The case of Madeleine McCann

[nugnug]

well untill we see her tweets we dont know she did anything wrong.

i dont exept the word of sky news as proof of guilt.

[nugnug]

ive just had a read of some of her tweets she doesnt seem like a troll to me.

http://t.co/2eJJvkxkt5

[Patti]

ive just had a read of some of her tweets she doesnt seem like a troll to me.

http://t.co/2eJJvkxkt5

LOL....Nugs you have posted every tweet #Mccann

I can't find one of her tweets...I did notice someone posing as MWT though.

[nugnug]

the tweets are there ill try to find a better link.

[nugnug]

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2014/10/06/how-do-tabloid-newspaper-hacks-manage-to-trace-private-home-addresses-of-twitter-users/

[Patti]

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2014/10/06/how-do-tabloid-newspaper-hacks-manage-to-trace-private-home-addresses-of-twitter-users/

All he needed to do really was to get her to email him and hey presto they have the IP address.  I don't think its illegal to do that, but this sort of method is rife and quite easy to do, unless the sender is using a proxy, but even if they use one of those it has to pass through a host. Once the host has been identified then the senders details are unique to them.  Its like an internet fingerprint.

Nugs I don't agree with journalists using this method and exposing people. Its an invasion of privacy. If one has to research people for using vile attacks on people; in my opinion once they have gained that information it should be given to the correct authorities for them to deal with.  Journalist overstep the mark sometimes.

Her untimely death has sparked a major row on such methods used by journalists and rightly so. But, lets not forget the vile tweets this lady is supposed to have tweeted in the first place.   

[nugnug]

i see know evedence that she was troll just acused of being one ive seen a few of the actull trolls and there carrying on as normal,

i see no evedence she said the things aributed to her other than the rather dubious word of marten brunt.

the police hadent qustioned her.

funny he cliams to have been invited in her house but theres no recording of what was said.

[guest154]

But, lets not forget the vile tweets this lady is supposed to have tweeted in the first place.   

I think you need to research her posts more, Patti. She didn't tweet the death threats did she? I think she is being grouped with some of the nastier comments that have been posted.

What I will say, Patti. Is this - is there much of a difference between her beliefs and the beliefs of some of the members on here? Bare with me.

Brenda Leyland had different beliefs about what happened to Maddie.
Brenda Leyland didn't believe the story from the relatives, she thought they had lied and covered up - she posted her thoughts on the internet.

How is that any different to say you or Lookout? If you don't believe that Bamber is guilty, then the Bamber relatives must have stitched up him with their findings & with the silencer. If you don't believe Bamber is guilty then the police must have stitched him up. So it's posted online that the Bamber relatives are liars, they are greedy - you don't believe the official case.

Now I know that you personally try to keep your posts as unpersonal as you can do when it comes to the Eatons and the Boutflours and even Julie Mugford, but i'm sure you have to agree that believing Bamber is innocent has to go hand in hand with saying people have lied to put him in prison and to keep him in prison.

What about the people that posts June is guilty of the murders? Or that the blood in the silencer was planted? That Julie told lies?

To the outside world aren't those type of comments in the same vain as Brenda Leyland's beliefs and posts?

To the Bamber relatives aren't some members here just as guilty as Brenda Leyland?

[nugnug]

i watched most of the nasty weird tweeters and i never came across her.

i dont think her views were that diffrent to mikes.

[Patti]

I think you need to research her posts more, Patti. She didn't tweet the death threats did she? I think she is being grouped with some of the nastier comments that have been posted.

What I will say, Patti. Is this - is there much of a difference between her beliefs and the beliefs of some of the members on here? Bare with me.

Brenda Leyland had different beliefs about what happened to Maddie.
Brenda Leyland didn't believe the story from the relatives, she thought they had lied and covered up - she posted her thoughts on the internet.

How is that any different to say you or Lookout? If you don't believe that Bamber is guilty, then the Bamber relatives must have stitched up him with their findings & with the silencer. If you don't believe Bamber is guilty then the police must have stitched him up. So it's posted online that the Bamber relatives are liars, they are greedy - you don't believe the official case.

Now I know that you personally try to keep your posts as unpersonal as you can do when it comes to the Eatons and the Boutflours and even Julie Mugford, but i'm sure you have to agree that believing Bamber is innocent has to go hand in hand with saying people have lied to put him in prison and to keep him in prison.

What about the people that posts June is guilty of the murders? Or that the blood in the silencer was planted? That Julie told lies?

To the outside world aren't those type of comments in the same vain as Brenda Leyland's beliefs and posts?

To the Bamber relatives aren't some members here just as guilty as Brenda Leyland?

I will get back to you Mat....Have to nip out for a while. I did say supposed to have tweeted Mat. I have not seen her tweets so maybe I should refrain from commenting about them.

I am not responsible for what anyone posts Mat. I am only responsible for what I post.

[guest154]

I will get back to you Mat....Have to nip out for a while. I did say supposed to have tweeted Mat. I have not seen her tweets so maybe I should refrain from commenting about them.

I am not responsible for what anyone posts Mat. I am only responsible for what I post.

Be brave at the dentist, Patti! 

[Patti]

I think you need to research her posts more, Patti. She didn't tweet the death threats did she? I think she is being grouped with some of the nastier comments that have been posted.

I do Mat, because I have not seen a tweet of that nature. I'm afraid I am victim to bad press and second hand information. Mountains out of mole hills and all that. I did say supposed, does this let me off the hook? I guess in way it reflects my judgement and the fact I am only human, so therefore I make mistakes. 

What I will say, Patti. Is this - is there much of a difference between her beliefs and the beliefs of some of the members on here? Bare with me.

Brenda Leyland had different beliefs about what happened to Maddie.
Brenda Leyland didn't believe the story from the relatives, she thought they had lied and covered up - she posted her thoughts on the internet. 

In my opinion Mat I have not read the full story. But, I have been on twitter and seen some of the disgusting remakes made on the family. To be honest I refrained from tweeting #Mxxxxxxxxxxxxxx because I did not want to be a part of that discussion.  Don't know about you but, debating is one thing, but it can also get out of hand like on a forum.

How is that any different to say you or Lookout? If you don't believe that Bamber is guilty, then the Bamber relatives must have stitched up him with their findings & with the silencer. If you don't believe Bamber is guilty then the police must have stitched him up. So it's posted online that the Bamber relatives are liars, they are greedy - you don't believe the official case.

I don't know why you pluck mine and Lookout's name out of the hat. Lookout says it like it is and yes sometimes Lookout can go a bit further that others do, Lookout is not as reserved as I am.  Because the Bamber case is debated on a forum its impossible not to speak about the relatives and the people that were involved at the time.  What happened will affect the rest of their lives too, especially Colin.  I see no reason to be hurtful towards them, they lost love ones too. I can only speak for myself Mat and its not my fault if other posters post nasty things about them.  I know I am a moderator, but I do not read every single post and if someone is unhappy about a post then it is up to them to contact admin or use the report button.  I could bore you daft and go on about it all night long, but again I am not responsible for what others write. I suppose in answer to your question there is no difference at all. Things are said on both red and blue forum that turn my stomach...I don't complain because, where will it get me?

Now I know that you personally try to keep your posts as unpersonal as you can do when it comes to the Eatons and the Boutflours and even Julie Mugford, but i'm sure you have to agree that believing Bamber is innocent has to go hand in hand with saying people have lied to put him in prison and to keep him in prison.

People will always have view Mat, no matter.

What about the people that posts June is guilty of the murders? Or that the blood in the silencer was planted? That Julie told lies?

To the outside world aren't those type of comments in the same vain as Brenda Leyland's beliefs and posts?

To the Bamber relatives aren't some members here just as guilty as Brenda Leyland?

I hope I covered everything...Gawd! The price of teeth these days lol

[nugnug]

sky have admited she wasnt the worst offender wich makes me wonder why the chose to single her out.

[nugnug]

not a troll at all acording to this.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/10/06/trolls_0_n_5938990.html?ncid=webmail1

[Patti]

not a troll at all acording to this.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/10/06/trolls_0_n_5938990.html?ncid=webmail1

Have they said what she died of Nugs or why she was staying in an hotel?