Investigation into McCann internet trolls launched by police Part 2

Johanna @UnterdenTeppich
Libel lawyers for the #McCann s committing libel for their clients? Preempting a formal inquest? http://www.carter-ruck.com/Blog/?p=714 #Scum

Jayelles » Sat Dec 13, 2014 10:32 am
The anti Mccann gang are claiming that Sweepyface was "baited" into making her "miserable lives" tweet by shameful McCann supporters.

Proof of this baiting is being circulated on Twitter. The "proof" is a tweet linking to a thread on the J4 forum called "How long must the McCanns suffer?" That is all - a link to this discussion thread as one might link to a news article. Sweepy chose to reply although it wasn't a question as such and it wasn't directed at her or anyone else in particular, yet it is being described as "baiting" and implied that somehow, her nasty response is the fault of the McCann supporters!

The same antis are complaining that her tweets were taken out of context. They must think that having the above "context" makes her comments seem less nasty. What about the context of the "You give them a break Humpty, I'm not willing" tweet (may not be an exact quote, but very close)? What had Humpty said to illicit that response? The only tweet which Humpty made which fits the timing and general sense of this tweet is the one where he advocates giving the McCanns a break over Christmas/think of the children.

Does context lessen or worsen the tweet? Was Humpty guilty of baiting too?

Ironically, the anti who is bleating about baiting is the same woman who repeatedly and erroneously "outs" McCann supporters. She wrongly fed Sweepyface and others the idea that one of the young Ocean Club nannies was tweeting about the case. As a result, this young nanny was quite hideously trolled by Sweepyface, Isabelle Mcadden and a very creepy individual called Jason who actually threatened the young nanny. Mcfadden tweeted a faked image of a tweet supposedly made by person they claimed was the young nanny saying that she liked to have s.e.x with strangers. This led to Sweepy making some disgusting remarks about her and Jason threatened her. McFadden then tweeted the nanny's work address and contact details and Sweepy laughed at the thought of her being "bloody scared" about this.

However, the threats and vile comments weren't tweeted to the McCann supporter the above woman falsely claimed was the nanny, but to the girl herself. Within hours, the young nanny deleted her Twitter account - a fact Sweepy commented upon.

So who baited Sweepy on this occasion? Was it mcFadden for posting the faked tweet and personal details? Was it Syn0nymph for assuring everyone she was correct about the McCann supporter being the young Ocean Club nanny when she most certainly was not? Was it Jason for posting the threats? Was it Dodgy for stirring it all up and posting photos of the young nanny? Was it the young nanny's fault for just existing?

They claim they are being unfairly vilified for "just asking questions" or for "just having an opinion". Wrong, they are vilified because of activities like the above which are sadly typical.

Actually, that young nanny would have had a case for libel as well as Malicious Comms and Harassment because they were not only abusing her appearance and reputation, they were questioning her fitness to do her job. Their photoshopping and false slurs had the potentional to cause her problems at work.

Another one involved in that was Liz Martin. She also questioned the nanny's fitness for her position - based upon utter lies and fabrication.

I wonder if the nanny reported it to police?

438717225886056448|Wed Feb 26 16:48:32 +0000 2014|#mccann I have just e-mailed Pinky Mitchell, I await some response !

===

447015143881596928|Fri Mar 21 14:21:30 +0000 2014|#mccann Sent my own coruscating e-mail to Cameron, will not post link as my private details are on it and we know what the Shills are like

===

406152389209509888|Thu Nov 28 20:07:30 +0000 2013|@GILLYSPOT Yep, well I spoke to SY about this mornings claims, but someone is claiming mate@ maidstone in order 2 harass another tweeter.

===

406029122406580224|Thu Nov 28 11:57:41 +0000 2013|#mccann I INVITE YOU TO CONTACT BOTH CW AND SY AS I DID AND CHECK FOR YOUR SELF GO AHEAD DONT DELAY DO IT NOW

====

405988858979815424|Thu Nov 28 09:17:41 +0000 2013|#mccann RING, EMAIL, WRITE TO MET POLICE UNTIL THEY KNOW THE ANGER, ALSO DO SAME WITH PJ SUPPORTING THEM.LETS SHOUT OUT
405988384297852928|Thu Nov 28 09:15:48 +0000 2013|#mccann PERHAPS EVERYONE SHOULD AVAIL THEMSELVES OF THE TEL NO AIRED 2NIGHT ON CW.,FLOOD LINE, MAKE FEELINGS KNOWN.

Inez Shoota! ‏@CaroleShooter 1 hr1 hour ago
I think Brunt considered a lot of things before stalking Brenda. Nice neighbourhood no risk to self. #mccann

Princess Princess ‏@Princessmc2014 2h2 hours ago
@SUEBELL41012537 @martin_liz Martin Brunt has blood on his hands Trolls on #mccann Have blood on their hands #skynews GUITY #FACT

Idiot hounder:

I was thinking if any of Brenda's family have their own lawyer present at the Inquest, could they garner their own evidence, re- laws of evidence to be observed in cases of potential criminality? And i think we also read early in the case that Brenda's son is studying to be a lawyer in the U.S., and if that is the case he would know what his options are to take things further if there is culpability for his mother's death because of the stalking, harrassing and death threats made towards her.

514830125050105856|Wed Sep 24 17:34:01 +0000 2014|@AdirenM @kiki_barnes @vivienmiss @Randomleigh1 If you should see her around PDL, please give her a slap from me

------

515242647058120704|Thu Sep 25 20:53:14 +0000 2014|@umweltbuerger @siamesey #mccann Some one said, made me laugh, wish Shills would do a Jonestown

516339051591643137|Sun Sep 28 21:29:57 +0000 2014|@RothleyPillow @PORTUGALONLINE #mccann I sometimes send their most outrageous ones direct to CM & Brunt