Trolls on the attack......

Poe wrote:I'd be interested to know how Martin Brunt got Sweepyface's personal details too.

According to this news article from 2012 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/9318937/Facebook-to-release-trolls-IP-addresses.html, Facebook say that all demands for personal information must be backed up with a court order.

A concerned member of the public would be laughed out of court if they tried to get an order for Sweepyface's details. If the police obtained the information, the Data Protection Act mean that they cannot legally give out that personal data.

So who tipped off Brunty?

The most simplest, most logical explanation in my opinion, is that the whole thing is a set-up and Sweepyface is part of Team McCann.

@Andrew & Clay - the Barmaid kicked the ghosts out because they don't serve spirits  

Or Sweepyface was careless and left clues dotted around Facebook or Twitter as to her real identity. I've seen trolls contacting people's places of employment, families, churches and goodness knows what else. They pick up tiny details and then sniff around, stalking and searching until they get the information they want. They probably put that in the "dossier" that Sky got hold of and Brunty just followed it up. I don't think he has the brains to attempt anything more complex, quite frankly.

Here's a history of Sweepyface's tweets on Twitter up until the end of September:

http://greptweet.com/u/sweepyface/sweepyface.txt

Interesting reading.

I haven't read through them all but if she made any abusive tweets they should be there for anyone to verify.

It seems Martin Brunt was following her and she challenged him on September 29:

Just noticed @skymartinbrunt is following me, why Martin won't you investigate some of these facts and show neutrality ?

Interesting ...

Has been a crazy week....

Châtelaine wrote:Interesting ...

hmm interesting and suspicious at the same time..

So he only started following her on Monday and "outed" her as a troll on Thursday: hmm don't know if I smell a Rat or not.

To be fair, you don't need to follow anyone on twitter to read their tweets (unless they're protected behind a lock, and hers weren't).

He could have been reading her tweets for as long as she's been on Twitter. I'm curious as to why he decided to follow her. Because when you follow someone, it's the same thing as announcing, "Hello! I'm here! And I'm reading what you have to say!"

So it was Martin Brunt who drew attention to himself by following her. What happened after that? Did she follow him back? Did they have private correspondence?

Did they have private correspondence?

that's what i am wondering and if they did surly it not over the last couple of days.

It's as well to remember that the tactics of frightening off those who comment on the McCanns  do not target the the organised pro lobby - came across this article from Steel Magnolias quoted in turn on :

http://marieluzcorezmurdervictimofthemccanns.blogspot.com.es/2012/05/mccann-latest-victim-antonio-castela.html

3/5/2012

Correio da Manha

G. Amaral: Ameaçado de morte
Gonçalo Amaral recusou-se ontem a fornecer a sua actual morada à juíza do Tribunal de Faro, alegando ter “recebido ameaças de morte”. O ex-inspector da PJ foi ouvido no julgamento de Aragão Correia e António Dores, acusados de difamação.

G. Amaral: Threatened with Death
Gonçalo Amaral yesterday refused to provide his current address to the Judge of the Court of Faro, claiming to have "received death threats." Former PJ inspector was heard at the trial of Aragao Correa and Antonio Dores, accused of defamation.

For those who do not know, the McCanns are heavily involved with Aragao Correa ,they use him to discredit Gonçalo Amaral...
And if I may draw your attention to a very serious comment left on the MMF by a blogger.

Quote

It's not Internet nutters that Dr Amaral should be worrying about. Internet nutters are people who hide behind a pseudonym and hurl abuse at those who dare to express a different opinion. Such nutters are basically cowards - if they could kill by right-clicking the mouse, no doubt they would, but to actually come out into the real world and physically kill someone - IMO highly unlikely.

What is more likely is that there is an organization behind most of the Internet nutters in the pro parents camp. IMO the purpose of such an organization is what is commonly referred to as reputation management. There are grounds to assume that the majority of the nutters in the pro parents camp probably work for one or more reputation management organizations.
This also explains the many "Road to Damascus" moments of erstwhile prominent antis. Such persons, or perhaps they aren't real persons at all but personas, were initially planted in the (for want of a better word) anti camp. Their purpose was to foment critical discussion and record important information in order to identify trends, so that strategies could be developed by reputation management to combat them.

IMO the 3As could have been established under the auspices of such a reputation management organization in order to concentrate the anti activity in one place - anti activity which was difficult to control on the Mirror website and being on the website of a national daily newspaper, too accessible to too many people. Thus getting the Mirror site closed down and concentrating activities in one place, made it easy to monitor what was going on and keep it under control.

[...]

But it's not the reputation management people that Dr. Amaral should fear either; imo it's whoever is employing their services. The longer this goes on and the closer he gets to revealing the truth, the greater the danger he faces. To date they have tried everything to silence him and if one looks at the lengths to which they have already gone to discredit him and break his resolve, it is clear that he is up against some extremely powerful forces indeed. Only a fool would discount the possibility that eliminating Dr Amaral is the final option if all else fails, especially as all else is starting to look close to failing.

Unquote

Considering that KMC told the judge a few months ago that TM runs a media monitoring unit, that the very first  lawyers which flew out to help were experts in reputation management.

Tigger wrote:
Considering that KMC told the judge a few months ago that TM runs a media monitoring unit, that the very first  lawyers which flew out to help were experts in reputation management.

Weren't the very first lawyers that flew out someone (unnamed) from the Intl Family law Group and a barrister(also Unnamed). The experts in reputation management came shortly afterwards I think?

Just seen your tweet Cristobell on the Mccann hashtag wotsit.

Cristobell Author ‏@RosalindaHu now7 minutes ago
@IWILLNOTGOAWAY @princessfudge @xklamation They have whooshed filth from Exposing the Myths, all our names etc. R they in a panic? #mccann

Are the paid shills deleting everything then?

Deleting evidence against themselves so only one side looks to have committed any crime? The 'antis' are indeed foul and unhinged predators, and the McCann supporters respectable and wholesome members of society?

Dee Coy wrote:Deleting evidence against themselves so only one side looks to have committed any crime? The 'antis' are indeed foul and unhinged predators,  and the McCann supporters respectable and wholesome members of society?

Yes, I imagine that's the plan, but lets face it, they'll only be able to keep the "respectable" face on for about 2 days (and I'm being generous there) until they start again, so it wouldn't take too long to get enough evidence of their wrongdoing

Antonia wrote:

Tigger wrote:
Considering that KMC told the judge a few months ago that TM runs a media monitoring unit, that the very first  lawyers which flew out to help were experts in reputation management.

Weren't the very first lawyers that flew out someone (unnamed) from the Intl Family law Group and a barrister(also Unnamed). The experts in reputation management came shortly afterwards I think?

Check out Woolfall's CV - Bell Pottinger were the first, the family lawyers came later and helped set up the Fund, which was entirely THEIR idea. Yeah, right...

Tigger, Bell Pottinger are not lawyers - they are PR people/global reputation management experts. They were indeed the first lot of experts to arrive to support the McCanns, just checked this in my bible (Kate's book). The IFLG were the first lawyers to arrive to help the McCanns and have never understood the relevance of them as they deal in child abduction by Family members.

Poppy wrote:So he only started following her on Monday and "outed" her as a troll on Thursday: hmm don't know if I smell a Rat or not.

Towards the end of her Twitter timeline sweepyface became convinced that @basilandmanuel was Amy Tierney.

She was referring to @basilandmanuel as 'Amy', and suggesting any tweeting done by Amy Tierney as a witness to the case should have serious consequences.

Whether this has any relevance I have no idea, but it is the only indication of anything like intimidation I can find.

http://www.anorak.co.uk/407861/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-brenda-leyland-is-monstered-by-trolls.html/

Good article/blog.

Antonia wrote:Tigger, Bell Pottinger are not lawyers - they are PR people/global reputation management experts. They were indeed the first lot of experts to arrive to support the McCanns, just checked this in my bible (Kate's book). The IFLG were the first lawyers to arrive to help the McCanns and have never understood the relevance of them as they deal in child abduction by Family members.

They do, or certainly did, have an in-house lawyer.

Dee Coy wrote:

Poppy wrote:So he only started following her on Monday and "outed" her as a troll on Thursday: hmm don't know if I smell a Rat or not.

Towards the end of her Twitter timeline sweepyface became convinced that @basilandmanuel was Amy Tierney.

She was referring to @basilandmanuel as 'Amy', and suggesting any tweeting done by Amy Tierney as a witness to the case should have serious consequences.

Whether this has any relevance I have no idea, but it is the only indication of anything like intimidation I can find.

A number of people believe that. I don't know because I blocked it some time ago after it started ferreting about trying to get my real details. I would not be surprised if it was true though. If it is then she would be in serious trouble. A material witness interfering with an active police investigation.

Picked up a copy of the Sun earlier. Lorraine Kelly having her say on the troll stuff. Cant stand that woman.

Here's HiDeHo's latest video which somehow I don't think Lorraine Kelly will bother watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73Qrqj87gv4

I can recommend. Very much to the point, even [or especially?] for the uninitiated.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/communications_sent_via_social_media/

CPS Prosecution Guidelines for the Malicious Communications Act with reference to Twitter.

I'm no lawyer, but given these guidelines I'd be surprised if anyone was charged - unless of course some of the material we don't know about is highly offensive.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-internet-trolls-devoid-4379575#ixzz3FCy39EAy

Remove all objects which won't take well to being kicked before reading this article.