Brenda Leyland. Coroner's Court reconvenes on 20 March 2015.

[Alfred R Jones]

According to the "acordão" of the Tribunal de Relação from October 2010 when the book ban was overturned, the judges stated that, as the McCanns sought the press and used the media to push their story, they had to take criticism along with praise. They can't decide what people are to think of them, they can't force people to like them or even respect them. I believe that people have the right to say what they want about them, excluding of course racism, blackmail and actual threats. After 7+ years, no one has ever attempted to attack them, so why would they want to now.

I find it hypocritical that the McCanns are upset about people taking photos of the twins when they so happily posed with them in photo shoots in the Algarve just after Madeleine's disappearance.

So, you'd be happy for people to take photos of your kids without your permission and put them on the web, even if you had previously had a picture of yourself and your children published in the paper would you?  Really? 

[Alfred R Jones]

Personally I blame the people who egged Brenda Leyland on.   By the look of it this person was a lonely woman,  twitter brought her the company she craved,   she found her niche with people who gathered in a large group to mock and torment the McCann's.   Brenda knew what she was doing, she was a woman in her sixties, an intelligent woman,   no one made her do it,  but she gained power from those who slapped her on the back and so she continued doing what she did.

Debating the McCann case is one thing,  opening up facebook and twitter for the sole intention of whipping up hatred for other people is another.

Very well said.

[Montclair]

So, you'd be happy for people to take photos of your kids without your permission and put them on the web, even if you had previously had a picture of yourself and your children published in the paper would you?  Really?

Obviously, the only reason the parents stopped having their children photographed was because Social Services warned them imo.

[pathfinder73]

So, you'd be happy for people to take photos of your kids without your permission and put them on the web, even if you had previously had a picture of yourself and your children published in the paper would you?  Really? 

You wouldn't do a photo shoot with your kids if you don't want that to happen. Do what I say not as I do is hypocritical.

[Jean-Pierre]

According to the "acordão" of the Tribunal de Relação from October 2010 when the book ban was overturned, the judges stated that, as the McCanns sought the press and used the media to push their story, they had to take criticism along with praise. They can't decide what people are to think of them, they can't force people to like them or even respect them. I believe that people have the right to say what they want about them, excluding of course racism, blackmail and actual threats. After 7+ years, no one has ever attempted to attack them, so why would they want to now.

I find it hypocritical that the McCanns are upset about people taking photos of the twins when they so happily posed with them in photo shoots in the Algarve just after Madeleine's disappearance.

And it follows that the McCanns have the right, within the law, to retaliate.  The operative word is of course within the law.

Do I take it, montclair,  that you are perfectly comfortable with grown adults engaging in online discussion of which school bus the twins take, and taking covert photographs of them?

 

[Montclair]

Personally I blame the people who egged Brenda Leyland on.   By the look of it this person was a lonely woman,  twitter brought her the company she craved,   she found her niche with people who gathered in a large group to mock and torment the McCann's.   Brenda knew what she was doing, she was a woman in her sixties, an intelligent woman,   no one made her do it,  but she gained power from those who slapped her on the back and so she continued doing what she did.

Debating the McCann case is one thing,  opening up facebook and twitter for the sole intention of whipping up hatred for other people is another.

I find the people defending the McCanns very short of arguments. Tell me please who was egging Brenda on? Of course, in your mind, it could not be because she decided for herself, after seeing all the information and the police files, that perhaps all was not as the parents said it was. How did she mock and torment the McCanns? She never sent them any personal messages. All she did was express her own opinion that some might find offensive but that's tough luck. Certainly not a reason to be pushed to committing suicide.

As for debating the case, that is something that the McCanns do not want at all, they are afraid of debates and different opinions.

[Alfred R Jones]

Obviously, the only reason the parents stopped having their children photographed was because Social Services warned them imo.

You seem not to have answered my question.

[Alfred R Jones]

You wouldn't do a photo shoot with your kids if you don't want that to happen. Do what I say not as I do is hypocritical.

So basically anyone who allows themselves to be photographed by the media is fair game for paparazzi regardless of the circumstances, is that your view?

[Montclair]

And it follows that the McCanns have the right, within the law, to retaliate.  The operative word is of course within the law.

Do I take it, montclair,  that you are perfectly comfortable with grown adults engaging in online discussion of which school bus the twins take, and taking covert photographs of them?

 

Personally, I have been on a lot of blogs and fora and I have never seen any discussion about which bus the children or anyone wanting to take photos of them.

[Wonderfulspam]

I find the people defending the McCanns very short of arguments. Tell me please who was egging Brenda on? Of course, in your mind, it could not be because she decided for herself, after seeing all the information and the police files, that perhaps all was not as the parents said it was. How did she mock and torment the McCanns? She never sent them any personal messages. All she did was express her own opinion that some might find offensive but that's tough luck. Certainly not a reason to be pushed to committing suicide.

As for debating the case, that is something that the McCanns do not want at all, they are afraid of debates and different opinions.

Yup, because their story just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

The abduction theses are laughably improbable & they'd much prefer it people didn't know that & that we would all just lay down & surrender to their toxic media campaign.

[Alfred R Jones]

I find the people defending the McCanns very short of arguments. Tell me please who was egging Brenda on? Of course, in your mind, it could not be because she decided for herself, after seeing all the information and the police files, that perhaps all was not as the parents said it was. How did she mock and torment the McCanns? She never sent them any personal messages. All she did was express her own opinion that some might find offensive but that's tough luck. Certainly not a reason to be pushed to committing suicide.

As for debating the case, that is something that the McCanns do not want at all, they are afraid of debates and different opinions.

Who do you think pushed Brenda to suicide then?  One minute you have her as an independent, clear-headed rational person, the next someone who was easily pushed to suicide.  The two are not compatible.

[Jean-Pierre]

Personally, I have been on a lot of blogs and fora and I have never seen any discussion about which bus the children or anyone wanting to take photos of them.

Time for your opthalmist checkup then. 

Funny how people are very quick to defend their rights of free speech, and defend Brenda Leyland's right to post whatever she likes as "sweepyface" and then get terribly exercised when the media, in the shape of Martin Brunt, exercise that selfsame right.

Double standards, perhaps.

 

[Mr Gray]

According to the "acordão" of the Tribunal de Relação from October 2010 when the book ban was overturned, the judges stated that, as the McCanns sought the press and used the media to push their story, they had to take criticism along with praise. They can't decide what people are to think of them, they can't force people to like them or even respect them. I believe that people have the right to say what they want about them, excluding of course racism, blackmail and actual threats. After 7+ years, no one has ever attempted to attack them, so why would they want to now.

I find it hypocritical that the McCanns are upset about people taking photos of the twins when they so happily posed with them in photo shoots in the Algarve just after Madeleine's disappearance.

You obviously have a very poor understanding of the law..no one has the right to libel the McCanns...as some have already found out

[Montclair]

You obviously have a very poor understanding of the law..no one has the right to libel the McCanns...as some have already found out

You are so in love with this couple that you are completely blind to logic and facts.

If the McCanns felt that they were libelled by Brenda or other "trolls" nothing was stopping them taking them to court.

[Alfred R Jones]

You are so in love with this couple that you are completely blind to logic and facts.

Do you think that's Andy Redwood's problem too then?  In love with Kate is he?  One could turn the tables and say that your utter contempt for the McCanns as people has blinded YOU to logic and facts, but I don't suppose you'd be able to see that, so blinded are you by contempt...