Brenda Leyland Inquest - NOTES from the Coroners Court Friday Mar 20th 2015 - posted on HiDeHo's forum
Brenda Leyland Inquest - NOTES from the Coroners Court Friday Mar 20th 2015 - posted on HiDeHo's forum
They wish to remain anonymous.
Please note that they should not be taken as verbatim. They are in the most part a paraphrased record of what could be heard. It was very difficult to hear what they were saying as the witnesses were facing away towards the coroner, and there was no audio system to assist.
Friday 20th March 2015
(Brunt was in Cafe Nero at 9.00 a.m. where we bought our take out coffees, he looked haunted. I gave him my very best death stare)
We arrived at the Town Hall at 9.15a.m. The square was already awash with the press.
4 camera crews were filming us as we walked up to the doors.
At least a dozen Journos of varying flavours.
Brunt's walk of shame happened at 9.20. He spoke to no one and went straight in not to be seen for an hour .
Met Jon . Met Sonia Poulton and her crew.
We were all in the Foyer waiting for the court doors to be opened when in came Rebecca Sherlock.
5 ft tall, huge sunglasses,bleach blonde hair, black coat ,black trousers, hideous purple plastic 'Dolly' shoes and matching nails. To say the room was shocked would be an understatement. There was the merest hint of a communal sharp intake of breath. Brazen is the adjective that springs to mind. She even smirked as she recognised me.
Upstairs we went to the public gallery. Sherlock sat right next to my bestie. She asked if she could borrow a pen. I said 'No'. She used her mobile to take her notes.
There were 11 persons in the press box.
There were seventeen in the public gallery.
The minutes ticked by. It was around 10.20 when things began to get underway.
The Coroner, Catherine Mason was fairly young, around 35 , blonde.
The tension began to be palpable.
The Coroner started by outlining the scope of the inquest.
It was only to be WHO, How,When and Where the person died. NOTHING ELSE.
No circumstances,no fault, no blame.
A full enquiry was/is? being done by police.
Then something I missed about Rule 23 ?????
Doctor West was the Pathologist.Who was NOT THERE.
The Coroner listed the witnesses that would be giving evidence.
Dr.Smith (on behalf of Pathologist)
Detective Sargeant Hutchins
Written evidence from Ben Leyland
DrZ ( the psychiatrist)
Police Sergeant Taylor
It will be sworn evidence
Council for SKY was a woman who's name I didn't catch
The Coroner touched on the opening of the inquest where the body had been identified and evidence given by Ben Leyland and Brenda's ex husband Michael Leyland.
Brenda died on October 4th and found ? at 14.05 hours at the Marriott Hotel.
'She was a much loved Mother and friend'
Brenda's Post Mortem was carried out on 7th October by by Dr.West. THERE WAS NO OBVIOUS CAUSE OF DEATH
Dr Smith Takes the stand. He is barely audible, young, mumbling, and as his evidence progressed I began to pray I never Died in Leicestershire.
The toxicology report was as follows.
She had Ethanol ( alcohol) & Citralopram in her system. The Cause of death was deemed to be 'Asphyxia by Helium'
She was under the drink drive limit for alcohol.
She had also taken a therapeutic dose of Paracetamol, Therapeutic dose of Codeine, and an antihistamine at normal dose.
The toxicology was done using Blood, Urine,Vitreous Humour (fluid from the back of the eye)
Dr.Smith then said 'There is no test available for Helium available in this country'
I nearly fell off the bench. THAT made everyone look around and raised a few eyebrows.
The level of Citalopram was 1895 units. The norm is 20 to 50 BUT the pathologist said 'at death the fat cells that store this drug release it back into the bloodstream. So the raised levels could very well be due to post mortem release to an artificially high level.
Her Kidney function was normal.
No further questions were asked.
End of first witness.
The evidence of Martin Edward Brunt. Journalist.
He states that the dossier came into his possession by a third party.
Asked to name the person HE REFUSES.
Brenda was not named in the dossier. But the source knew where Brenda lived and her name.
He got the information from a TWEETER.
Brunt had trawled Facebook and found Brenda because of the photos of her Boxer dog. ( The bastard)
He went to her house.He parked 30 yrds away with his camera man. at 7.00a.m.
At 10.00 a.m. Brenda came out of her house.
He followed behind her and called out her name.
The Coroner then asked Brunt if he had identified himself to her.
Brunt said 'It should have been obvious because of the camera'.
He was surprised she spoke to him.
He adked her why she was 'attacking' the McCanns on Twitter. She said she was enititled to.
( here he made no mention of the CPS looking into her)
They stayed in the village for 1&half hours.shooting footage.
(No mention of Summers&Swan)
The car came back.
'Come in Martin' (and cameraman)
both of them went in.
She appeared relaxed.They conversed for 30 minutes.
He was surprised to be invited in.He had no concerns about her.nt adked her if she was interested in being filmed in house in a more considered interview. She didn't,
She talked to Brunt about the McFund. She had questions about that.She also questioned the childcare arrangements of the McCanns on that holiday.
She said Twitter was a means to express her feelings and she hoped she hadn't done anything illegal.
He says he told her inside the house that the CPS were considering prosecution.
She said she probably would never tweet again.
Asked what he would do he told her that she would be on SKY.
'Will you identify me?' He said he would use the footage of the outside of her house.
He gave her his mobile number andemail.
'I hope I haven't ruined your day'
'Call me with any concerns'
He said they had many other twitter handles in the dossier.Sky implied they would be outing othersand doorstepping them.
Oct 3rd. SKY HEADQUARTERS Johnathon Levy wanted view on film etc.??? ( Reggie ??? )
Brunt tried to find other tweeters
Brenda had rung the next day ( 30th? )and asked when the expose would be happening.
He said he would keep her informed WED NIGHT.
Explained what would be shown.
She said she was feeling better after having a drink and speaking to her son in LA.
He told her he wouldn't name her or the village.
They had a 10 minute conversation. He had no serious concern about her.
He didn't know her History.
Brunt didn't decide to run the story. His line manager did.
He was out of the country when told she was dead.
He said he was devastated by this and still was.
The evidence of Johnathon Levy. News Editor.
( my impression of Levy; Slimy, evasive, sweating, arrogant, disinterested, probably thinking about his expense account)
On the 22nd September 2013 Brunt's line manager spoke of running this story.
The OFCOM guidelines had been looked at.Legal, ethical etc. (right...Yeah)
Guidelines on Doorstepping or invasion of privacy . It depends on the 'Amount of common good ' That'swhat warrants it.
The common good should outweigh intrusion ( well did it!????)
He was satisfied with the guidelines
There were 3 options regarding the identifying of Brenda.
1) to name her
2) for her not to be indentified
3)to identify her visually but no name
They didn't name her.
He exits no doubt planning an extravagant lunch on his account.
he evidence of Dr Z (her psychiatrist)
(May i just say at this point that his very presence in that inquest disturbed me greatly. He made Dr.Strangelove look relatively normal and sane.WHY was he there? He hadn't seen her in YEARS!! )
He had had no consultation with ms.Leyland .
He saw her yearsago.
She suffered recurrent depression.
She was 'emotionally damaged'.
He was not aware of actual suicidal thoughts.
She had full insight into her own emotions.
He was not aware of any suicide attempts.
The doorstepping could have contributed to her death.
( The bloke was straight out of central casting. Your typical mad psychiatrist. He blinked furiously throughout, he grimaced and gurned throughout his testimony. He was very hesitant and appeared completely baffled and bewildered,
White hair, dark suit)
The evidence of Detective Sergeant Hutchins;
He examined her computers.
Between November 2013 and September 2014 Ms.Leyland tweeted 2210 times. 19% of them were #mccann related.
The dossier was handed to the Met by a third party. It was deemed NOT RELEVANT.
Brenda's tweets re;McCann were not illegal and did not cause offence.
If a crime has NOt been committed then the journalist does not have to reveal his source.
There was no offence by journalist.
Ms Leyland did not tweet again after 29th September.
She did not see postings by others after 29th September.(on Twitter)
Some tweets ARE 'Subject to enquiries outside of this investigation'.
She had an I pad at the Hotel and a LapTop at home.
She had researched Death by Helium.
From 30th Sept until 2nd October her internet was exclusively suicide related. Specifically Helium. She had also searched for private garage rental.
My impression of Hutchins; Ill fitting shirt & tie. Dark suit, shaved head. He was quietly spoken,mumbling and difficult to follow as he had his back turned to the public gallery most of the time. I didn't like him) Looked like a more wimpy Mitchell brother from central casting.
The written evidence given by Ben Leyland. Her youngest son.
She was divorced in 2001 .
She moved from Oadby to Burton Overy post divorce.
She was a social figure in the village
She had a number of close friends
She had had a dispute about a wall/fence with a neighbour . Emails/conversations etc.
A few days before (sky) she had had a dispute with the neighbour she was upset,angry and embarrassed.
That was a week before SKY.
Tuesday 30th Sept she phoned Ben.
She was Panicky
'I've been tweeting about the McCanns'.
Sky had turned up. She was afraid of the claims made by Brunt.
They tried to stop the media.
Ben contacted their solicitor in London.
Ben phoned at 16.00 /17.00 hrs. UK time. ( he lives in LA)
Couldn't get them???
He was hoping for further contact with solicitor.
He saw her twitter account on 1st October 2013
He was unhappy, he called his dad over it. To make sure she was OK.
He was still waiting for the solicitor.
He was sure the story would 'blow over'.
The news story broke on Oct 2nd.
Dad, brothers tried to contact her. They couldn't reach her.
The issue of suicide was brought up.
Brenda had contacted a neighbour about looking after her cat while she was going to 'Lay low'.
There were reporters outside her house.
She emailed Ben on Wednesday.She said she was 'Cheerier'.
He couldn't call her.
Saturday 4th October she was found dead.
She had tried previously ( a long time ago) to commit suicide.
She was Proud, Very happy, Was quiet as a younger person. She failed to sustain relationships. Was a depressive.
She had previously been to a clinic for depression. She was a depressive throughout her life.
She had untreatable health issues.
Sky was the final straw. It broke her!.
The evidence of Sergeant Taylor. PC 379 Now based in Loughborough.
He was on patrol. He got a call at 13.50 therewas a deceased person at the Marriot Hotel. Room 449.
There was aparemedic and an other female PC there.
The STAFF at the Hotel found her.
The policeman knew about the SKY expose.
SOMEBODY googled her , found the newspaper story and printed it off for him.
There was an IPAD in her room,open. They tapped the screen and the browser site was Helium.
She was on a Kingsize bed. On her back.The Ipad next to her body.
He touched the screen and it popped open on the Helium site.
'Did the scene mirror the instructions on the screen?' Yes. he said.
There were two cans of Helium.
I at the side of the bed on the floor. The other cradled in her arm.
Asked how big they were he opened his hands about ten inches and said 'Two, about this size'.
There are outlets that sell them. There are no regulations regarding the sale of Helium.
There was NO NOTE.
Not in the room and not at her house.
There were no communication texts after the 29th Sept.
They were SATISFIED THERE WAS NO THIRD PARTY INVOLVEMENT.
Police say death by her own hand.
Police say Brunt was catalyst.
Police say Nobody could have stopped her.
he summing up by The Coroner, Catherine Mason.
There are many issues surrounding this death.But she is only concerned with WHO, HOW, WHEN and Where this occured.
Brendawas Intelligent, Loving and proud.
She was informed about when and how Brunt's piece would run.
SHE PROBABLY researched suicide.
It was a scene that mirrored her research.
There was no note
No third party involvement
Asphyxia due to Helium inhalation + Drug Citalopram toxicity.
The Coroner would be raising concerns about the sale of Helium.
Re: Brenda Leyland Inquest - NOTES from the Coroners Court Friday Mar 20th 2015 - posted on HiDeHo's forum
Coroner’s Court Inquest into the death of Brenda Leyland
Friday 20th March 2015
Senior Coroner Mrs Mason
All information to hand so able to proceed
Much interest and many issues
Court to decide who died, how she died, when she died and where she died.
Not part of this court to decide WHY she died.
Not ?? Article 2
Not to find fault or apportion blame
Running order -
Dr West statement
Detective Sergeant Hutchings
Ben Leyland statement
Jonathon Levy (Sky)
Interested persons -
Family, though not present
Dr West (pathologist)
Mrs Mason (coroner) read out the salient facts from the pathologists report. (Dr West not present)
There was nothing undue from the external and internal examination of the body.
So toxicology information is provided by Dr Smith - Mrs Mason read very quickly from a printed report referring to ethanol, citalopram, amytriptoline, paracetamol, Codeine
Death was due to asphyxiation due to helium inhalation and to citalopram (unsure of what she said further)
Dr Smith (toxicologist)
Standard tests were done on blood, urine and vitreous humor
Blood alcohol level in all 3 samples
68mg/100ml alcohol in blood (slightly below that which is the legal driving limit 80mg/100ml)
Found evidence of paracetamol, codeine, citalopram, antihistamine, amytriptoline +?? (couldn’t hear)
It was not possible in this country to test for helium
Urine sample - previous medication traced plus ibuprofen too. Level of 1859? Antidepressant - BUT after death the ‘drug’ is sequested into the organs and then may elevate the results compared to a sample prior to death. This may have contributed to her death at these levels but would not have caused it.
There were kidney function tests.
Citalopram was at a level that contributed to but not caused death.
Others were at the level for therapeutic use.
Helium analysis not available in the UK. Helium displaces oxygen. Loss of consciousness due to not enough oxygen getting to the brain. It is necessary to rely on circumstantial evidence available. Dr Smith confirmed it is known that large quantities of Helium can cause death.
Death was due to asphyxiation – part due to helium inhalation and – other medicinal drugs.
Detective Sergeant Hutchins
Brenda had a Twitter Account and made postings to do with the McCann family. 2210 tweets over a given period of time (??) and 424 (19%?) directly mentioned McCanns.
A third party presented a dossier to Met Police including these tweets.
When Q by Coroner he said – there was nothing in these tweets which would be a criminal offence.
LAWYER for Sky News interrupted here - was told by Coroner that there was no need to reveal that source.
DS Hutchins again ....
Brenda did not make any postings after 29th Sept 14 but -
Other people made postings to her account appearing after 29th. Brenda did not see postings so they couldn’t have contributed to her death.
Other enquiries into these postings are ongoing and outside of this inquiry
There were 2 other devices - an iPad with screen on self euthanasation using helium. Between 30 Sept and 2 October internet searches for suicide using helium. These were exclusive searches during this time.
Coroner's officer reads Ben Leyland, the (youngest) son's written report
Her death was on fourth of October 2015
Initially the family home was in Rothley (Reggie's note. Did I hear this right?)
Brenda was a social figure in the village and she had close friendships within that village.
She had a fractious relationship with one neighbour over a wall or fence. There were emails and conversations that had taken place. There was a verbal altercation with the neighbour and other neighbours and villagers had spoken to her about this argument. She was upset and embarrassed. Brenda didn't like to think she was disliked. This was approximately a week before the reporter from Sky visited her saying Scotland Yard had a dossier on her.
He suggested pursuing a legal claim and discussed how to prevent her picture being published. He called solicitors in London at approximately 1600 to 17:00 hours UK time. He returned her call that night and said his mum panicked and went silent.
He logged on to her account and she had put a picture of his dog and his location as LA on her account. He still tried to contact the solicitor and wanted to help. He felt the story would blow over. Ben also contacted his father that night to let him know of the situation.
On Thursday 2nd of October the story broke on Sky News. Ben had no success trying to contact his mother that day. He contacted a neighbour who had been asked to cat sit for a few days while she lay low. He thought she had gone to other family. An email contact said she felt cheerier.
Saturday 4th October Ben received a call from his father about the death of his mother.
It was said she had attempted suicide before, a number of years ago.
His report continues saying she was very happy in the village however she had struggled with depression over the years and had alienated people in the past. She had difficulty connecting with people.
She was undergoing therapy, with medication for anxiety and extreme bouts of depression.
She had struggled with health conditions, and had physical, untreatable health issues.
He heard panic and fear in her voice after the Sky intervention. It was the final straw. She was broken, weak and completely destroyed by what occurred.
Martin Brunt (Sky journalist)
The coroner said she had no right to compel a journalist to supply his source of information.
A dossier compiled by a third party came into Martin Brunt's hands. He was not willing to say where the dossier had come from.
Martin Brunt was asked how did he make the connection between the dossier and @sweepyface as she was not named and there was no indication of a name and address.
One of his sources told him that she was Brenda Leyland and Leicester(shire/area?)
Brunt said he had done basic Internet searches and found two Brenda Leylands in Leicester.
He linked a photo of a dog on her Twitter account with a picture of the same dog on her Facebook account. He was then to approach her on the basis that she was @ sweepyface.
Brunt and a cameraman were in a car some 30 yards away from her house. They waited outside her house so he could try to talk to her, that is standard practice. They were both sitting in a car and the first time Brunt spoke to her was around 10 AM. A car approached Brenda's house and stopped. Brenda's front door opened and she came out rather quickly and walked round to the passenger side of this car. Brunt left his car along with his cameraman, and walked up behind her he called his name and asked her his first question. When asked by the coroner he said it was quite obvious we were a team. Brunt was surprised that she did speak to him.
"Why are you using your Twitter account to attack the McCanns?"
Brenda turned and didn't really answer the question she turned to get into the car. Then she came towards Martin Brunt and said "I am entitled to."
Martin Brunt then said "Are you aware your tweets are in the dossier that's been given to Scotland Yard?"
She said "Fair enough."
Martin Brunt returned to his car and stayed in the village to shot some footage. He also did his piece to camera.
The car Brenda had gone away in now returned.
Brunt approached Brenda again as she went towards her front door with her key ready. Brenda said "Come in Martin." Brenda invited both Brunt and the cameraman into her house. She seemed relaxed and they had a half-hour conversation. The fact that she invited us in was a surprise.
Brunt told the court that she was clearly concerned about being exposed on television.
He said "We caught you on the hop." Brunt offered a more-considered interview in her home but she wasn't interested and they talked.
Brunt said she was at pains to explain why she was using Twitter.
She was concerned about the fundraising of the McCanns.
She was concerned that they left the children alone in their apartment.
She felt Twitter was a means to express opinions and she hoped she hadn't done anything unlawful.
Martin Brunt also told her that the police were consulting the CPS.
She said she wouldn't be using that account again. "Probably won't tweet again."
The coroner said no activity was noted on that account after 29 September.
Brenda asked "What would Sky do." Brunt replied they would almost certainly use the footage from outside the house. He asked again if she would do more.
He didn't know when the footage would be used. Brenda asked "Would Sky identify her?"
Brunt said he didn't know but it was likely that they would and Brenda accepted that. Brunt gave her his card and said if she had concerns to call him. He added "I hope I haven't ruined your day."
He said that the intention was to contact others [mentioned] in the dossier.
The coroner asked him about the process regarding using the footage. He said he went to London and spoke to Jonathon Levi and others.
Brenda rang Brunt on the afternoon of his visit asking if she would be identified (and when they'd be running the report?). He said he didn't know and that he'd keep her informed.
Brunt spoke to Brenda on the Wednesday night and explained what they would be doing. When asked by the coronor he said he hadn't detected anything in her voice at all. In the conversation she had said " Oh, I have thought about ending it all. But I am feeling better, I have spoken to my son in LA." There was a 10 minute conversation. Brunt said they wouldn't name her or identify the village. Martin Brunt had no serious concern about her (from her voice). She said it was a pleasure to meet you.
When asked by the Coroner, he said the suicide remark was a throwaway remark. There was no indication she was serious about suicide.
Martin Brunt had no knowledge of her medical background.
There was no further contact after that conversation.
When asked by coroner he said it was not his decision to run the story at all.
He was devastated at the enormity of what happened.
LAWYER for Sky then stood up and queried the dates of the conversation. She said it was the 30th September that 'the conversation' took place. The follow up took place on 1 October.
Jonathon Levy - Senior Manager at Sky News
He was informed on 22/9/14 by Martin Brunt's line manager of the story - by e mail.
He said he had not attempted to contact Brenda Leyland.
Ofcom and Sky News has editorial guidelines and they expect their journalists to operate within these guidelines.
It has to be demonstrated that 'doorstepping' / 'invasion of privacy' needs to be warranted. The method used was proportionate to the subject matter.
Martin Brunt's line manager and a.n.other made the decision to doorstep. Jonathon Levy was satisfied with that decision when he heard it had happened, and that the guidelines had been met.
A decision was chosen from three options about how to broadcast -
1. Identify Brenda and the village
2. No identity and to obscure face
3. Visually identify but not name her or the village and obscure the car number plate
They considered 3. the right option. It was not necessary to fully identify her and create a huge interest by others. They did not identify her and continued not to name her even when other media did so.
Brenda Leyland was contacted and J Levy was aware of the 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.
Coroner asked - did she always have full insight into her conversations?
Dr Z - yes, she would understand consequences of her actions. In discussions I think she flirted with talk of suicide.
He said he was not aware she had tried to take her own life in the past.
I've noted "suicidal tendencies".
Coroner - "But the risk of serious harm is always there?"
I've noted "not aware of any actions; risk of serious self-harm".
Dr Z - yes. He described her as an extremely intelligent lady. Her reaction, could not have been expected by others. And with his knowledge it couldn't have been foreseen.
Coroner - her personality would be to trigger such events?
Police Sergeant Taylor
attended the call to a female who was dead in a hotel room
Saturday 4 October 13.50. Call to police to attend the scene at Marriott Hotel, Enderby
Also at scene was Police surgeon, First Response Paramedic
Sgt Taylor recognised the name of Brenda Leyland from the media reports and googled some information before leaving the station.
First Responder had been in to the scene and there were no life signs and Brenda was pronounced dead. Sgt Taylor knew then that this was the lady who had been in the media recently.
At the scene was an iPad which when turned on opened onto a site referring to helium.
The scene reflected the instructions on the IPad. There were 2 helium canisters about 30 cms in height each (I'd say 40cms). One by Brenda and one by the bed.
Sgt Taylor said these were easily obtainable. There are no regulations around selling them.
It is known that helium in large doses can cause death.
No notes were found in the hotel room or at the home address. No one had received a letter or text after her death.
Sgt Taylor was satisfied that there was no 3rd party involvement. All had been planned by her hand and actioned by her own hand. The events with the reporter, Martin Brunt, and the consensual meeting he feels was the catalyst to the events. The iPad and laptop were looking to a logical sequence.
Sgt Taylor knew of no opportunity that could have stopped the sequence of events.
I've noted a repeat of the who, how, where, when. I also noted the comment that Brenda'd been "upset by recent exposure to the media".
Brenda was an intelligent and proud lady.
It was clear who she was approached by and for what purpose. She was kept informed of the events and what would take place. She was given contact numbers.
I am satisfied that although she did have a mental health history others would not know she had mental health issues. She did mention she wanted to take it (her life) but she was cheerier.
Nobody was to know she would take her own life. There was evidence of research (about suicide) without anyone else knowing.
She bought the helium canisters and took herself to the hotel room. She had researched the method and the scene mirrored her internet research. There was no note left.
It was clear that the preparation was her own and there was no 3rd party. She had insight into her own behaviour.
The cause of death was
1b. Inhalation of helium
2. Citalopram intoxicity
Verdict : Suicide.
Finally, the coroner expressed her concern about the regulations regarding access to helium.
Re: Brenda Leyland Inquest - NOTES from the Coroners Court Friday Mar 20th 2015 - posted on HiDeHo's forum
(Date Posted:22/03/2015 8:43 AM)
And the most vital queston was not raised.
Why did Brenda say "if anything happens to me treat it as suspicious".
RE:Brenda Leyland Inquest - NOTES from the Coroners Court Friday Mar 20th 2015
(Date Posted:22/03/2015 9:10 AM)
This was the tweet...
Re: Brenda Leyland Inquest - NOTES from the Coroners Court Friday Mar 20th 2015 - posted on HiDeHo's forum
@Tony Bennett wrote:L-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun's piece on MARTIN BRUNT yesterday, for those who haven't seen it.
As usual, a correct assessment - and an utterly damning verdict on Brunt, SKY News and Rupert Murdoch:
" I was devastated, I still am and the enormity of what's happened will always be with me."
Martin Brunt speaking of the tragic death of Brenda Leyland, the enormity of what has happened will always be with him, he said.
How can the enormity of a death which you played a part, whatever way, however small, not always be with you, unless you are a lowlife?
Brunt I never took for a lowlife, but in the case of Brenda Leyland, he joined the club.
The death of Brenda Leyland it seems will always be with him, not because of the sympathy he has for her loss of life, her family, he is feeling sorry for himself.
He had the opportunity at the inquest yesterday to make, not amends, impossible to do that, but to do the decent thing:
To apologise to the Leyland family, to Brenda's sons for his actions for the enormous part he played in what led to her death.
To offer his sympathy and condolences. To not make it about his feelings, but theirs.
He spoke of his own devastation. Not theirs!
He passed up also the opportunity to do the right thing, and disclose his source, as to who are/is the lowlife with whom he colluded, and who put together the file which he used to threaten Brenda Leyland, just because he and they could.
That Mr Brunt, must have been devastating for the Leyland family to learn that you consider the life of the scum who put this file together of greater value than the life of an innocent person, their loved one?T o know that you were not prepared to do what would have been right and proper for Brenda Leyland her family.
Instead Brunt whinged about his own devastation. How the events will stay with him.
For Brenda Leyland's family, her death remains with them for the rest of their lives. For her son, the young man Ben, who quite clearly loved his mother dearly, his life has been devastated by Brunt's actions. For the rest of this young man's life he has to live a life without her, without his lovely mum. My heart breaks for this young man.
So do not Mr Brunt, seek pity. You are undeserving!
What you did to Brenda Leyland, despicable. What you did not do for her, her family yesterday, just sickening!
Yeah, yeah, these poor journalists, they cannot reveal their sources, or these sources will no longer come forth with information, or as in this case, bring them a file where they wrongly accused Brenda Leyland, of committing crimes against the McCanns, and which Brunt, and Murdoch's Sky acted upon.
One has to ask why?
Brunt knew what he was doing, no question about it. He accepted the job of being the one despatched, to lie in wait, outside the home of Brenda Leyland, and as we now also know from his statement at the inquest, he waited for three hours for his opportunity to do so.
His Special Report was not put together in a day. It was a planned attack on Brenda Leyland by his employers at Sky, together with the vile vigilantes, Jim Gamble, Mitchell and the McCanns for sure would have known of it. For them NOT to have known that the round the clock newsreel of Brenda being attacked by Brunt was to be aired is not believable. For them not to have known about Brunt's Special Report, is too ridiculous for words.
Brunt was and is part of Twitter. He knew and knows the score there. He knew that many of the McCann supporters posted vile and threatening twit messages to this lady. He himself, only days before he attacked her, began 'following her' on Twitter.
Brenda Leyland it seems posted a message querying Brunt doing so!
Brunt was up to no good for sure together with the others with whom he was colluding, the scum element of the McCann support.
Brunt is not a stupid man. He knew what he did and what he said to Brenda Leyland was so very wrong. Yet he continued.
He protected the person, on camera, who made the accusations against Brenda Leyland, and still does now.
What we all should be asking is HOW, they, Brunt, Gamble, McCanns, Mitchell, Sky, decided who from the alleged great numbers of persons that we are led to believe are contained in that file, was to be their target and WHY?
Who suggested Brenda Leyland from those they had to choose from?
Lots of questions still remain unanswered, but it looks like. unless a criminal case is brought against Brunt/Sky and the others, we will never know the full extent of their dirty deeds, or why they targeted Brenda Leyland. A woman innocent of any criminal act.
Questionable as to whether the same applies to those responsible for pushing this lady to commit suicide.
Of course we can say that no one could have known she would take her own life. But they ALL, each, and every one of them knew that such reporting by Sky, round the clock, screening the footage of Martin Brunt attack this lady, and followed by his Special Report, would have been enough to cause enormous distress and harm to whomever they chose as their target.
Brunt admitting yesterday that Brenda Leyland made such a comment to him, that she was thinking of this, should have been enough for Brunt to put a stop to this.
But they were all in too deep. They rolled with it.
We must not forget that Brenda Leyland was someone who held strong views about the McCann case, and voiced them. She cared that there should be justice for Madeleine, she was NOT a criminal.
The actions of Sky, Brunt, Gamble, the vile vigilantes, McCanns and Mitchell, their attack on this lady was completely unjustified.
Brunt is no innocent party, absolutely not.
Brunt sold his soul to the devil that is Murdoch, and based on his conduct yesterday he hasn't asked for it back.
Yesterday he continued his assault on Brenda Leyland her family by his non disclosure of information.
What he did to this lady, her family, I hope haunts this man for the rest of his life.
And to remind us, he may have whimpered yesterday felt sorry for himself but his harsh words during his Special Report about an innocent lady, tell us that he had not a jot of sympathy for what he had done to her. From Brunt's Special Report :
After our initial exchange with Sweepy face she invited us in.
Off Camera she explained more about the anonymous tweets she sends from the heart of this pretty village. She had questions for the McCanns. She believed Twitter was a vehicle for expressing those thoughts.
She will probably never tweet again. She hoped she hadn’t broken the law.
Sweepy Face and the many others whose comments have been recorded may find that Scotland Yard may take a different view.
Martin Brunt, what a poor excuse for a decent human being. He showed not one iota of thought or care for this woman what he was doing to her. Now HE wants sympathy?
Brenda hadn't broken the law. Scotland Yard did Not take the same view as Brunt and his cronies.
Brenda Leyland did not discuss online the McCann case again. Brunt and his cruel cronies saw to that, they caused this lady to take her life. As her son Ben stated, Brunt was the final straw. This woman was being attacked, receiving real threats online. Brunt/Sky and the rest waded in!
And it has to be said. The reporting on this is shocking. Brenda Leyland is portrayed as some crazy lady who sat, and just fired off messages about the McCanns.
She was part of a group of many many people who discuss this case on Twitter, her twit messages were part of conversations with many others.
She was not some lone individual, not some nut just firing off messages. She made very valid, intelligent contribution to the discussions. She recognised absolutely that all was not right with this case, with the McCann version (s) of events.
And if truth be told that is the threat she posed the McCanns, like thousands of others, she knew the truth of what happened to little Madeleine has yet to be told.
We've heard an account of the truth by Kate McCann - only an account!
And that just won't cut it!
As to Martin Brunt, he has gotten off lightly. The Inquest is not a criminal trial, and he was informed that no criminal charges would be brought.
Perhaps, who knows, young Ben Leyland might have different ideas as to Brunt's fate!
21st March 2015