appalling — surely amounted to a form of bullying. They are a classic example of what we mean by “trolling”.

Other people who believe in the complicity of the McCanns in the death of their missing daughter, Madeleine, have tweeted worse, arguably illegal, comments. But that’s irrelevant to the overall argument about the media’s  right to reveal Leyland’s attacks. She just happened to be the first  to be identified.

The digital world is all about transparency. Leyland may have thought that by hiding behind her Twitter handle, @sweepyface, she could evade responsibility and public embarrassment for her actions.

I concede that the circumstances were unfortunate, and I have a feeling that Sky News will think again about live doorstepping. It may not amount to trial by media, a knee-jerk reaction to the incident, but it does smack of unnecessary intrusiveness.

Then again, I can’t help feeling that it is a bit rich to accuse Brunt of being a bully for having revealed the existence of a genuine bully. He is a sensitive man, quite unlike the stereotypical foot-in-the-door reporter of yesteryear legend, and I am sure he is upset at her death.

Roy Greenslade is Professor of Journalism, City University London, and writes a blog for the Guardian
http://www.standard.co.uk/business/markets/doorstepping-troll-brenda-leyland-was-justified-so-lets-not-bully-skys-martin-brunt--roy-greenslade-9781575.html

That seems a fair assessment.

[stephen25000]

That seems a fair assessment.

Well as you back the mccanns 100%, what else would you say.

[carlymichelle]

no evidence in death of brenda

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2784499/Inquest-open-McCann-troll.html#ixzz3FYftot1G

 could it be murder??

[ferryman]

no evidence in death of brenda

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2784499/Inquest-open-McCann-troll.html#ixzz3FYftot1G

 could it be murder??

Apparently not:

Opening the inquest, Leicester Coroner Catherine Mason was told there was no evidence of foul play or third party involvement in the death.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2784499/Inquest-open-McCann-troll.html#ixzz3FYm3A4Qf
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[Cudge]

no evidence in death of brenda

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2784499/Inquest-open-McCann-troll.html#ixzz3FYftot1G

 could it be murder??

Could it be natural causes ?

[ferryman]

Could it be natural causes ?

Possibly, although note this word of caution:

"The cause of death is still not known and police inquiries are rightly ongoing.

All options open, seemingly.

[Jean-Pierre]

no evidence in death of brenda

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2784499/Inquest-open-McCann-troll.html#ixzz3FYftot1G

 could it be murder??

No.  Sorry to disappoint.   

[Alfred R Jones]

Possibly, although note this word of caution:

"The cause of death is still not known and police inquiries are rightly ongoing.

All options open, seemingly.

Didn't someone on here state quite categorically that she had hanged herself? 

ETA: Ah, it was Joana Morais in her hysterical rant.  How she should know more about the cause of death than the coroner is a puzzle.

[ferryman]

Didn't someone on here state quite categorically that she had hanged herself? 

ETA: Ah, it was Joana Morais in her hysterical rant.  How she should know more about the cause of death than the coroner is a puzzle.

Colombosstogey here, as well as (no doubt) Joana Morais ...

[a.baker]

Investigation still ongoing. Is it possible they could be waiting for the results of toxicology tests?

[Alice Purjorick]

Sgt Taylor added that officers were awaiting the results of additional post-mortem tests and were still undertaking inquiries into the death.

Adjourning the inquest until December 18, Mrs Mason said: "It's quite clear from the evidence before me that I am not in a position to conclude (the inquest) today.

"The cause of death is still not known and police inquiries are rightly ongoing.

"Therefore, with the sergeant still tasked to complete the police inquiries and the pathologist still to provide a cause of death, I am adjourning the inquest."

Before everyone is galloping off over the horizon this is what the coroner said. But what does she know? (that is irony not suggesting a conspiracy; just saying like before some nutter goes off on one)