PAT BROWN TO SUE RAHNI SADLER

Richard D. Hall wrote:This is what mainstream media do.  This is why I gave Jenny Kleeman (Guardian) 3 conditions before taking part in a mainstream production.

1.  I want to see the finished item before it airs so I can check it for accuracy.

2.  I want the film to focus on the facts, not on beliefs.

3.  I want you to post links to my film.

They ran a mile.  They ran a mile because their intentions are not honourable.  They never are.  They are especially less honourable when they invite somebody with an opposing view to their own.  This is how mainstream "deals with" experts that oppose them.  They trap them.  If Pat Brown signed a contract I would recommend reading the small print.  I would be surprised if it does not say words to the effect that they CAN mis-represent what she is saying.  Their contracts normally state that they take ownership of the content and they can edit it in any way they like.

Did Fox News go to court and get permission to lie?


onna Halper, professor of political communication, former journalist, current free-lancer.
Written 14 Mar


They don’t need permission from the courts; they have it from the Constitution. Under the first amendment, what Fox News does is protected speech. (Ditto for MSNBC, or any of the networks, be they cable or satellite or terrestrial.) In fairness to Fox News, it should be noted that what you might think is a lie, someone else might think is the truth. The point is that whether you like them or whether you hate them, they have the right to express themselves, without government interference.

Until 1987, there was an FCC ruling called the “Fairness Doctrine,” which said radio and TV were obligated to give both sides of the issues. But since the Fairness Doctrine was eliminated, radio and TV are free to present as much or as little opinion as they want, and they can also slant their news coverage in one direction or another. However, many networks choose not to do this, and you will rarely see the traditional networks (ABC, NBC, CBS and PBS) intentionally lie; over the years, the traditional networks have usually tried to be fair to the facts. But intentional bias is much more prevalent on cable news channels, especially those with a built-in political point of view. And as frustrating as it might be to watch something (or someone) you believe is dishonest, not agreeing with a commentator or a channel or a network is not sufficient cause for them to be censored. Our system of laws does not work like that



https://www.quora.com/Did-Fox-News-go-to-court-and-get-permission-to-lie

I know this is referring to American law, but my guess is that it is the same, for example, in the UK and Australia

Being unable to watch Sunday night yet I have read what claims to be a transcript. If it is an accurate portrayal I am extremely disappointed with the contribution of Dave Barclay who allegedly claims that cadaver dogs are useless and will alert to any decaying flesh, including meat, gone off in the boot of a car. That a forensic scientist should make such a ridiculous claim is mind-boggling. Has he no regard for his reputation? He also claims that "standard practice in reasonably good class burglars to make an exit is to open the back door as well so that if somebody comes in the front door you can run out" (his championing of the "red herring" window), then contradicts his break- in theory by stating Madeleine could have been the victim of a hit and run drunk driver who, rather than flee the scene, stopped and collected her body! Sadly, it would appear he has lost not just his common sense but also his linguistic abilities.

Wouldn't waste money suing just to save face.  Far simpler to avoid dubious media invitations in the first place.

Can't blame everyone else for your naivety.

Will Colin sue too?

Re: Dave Barclay and the dogs,

Perhaps someone should get him a copy of a recent book called What the Dog Knows, by Cat Warren. It might enlighten him.

Maddie McCann criminal profiler claims hatchet job and threatens lawsuit against Seven West



By
Mark Saunokonoko

The US criminal profiler featured on Channel 7's Madeleine McCann documentary is threatening legal action to sue journalist Rahni Sadler and Seven West Media.

Crime expert Pat Brown said she was "absolutely appalled" at how the Sunday Night show was edited to produce a one-sided pro-McCann view, and claimed she had been set up to be humiliated by Sadler.

A former Scotland Yard detective who also featured in the documentary told Nine.com.au his analysis of Maddie's disappearance had been heavily distorted and that he would never work with Seven again.

The episode promised "major new developments", but ultimately failed to deliver on the much-hyped bombshell lead that would break the almost decade-long cold case open.

Washington DC-based Brown told Nine.com.au that Sadler interviewed her exhaustively for an hour but only used fractional snippets that could ultimately make her a target for legal action from the McCanns.

MORE: McCanns fail to stop 'not innocent' ruling in Maddie's disappearance
MORE: Abduction theories blasted as ridiculous; 'Maddie likely dead', crime expert claims


"They edited it poorly. They edited it exactly the way they wanted to make me look - which was an idiot," Brown said.

Brown said Sadler "interrogated" her at length about the physical, circumstantial, and behavioral evidence that supported her theories that Kate and Gerry should still be considered suspects in what happened to Madeleine.
   
Rahni Sadler, reporter for Channel 7's Sunday Night show. Source: Seven
But Brown said only one part of the interview about theories of Kate and Gerry disposing of their daughter's body made it to the screen - and that did not include any of her reasoned analysis.

"They wanted the viewers to believe I said the McCanns were guilty of a crime. Then they did not use any of the important evidence I put forward to support a theory that the McCanns may well be involved.

"They edited a number of other statements to make me look ridiculous."

One such moment in the documentary came when Sadler asked Brown how it was possible the McCanns' friends, otherwise known as the Tapas 7, could all be involved in a cover-up.
   
US criminal profiler Pat Brown (right) appears on TV network CBS to discuss the Maddie McCann case in 2010. Source: CBS

Brown told Nine.com.au her reply had been chopped, and it removed the crucial part where she said it was possible that one or two friends had helped create an alibi for the McCanns.

Jane Tanner, a friend who was holidaying in Praia da Luz with the McCanns, was critical in driving the theory Madeleine was abducted after allegedly seeing a man carrying a child near apartment 5A.

But Portuguese police have always harboured doubts over the validity of Tanner's statements, which changed several times as the investigation got underway.

"Everything that I was trying to explain was eliminated in the final production," Brown said.
   
Kate McCann arrives at the headquarters of Policia Judiciaria, the Portuguese criminal police, for questioning 07 September 2007, in Portimao. Source: AFP

The documentary suggested Brown's book had been dropped by retailing giant Amazon because of its speculative content which theorised Kate and Gerry may have hidden Maddie's body after an accidental death in the holiday apartment.

The reality, according to documents seen by Nine.com.au, was that Amazon was threatened by Carter-Ruck, the notorious London libel firm long employed by the McCanns to shut down negative headlines.

Brown said she had made numerous appearances on major US TV networks over a 15-year career and had never wanted to sue – until now.

US-based attorney Brian Close, who is representing Brown, said he has identified defamation, intentional misrepresentation and false light as grounds for legal action against Sadler and Seven West Media.

Former London Met homicide detective Colin Sutton was also angered at the way his commentary had been manipulated in the edit suite.

He told Nine.com.au the misrepresentations were "unfair, unethical and represents the sort of journalism with which I do not wish to be associated."

Nine.com.au has contacted Seven West Media for a statement but have not had comment at the time of publishing.

Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/world/2017/04/24/12/15/maddie-mccann-criminal-profiler-claims-hatchet-job-and-threatens-lawsuit-against-seven-west#o5gSjK5LiiMV01p2.99

Get'emGonçalo wrote:A former Scotland Yard detective who also featured in the documentary told Nine.com.au his analysis of Maddie's disappearance had been heavily distorted and that he would never work with Seven again.

Who is this?

Is it Colin Sutton?

Has he gone on the written record with an actual quote, apart from "unfair, unethical and represents the sort of journalism with which I do not wish to be associated," which is attributed to him in the above piece?

I wonder if he would say the same about the Daily Mirror, Sun articles, and the SKY News documentary?

Probably not, eh, Colin? Too many lucrative future contracts at stake?

Get'emGonçalo wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

Get'emGonçalo wrote:A former Scotland Yard detective who also featured in the documentary told Nine.com.au his analysis of Maddie's disappearance had been heavily distorted and that he would never work with Seven again.

Who is this?

Is it Colin Sutton?

Has he gone on the written record with an actual quote?

Apology a bit too late now Colin,the damage has been done,target hit!?

Tony Bennett wrote:

Get'emGonçalo wrote:A former Scotland Yard detective who also featured in the documentary told Nine.com.au his analysis of Maddie's disappearance had been heavily distorted and that he would never work with Seven again.

Who is this?

Is it Colin Sutton?

Has he gone on the written record with an actual quote, apart from "unfair, unethical and represents the sort of journalism with which I do not wish to be associated," which is attributed to him in the above piece?

I wonder if he would say the same about the Daily Mirror, Sun articles, and the SKY News documentary?

Probably not, eh, Colin? Too many lucrative future contracts at stake?

IPCC Colin?

Levels of utter stupidity now rising.

McCanns sue if you say they did it
And you sue if someone else says you said they did it,
so that you cannot be sued by the McCanns for saying they did it
because it was the other person who said you said they did it . . .

Have I got that right ?

http://www.9news.com.au/world/2017/04/24/12/15/maddie-mccann-criminal-profiler-claims-hatchet-job-and-threatens-lawsuit-against-seven-west

Get'emGonçalo wrote:Levels of utter stupidity now rising.

McCanns sue if you say they did it
And you sue if someone else says you said they did it,
so that you cannot be sued by the McCanns for saying they did it
because it was the other person who said you said they did it . . .

Have I got that right ?

http://www.9news.com.au/world/2017/04/24/12/15/maddie-mccann-criminal-profiler-claims-hatchet-job-and-threatens-lawsuit-against-seven-west

 errrmmmmmmmmmmm  I think so.

The Sun is now featuring the headline "They annihilated me" attributed to Pat Brown who is frantically denying that she claimed the parents disposed of  the body and faked a kidnap. Such protestations only favour the McCanns and their version of events as it may well appear to readers that she is terrified of standing full square behind her theory. All those who "naively" took part in this hatchet job have set back ground gained among the uninformed by the Supreme Court ruling. No-one in his/her right mind would agree to participate in such a program without having a written guarantee of veto over what is broadcast. I say that as an ordinary person who was caught up in a case which is still being rehashed on T.V. and in the media every few years. We were complete novices, but even we had the wit (or perhaps cared enough about the outcome) to ensure that our words could not, in any way, be used to portray the opposite of our intentions. It has been a bad week for justice for Madeleine. I accept that fora like this will keep plugging the truth but they reach a tiny audience when compared to mainstream media. Reading the comments on today's papers and comparing them with those from the nanny article shows a  depressing sea-change of opinion in favour of the McCanns version of the truth.

'THEY ANNIHILATED ME'
Madeleine McCann crime expert who told doc her parents Gerry and Kate may have hidden body plans to sue show for twisting her comments


Criminal profiler says her views on Maddie's disappearance were misrepresented

By Neal Baker and Tui Benjamin
24th April 2017, 3:35 pm
Updated: 24th April 2017, 5:40 pm


A CRIME expert who told an explosive documentary that Kate and Gerry McCann could have hidden their daughter Madeleine’s body plans to SUE the Aussie TV channel which ran the show.

US criminal profiler Pat Brown featured on Channel 7’s Sunday Night show claiming the McCanns could have put Maddie’s body in a bag, hid it at the beach and moved it weeks later.

But the expert – who told the show there was a possibility Madeleine had been killed as the result of an accident, neglect or abuse – now plans to sue for defamation as although she said it was possible, she never said the McCanns did it.

Pat claims in her original hour-long Skype interview with journalist Rahni Sadler that she made it clear this was only a theory based on her view of the evidence available.

Pat, who said she has received hate mail since the show aired, revealed: “I thought whether people agreed with the evidence or not, I would be able to present this as a professional.

“I never stated the McCanns were guilty of anything other than neglecting their children, and I will stand by that.

“I never said the McCanns are guilty of covering up the death of their child or moving their child’s body.

“The show purposefully set out to destroy my reputation. The only reason I was featured was to annihilate me by making me look foolish.”

Pat’s lawyer Brian Close said he had identified multiple misrepresentation, false light and defamation claims against Seven West Media and Rahni Sadler.

He said: “The misleading edits portray Pat Brown in a false light by contorting her statements and changing their substance, and the broadcasts and publications have done and continue to do damage to Ms Brown’s professional reputation wherever they are viewed around the world."

Seven News Media, which runs the channel, has been approached for comment.

On the programme, Pat said: “There are other cases where a child has come to some kind of harm by way of a parent either by neglect or abuse and the parents have indeed covered that crime up by trying to move the child’s body and claim that the child has gone missing and has been abducted.”

And in a trailer for the show, she was quoted as saying: "They are lying and they are concealing guilt".

The programme also aired claims from ex-top cop Goncalo Amaral, the original lead investigator into Madeleine’s disappearance.


He alleged that MI5, Gordon Brown and the British Government could have helped the McCanns cover up Maddie's death.

Other theories discussed by experts included that Madeleine could have been run over by a drink-driver who left her body in one of the area’s 600 secluded wells or that she had been stolen by a human trafficking gang "working to order".

The show also claimed Scotland Yard were chasing a new lead on an employee working within the holiday complex at the time of Maddie’s disappearance.

In response to some of Sunday Night’s allegations, Gerry McCann told the programme: “How could we have disposed of or hidden her body? It’s just nonsense.

"If she fell in the apartment and died why would we cover that up?”

There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing by the McCanns.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3401813/madeleine-mccann-crime-expert-who-told-doc-her-parents-gerry-and-kate-may-have-hidden-body-plans-to-sue-show-for-twisting-her-comments/

Some of the media are a bit schizophrenic, do you want us to believe the abduction story or watch the McCann's awkward ramblings when asked about a possible death in 5a?   

"In response to some of Sunday Night’s allegations, Gerry McCann told the programme: “How could we have disposed of or hidden her body? It’s just nonsense.
"If she fell in the apartment and died why would we cover that up?”
There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing by the McCanns."


+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Added by a Mod:  Daily Mail now taking up  the story tomorrow

Pat Brown suing Channel 7 over Madeleine McCann programme:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4441000/Crime-expert-suing-channel-Madeline-McCann-programme.html    (They spelt Madeleine incorrectly)

QUOTE:

Miss Brown told The Sun: 'I thought whether people agreed with the evidence or not, I would be able to present this as a professional.'

She added: 'The show purposefully set out to destroy my reputation. The only reason I was featured was to annihilate me by making me look foolish.' 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4441000/Crime-expert-suing-channel-Madeline-McCann-programme.html#ixzz4fCWfh4Mi
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Pat Brown suing Channel 7 over Madeline McCann programme
Daily Mail
A crime expert who told documentary-makers Madeline McCann's parents could have hidden her body is suing the producers for misrepresenting her ...

ALSO

New clue in Madeleine McCann disappearance search after burglary report  - Coventry Telegraph

On the 10th anniversary of her disappearance, former police chief gives his theory on Madeleine ...  - JOE

Former police chief reveals shock new theory on Madeleine McCann disappearance  - Coventry Telegraph
Full Coverage

The name of 'Pat Brown' is being mentioned a lot, so she will get a lot of extra hits on her website.

Also, the phrase 'Hiding the Body' is all over the internet like a rash today.

I am sure we all wish Pat well but, if she really decides to go ahead with an expensive libel action in Australia, it must be debatable if she will succeed. No doubt the TV company will have read the kind of comments she made in her e-book and has made about the case on her blog. - Mod 


EDITED TO ADD: Still more news stories >

Madeleine McCann crime expert who told doc her parents Gerry and Kate may have hidden body ...
The Sun
Maddie McCann documentary on Australia's Channel 7 leads to lawsuit threat But the expert – who told the show there was a possibility Madeleine ...
Madeleine McCann may have been kidnapped by slave traders and sold, claims ex-Scotland Yard ...  - The Independent
Madeleine McCann: Key witness statement about blood in rental car should be explored  - 9news.com.au
Full Coverage

PAT BROWN @ProfilerPatB
@Cadaver_Cat Action has been taken. As of noon yesterday @RahniSadler and @SevenWestMedia received a six page defamation letter from my attorney. #mccann

sallypelt wrote:PAT BROWN @ProfilerPatB
@Cadaver_Cat Action has been taken. As of noon yesterday @RahniSadler and @SevenWestMedia received a six page defamation letter from my attorney. #mccann

Good luck Pat Brown! 

TM and Op Grange take note: The Truth of The Lie will NEVER be buried!

Get'emGonçalo wrote:Levels of utter stupidity now rising.

McCanns sue if you say they did it
And you sue if someone else says you said they did it,
so that you cannot be sued by the McCanns for saying they did it
because it was the other person who said you said they did it . . .

Have I got that right ?

http://www.9news.com.au/world/2017/04/24/12/15/maddie-mccann-criminal-profiler-claims-hatchet-job-and-threatens-lawsuit-against-seven-west

You are spot on GEG. Pat Brown is now taking to Twitter to promote her outrage and her blog.

Pat Brown, the seasoned profiler undertook an interview on Skype with an Australian channel and made the excuse she was too busy to check them out. How busy is Pat Brown to have made such a silly mistake?

Then there is Colin Sutton who is saying Channel 7 misrepresented him - he's not suing and I doubt he'll return their cheque uncashed. This is a mouth-piece for hire. Some you win, some you lose but you bank the cheque regardless, especially when your chosen field is to be a media pundit on all things law enforcement.

Both of them irritate me.

Blog explanation from Pat Brown of why she did the show:

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/why-i-did-sunday-night-show-with-rahni.html

Doug D wrote:Blog explanation from Pat Brown of why she did the show:

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/why-i-did-sunday-night-show-with-rahni.html

Why the need to explain?

I hope Pat sues and wins.

plebgate wrote:I hope Pat sues and wins.

Me too Plebs!  

It's a brave move, and high time somebody fought against these sleazy rags, and all their lies and spin re the McCann farce. I think Pat is absolutely right to sue!  These journalists have no scruples, and are totally immoral and corrupt. 

Just look what they did to poor Brenda Leyland, and got away with it too! I wonder how the final edit of her interview with Brunt would have looked, if she hadn't killed herself immediately thereafter (RIP)?  Guaranteed it would have been grotesquely butchered in favor of the McCanns.

Verdi wrote:

Doug D wrote:Blog explanation from Pat Brown of why she did the show:

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/why-i-did-sunday-night-show-with-rahni.html

Why the need to explain?

 Because she believes in openness, transparency and honesty perhaps?

Does anyone know the date(s) that both Pat Brown and Colin Sutton gave their interviews to Channel 7?