Martin Brunt Confronts Twitter "Troll"

Monty Heck wrote:Brunt's behaviour rather ironic, considering that for a long period of time he ran what was essentially a MMcC discussion forum on his Life of Crime blog, featuring offensive commentary, mainly from a pro McC element.  Strange he is now taking the moral high ground, considering he content encouraged on his forum by somewhat unbalanced sounding individuals.  But who remembers the past when today is another day.

Yes Monty Heck, I remember it well as I was a member of that site but even then pro Mc element got away with lots of abuse and bullying ?

They then turned it around and made it look as if they were the victims.They could delete and alter posts which I found very
 strange !!!

Martin Brunt brought up the photograph of the McCanns "caught on a TV camera at the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow".

It had been put up on a Facebook account discussing the McCann case.

He pointedly pointed out that he was showing the picture with the twins' faces obscured.

I thought that picture was taken the day of Madeleine's birthday, in May... We worked it out on another thread.

Not that it matters - just another oddity.

Very shiny suit Mr Brunt was wearing whilst reading his troll dossier on a park bench.

(Jim Gamble's black damask number with pointy-collared shirt and green NSPCC button - I winced)


What a charming-looking village! Birds singing, roses round the door and even a red telephone box...

Did anyone clock what sort of car that was at 1.19mins?

Anyone remember from the 3As days when someone posted a picture of Parker, Lady Penelope's Chauffeur.    I really laughed as imo there was a real resemblance.

Edited to add - Brunty looking like Parker.

plebgate wrote:Anyone remember from the 3As days when someone posted a picture of Parker, Lady Penelope's Chauffeur.    I really laughed as imo there was a real resemblance.

Yes -  do you remember that poster - I ve forgotten her name - she was American and always said Godspeed?

I'd be interested to know the ratio of male / women posters. But I dont think everyone would admit their gender. I'm sure there are females posing as males and vice versa.

HelenMeg wrote:I think it is important to realise that whether it be a whitewash or truth  is yet to be decided or confirmed.
We are surely witnessing the main players fighting. There is bound to be a fight between the various players within the establishment as to how this is to be concluded. Some have nothing to lose and some have everything to lose. This not about the Mc Cann couple....  Everyone wants this resolved and closed but each player has a different motivation and wants a different closure. That is the fight that we are witnessing - and everything is kicking off as a result. How this is to be closed is not yet decided. IMO

The general public still plays an important role - we still have to demand the truth.

Agreed.  If this were not so it's likely this case would have been concluded for good long ago.  A smilar thing is happening in the aftermath of the Scottish independence referendum, where the media entirely lost its head and threw balance out of the window to such an extent that there were protests against the BBC and the mainstream media is left discredited, unlikely ever to recover.  Online news sites, to which people had to turn in order to gather facts are now being consolidated into permanent entities, and the result is likely to be the demise of a section of the current print media.  People are withholding their BBC licence fee in protest and a petition is being raised for a Scottish Parliament inquiry into their pre referendum conduct and a demand for a devolved state broadcaster. 

The public does indeed play an important role.  Seven years on and, no matter how many times the media attempts to drum in that the McCs are cleared of all suspicion, the more vocal the comments from those who believe they still have a case to answer, if only for child neglect.  Public opinion is what goverments and corporations fear most, and what they seek endlessly to shape and form to their agenda, but the internet in particular thwarts these ambitions as people find alternative ways of getting information and platforms for discussion.

jozi wrote:

Monty Heck wrote:Brunt's behaviour rather ironic, considering that for a long period of time he ran what was essentially a MMcC discussion forum on his Life of Crime blog, featuring offensive commentary, mainly from a pro McC element.  Strange he is now taking the moral high ground, considering he content encouraged on his forum by somewhat unbalanced sounding individuals.  But who remembers the past when today is another day.

Yes Monty Heck, I remember it well as I was a member of that site but even then pro Mc element got away with lots of abuse and bullying ?

They then turned it around and made it look as if they were the victims.They could delete and alter posts which I found very
 strange !!!

I used to read it but it eventually descended into complete chaos due to the behaviour you mention, and yes, it was very strange that this conduct was not just tolerated but seemed to be encouraged.  Yet here we are today, with MB reincarnated as troll hunter extrordinaire. 

missbeetle wrote:Martin Brunt brought up the photograph of the McCanns "caught on a TV camera at the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow".

It had been put up on a Facebook account discussing the McCann case.

He pointedly pointed out that he was showing the picture with the twins' faces obscured.

I thought that picture was taken the day of Madeleine's birthday, in May... We worked it out on another thread.

Not that it matters - just another oddity.

Very shiny suit Mr Brunt was wearing whilst reading his troll dossier on a park bench.

(Jim Gamble's black damask number with pointy-collared shirt and green NSPCC button - I winced)


What a charming-looking village! Birds singing, roses round the door and even a red telephone box...

Did anyone clock what sort of car that was at 1.19mins?

The photograph of the McCanns at the Commonwealth Games with their twins was posted up on Twitter. It was then copied onto this forum/allowed by Candyfloss iirc and I objected to it.

There is no reason whatsoever to show pictures of the McCann twins. They are children. Their own parents owned up to neglecting them and then went to a court in Lisbon and spoke of their little boy hearing about Goncalo saying something or other on a school bus radio and spoke on the court steps to complain about babysitting arrangements and accused Amaral of delaying tactics. Kate and Gerry speak of pain and distress to the twins and yet Kate speaks about them on Lorraine Kelly's sofa! - who can forget the revelation of leaving them in the car while Kate paid for petrol but it was only 6 feet away and the kids were pulling funny faces at her through the back window of the car. Their own parents ask for damages in a Lisbon trial for the twins. Their own parents haven't brought a single medical professional to the Lisbon trial who can confirm the pain and distress of any of the family and if my understanding is correct, the Lisbon trial could have been held in camera.

I think it's disgusting for anyone to post pictures of the twins. I find it equally disgusting the McCanns don't mind speaking about their children as and when it suits them in media and court appearances.

plebgate wrote:
Loadsa, loadsa cash spent on looking for missing Maddie and still they are banging on about press regulation.   Remind me again, who left their children alone on that holiday and having done so why did Mr. receive a standing ovation from some police officers?

Who are they exactly?

Plebgate, I remember thinking exactly that perhaps two or three days after the disappearance - it's my earliest recollection of the case. As I don't really do "celebrity" I assumed that the McCanns must be perhaps TV doctors, or something, just because of the amount of fuss they had managed to create. It was actually quite a while before I found out they were ostensibly just regular people.

Oh and talking of vile comments, I find it pretty vile that anyone could write  that they wanted another person to feel fear.  Yes, I really do find that pretty vile.

Clay Regazzoni wrote:

plebgate wrote:
Loadsa, loadsa cash spent on looking for missing Maddie and still they are banging on about press regulation.   Remind me again, who left their children alone on that holiday and having done so why did Mr. receive a standing ovation from some police officers?

Who are they exactly?

Plebgate, I remember thinking exactly that perhaps two or three days after the disappearance - it's my earliest recollection of the case. As I don't really do "celebrity" I assumed that the McCanns must be perhaps TV doctors, or something, just because of the amount of fuss they had managed to create. It was actually quite a while before I found out they were ostensibly just regular people.

I think a lot of people felt like that and that is why we all started fishing around....I certainly did !!! The case was unbelievably amateurish but there was only us that could see through it, no one in authority did , just us plebs.....We obviously have been played like a giant Cluedo game, World Wide in fact, how to monitor the masses and control them.........Big Brother is here folks, get use to it !!!

As always with Team McCann, you have to ask "Why now?"

There was a time when touring European cities and meeting the Pope was what it was all about. Not now.

There was a time when having your relatives bang the drum for the "search" was what it was all about. Not now.

There was a time when hiring private detectives was what it was all about. Not now.

So why now, after 7 years during which they must have been aware of any number of grossly abusive, violent and threatening comments (all of which I, and all sensible people, condemn) is this approach sanctioned?

Maybe it always was planned, as part of an offensive with the Summers-Swan book playing a part?

Why now?.......

IMO it is simply to piggyback the latest book and try and help sway public opinion back the other way towards their innocence.

What a great way to do it... tarnishing the press and reminding them to be 'pro McCann or stay silent', getting more limelight for the pro McCann book and their 'victim role' prior to the libel trial and more importantly... get some cash in quick.

I am strongly of the belief that they have run out of money now, which is why items such as Richard Halls videos haven't been CR'd. The fact that CR took this latest case on as a 'no win no fee' backs up the theory that without the cheque for £55k, they wouldn't have had the cash to employ their services again.

I think they are preparing themselves for a lot of probing questions once the libel trial goes against them, so they are in damage limitation mode.

Robert Sharpe talking sense about Twitter on Sky News (courtesy Joana)

I would lie in bed, hating the person who had done this to us; the person who had taken away our little girl and terrified her; the person who had caused these additional problems for me and the man I loved. I hated him. I wanted to kill him. I wanted to inflict the maximum pain possible on him for heaping all this misery on my family.

I remember feeling such disdain for Ricardo at this point. What was he doing? I thought. Just following orders? Under my breath, I found myself whispering, ‘Fucking tosser, fucking tosser.’ This quiet chant somehow kept me strong, kept me in control. This man did not deserve my respect. ‘Fucking tosser . . .’

Not sure how I feel about seeing Mr Amaral – for the first time ever, I hasten to add! I know I’m not scared but that man has caused us so much upset and anger because of how he has treated my beautiful Madeleine and the search to find her. He deserves to be miserable and feel fear.

I hope the Metropolitan Police will consider taking action against whoever wrote and published those.

I have phoned Grange this morning (Tel 020 7321 9251) and asked them to urgently investigate this 'threat', imo, made yesterday to the lady, Martin Brunt of Sky News, 'exposed' as 'a dissenter' of the McCanns.

(Don't even get me started on the 'grammer' and 'spelling' by this TWAIT!)

PeterMac wrote:

I would lie in bed, hating the person who had done this to us; the person who had taken away our little girl and terrified her; the person who had caused these additional problems for me and the man I loved. I hated him. I wanted to kill him. I wanted to inflict the maximum pain possible on him for heaping all this misery on my family.

I remember feeling such disdain for Ricardo at this point. What was he doing? I thought. Just following orders? Under my breath, I found myself whispering, ‘Fucking tosser, fucking tosser.’ This quiet chant somehow kept me strong, kept me in control. This man did not deserve my respect. ‘Fucking tosser . . .’

Not sure how I feel about seeing Mr Amaral – for the first time ever, I hasten to add! I know I’m not scared but that man has caused us so much upset and anger because of how he has treated my beautiful Madeleine and the search to find her. He deserves to be miserable and feel fear.

I hope the Metropolitan Police will consider taking action against whoever wrote and published those.

Shocking

jeanmonroe wrote:

I have phoned Grange this morning (Tel 020 7321 9251) and asked them to urgently investigate this 'threat', imo, made yesterday to the lady, Martin Brunt of Sky News, 'exposed' as 'a dissenter' of the McCanns.

(Don't even get me started on the 'grammer' and 'spelling' by this TWAIT!)

Martin Brunt also gave away - indirectly, with the help of the Daily Mail - EXACTLY where she lives.

I hope the Police are protecting this lady.

EVERYONE on this forum has a 'duty' to phone OG, like i did, for them to 'provide protection' for this lady.

Tel 020 7321 9251.

SKY News reporter MB 'inciting' hatred against her, because she has 'the temerity' to not 'believe' ONLY the McCanns 'story' of 'abduction'?

Please CALL OG.

I have yet to see proof of anything "vile" she posted.

PeterMac wrote:

I would lie in bed, hating the person who had done this to us; the person who had taken away our little girl and terrified her; the person who had caused these additional problems for me and the man I loved. I hated him. I wanted to kill him. I wanted to inflict the maximum pain possible on him for heaping all this misery on my family.

I remember feeling such disdain for Ricardo at this point. What was he doing? I thought. Just following orders? Under my breath, I found myself whispering, ‘Fucking tosser, fucking tosser.’ This quiet chant somehow kept me strong, kept me in control. This man did not deserve my respect. ‘Fucking tosser . . .’

Not sure how I feel about seeing Mr Amaral – for the first time ever, I hasten to add! I know I’m not scared but that man has caused us so much upset and anger because of how he has treated my beautiful Madeleine and the search to find her. He deserves to be miserable and feel fear.

I hope the Metropolitan Police will consider taking action against whoever wrote and published those.

Exactlly.
If the Metropolitan Police take action against anti-McCann trolls then Kate's bewk should be given as dossier to Met Police to take action.

It can't be right they are allowed to diss it but can't take it.

http://news.sky.com/story/1346687/gerry-mccann-says-make-example-of-web-trolls


Gerry McCann Says Make Example Of Web Trolls

Madeleine McCann's father calls for more prosecutions after Sky News revealed details of a dossier of abuse targeting his family.

10:15, UK, Friday 03October 2014

Madeleine McCann's father has called for tougher action against web trolls after Sky News exposed a woman who abused his family online.

Gerry McCann said online abuse had caused "severe distress" to him and his wife Kate and that police should be more willing to prosecute the perpetrators.

He was speaking after Sky's Crime Correspondent Martin Brunt revealed in a special report that Scotland Yard is investigating a dossier of social media abuse targeting the McCanns - whose three-year-old daughter went missing on a family holiday in 2007.

When confronted over her actions, one of the trolls, who used the name "Sweepyface" online, told Sky News she believed she was "entitled" to attack the couple on Twitter.

Mr McCann said he had not read the Sweepyface tweets, but he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "Clearly something needs to be done about the abuse on the internet. I think we probably need more people to be charged.

"We do not have any significant presence on social media or online and I've got grave concerns about our children as they grow up and start to access the internet in an unsupervised capacity.

"People are threatening to kidnap our children, people are threatening violence against Kate and myself."

He said police should be more willing to charge internet trolls.

"I'm glad to see the law around this area has been reviewed. We need to make examples of people who are causing damage," he said.

"It causes us severe distress. There is so much vile nonsense written on the internet."

Mr McCann also branded the Sunday Times "disgraceful" after winning a £55,000 libel payout over a story which claimed the couple had deliberately hindered the search for Madeleine, who vanished in Praia da Luz.

He said the story showed there had been no change in the newspaper industry as a result of the Leveson Inquiry.

"This damaged us, it damaged the reputation of the fund and it quite potentially can damage the search for Madeleine," he said.
-----------------------------------------------------------

"and I've got grave concerns about our children as they grow up and start to access the internet in an unsupervised capacity."

WHERE, THEY WILL FIND THAT THEY TOO WERE PUT IN SERIOUS DANGER OF 'ABDUCTION, R*PE, DEA*H' THEMSELVES, BY HIMSELF AND HIS WIFE, WHILE THEY 'WENT TO DINNER', LEAVING THEM AND THEIR SISTER ALONE IN A DILIBERATELY, CONSCIOUSLY, LEFT UNLOCKED, APARTMENT, IN A BEDROOM, TOTALLY OUT OF THEIR SIGHT.

I'd have 'grave concerns' about them 'finding out' about that too, Mr McCann!

Still, like Mr McCann said, on record, "it could have been worse, you must remember that there were THREE children diliberately left alone, by us, in that room"
--------------------------------------------------------
"This damaged us, it damaged the reputation of the fund and it quite potentially can damage the search for Madeleine," he said.
==============================
MCCANN "PRIORITIES"

1, 2, 3!

(1) ME/KATE/US..................(2) MONEY (FUND)....................THEN (LASTLY) (3)...................er, ummm, Margaret? um, er, whatshername?, er, oh yeah,.......... Madeleine!

Forgot to add this - from St Katherine's Diary

"I had lots of hope that there would be progress in Murat's situation. I'm sure that he is involved and I feel like killing him, but I can't". Nine days later, Madeleine's mother receives a message from a woman that tells her that Murat tried to photograph the granddaughter of a friend, also three years old and blond, and Kate sends "the whole" information to the PJ. "I'm certain that he is guilty and I just want to scream", she writes on the 27th of July.

Charming family.
So that is threats, foul language, intimidation, wishing harm and the rest on both Police officers who were trying to help and on the man who volunteered to help with the interpretation in the early stages

Meanwhile, despite wanting to kill the man who harmed Madeleine the suddenly Blessed Katherine has managed to "forgive' him !
It's just the rest of the world she now hates.

Are they just upping things in desperation? But surely this is going to backfire? Sky are just looking ridiculous.

I think that the book was badly misjudged. The reviews are terrible. And it is hardly flying off the shelves. Maybe they could have got away with it a few years earlier. But seeing as it doesn't really add much that wasn't in Kate's book. (And Kate's book is terrible. But it gives a fascinating insight into how her and Gerry's minds work, imo.)

"Mr McCann said he had not read the Sweepyface tweets,"

Really!?  but he thinks the people should be charged. It's like those people that try and ban a film or a book but have never seen or read it!

"We do not have any significant presence on social media or online and I've got grave concerns about our children as they grow up and start to access the internet in an unsupervised capacity."

I bet you do Gerry and we all know why!

"People are threatening to kidnap our children, people are threatening violence against Kate and myself."



How does he know this to be true if he doesn't read the tweets?

As far as I can see the 'sweepyface' tweets are pretty below the belt but she is not actually directly threatening anyone. Is this the same with all the other tweets and messages?   Have people explicitly threatened to do any of these things?  Personally I think if someone is insulting another person online or elsewhere it's not a crime, if you actually threaten to do something unlawful to someone it's crossing a line.

I just hope martin brunt thought it was all worth it,doing the bidding of the mccanns, he has turned out to be despicable man.

jeanmonroe wrote:http://news.sky.com/story/1346687/gerry-mccann-says-make-example-of-web-trolls


Gerry McCann Says Make Example Of Web Trolls

Madeleine McCann's father calls for more prosecutions after Sky News revealed details of a dossier of abuse targeting his family.

10:15, UK, Friday 03October 2014

Madeleine McCann's father has called for tougher action against web trolls after Sky News exposed a woman who abused his family online.

Gerry McCann said online abuse had caused "severe distress" to him and his wife Kate and that police should be more willing to prosecute the perpetrators.

He was speaking after Sky's Crime Correspondent Martin Brunt revealed in a special report that Scotland Yard is investigating a dossier of social media abuse targeting the McCanns - whose three-year-old daughter went missing on a family holiday in 2007.

When confronted over her actions, one of the trolls, who used the name "Sweepyface" online, told Sky News she believed she was "entitled" to attack the couple on Twitter.

Mr McCann said he had not read the Sweepyface tweets, but he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "Clearly something needs to be done about the abuse on the internet. I think we probably need more people to be charged.

"We do not have any significant presence on social media or online and I've got grave concerns about our children as they grow up and start to access the internet in an unsupervised capacity.

"People are threatening to kidnap our children, people are threatening violence against Kate and myself."

He said police should be more willing to charge internet trolls.

"I'm glad to see the law around this area has been reviewed. We need to make examples of people who are causing damage," he said.

"It causes us severe distress. There is so much vile nonsense written on the internet."

Mr McCann also branded the Sunday Times "disgraceful" after winning a £55,000 libel payout over a story which claimed the couple had deliberately hindered the search for Madeleine, who vanished in Praia da Luz.

He said the story showed there had been no change in the newspaper industry as a result of the Leveson Inquiry.

"This damaged us, it damaged the reputation of the fund and it quite potentially can damage the search for Madeleine," he said.
-----------------------------------------------------------

"and I've got grave concerns about our children as they grow up and start to access the internet in an unsupervised capacity."

WHERE, THEY WILL FIND THAT THEY TOO WERE PUT IN SERIOUS DANGER OF 'ABDUCTION, R*PE, DEA*H' THEMSELVES, BY HIMSELF AND HIS WIFE, WHILE THEY 'WENT TO DINNER', LEAVING THEM AND THEIR SISTER ALONE IN A DILIBERATELY, CONSCIOUSLY, LEFT UNLOCKED, APARTMENT, IN A BEDROOM, TOTALLY OUT OF THEIR SIGHT.

I'd have 'grave concerns' about them 'finding out' about that too, Mr McCann!

Still, like Mr McCann said, on record, "it could have been worse, you must remember that there were THREE children diliberately left alone, by us, in that room"
--------------------------------------------------------
"This damaged us, it damaged the reputation of the fund and it quite potentially can damage the search for Madeleine," he said.
==============================
MCCANN "PRIORITIES"

1, 2, 3!

(1) ME/KATE/US..................(2) MONEY (FUND)....................THEN (LASTLY) (3)...................er, ummm, Margaret?  um, er, whatshername?, er, oh yeah,.......... Madeleine!

Indeed. Abuse on the internet is a very big problem. Not least child abuse. Child neglect is also a terrible problem.

I'd like to see two people charged on counts of neglect, at the very least.

They were never charged with neglect because as the PJ said , they didn't know what crime(s) had been committed. 
Also, if charged with neglect, they could not then have been charged with homicide, concealment of a corpse and filing a false police report.

The mccanns and the rest of their group never left their children home alone any night, medical people tend to by hyper protective when it comes to childcare since they know what can happen in a fraction of a second , even whilst standing next to their child.

Each night, an adult member of the group was absent, allegedly with an illness or looking after/changing a sick child.

Oldfield on his check, described a completely different apartment.
I wonder what apartment fitted his description?

The twins were missing initially when the alarm was raised according to at least one witness and were reported in one of the rogs as being taken back to their apartment (how can you take someone back to their apartment if they are already there?)
Also their bedding was noticed to be missing.
We also have statements from gerry of them sleeping on a bed, as well as them being in cots, so, which is it?

If the children were being babysat each night by one of the adults , then there could not have been an abduction.
No abductor is going to break into an apartment to abduct a child and come face to face with a parent.

For there to be an abduction as claimed, they had to claim neglect , as in leaving the children home alone and doing checks.

No neglect - no abduction.
No abduction - What did you do to Maddie?

If the PJ had gone for neglect then the following is what would have likely happened.

Charged with neglect the mccanns and chums appear in court,
The mccanns and chums plead not guilty.
Trial commences.
The mccanns and chums stand up and openly admit they didn't neglect the children, they were all in fact sleeping in one apartment each night watched by an adult member of the group.

Verdict is NOT GUILTY since there was never any neglect.

The mccanns and chums walk free.

The mccanns cannot then be charged with homicide, concealment of a corpse and filing a false police report.

They walk away free and easy

It is a risk they are and were prepared to take.
Their lawyers would have advised them admit to the minimum offense and we can probably plea deal down to probation and a fine or minimal jail time.
They get a fine and possibly sanctions on their medical licences which could include retraining and/or supervision.
It is unlikely they would lose their licences,

I am not sure if the UK police could bring charges since they were already tried in Portugal.

This would be something they would look into,

If no charges could be laid, they could publicly announce Maddie did die in their apartment, they panicked and hid her etc and nothing would happen,.
Nothing could happen.

Those who are pro Maddie will not change their minds so they don't count.
Those who support the parents may or may not change their minds, they don't matter either.
 
What matters is they have a nice little fund.

If they could face charges in the UK then they may decide to risk the child neglect trial and whatever outcome as it would still be less than homicide etc in the UK.

Basically win win for the mccanns.

They were never charged because you cannot charge them on the basis they have done something but you don't know what, nor how, why, when, with whom or where.

Currently this is as best a position they can have since no one knows what the truth is or isn't and confusion reigns which as gerry says is good.

PeterMac wrote:Forgot to add this - from St Katherine's Diary

"I had lots of hope that there would be progress in Murat's situation. I'm sure that he is involved and I feel like killing him, but I can't". Nine days later, Madeleine's mother receives a message from a woman that tells her that Murat tried to photograph the granddaughter of a friend, also three years old and blond, and Kate sends "the whole" information to the PJ. "I'm certain that he is guilty and I just want to scream", she writes on the 27th of July.

Charming family.
So that is threats, foul language, intimidation, wishing harm and the rest on both Police officers who were trying to help and on the man who volunteered to help with the interpretation in the early stages

Meanwhile, despite wanting to kill the man who harmed Madeleine the suddenly Blessed Katherine has managed to "forgive' him !
It's just the rest of the world she now hates.

AND this!

KM's 'diary'

May 14

"Murat continues to be the main suspect and for good reason, but unfortunately there is no strong evidence."

June 5

"I had lots of hope that there would have been progress in Murat's situation and that they had more things about him. We have no understanding of it, is to lie with how many teeth have (Note: Currently seeking clarification on this sentence). Thinking about it causes so much anger and hatred in me. I am sure that he is involved and I want to kill him, but I cannot."
===============================================

She never did 'explain' WHAT the 'good reason' WAS that RM continued to be THE 'main' suspect', did she?

Just so i get this 'right'

KM said she 'wanted to KILL the MAN who harmed Madeleine' and, AND, 'wanted to KILL R Murat', AS WELL!

But ANYONE saying, typing, they 'want to 'kill' HER' is a nasty, nasty, TROLL!

Oh dear............The' things' she's erm, 'forgot' she SAID!

Still, we'll 'remind' her, won't we?

Nice, ain't we?

POT, KETTLE, BLACK, GANDER, GOOD, GOOSE...............................springs to mind!

Hobs wrote:They were never charged with neglect because as the PJ said , they didn't know what crime(s) had been committed. 

I believe the Portuguese equivalent includes an element of "Intent" as well, which would be difficult to prove.

Does anyone "Do" twitter and could put these quotes up ?Perhaps on Twitlonger, though I have absolutely no idea how it works, and no intention of finding out.