Re: Cause of Brenda Leyland's Death Inconclusive

by sallypelt 08.10.14 16:56

Lance De Boils wrote:So where did the 'hanged' come from?
I would have thought that if poor Brenda did hang herself, this would be quite an easy cause of death to establish from a post mortem exam.

Lance, I think I read it in one of the Mirror newspapers

by ChippyM 08.10.14 16:59

juliet wrote:Versailles, it turned out that the police lied about Peaches Geldof, saying there was no sign of drugs paraphernalia when it later turned out there were drugs everywhere.

Sorry I don't agree with this. The media reported no drug paraphernalia was found. The police quite rightly IMO, do not give a running commentary of what they find at a crime scene.

Later when an inquest is held they said what they found.

I believe the report of no drugs found at the Geldof house was a result of reporters at the scene not seeing any being taken away or trying to talk to someone in the investigation and interpreting their unnofficial response, so they gave the impression they knew it to be fact.

The police will never seen to be doing the right thing in this age of instant news and reports. If they keep silent before an inquest they are seen as holding back. Similarly if an inquest reports the cause of death is inconclusive, this is seen as a mistake rather than the authorities taking their time to do things properly.

No I don't trust the police 100% but as far as I can see this inquest result is not out of the ordinary.

by ChippyM 08.10.14 17:06

Lance De Boils wrote:So where did the 'hanged' come from?
I would have thought that if poor Brenda did hang herself, this would be quite an easy cause of death to establish from a post mortem exam.

Something like hanging doesn't just produce one medical effect. I would have thought the cause of death would have to be pretty specific and relates to the exact method used.

by juliet 08.10.14 17:10

If you google reports of Peaches' sad death they all say police found no evidence of drugs or drugs paraphernalia. Much much later they admitted to all the stuff they found. Perhaps they wanted to protect Bob Geldof but they deliberately misled the press.

by Joss 08.10.14 17:15

MRNOODLES wrote:
Joss wrote:
SixMillionQuid wrote:She was still forced to leave her home following the visit. And during that visit she was caught by surprise when told a dossier about her was handed to the police. What happened when Mr Brunt was invited to her home only he can answer and possibly his boss. The news forced her to go somewhere we she would not normally go. So as far as I'm concerned SKY news can't just spin their way out of this one.
Yes they sure did, and placed Brenda in a horrible situation. They need to be held to task over it. I still really want to know Why they picked Brenda Leyland for their target?

Because she was an easy soft target, a 63 year old lady. Rather than a 6ft+ young male.

IMO

Yeah possibly, or someone that would of told them to eff off and slammed the door shut on them, and called the cops on them for harrassment and threats.

by MoonGoddess 08.10.14 17:17

MRNOODLES wrote:
Joss wrote:
SixMillionQuid wrote:She was still forced to leave her home following the visit. And during that visit she was caught by surprise when told a dossier about her was handed to the police. What happened when Mr Brunt was invited to her home only he can answer and possibly his boss. The news forced her to go somewhere we she would not normally go. So as far as I'm concerned SKY news can't just spin their way out of this one.
Yes they sure did, and placed Brenda in a horrible situation. They need to be held to task over it. I still really want to know Why they picked Brenda Leyland for their target?

Because she was an easy soft target, a 63 year old lady. Rather than a 6ft+ young male.

IMO

and had something to lose financially if sued IMHO

by ChippyM 08.10.14 17:18

juliet wrote:If you google reports of Peaches' sad death they all say police found no evidence of drugs or drugs paraphernalia. Much much later they admitted to all the stuff they found. Perhaps they wanted to protect Bob Geldof but they deliberately misled the press.

Yeah I know but there was not one direct quote from police about what they found in the house as the investigation was ongoing. The media elaborate, every single paper repeats it and then the police are accused of lying. I don't think differring initial reports in papers are proof of cover-ups.....just proof of the media being scumbags.

by thetruthbeknown 08.10.14 17:20

I would have been more suspicious if they had stated cause of death so quickly. The postmortem only started yesterday, and as it can be that people have more than 1 possible cause of the actual injury or cause of death, then adjournment at this stage is right. It would have been opened so early so that her family can lay her to rest.

by Searcher 08.10.14 17:53

Is there anything in the report as to who it was who found Brenda in the hotel room, and called the police? The same person, or two people, or a staff member? I still find it so hard to believe that a mother who cared so much for a child's life, and one whom she did not know personally could leave her own son willingly. Very strange.

by HelenMeg 08.10.14 18:05

Searcher wrote:Is there anything in the report as to who it was who found Brenda in the hotel room, and called the police? The same person, or two people, or a staff member? I still find it so hard to believe that a mother who cared so much for a child's life, and one whom she did not know personally could leave her own son willingly. Very strange.

I do too - but in a moment of deep despair anything is possible

by MRNOODLES 08.10.14 18:32

MoonGoddess wrote:
MRNOODLES wrote:
Joss wrote:
SixMillionQuid wrote:She was still forced to leave her home following the visit. And during that visit she was caught by surprise when told a dossier about her was handed to the police. What happened when Mr Brunt was invited to her home only he can answer and possibly his boss. The news forced her to go somewhere we she would not normally go. So as far as I'm concerned SKY news can't just spin their way out of this one.
Yes they sure did, and placed Brenda in a horrible situation. They need to be held to task over it. I still really want to know Why they picked Brenda Leyland for their target?

Because she was an easy soft target, a 63 year old lady. Rather than a 6ft+ young male.

IMO

and had something to lose financially if sued IMHO

Yes that's a good bet too thumbsup

by **PeterMac** 08.10.14 18:51

juliet wrote:If you google reports of Peaches' sad death they all say police found no evidence of drugs or drugs paraphernalia. Much much later they admitted to all the stuff they found. Perhaps they wanted to protect Bob Geldof but they deliberately misled the press.

Sorry, but you have seriously misunderstood the situation.

They have to mislead the Press.
The press are NOT Coroner, nor Judge, nor jury.
And the modern Press have no morals, and almost none can be trusted.
Which leaves the police in an impossible situation.
At that moment their duty is to Her Majesty's Coroner, and to no one else.
They cease to be Police Officers under the control of the Chief Constable, and become Coroner's officers, under the direct control - if s/he wishes - of HM Coroner.
The Office of Coroner dates from the 11th century.
Police date from 1834

The press have no part in any of this,
So they did not "admit" to the stuff they had found, they gave evidence under oath in a Court of law, to the person legally and constitutionally entitled to receive that evidence.

by jeanmonroe 08.10.14 19:15

WHO was the 'photographer' that photographed Brenda 'over her garden fence'?

Who did the photographer 'work for'?

Was the 'photographer 'there' BEFORE or AFTER Sky New's 'doorstepping'?

How did the 'photographer' KNOW where BL lived?

I don't 'recall' there being a fence at the FRONT of her house.

istbc.

thinking

by Dont Make Me Laff 08.10.14 19:17

jeanmonroe wrote:WHO was the 'photographer' that photographed Brenda 'over her garden fence'?

Who did the photographer 'work for'?

Was the 'photographer 'there' BEFORE or AFTER Sky New's 'doorstepping'?

How did the 'photographer' KNOW where BL lived?

Good points... And how do we know she was photographed? did she tweet it?

by galena 08.10.14 19:28

MRNOODLES wrote:
MoonGoddess wrote:
MRNOODLES wrote:
Joss wrote:
SixMillionQuid wrote:She was still forced to leave her home following the visit. And during that visit she was caught by surprise when told a dossier about her was handed to the police. What happened when Mr Brunt was invited to her home only he can answer and possibly his boss. The news forced her to go somewhere we she would not normally go. So as far as I'm concerned SKY news can't just spin their way out of this one.
Yes they sure did, and placed Brenda in a horrible situation. They need to be held to task over it. I still really want to know Why they picked Brenda Leyland for their target?

Because she was an easy soft target, a 63 year old lady. Rather than a 6ft+ young male.

IMO

and had something to lose financially if sued IMHO

Yes that's a good bet too

Yes I thought that as well. If they picked someone with enormous financial resources that person would probably sue Sky and Brunt might find himself out on his ear. Someone with nothing to lose might cash in on their new found celebrity and use the opportunity to find a wider platform for their views.

But why the assumption that women are easy targets? A man has the extra threat that child porn could be 'found' on his computer and he could be branded a paedophile thus eliminating all sympathy. I suspect the reason they picked a woman is simple - most of the people who discuss the McCann case are in fact women!

by juliet 08.10.14 19:30

PeterMac, it is very sad for all of us when the police don't trust the press one inch and vice versa. There used to be co-operation which benefited both sides. I sincerely hope (trust) that a Coroner still has absolute integrity.

by galena 08.10.14 19:35

HelenMeg wrote:
Searcher wrote:Is there anything in the report as to who it was who found Brenda in the hotel room, and called the police? The same person, or two people, or a staff member? I still find it so hard to believe that a mother who cared so much for a child's life, and one whom she did not know personally could leave her own son willingly. Very strange.
I do too - but in a moment of deep despair anything is possible

I don't know if you've seen Blacksmith's latest blog but I think he does a good job of describing the sheer intrusive nature of this kind of media invasion and the impact it has on the average person who has never experienced it. Add that to the threat of arrest + the possibility of being sued by the McCanns and losing everything - she knows hat happened to TB and GA. People talk a lot about money not being everything, but in my opinion the older you get the more important material security becomes to say nothing of having the respect of your community. I like to think in her situation I would have fought back by threatening to sue Sky but who knows? Only someone who has experienced this kind of trial by media knows what it feels like.

by aiyoyo 08.10.14 19:45

PeterMac wrote:
juliet wrote:If you google reports of Peaches' sad death they all say police found no evidence of drugs or drugs paraphernalia. Much much later they admitted to all the stuff they found. Perhaps they wanted to protect Bob Geldof but they deliberately misled the press.

Sorry, but you have seriously misunderstood the situation.

They have to mislead the Press.
The press are NOT Coroner, nor Judge, nor jury.
And the modern Press have no morals, and almost none can be trusted.
Which leaves the police in an impossible situation.
At that moment their duty is to Her Majesty's Coroner, and to no one else.
They cease to be Police Officers under the control of the Chief Constable, and become Coroner's officers, under the direct control - if s/he wishes - of HM Coroner.
The Office of Coroner dates from the 11th century.
Police date from 1834

The press have no part in any of this,
So they did not "admit" to the stuff they had found, they gave evidence under oath in a Court of law, to the person legally and constitutionally entitled to receive that evidence.

Very rightly so.
The Press and Police have different roles and different objectives.
The former's objective is to make profit, while the latter has a duty to the victim and Her Majesty's Coroner. The latter's role isn't to satisfy or co-operate with the press.

Hence, the statement "The McCanns and Hol. friends are not persons of interest" might just be to mislead the press, to throw them off track, so that they don't interfere with Police's work.

The Police never let on, they don't have a duty to the press or to the public, in due time maybe, but not otherwise.

by jeanmonroe 08.10.14 19:49

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/10/06/outed-madeleine-mccann-troll-kills-herself-but-millions-live-on-online.html#

This is all i've got......................so far!

"On Thursday, Leyland fled her home after a photographer snapped her photo from behind her garden fence."
---------------------------------------------------------

"Last week, though, Leyland admitted to Martin Brunt of Sky News that she sent harassing messages TO the parents of the missing child under the Twitter handle @sweepyface."

Did she, did she REALLY 'admit' to MB that she 'sent' harassing messages TO the parents..............under her 'twitter handle'?

How did she 'send' these 'messages/tweets' TO the McCanns when THEY don't even 'have' a Twitter 'account'?

thinking

by Dont Make Me Laff 08.10.14 19:57

She didn't
she sent them into cyber space

I don't do twitter - the clue is in the word (twit) but I imagine all comments go into cyberspace
Guess I was wrong maybe they just go to the SKY

by jeanmonroe 08.10.14 20:05

Yeah! Just like the 50 (FIFTY) TEXTS a DAY Brenda managed TO 'SEND' TO the McCanns as attested by Carole Malone, of the Daily Mirror!

Unsurprisingly, of course, 'our' Carole cannot provide us with a scintilla of 'evidence' that that was TRUE,

I suppose Brenda must have had the McCanns, private phone number, on 'speed dial'!

by thetruthbeknown 08.10.14 20:05

jeanmonroe wrote:http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/10/06/outed-madeleine-mccann-troll-kills-herself-but-millions-live-on-online.html#

This is all i've got......................so far!

"On Thursday, Leyland fled her home after a photographer snapped her photo from behind her garden fence."
---------------------------------------------------------

"Last week, though, Leyland admitted to Martin Brunt of Sky News that she sent harassing messages TO the parents of the missing child under the Twitter handle @sweepyface."

Did she, did she REALLY 'admit' to MB that she 'sent' harassing messages TO the parents..............under her 'twitter handle'?

How did she 'send' these 'messages/tweets' TO the McCanns when THEY don't even 'have' a Twitter 'account'?

I cant see that being true. Most of us that live in Leics know the machine here, most keep anti feelings to themselves in public, and seek like minded people on the internet, or debate our points online. It doesnt surprise me at all that she felt no way out in the end. It may be so that her local community, friends and even family were unaware of her feelings on this subject. Ive put myself in her shoes, and id be horrified at my feelings on this subject being exposed to all and sundry in my community, friends, family.

by jeanmonroe 08.10.14 20:20

thetruthbeknown wrote:

"Ive put myself in her shoes, and id be horrified at my feelings on this subject being exposed to all and sundry in my community, friends, family."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd love, just LOVE, my 'feelings and views' to be 'exposed/known' not only 'in my community, friends, family' because, unsurprisingly they already KNOW my 'views'

but

I'd like the WHOLE WORLD to 'know' my 'views' on the 'disappearance' of a 3 years old child, diliberately, consciously, left alone with TWO siblings, younger than even her. A TOTALLY unprotected, defenceless, 3 years old child.

I have asked the McCanns to SUE me. (IN a courtroom., under OATH)

I have asked Sky News to 'interview' me.

I have spoken to OG officers.

Guess what?

Nothing, Zilch, Nada, Zero, 'response'

What does THAT 'tell' ya?

by thetruthbeknown 08.10.14 20:43

jeanmonroe wrote:thetruthbeknown wrote:

"Ive put myself in her shoes, and id be horrified at my feelings on this subject being exposed to all and sundry in my community, friends, family."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd love, just LOVE, my 'feelings and views' to be 'exposed/known' not only 'in my community, friends, family' because, unsurprisingly they already KNOW my 'views'

but

I'd like the WHOLE WORLD to 'know' my 'views' on the 'disappearance' of a 3 years old child, diliberately, consciously, left alone with TWO siblings, younger than even her. A TOTALLY unprotected, defenceless, 3 years old child.

I have asked the McCanns to SUE me.

I have asked Sky News to 'interview' me.

I have spoken to OG officers.

Guess what?

Nothing, Zilch, Nada, Zero, 'response'

What does THAT 'tell' ya?

Good for you :) But some are not that confident, plus my children are school age, and they are more important to me than anything, I wont put them through any kind of harrassment etc. As much as I want to see justice for Madeline, and I will follow and take an interest, I wont put myself right out there. Call me a coward if you want :/

by Dont Make Me Laff 08.10.14 20:58

The whole scenario sickens me and I with Jeanmonreo

The Only way that this will end is when the Mcanns and their FRIENDS are put under scrutiny
I say
MET 38 Bring them all in and ask them to justify their versions, ab=nd above all
Ask KAE McCann to answer not 48 questions but just one
WHY DID you want to hamper the investigation?

by juliet 08.10.14 21:09

Liking your attitude jeanmonroe! The reason most of us are (like Brenda) so concerned about this case is that neither our press or our police are doing their job. Instead they seem powerless to do anything but bow and scrape to the McCanns and ignore every screaming great lie, anomaly, sheer impossibility in the tale they tell. It is unbelievable that now even the humble public are being persecuted - even to death - for daring to question the McCann line.

by thetruthbeknown 08.10.14 21:12

There are many that are willing to go on record, to put the case across..but I fear they know who is vulnerable. And they will scapegoat and use them for their 'examples'. I would imagine they would also like to quieten local 'factions' too. There are a few in the local area, and a few outspoken ones too I think, but I doubt press etc would ever 'intrude' on them (for obvious reasons)

by Dr What 08.10.14 22:00

I wonder if Brenda wrote and left a suicide note, either at home or in the hotel room?

If she did, presumably the Coroner will make reference to one.

by thetruthbeknown 08.10.14 22:06

I expect she would have been more careful then to leave a note where it could be found and accidently 'lost'. Seems she was sceptical about 'evidence' etc where anything to do with McCann. I expect if she was to leave any indication, it would have been by message or something to trusted friend or relative.

by Joss 09.10.14 4:38

I would think from what Brenda said about if anything happens to her then not to necessarily believe the first version of it.... something to that effect, on a tweet i saw here that was posted.
That to me says there was something going on in her life where she felt threatened by someone, but she didn't elaborate on that publicly. But perhaps she expressed those concerns to people close to her, and we don't know if she did or didn't do that? Seeing as this is an ongoing investigation we may or may not find out, but my feelings on this are there is more to all of this than any of us know about, and only Brenda Leyland knew.