Re: Let's Not Forget Brenda

by Smokeandmirrors 18.12.14 23:14

aiyoyo wrote:I hope BL's son seek from Coroner the name of the person organising the dossier, the name of the person handing it to the Press.
Those responsible need to be questioned on the why,when,how and the whereforth etc. The Coroner owes it to BL's family to give them answers why she was singled out to be targeted and most importantly WHO did it.

What was Brunt involvement (if any) with those responsible for the dossier?
Did he collude with them? Were the McCanns and/or any of their family member/s directly or indirectly involved or associated with the dossier and "troll" doorstepping operations?

And not to forget that he LIED when he said police were investigating her. The police said they were not. And IF it was the McCanns who handed the dossier in as Hogan-Howe said, Gerry LIED about saying they don't use Twitter etc.

Lies, lies and more lies - I sincerely hope the disgusting duo get called to account for the lies they have told

by aiyoyo 18.12.14 23:15

@ TB,
I think the principle is that any witness who may be subject to criticism is entitled to be legally represented, as well as anyone else with a clear interest (e.g. the next-of-kin of the deceased). I am not sure how the actual principle is worded, however.

Legal representation entitlement is not the question here.
Rather I would like to know why Sky's counsel is entitled to be given all the witnesses statements ?

by **Tony Bennett** 18.12.14 23:56

aiyoyo wrote:

@ TB,
I think the principle is that any witness who may be subject to criticism is entitled to be legally represented, as well as anyone else with a clear interest (e.g. the next-of-kin of the deceased). I am not sure how the actual principle is worded, however.
Legal representation entitlement is not the question here.

Rather I would like to know why Sky's counsel is entitled to be given all the witnesses statements?

I refer to what I said in my post above.

SKY News has been made, in effect, a party to the proceedings, I think 'interested person' may be the phrase in inquests.

Anyone who is a party in court proceedings, or an inquest, is entitled to be represented by solicitors/barristsrs.

Both the parties themselves and their legal representatives are entitled to see everything - witness statements, expert reports etc.

Plus of course the jury, if there is one.

Did the Coroner refer to a jury at all?

by Woofer 19.12.14 0:07

Tony Bennett wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:

@ TB,
I think the principle is that any witness who may be subject to criticism is entitled to be legally represented, as well as anyone else with a clear interest (e.g. the next-of-kin of the deceased). I am not sure how the actual principle is worded, however.
Legal representation entitlement is not the question here.

Rather I would like to know why Sky's counsel is entitled to be given all the witnesses statements?
I refer to what I said in my post above.

SKY News has been made, in effect, a party to the proceedings, I think 'interested person' may be the phrase in inquests.

Anyone who is a party in court proceedings, or an inquest, is entitled to be represented by solicitors/barristsrs.

Both the parties themselves and their legal representatives are entitled to see everything - witness statements, expert reports etc.

Plus of course the jury, if there is one.

Did the Coroner refer to a jury at all?

There will be no jury, she will sit alone.

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic24240.html#p318012

by Snifferdog 19.12.14 8:05

Something really stinks with the whole Brenda Leyland affair, as is the case with Jacinta Saldahna.

I realise that I may "miss out" on a lot of "info" not having a tv, but how convenient is it for TM that:

Brenda epitomized the main cross section of members of CMOMM and some other sites: Presentable middle age to older, fit and healthy female, active, comfortably off, with loving, successful older children, dogs, friends, healthy, house, pension etc, - in short - Somebody who had every reason to look forward to her golden years - BUT WHO DIED/LOST EVERYTHING FOR ONE REASON ALONE, because she did not give up on Madeleine.

I may be in for a tarring and feathering here from some, but it has to be said - perhaps Brenda never really existed as she has been portrayed.

I take everything I read or hear from the MSM with a fat pinch of salt. Why should one believe ANYTHING when there is hard evidence that politicians, their spokespeople, big business, the press, AND upholders of the law, lie freely to the public, whenever, and as much as they choose.

IMO. the message was sent through loud and clear:

BEWARE! YOU TOO COULD END UP LIKE BRENDA......

Jacinta, on the other hand, was used as an example as to the fate that may befall one should one even unwittingly become part of a spoof aimed at the Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha family.

We also have the lovely Machavillian Lord McAlpine, who died mysteriously, with no known funeral, soon after being outed as a raving paedophile, which he quickly tried to negate using tactics from a devious book he authored, "The True Machevillian", or some such fitting title.

This modus operandi seems to have worked well in the past, evidenced by the many taboo (politically incorrect???) subjects that we are "not allowed" to discuss, because some human says so, making certain subjects anathema to many, the modus operandi being brainwashing by persistent repetition, and the examples made of those that dare speak out, and stand by their convictions.

by **PeterMac** 19.12.14 9:49

Mo wrote:Does anybody know if the actual film of Martin Brunt doorstepping Brenda will be shown in the Coroners Court? I think many of the questions being asked would be answered if they did.
Thanks
Mo

I doubt it wil be shown, but HM Coroner has seen it, and may simply inform the court of that fact.

by jeanmonroe 19.12.14 10:52

Just asking:

WHEN did Brenda leave her house and go to the hotel?

Did the Police 'know' about the life threatening 'tweets' to BL from the 'ardent McCann SUPPORTER' Cindy Martin?

Did Brenda 'move' to the hotel, on Police 'advice' (as Sky News had exposed exactly where she lived) because of the life threatening 'tweets'?

Was BL's life, diliberately and consciously, 'put in danger' by Sky News employee, Martin Brunt, broadcasting WHERE she lived, thus possibly, exposing her home, and herself, to 'attack/assault' by 'rabid' McCann's 'SUPPORTERS'?

Did BL move to the hotel, because the Police, if they knew, of the McCann's SUPPORTER's 'tweets', did 'NOTHING'?

Even MWT 'informed' the police, about the LIFE THREATENING 'tweets' to BL

AND he 'told' J Gamble, an ardent McCann SUPPORTER about the 'threat' to BL's life.

Did Ex Cop Gamble 'inform' the police, (because, he too, also KNEW about the threats)

If not, WHY not?

Ergo, imo, the police DID 'know' (about the 'tweets' to BL)

WHAT did THEY (police) actually DO, (action?) after being informed, by an Ex Cop, about the THREATS to BL's LIFE?

What exactly did Sky New's 'head' of news 'gathering', JL, actually 'witness'? (NAMED as a 'witness' by Coroner, i believe)

Is Martin Brunt, still a 'kunt'? winkwink

(Rhetorical)

by Liz Eagles 19.12.14 11:02

I sincerely hope among many, many questions, the Coroner will ask Sky News why exactly they chose Brenda Leyland from a 'secret dossier' and why in God's name they thought it newsworthy (i.e. in the public interest) to show her face and Martin Brunt's door-stepping of her every fifteen minutes for an entire day.

by Woofer 19.12.14 11:03

PeterMac wrote:
Mo wrote:Does anybody know if the actual film of Martin Brunt doorstepping Brenda will be shown in the Coroners Court? I think many of the questions being asked would be answered if they did.
Thanks
Mo
I doubt it wil be shown, but HM Coroner has seen it, and may simply inform the court of that fact.

Thank goodness she has seen it.

I hope she`s also had sight of, not only Brenda`s harmless tweets, but also the sick, threatening tweets sent to her. And I hope she has also been advised who compiled the dossier.

by Snifferdog 19.12.14 11:10

aquila wrote:I sincerely hope among many, many questions, the Coroner will ask Sky News why exactly they chose Brenda Leyland from a 'secret dossier' and why in God's name they thought it newsworthy (i.e. in the public interest) to show her face and Martin Brunt's door-stepping of her every fifteen minutes for an entire day.

....which tells me All is Not as it Seems.

by jeanmonroe 19.12.14 11:26

Just 'thinking'

COULD DCI Redwood AND BHH be 'dragged' (kicking and screaming) into the 'inquest'?

THEY both 'KNEW' about the 'dossier', (earliest 9th September, 2014, i believe, (23 DAYS BEFORE BL's 'exposure')) didn't they?

'It' was 'sent' to OG officers, BY McCann 'family members' wasn't it? (BHH)

Who 'passed it on' to Leicester Police, apparently (BHH).

As Sky New's 'report' was about the 'dossier' can the coroner ask, who also 'knew' about the 'dossier'?

PRIOR to 'broadcast'

Martin Brunt's 'ascertion' that police 'ARE' investigating her. (but, apparently the police were NOT 'investigating' BL, because she had not, broken the law, ANY law, she was just stating her 'opinions' about what she thought was an 'injustice' for a 3 years old 'missing' child)

Bottom line,,,,,,,'could' OG team 'members' and BHH be called to inquest, by coroner, and 'asked' what THEY 'knew', about the 'dossier'?

by **PeterMac** 19.12.14 11:53

Have emailed Sky with some questions.
I do not expect an acknowledgement, let alone an answer !

by jeanmonroe 19.12.14 15:21

Did Martin Brunt, Sky News, jeopardise, diliberately and consciously, a possibly 'live' ongoing police 'investigation' by 'interfering' with a possible police 'suspect/witness'?

Who had NOT broken any UK laws!

Martin Brunt told BL 'the police are investigating'

If, IF, Brunt, Sky News, has 'interfered' in a live police 'investigation' that's tantamount to 'perverting the course of justice' or 'misconduct in public place'

Did Brunt 'threatened' BL, behind her closed door?

And would we 'believe' him if he said he 'didn't'?

If, IF, indeed there was a 'live' investigation' going on, into BL's 'behaviour', then it IS Brunt, and Sky News, that has broken the law!

And both, imo, should be 'charged' with '~~nobbling~~ /interfering" with a future possible police suspect/witness'!

YES? NO?

by ultimaThule 19.12.14 15:45

An interesting concept, JeanM.

We have it on ~~film~~ Brunt's authority that the police were investigating the content of Ms Leyland's tweets in relation to the McCanns and, as far as I'm aware, the remit of a crime reporter does not include confronting police suspects as it may cause an innocent party to become the subject of a media frenzy and expose them to reputational damage of the type experienced by Mr Christopher Jefferies who was the wholly innocent landlord of a murder victim.

Whatever possessed Brunt to act as he did? And whatever possessed Sky News to broadcast his report without affording Ms Leyland the same consideration they afforded Ms Fat Ankles?

by **PeterMac** 19.12.14 16:21

The ankles are "Well within the bounds of normal ankles" said a spokesman

by jeanmonroe 19.12.14 16:29

Whatever possessed Brunt to act as he did?
----------------------------------

He had an ~~interest~~ % (to ~~protect~~) of a certain 'book' he 'plugged' relentessly on Sky News?

Possibly thought 'that % will come in handy' towards the 'ol pension pot.

Brunt spent a long time, 'Looking for McCann 'trolls'" but very, very, little time actually 'Looking for Madeleine' winkwink

See what i did there? winkwink

by Joss 19.12.14 16:34

I would hope there are some laws in place to protect someone like Brenda, to be able to keep her private details private and not for public consumption for those that wish to do harm to another. If there are such laws in place and someone like Brunt & Sky news have breached those laws then they should by rights have incurred whatever the due penalty is for that. No criminal offence has been established yet, but is that what the Coroner said could change after the inquest hearing? Once all the circumstances at the inquest have been established into Brenda's death, can family then take the case further to perhaps criminal charges if the law has been broken, and as a consequence their family member died as a result of the harrassment?

by ultimaThule 19.12.14 16:38

PeterMac wrote:The ankles are "Well within the bounds of normal ankles" said a spokesman

Should the ~~family source~~ spokesman take a tape measure to parts above the ankle, I suspect they will be found to fall well outside the bounds of what is considered to be normal or, indeed, healthy, PeterM.

by ultimaThule 19.12.14 16:42

jeanmonroe wrote:Whatever possessed Brunt to act as he did?
----------------------------------

He had an ~~interest~~ % (to ~~protect~~) of a certain 'book' he 'plugged' relentessly on Sky News?

Possibly thought 'that % will come in handy' towards the 'ol pension pot.

Brunt spent a long time, 'Looking for McCann 'trolls'" but very, very, little time actually 'Looking for Madeleine'

See what i did there?

It occurs to me that Brunty's getting a bit long in the tooth for the active life of a roving crime reporter, jeanm. What d'ya reckon.. early retirement or a desk job ~~where he can do no more harm~~ in head office? winkwink

by jeanmonroe 19.12.14 16:55

The ONLY question, imo, the coroner should be asking is:

"Would, could, it reasonably, be assumed, that BL, who had not broken any UK law, be 'here' today, if, MB and Sky News, had NOT broadcast her 'image and place of abode and twitter 'user' name' thus subjecting her to life threatening, threats, from so called McCann 'supporters' and 'implying', to her, that she had, broken UK law, which she hadn't, and the police were investigating"?

by tiny 19.12.14 17:02

I put this on the twitter page,but I think it should go here,i am absolutely disgusted.

Let's Not Forget Brenda - Page 14 B5OR8k1IAAAQ-m6

by jeanmonroe 19.12.14 17:07

ultimaThule wrote: Whatever possessed Brunt to act as he did?
---------------------------------

It occurs to me that Brunty's getting a bit long in the tooth for the active life of a roving crime reporter, jeanm. What d'ya reckon.. early retirement or a desk job ~~where he can do no more harm~~ in head office?

Dosen't matter where he goes, or what he does, you can forget any 'good stuff' he did.

HE WILL ONLY EVER BE 'REMEMBERED' FOR HARRASSING, DOORSTEPPING, A FEMALE PENSIONER, AND BY HIS ACTION, 'SUBJECTING' HER TO 'DEATH THREATS', FROM MCCANN 'SUPPORTERS' WHICH COULD, COULD, HAVE BEEN A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTATING 'FACTOR' LEADING TO HER TAKING HER OWN LIFE.

HE MUST FEEL SOOO 'PROUD' OF HIS 'ACTIONS' AGAINST A FEMALE PENSIONER!

CAN'T SEEM TO 'REMEMBER' HIS 'DOORSTEPPING' OF THE SPEAKERS WIFE, SB, WHEN SHE SENT 'VILE' TWEETS, AND 'ACCUSATIONS', ABOUT LORD Mc!

SHE MIGHT HAVE SENT HER 'PADDY' AROUND TO BRUNT TO ERM, HAVE A 'CHAT'!

ACTUALLY, THAT PROBABLY EXPLAINS WHY HE NEVER 'DOORSTEPPED' SB!

'DOORSTEPPING' A VULNERABLE FEMALE PENSIONER............TICK.

'DOORSTEPPING' A HEALTHY, BARE KNUCKLE FIGHTING, 6' 3" 'BLOKE'......................NO CHANCE!

by ultimaThule 19.12.14 17:19

It's my understanding that Brenda Leyland was subjected to a concerted twitter attack by McCann supporters which may have begun in February of this year, jeanm, and I am curious to know whether this will be a subject of remark at the inquest into her premature death.

@tiny Can you provide a link to that truly disgusting tweet?

by Joss 19.12.14 17:19

tiny wrote:I put this on the twitter page,but I think it should go here,i am absolutely disgusted.

People projecting their hatred onto others and showing themselves up for what they really are. Makes me wonder what they must be like in real life.

by j.rob 19.12.14 17:23

ultimaThule wrote:It's my understanding that Brenda Leyland was subjected to a concerted twitter attack by McCann supporters which may have begun in February of this year, jeanm, and I am curious to know whether this will be a subject of remark at the inquest into her premature death.

@tiny Can you provide a link to that truly disgusting tweet?

Definitely. You accuse your critics of the very thing that you yourself are doing. It's a surprisingly effective device. Especially if used on people who would never do such a thing.

by tiny 19.12.14 17:31

ultimaThule wrote:It's my understanding that Brenda Leyland was subjected to a concerted twitter attack by McCann supporters which may have begun in February of this year, jeanm, and I am curious to know whether this will be a subject of remark at the inquest into her premature death.

@tiny Can you provide a link to that truly disgusting tweet?

Dr Didit on twitter

by jeanmonroe 19.12.14 17:33

tiny wrote:I put this on the twitter page,but I think it should go here,i am absolutely disgusted.

I fully EXPECT Brunt and Sky News to 'track' down and 'doorstep' this 'troll' and 'expose' him/her for what they are doing, to BL's remaining family members.

And then,.......... i WOKE up!