Brenda Leyland and the inquest

What do you think?  Anyone heard anything else?
https://twitter.com/B_balou/status/567817993318752256

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/medianews/article4357525.ece

Since the coroner has "demanded" that Martin Brunt reveal his source, will he face jail if he refuses? Maybe the coroner should summon Jim Gamble to explain his support of what Brunt did.

Thank you Fred.

About time Brunt did some explaining I reckon. Hopefully a whole lot may be revealed . We can but do as normal and "Hope"

well, for a start coroners don't jail people and if the coroner wants to know the source of the story, why not ask the police. after all, it was reported that the file was handed to both the police and sky news by those who compiled it.

still, i wonder how this got leaked and by who and why, assuming that it's true.

Marky wrote:well, for a start coroners don't jail people and if the coroner wants to know the source of the story, why not ask the police. after all, it was reported that the file was handed to both the police and sky news by those who compiled it.

still, i wonder how this got leaked and by who and why, assuming that it's true.

If the dossier was compiled by a number of people, Brunt may not have got his information from the same person who submitted it to the police.
The coroner wishes to know who told Brunt.

jassi wrote:

Marky wrote:well, for a start coroners don't jail people and if the coroner wants to know the source of the story, why not ask the police. after all, it was reported that the file was handed to both the police and sky news by those who compiled it.

still, i wonder how this got leaked and by who and why, assuming that it's true.

If the dossier was compiled by a number of people, Brunt may not have got his information from the same person who submitted it to the police.
The coroner wishes to know who told Brunt.

which begs the question. why does the coroner want to know.?

It may well be that the coroner already knows the name of the source and indeed the identities of others involved in the compilation and dissemination of the dossier if the investigating authorities have done their work.

But she may wish to hear it straight from the horse's mouth for the official record.
If the reply is silence, it will speak volumes to her and the wider public about the integrity of Brunt and the news outlet he works for.

To hell with the protection of sources in this instance.
A woman is dead.
And her family needs to know why.

I felt sure this would happen, the coroner would want it for the public record.

ETA: Just read elsewhere that Sky has said it will protect it's source. So I guess there will be some legal debate over this.

On J.Havern forum a poster typed the full article:


"A coroner has demanded that a Sky News reporter divulge his source for a story about a woman who was found dead after the broadcaster revealed that she had "trolled" the parents of Madeleine McCann

The demand has raised fresh concerns about the state encroaching on journalists' rights to keep their sources confidential, in the wake of revelations that police forces looked into their phone records on hundreds of occasions.

Martin Brunt, Sky's crime correspondent, is due to give evidence next month at the inquest of Brenda Leyland, 63, whose body was found in October. Mrs Leyland, of Burton Overy, Leicestershire, had been confronted days earlier as part of Mr Brunt's expose of a vitriolic online campaign against Kate and Gerry McCann. Their daughter, Madeleine, was three years old when she vanished from their holiday apartment in Portugal in 2007.

Mrs Leyland, a divorced mother of two, was said to have used the Twitter handle @sweepyface to post thousand of tweets about the McCanns, describing them as the "worst of humankind".

Leicestershire police wrote to Sky on behalf of the coroner, Catherine Mason, asking a series of questions including the identity of the person who was behind the dossier of tweets. Sky has said that it will protect its source, arguing that its rights are protected under European law. It is understood that neither the police nor the coroner have responded since. Mr Brunt and Jonathan Levy, director of news gathering operations at Sky News, are expected to be called to give evidence as witnesses on March 20.

Coroners were given extra powers to question witnesses in new rules issued 18 months ago. Gavin Millar, QC, a prominent media lawyer, said: "I don't think coroners really understand the limits of their powers in terms of trying to force journalists to reveal their sources. It's a specialist area of law and they are not media lawyers. As the investigations of coroners become more forensic and more determined, and they are given extra powers to require information from witnesses, they are going to have to start confronting these issues and acquire some learning about the rights of journalists."

Bob Satwell, executive director of the Society of Editors, said that it was "always worrying" when a journalist was asked to reveal their source because they should "obviously" remain confidential. He said that there had been a drive by the authorities to know journalistic sources, which had previously been "sacrosanct". He added: "Its (sic) almost like they think the media is a fair game, and that's a highly dangerous position."

The demand comes after the government promised to change legislation so that police must gain a judge's agreement before they can snoop on journalists.

Police admitted using the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act to obtain email and phone communications between 82 journalists and 242 sources across 34 investigations in the past three years."

Thanks frencheuropean

"He said that there had been a drive by the authorities to know journalistic sources, which had previously been "sacrosanct". He added: "Its (sic) almost like they think the media is a fair game, and that's a highly dangerous position."

They seem to forget that media hounded Brenda (fair game?) and now she is dead. Bloody hypocrites. UK media is a f***** joke.

weissnicht wrote:"He said that there had been a drive by the authorities to know journalistic sources, which had previously been "sacrosanct". He added: "Its (sic) almost like they think the media is a fair game, and that's a highly dangerous position."

They seem to forget that media hounded Brenda (fair game?) and now she is dead. Bloody hypocrites. UK media is a f***** joke.

state controlled media would be worse.

almostgothic wrote:To hell with the protection of sources in this instance.

once you open the stable door the horse will be gone forever. no one will ever again speak to the media or even the police again with information. crimes will go unpunished. cover ups and scandals undetected.

is that what you want?

oh, cheers frenchie.

Marky wrote:oh, cheers frenchie.

"Thanks frencheuropean" chrissie

____________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello Chrissie and Marky, happy to help a bit .

"Strewth mate! A pensioner died after you doorstepped her, on Sky News main news channel. Tell the coroner who gave you the dossier, you fcuking drongo!"
"Said horrible things about, not to, the McCanns because she didn't believe their cock and ball story, in her opinion, is not a crime, you fcuking galah!
"i read her tweets and have heard worse , about me, down the pub, you fcuking moron"
"If you don't comply with the coroner's request, your P45 will be waiting!"
"And if i hear you were on a percentage for plugging that crap S&S book, all day, for personal advancement, i'll fcuking sue you, myself, personally!"
"Call yourself a senior crime correspondant?"
"You're a fcuking joke!"
"And a widowed pensioner died, you prick!"
"get back to reporting on abandoned crying dogs, you fcuking dickhead!'
"Did i mention i think you are a fcuking drongo, galah, moronic, lying prick, dickhead?"

Marky wrote:

almostgothic wrote:To hell with the protection of sources in this instance.

once you open the stable door the horse will be gone forever. no one will ever again speak to the media or even the police again with information. crimes will go unpunished. cover ups and scandals undetected.

is that what you want?  

But ... but ... the stable door isn't open right now, and yet we've had almost eight years of crimes going unpunished and cover ups undetected.

If push comes to shove, I'm sure the legal process will be able to detect the difference between public-spirited, altruistic whistleblowing and the sordid, vicious outpourings of a bunch of shit-stirring gangsters.

Time to open the door of the Augean Stables, let in the light and clean up the stench and the filth.

almostgothic wrote:

Marky wrote:

almostgothic wrote:To hell with the protection of sources in this instance.

once you open the stable door the horse will be gone forever. no one will ever again speak to the media or even the police again with information. crimes will go unpunished. cover ups and scandals undetected.

is that what you want?  

But ... but ... the stable door isn't open right now, and yet we've had almost eight years of crimes going unpunished and cover ups undetected.

If push comes to shove, I'm sure the legal process will be able to detect the difference between public-spirited, altruistic whistleblowing and the sordid, vicious outpourings of a bunch of shit-stirring gangsters.

Time to open the door of the Augean Stables, let in the light and clean up the stench and the filth.

a romantic take on the situation. once you set a legal precedent that's the end of it. protection for those who wish to see a wrong put right will be gone forever. that must not be allowed to happen.

jeanmonroe wrote:"Strewth mate! A pensioner died after you doorstepped her, on Sky News main news channel. Tell the coroner who gave you the dossier, you fcuking drongo!"
"Said horrible things about, not to, the McCanns because she didn't believe their cock and ball story, in her opinion, is not a crime, you fcuking galah!
"i read her tweets and have heard worse , about me, down the pub, you fcuking moron"
"If you don't comply with the coroner's request, your P45 will be waiting!"
"And if i hear you were on a percentage for plugging that crap S&S book, all day, for personal advancement, i'll fcuking sue you, myself, personally!"
"Call yourself a senior crime correspondant?"
"You're a fcuking joke!"
"And a widowed pensioner died, you prick!"
"get back to reporting on abandoned crying dogs, you fcuking dickhead!'
"Did i mention i think you are a fcuking drongo, galah, moronic, lying prick, dickhead?"

ah, well...

weissnicht wrote:"He said that there had been a drive by the authorities to know journalistic sources, which had previously been "sacrosanct". He added: "Its (sic) almost like they think the media is a fair game, and that's a highly dangerous position."

They seem to forget that media hounded Brenda (fair game?) and now she is dead. Bloody hypocrites. UK media is a f***** joke.

Bloody hypocrites is right. In 2007 Martin Brunt reported Kate McCann was going to be charged with Madeleine's "accidental death". Seven years later he hounded to death Brenda Leyland for her comments about the McCanns.

The coroner needs to know "who" told "what" to Brunt and "when". That information about the dossier is key.

interested wrote:

weissnicht wrote:"He said that there had been a drive by the authorities to know journalistic sources, which had previously been "sacrosanct". He added: "Its (sic) almost like they think the media is a fair game, and that's a highly dangerous position."

They seem to forget that media hounded Brenda (fair game?) and now she is dead. Bloody hypocrites. UK media is a f***** joke.

The coroner needs to know "who" told "what" to Brunt and "when".  That information about the dossier is key.

why?

Marky wrote:

interested wrote:

weissnicht wrote:"He said that there had been a drive by the authorities to know journalistic sources, which had previously been "sacrosanct". He added: "Its (sic) almost like they think the media is a fair game, and that's a highly dangerous position."

They seem to forget that media hounded Brenda (fair game?) and now she is dead. Bloody hypocrites. UK media is a f***** joke.

The coroner needs to know "who" told "what" to Brunt and "when".  That information about the dossier is key.

why?

Because the coroner should be investigating the circumstances surrounding the death of a woman who did not believe what the UK press have been feeding the public for close to eight years.

interested wrote:

Marky wrote:

interested wrote:

weissnicht wrote:"He said that there had been a drive by the authorities to know journalistic sources, which had previously been "sacrosanct". He added: "Its (sic) almost like they think the media is a fair game, and that's a highly dangerous position."

They seem to forget that media hounded Brenda (fair game?) and now she is dead. Bloody hypocrites. UK media is a f***** joke.

The coroner needs to know "who" told "what" to Brunt and "when".  That information about the dossier is key.

why?

Because the coroner should be investigating the circumstances surrounding the death of a woman who did not believe what the UK press have been feeding the public for close to eight years.

that's not an answer, it's an opinion.

Marky:

What do YOU think the coroner should 'ask about', at BL's inquest?

"Sky News may face demand at inquest to reveal source of story about Twitter troll" ........"Leicestershire police has written to Sky News on behalf of Coroner Catherine Mason, asking a series of questions including the identity of the person who was behind the dossier of tweets."

The above is from an article dated 19 February 2015 found in "Press Gazette Journalism Today" www.pressgazette.co.uk-sky-news-may-face-demand-at-inquest-to-reveal-source-of-story-about-Twitter-troll

(Apologize, that's the best I can do with the link; hope someone can find the article.)