The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann. Please note that your username should be different from your email address!

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

(Please note: if you register with the sole intention of disrupting or spamming, please don't expect to be a member for too long.)

Many thanks,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Let's Not Forget Brenda

Page 5 of 20 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 12 ... 20  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by Joss on 21.10.14 15:43

@Snifferdog wrote:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Interesting.
So its the McCanns who organised Brendas doorstopping.
Everything they touch..........
Yeah, says it all really, angryred
avatar
Joss

Posts : 1950
Reputation : 182
Join date : 2011-09-19

Back to top Go down

No room for misunderstanding there !

Post by PeterMac on 21.10.14 15:43

" />
Didn't Gerry say they hadn't read them
Didn't Sky say something else
Didn't Brunt say something other
Didn't Gamble say a third different thing.
Didn't BHH say the Mccanns HAD handed it over, but it was nothing to to do with the Met so they sent it to that notoriously impartial Force, Leicester.

Do any of them know what it is like to tell the truth ?

____________________

avatar
PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 159
Join date : 2010-12-06

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by Joss on 21.10.14 15:52

@PeterMac wrote:" />
Didn't Gerry say they hadn't read them
Didn't Sky say something else
Didn't Brunt say something other
Didn't Gamble say a third different thing.
Didn't BHH say the Mccanns HAD handed it over, but it was nothing to to do with the Met so they sent it to that notoriously impartial Force, Leicester.

Do any of them know what it is like to tell the truth ?

The truth and those liars are strangers. And we all know about liars, you can't trust them.
avatar
Joss

Posts : 1950
Reputation : 182
Join date : 2011-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by Joss on 21.10.14 16:03

Truth fears no questions. ~Unknown
avatar
Joss

Posts : 1950
Reputation : 182
Join date : 2011-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by MoonGoddess on 21.10.14 16:18

Ristretto wrote:-

It remains my view that Brenda Leyland would, almost certainly, if a case had been brought been guilty of the crime of harassment

I regret that you could be right there, but NOT because she was guilty of the crime, but because 'Team McCann' can afford the likes of Carter Ruck behind them!

Quite likely someone of your mindset persuaded Brenda what justice had in store for her, and she just couldn't face that fight...

There you go Gerry, you wanted an example made of these "evil" internet trolls

God Bless your spirit Brenda Leyland

____________________
Not to help justice in her need would be an impiety ~Plato~
avatar
MoonGoddess

Posts : 282
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-09-28

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by MoonGoddess on 21.10.14 16:20

@Joss wrote:Truth fears no questions. ~Unknown



x

____________________
Not to help justice in her need would be an impiety ~Plato~
avatar
MoonGoddess

Posts : 282
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-09-28

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by Joss on 21.10.14 16:21

Here are Brenda Leyland's tweets.

The false accusations against Brenda Leyland come only from 2 sources: one, from people who, frankly, have lost touch with reality and basic common values and the other, journalists committing criminal journalism as per our “Serial Journalism” post.

For Brenda it was just too much too cope with.

We believe she will be decisive in the opening of the true Maddie’s Pandora’s Box.

Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe’s appearance on Eddie Nestor on BBC London on Tuesday 07OCT14, 3 days after Brenda’s death, is just a sign of this.

This is what the Commissioner said then (transcript from JH Forum): “But in terms of that file [Tr*ll Dossier], what happened if you recall was that the family [McCanns] handed to our team that are investigating the, or reviewing the murder of...of sorry, reviewing the missing girl. errr the McCann daughter. The file was handed to that team and we were liaising with Leicestershire police which is where the McCann family live.....”

First, the Commissioner contradicts Martin Brunt on the report. At 3:58 Brunt says: “The woman who organised the dossier said she contacted police because the abuse was getting worse and internet service providers refused to help stop it.”

So it was either “the family” [McCanns] who contacted and handed the dossier over to the Met or it was this woman. If Commissioner wasn't sure who handed dossier in, he should have stated this.

Second, the word murder pops up. “Murder” and “missing” have in common the first letter but due to the sensitivity of each they’re not confused with each other by anyone much less by the Commissioner. And the word murder is said with clarity.
Pressure does tend to make truth leak into one’s language.

Either the Commissioner is putting both feet into mouth or sending a message. Or by doing the first he’s unintentionally doing the second.

Bernard Hogan-Howe is Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis as of 12 September 2011, only 4 months after Operation Grange was ordered by the PM David Cameron.

We would say Commissioner Hogan-Howe and Operation Grange are joined at the hip. He’s ultimately the one responsible for the Met not to allow Brenda’s death to be in vain.

http://textusa.blogspot.com.au/2014/10/new-pieces-same-game.html

____________________
avatar
Joss

Posts : 1950
Reputation : 182
Join date : 2011-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by plebgate on 21.10.14 18:27

@Ristretto wrote:
@plebgate wrote:I cannot see why Blair and Brown has been brought into the posts about Brenda.

Brunty, ASFAIK did not doorstep Brenda about Blair and Brown, so why post about them?

Also where is the proof that Brenda has commited libel?

Ristretto seems to be a budding lawyer or sumat.   I think this poster will get on well with UT.

Because the libel she posted as sweepyface is part and parcel of the role she played online.

I really do find the question on the last line of your post amusing. Are you one of the conspiracy brigade who explain everything by referring to the Paedophile conspiracy?
Show me the evidence that supports what Brenda Leyland posted about these two men and I might go along with you. Till then its as valid a claim as the one about the Queen being a lizard, only far more likely to be challenged as libel. Remember the onus is on the person making the claim to prove it.

Only a budding lawyer eh? Shows what you know doesn't it!

Eh, I thought a judge decided what is and what is not libel?

____________________
Judge Judy to shifty  witnesses   -    LOOK AT ME  -   Um is not an answer.

If I forget to add it to a post everything is In My Opinion and I don't know anything for sure.
Rolling Eyes

plebgate

Posts : 5980
Reputation : 1667
Join date : 2013-02-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by Stillthinking on 21.10.14 19:29

Part of me wonders whether MB chose Brenda as her tweets showed her to be articulate and capable of giving logical reasons for her doubts about the McCanns. Was he hoping she would she would put forward a solid  argument and then the report would be more balanced?

We all know there are some total nutcases on both sides of the fence. Imagine how much worse the report would have come across had he chosen a tweeter from the other end of the spectrum to represent those who doubt the McCanns' story. Or one of the infamous fantasists and WUMs from days gone by.

Stillthinking

Posts : 151
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-09-10

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by juliet on 21.10.14 20:05

I am sure Brenda did give Brunt her reasons for publicly questioning the McCann story when he went into her house. I am sure she said exactly why she was unhappy about at least one of their most important witnesses and also what she knew about the "shills". All controversial stuff. A couple of days later she was dead. And Brunt is in hiding.
avatar
juliet

Posts : 579
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-06-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by Stillthinking on 21.10.14 20:23

@juliet wrote:I am sure Brenda did give Brunt her reasons for publicly questioning the McCann story when he went into her house. I am sure she said exactly why she was unhappy about at least one of their most important witnesses and also what she knew about the "shills". All controversial stuff. A couple of days later she was dead. And Brunt is in hiding.


Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant on camera, in response to MB's doorstepping. Imagine how different the report would have looked had Brenda explained all of those reasons in direct response to the questions MB was asking. (No criticism whatsoever of Brenda intended
)

Stillthinking

Posts : 151
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-09-10

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by juliet on 21.10.14 21:19

I agree justthinking. Just a mention of a few salient points..and Brunt would have been scuppered. Incidentally Ristretto claims a family member is "horrified" by Brenda' s tweets. This woman ( wife or servant I assume) must be protected from Kate McCann's repulsive book then. And from the detailed torture and death threats sent to Brenda...
avatar
juliet

Posts : 579
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-06-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by plebgate on 21.10.14 21:39

Just listened to the tape of Katy Hopkins v. Gamble.    Well done Katy.

She defended Brenda and would not back down.  

Gamble says the persistent few should be dealt with severely (not exact wording?) and then the rest would fall in line (something like that).

Well there you are, to me that shows that some people want to shut everyone up.   The Question is Why?

How can he think that it is alright for S&S to be told by the MET POLICE to read the files and comment on the case via a book, but it is not alright (apparently) for others to read the files and comment?

Crazy imo.

plebgate

Posts : 5980
Reputation : 1667
Join date : 2013-02-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by MoonGoddess on 21.10.14 21:59

@plebgate wrote:Just listened to the tape of Katy Hopkins v. Gamble.    Well done Katy.

She defended Brenda and would not back down.  

Gamble says the persistent few should be dealt with severely (not exact wording?) and then the rest would fall in line (something like that).

Well there you are, to me that shows that some people want to shut everyone up.   The Question is Why?

How can he think that it is alright for S&S to be told by the MET POLICE to read the files and comment on the case via a book, but it is not alright (apparently) for others to read the files and comment?

Crazy imo.

because the TRUTH is getting 'out there' ... the question is; what is it about the TRUTH, that they are intent on keeping it hidden?

I didn't think I'd live to see the day when I was applauding Katy Hopkins big grin and as much as I admire her, I don't think she is the best spokesperson to reach the masses, they will discredit her in much the same way as Sonia Poulton is being discredited due to her association with David Icke.

____________________
Not to help justice in her need would be an impiety ~Plato~
avatar
MoonGoddess

Posts : 282
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-09-28

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by Guest on 22.10.14 0:21

Let's not forget - whois Jim Gamble?

From what I see, a self-employed, self-appointed nobody. Maybe the new Clarrie? cheerleader

Does the government or his ex-employers give him any credence any more?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by Joss on 22.10.14 3:50

@MoonGoddess wrote:
@plebgate wrote:Just listened to the tape of Katy Hopkins v. Gamble.    Well done Katy.

She defended Brenda and would not back down.  

Gamble says the persistent few should be dealt with severely (not exact wording?) and then the rest would fall in line (something like that).

Well there you are, to me that shows that some people want to shut everyone up.   The Question is Why?

How can he think that it is alright for S&S to be told by the MET POLICE to read the files and comment on the case via a book, but it is not alright (apparently) for others to read the files and comment?

Crazy imo.

because the TRUTH is getting 'out there' ... the question is; what is it about the TRUTH, that they are intent on keeping it hidden?

I didn't think I'd live to see the day when I was applauding Katy Hopkins big grin and as much as I admire her, I don't think she is the best spokesperson to reach the masses, they will discredit her in much the same way as Sonia Poulton is being discredited due to her association with David Icke.
Must be something very big with all the troubles they have gone to in trying to close down and shut up people's opinions of what actually happened. It certainly reeks of cover up by the establishment.
Would any other parents in these circumstances get all this protection and pandering to, or would they have had criminal charges to deal with and a forthcoming Trial by now?
avatar
Joss

Posts : 1950
Reputation : 182
Join date : 2011-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by Joss on 22.10.14 3:54

Somehow i get the feeling this case is much bigger than the McCann's and reaches beyond that, and if the truth would really come out we would all be shocked to our core, not that people looking for the truth in this case haven't already touched upon it, just IMO. And maybe Brenda was too close to the Truth?
avatar
Joss

Posts : 1950
Reputation : 182
Join date : 2011-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by Ristretto on 22.10.14 16:50

@MoonGoddess wrote:Ristretto wrote:-

It remains my view that Brenda Leyland would, almost certainly, if a case had been brought been guilty of the crime of harassment

I regret that you could be right there, but NOT because she was guilty of the crime, but because 'Team McCann' can afford the likes of Carter Ruck behind them!

Quite likely someone of your mindset persuaded Brenda what justice had in store for her, and she just couldn't face that fight...

There you go Gerry, you wanted an example made of these "evil" internet trolls

God Bless your spirit Brenda Leyland

Carter Ruck can only win such a case which you suggest would be a likely outcome, if Brenda Leyland was guilty. And I don't think the McCanns would have needed to spend a single penny on the case. Carter Ruck have publicly stated that they have done work for the McCanns in the past on a no win, no fee basis. Lawyers only do that when the law is decidedly in their favour.

I believe what was in her timeline constituted what is outlined as harassment in the Protection from Harassment Act. I suspect that a large proportion of lawyers would see her timeline in the same way.

Had Brenda Leyland been certain that she had committed no offence, had she been immediately supported by others who were also convinced of her rights such as Tony Bennett from here, then she would have had nothing to fear.

But what happened after she was doorstepped? Don't you remember? There was a ridiculous outpouring from those who doubt the McCanns which poured scorn on Brenda Leyland, which suggested that she had even been a pro and it was all a set up with Brunt. Those tweets and posts still exist.

Only after her death was announced was there a great cry that she was a victim.

I deplore the fact that she died. I deplore the fact that she did not explain herself and stand up for her views. With the support of others of similar views she may have felt able to do so.


Ristretto

Posts : 50
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-12-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by j.rob on 22.10.14 17:06

@Ristretto wrote:
@plebgate wrote:I cannot see why Blair and Brown has been brought into the posts about Brenda.

Brunty, ASFAIK did not doorstep Brenda about Blair and Brown, so why post about them?

Also where is the proof that Brenda has commited libel?

Ristretto seems to be a budding lawyer or sumat.   I think this poster will get on well with UT.

Because the libel she posted as sweepyface is part and parcel of the role she played online.

I really do find the question on the last line of your post amusing. Are you one of the conspiracy brigade who explain everything by referring to the Paedophile conspiracy?
Show me the evidence that supports what Brenda Leyland posted about these two men and I might go along with you. Till then its as valid a claim as the one about the Queen being a lizard, only far more likely to be challenged as libel. Remember the onus is on the person making the claim to prove it.

Only a budding lawyer eh? Shows what you know doesn't it!


So that would mean that the onus is on the McCanns and their friends to prove their claim that their daughter was abducted by an unknown abductor and they have no idea who this was and what happened to their daughter after she was allegedly stolen from her bed on Thursday evening on 3rd May 2007.

Can't wait to see THE PROOF.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 232
Join date : 2014-02-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by j.rob on 22.10.14 17:08

@Snifferdog wrote:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Interesting.
So its the McCanns who organised Brendas doorstopping.
Everything they touch..........

That would figure.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 232
Join date : 2014-02-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by Joss on 22.10.14 17:14

I also think some people could be jumping to conclusions in light of the Fact that Brenda Leyland's cause of death has not even been officially determined yet, and there is also an ongoing police investigation into Brenda's death, after death threats were made against her, so i think it is presumptuous to assume anything in regard to Brenda Leyland at this point in time.
And Brenda also had plenty of online support in her views to the lies and spin and money making ventures of the McScams. IMO.
avatar
Joss

Posts : 1950
Reputation : 182
Join date : 2011-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by j.rob on 22.10.14 17:20

@Ristretto wrote:
@MoonGoddess wrote:Ristretto wrote:-

It remains my view that Brenda Leyland would, almost certainly, if a case had been brought been guilty of the crime of harassment

I regret that you could be right there, but NOT because she was guilty of the crime, but because 'Team McCann' can afford the likes of Carter Ruck behind them!

Quite likely someone of your mindset persuaded Brenda what justice had in store for her, and she just couldn't face that fight...

There you go Gerry, you wanted an example made of these "evil" internet trolls

God Bless your spirit Brenda Leyland

Carter Ruck can only win such a case which you suggest would be a likely outcome, if Brenda Leyland was guilty. And I don't think the McCanns would have needed to spend a single penny on the case. Carter Ruck have publicly stated that they have done work for the McCanns in the past on a no win, no fee basis. Lawyers only do that when the law is decidedly in their favour.

I believe what was in her timeline constituted what is outlined as harassment in the Protection from Harassment Act. I suspect that a large proportion of lawyers would see her timeline in the same way.

Had Brenda Leyland been certain that she had committed no offence, had she been immediately supported by others who were also convinced of her rights such as Tony Bennett from here, then she would have had nothing to fear.

But what happened after she was doorstepped? Don't you remember? There was a ridiculous outpouring from those who doubt the McCanns which poured scorn on Brenda Leyland, which suggested that she had even been a pro and it was all a set up with Brunt. Those tweets and posts still exist.

Only after her death was announced was there a great cry that she was a victim.

I deplore the fact that she died. I deplore the fact that she did not explain herself and stand up for her views. With the support of others of similar views she may have felt able to do so.


Well, perhaps having studied the conspiracy theory as advocated by the McCanns that their daughter was stolen from her bed by an unknown abductor and spirited off into oblivion, Brenda came to the conclusion that it was a pile of nonsense. A bit like claiming that the Queen is a lizard.

And when she saw the very high level of support that had been given to people who looked as guilty as hell as coming up with an absurd conspiracy about why their daughter was missing she reached a different conclusion about what kind of support you can expect if you are innocent.

Such as being harrassed on your doorstep by Martin Brunt and Sky News. 

Maybe she reached a conclusion like this:

That high level support can be available to people who have committed an offence. But they have nothing to fear because they can count on high level support.


Others who are trying to point out this outrage, despite being innocent, cannot expect high level support. And in fact will be made to feel fear. Such as Brenda.


Still, it was nice of Martin Brunt and Sky News to broadcast that on prime-time TV.

Does Rupert Murdoch want to live in a democracy where there is at least a semblance of law and order.

Or what?

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 232
Join date : 2014-02-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by mouse on 22.10.14 18:22

Ristretto wrote: "But what happened after she was doorstepped? Don't you remember? There was a ridiculous outpouring from those who doubt the McCanns which poured scorn on Brenda Leyland, which suggested that she had even been a pro and it was all a set up with Brunt. Those tweets and posts still exist.

Only after her death was announced was there a great cry that she was a victim."



So you didn't view the absolute car crash that was 'AskBrunt! the live tweet on the very same day of the broadcast of the doorstepping at 2.45pm . When Brenda was still alive. No scorn for Brenda there - just a lot of people asking Brunty why he'd picked on this woman with no authority to do so. He didn't answer of course and bailed out early after attempting to answer about 12 lame questions...... I believe that is the last thing we heard from him. It was a total disaster. Read the Tweets.

mouse

Posts : 330
Reputation : 53
Join date : 2013-10-10

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by Snifferdog on 22.10.14 18:28

Ristretto wrote:
Carter Ruck have publicly stated that they have done work for the McCanns in the past on a no win, no fee basis. Lawyers only do that when the law is decidedly in their favour.
.................................................

No it was Kate who said that carter ruck were working for them pro bono.

____________________
“‘Conspiracy stuff’ is now shorthand for unspeakable truth.”
– Gore Vidal
avatar
Snifferdog

Posts : 1008
Reputation : 16
Join date : 2012-05-11
Location : here

Back to top Go down

Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

Post by The....truth on 22.10.14 18:46

Ristretto wrote

Had Brenda Leyland been certain that she had committed no offence, had she been immediately supported by others who were also convinced of her rights such as Tony Bennett from here, then she would have had nothing to fear. 



I am a bit puzzled by your comments here Ristretto.  To eliminate the negatives ...You are saying, I think, that she did have fear because she  was certain she had committed an offence and that she had fear because she was not immediately supported by others, Tony Bennett for example. Just a name at random from here or do you mean him especially ? 

Is this what you mean ? 

You yourself say that she had committed an offence I think. Correct ?

I would be grateful if you could clarify your comments for me.

The....truth

Posts : 88
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-02-18

Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 20 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 12 ... 20  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
McCanns apt & hire car


Blood and cadaver alerts
dismissed by UK Government


Retired DCI Gonçalo Amaral: "The English can always present the conclusions to which they themselves arrived in 2007. Because they know, they have the evidence of what happened - they don't need to investigate anything. All this is now a mere 'show off'."

Retired murder DCI Colin Sutton: "I would also like to make the point that Operation Grange was so restricted from the start as to be destined to fail."

Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley made public on national TV that Operation Grange is a complete fraud.

Ex-DCI Andy Redwood had a "revelation moment" on BBC's Crimewatch on 14th October 2013 when he announced that Operation Grange had eliminated the Tanner sighting - which opened up the 'window of opportunity', in accordance with their remit, to allow the fake abduction to happen.

Despite "irrelevant behaviour" from blood and cadaver dogs in the McCann's apartment, on Kate McCann's clothes, and in the car they hired three weeks after Maddie disappeared, Ex-Chief Inspector, Ian Horrocks, said: "The thought that Kate and Gerry McCann had anything to do with the death of their daughter is frankly preposterous."

Gerry McCann called for example to be made of 'trolls'. SKY News reporter Martin Brunt doorstepped Brenda Leyland on 2 October 2014. She was then found dead in a Leicester hotel room. Brenda paid the price. She paid with her life.

Ex-Deputy Chief Constable, Jim Gamble QPM, congratulated SKY reporter, Martin Brunt, on twitter for doorstepping Brenda Leyland on behalf of Gerry McCann.

Prime Minister Theresa May introduces Prime Suspect Kate McCann to Royalty: The Duchess of Gloucester.

Good Cop Down: The reality of being a police whistleblower
https://goodcopdown.wordpress.com/