Brenda Leyland Inquest

Just read that Sky News showed a copy of a Charlie Hebdo cartoon...then apologized for doing so. Have they expressed regret for what Martin Brunt did to Brenda Leyland? No...I didn't think so.

Rest in peace Brenda.

interested wrote:Just read that Sky News showed a copy of a Charlie Hebdo cartoon...then apologized for doing so.  Have they expressed regret for what Martin Brunt did to Brenda Leyland?  No...I didn't think so.

Rest in peace Brenda.

why should they. they didn't do anything wrong.

I think they did Marky. They doorstepped a retired woman living alone, giving her the impression that the police were going to contact her because she had been persecuting the McCanns. They caught her on the hop. What they said was not true, and they had no business to act as vigilantes waving a bunch of papers in her face, and filming her outside her easily identifiable house. She the while was polite, and invited them in to discusss the matter. I think the whole thing was way out of line - hounding someone in this way. If she had commited a crime and the police were contacting her, that is police business not some scandal-mongering TV programme and its would-be Columbo reporter.

comperedna wrote:I think they did Marky. They doorstepped a retired woman living alone, giving her the impression that the police were going to contact her because she had been persecuting the McCanns. They caught her on the hop. What they said was not true, and they had no business to act as vigilantes waving a bunch of papers in her face, and filming her outside her easily identifiable house. She the while was polite, and invited them in to discusss the matter. I think the whole thing was way out of line - hounding someone in this way. If she had commited a crime and the police were contacting her, that is police business not some scandal-mongering TV programme and its would-be Columbo reporter.

i disagree with everything you say. look at it from a neutral and rational standpoint. most of you won't.

comperedna wrote:I think they did Marky. They doorstepped a retired woman living alone, giving her the impression that the police were going to contact her because she had been persecuting the McCanns. They caught her on the hop. What they said was not true, and they had no business to act as vigilantes waving a bunch of papers in her face, and filming her outside her easily identifiable house. She the while was polite, and invited them in to discusss the matter. I think the whole thing was way out of line - hounding someone in this way. If she had commited a crime and the police were contacting her, that is police business not some scandal-mongering TV programme and its would-be Columbo reporter.

AMEN!!!

interested wrote:

comperedna wrote:I think they did Marky. They doorstepped a retired woman living alone, giving her the impression that the police were going to contact her because she had been persecuting the McCanns. They caught her on the hop. What they said was not true, and they had no business to act as vigilantes waving a bunch of papers in her face, and filming her outside her easily identifiable house. She the while was polite, and invited them in to discusss the matter. I think the whole thing was way out of line - hounding someone in this way. If she had commited a crime and the police were contacting her, that is police business not some scandal-mongering TV programme and its would-be Columbo reporter.

AMEN!!!

thought as much.

interested wrote:

comperedna wrote:I think they did Marky. They doorstepped a retired woman living alone, giving her the impression that the police were going to contact her because she had been persecuting the McCanns. They caught her on the hop. What they said was not true, and they had no business to act as vigilantes waving a bunch of papers in her face, and filming her outside her easily identifiable house. She the while was polite, and invited them in to discusss the matter. I think the whole thing was way out of line - hounding someone in this way. If she had commited a crime and the police were contacting her, that is police business not some scandal-mongering TV programme and its would-be Columbo reporter.

AMEN!!!

Seconded!

comperedna wrote:I think they did Marky. They doorstepped a retired woman living alone, giving her the impression that the police were going to contact her because she had been persecuting the McCanns. They caught her on the hop. What they said was not true, and they had no business to act as vigilantes waving a bunch of papers in her face, and filming her outside her easily identifiable house. She the while was polite, and invited them in to discusss the matter. I think the whole thing was way out of line - hounding someone in this way. If she had commited a crime and the police were contacting her, that is police business not some scandal-mongering TV programme and its would-be Columbo reporter.

Martin Brunt said, "The Crown Prosecution Service is considering...." which obviously was intended to give the impression that there could be a prosecution. The CPS was not considering anything in relation to Brenda. Brunt lied.

AnnaEsse wrote:

comperedna wrote:I think they did Marky. They doorstepped a retired woman living alone, giving her the impression that the police were going to contact her because she had been persecuting the McCanns. They caught her on the hop. What they said was not true, and they had no business to act as vigilantes waving a bunch of papers in her face, and filming her outside her easily identifiable house. She the while was polite, and invited them in to discusss the matter. I think the whole thing was way out of line - hounding someone in this way. If she had commited a crime and the police were contacting her, that is police business not some scandal-mongering TV programme and its would-be Columbo reporter.

Martin Brunt said, "The Crown Prosecution Service is considering...." which obviously was intended to give the impression that there could be a prosecution. The CPS was not considering anything in relation to Brenda. Brunt lied.

martin brunt said. "you know you have been reported to the police, to scotland yard? they are considering a whole file of twitter accounts..."

which of course is/was true.

What about all the rest of what I said, Marky?

Marky wrote:

interested wrote:Just read that Sky News showed a copy of a Charlie Hebdo cartoon...then apologized for doing so.  Have they expressed regret for what Martin Brunt did to Brenda Leyland?  No...I didn't think so.

Rest in peace Brenda.

why should they. they didn't do anything wrong.

Marky just saying more childish rubbish for a response.

Brunt was well out of order.

Marky wrote:

interested wrote:Just read that Sky News showed a copy of a Charlie Hebdo cartoon...then apologized for doing so.  Have they expressed regret for what Martin Brunt did to Brenda Leyland?  No...I didn't think so.

Rest in peace Brenda.

why should they. they didn't do anything wrong.

They didn't do anything right either.

whatsupdoc wrote:

Marky wrote:

interested wrote:Just read that Sky News showed a copy of a Charlie Hebdo cartoon...then apologized for doing so.  Have they expressed regret for what Martin Brunt did to Brenda Leyland?  No...I didn't think so.

Rest in peace Brenda.

why should they. they didn't do anything wrong.

Marky just saying more childish rubbish for a response.

Brunt was well out of order.

stick to your carrot. yum yum.  

comperedna wrote:What about all the rest of what I said, Marky?

what about it? i've already said i don't agree with it. what more do you want?

SKY News and Martin Brunt did everything wrong that day...

frencheuropean wrote:

Marky wrote:

interested wrote:Just read that Sky News showed a copy of a Charlie Hebdo cartoon...then apologized for doing so.  Have they expressed regret for what Martin Brunt did to Brenda Leyland?  No...I didn't think so.

Rest in peace Brenda.

why should they. they didn't do anything wrong.

They didn't do anything right either.

hi frenchie, gotsta disagree. martin brunt had legitimately followed the path of the story, the catalyst being a bbc interview with gerry mccann in which he said online trolls should be investigated and charged by police. brunt discovered the extent of police inquiries and the identity of @sweepyface and acted appropriately after following guidelines laid down by sky's lawyers. now while i'll appreciate one or two may not have liked what happened but that doesn't make it wrong nor is it unusual to doorstep people in pursuit of a story. but here's the rub. if brenda leyland had been either or both of the mccanns or any of the tapas crew a few offended souls on here would be fighting in the queue to have brunt's babies.

What it boils down to is that we are all entitled to our opinions on this and any other subject.

I'm not sure if there's any point arguing further one way or the other on this one.

True enough. NBY. We move on.

This will be my last word on the subject, but I feel Marky's last comment was simply silly. Quite separately from the McCann case connection, I believe what was done by identifying and doorstepping this woman with a live TV team outside where she lived: I did not know her name at the time, was very wrong of Sky and Brunt. It is the first time I have ever written to Ofcom and I did so because I felt an injustice had been done.

NBY is correct.

Not Born Yesterday wrote:What it boils down to is that we are all entitled to our opinions on this and any other subject.

I'm not sure if there's any point arguing further one way or the other on this one.

ah yes, the war cry of the mob. insofar as your opinions break no laws, you carry on. as for any point? no, not really. the police have stated there will be no criminal charges relating to the brenda leyland incident or to put it another way, sky and martin brunt have broke no laws and did no wrong. get over it.

comperedna wrote:...but I feel Marky's last comment was simply silly.

you may think that but deep down you know i'm not wrong. fortunately for you, you'll never get the chance to prove me right.

Marky wrote:

Not Born Yesterday wrote:What it boils down to is that we are all entitled to our opinions on this and any other subject.

I'm not sure if there's any point arguing further one way or the other on this one.

ah yes, the war cry of the mob. insofar as your opinions break no laws, you carry on. as for any point? no, not really. the police have stated there will be no criminal charges relating to the brenda leyland incident or to put it another way, sky and martin brunt have broke no laws and did no wrong. get over it.

Brenda Leyland also did not break any laws yet she was unjustifiably hung, drawn and quartered by SKY News...

Judge Dread wrote:

Marky wrote:

Not Born Yesterday wrote:What it boils down to is that we are all entitled to our opinions on this and any other subject.

I'm not sure if there's any point arguing further one way or the other on this one.

ah yes, the war cry of the mob. insofar as your opinions break no laws, you carry on. as for any point? no, not really. the police have stated there will be no criminal charges relating to the brenda leyland incident or to put it another way, sky and martin brunt have broke no laws and did no wrong. get over it.

Brenda Leyland also did not break any laws yet she was unjustifiably hung, drawn and quartered by SKY News...

fortunately for you no one is likely to prove you wrong and sky were justified in pursuing the story, a story that has its origins in one gerry mccann as i have said already or didn't you read that far back?

Hey Marky,
In France we don't have the same habit of doorstepping people, and private life is more protected. There are laws about that. For us it's wrong to chase and harass ordinary people with cameras when they are not convicted or jugded. Private scandalous stories with juicy photos are very rarely seen on the front cover of national/regional newspapers. The investigation journalists rather focuse on politicians, or economic scandals because it affects citizens. And, of course they are free to caricature what is a threat for liberty, a negation of equality and an insult to intelligence. It as a cost, of course, but it's worth it.
IMO, in France the court would condemn Brunt and SKy , at least for a symbolic euro, not to have respected the private life of someone, to have lied about charges against her when none was, and to have placate the report and her face everywhere without facing the consequences.

frencheuropean wrote:Hey Marky,
In France we don't have the same habit of doorstepping people, and private life is more protected. There are laws about that. For us  it's wrong to chase and harass ordinary people with cameras when they are not convicted or jugded. Private scandalous stories with juicy photos are very rarely seen on the front cover of national/regional newspapers. The investigation journalists rather focuse on politicians, or economic scandals because it affects citizens. And, of course they are free to caricature what is a threat for liberty, a negation of equality and an insult to intelligence. It as a cost, of course, but it's worth it.
IMO, in France the court would condemn Brunt and SKy , at least for a symbolic euro, not to have respected the private life of someone, to have lied about charges against her when none was, and to have placate the report and her face everywhere without facing the consequences.

yo,
i knew you had privacy laws but not the extent to which they apply so thanks for that.