Lying in the Sun

Brunt Bit by Bit Part 7

Brunt Bit by Bit Part 7


       
                               ...His shockingly irresponsible special report




Brunt:

In the past Kate and G McCann have refused to comment on the online abuse they suffer because they didn’t want to fuel it.  They have long been aware of their critics in the UK, Portugal and beyond.

But there is evidence that some of their attackers are much nearer to their home in Rothley in Leicestershire.

The dossier includes Twitter postings that suggest some people have been physically close to the couple.  Tweets allege sightings of them at their local gym, at the post office and a clothes shop.  One tweeter wrote he was trying to find Kate McCann.



Brunt tells us the McCanns have been long aware of their critics.  He then goes on to speak of their attackers having been physically close to them.


There is a world of difference between persons who are critical of them - AS Brunt himself has been in the past which I highlighted in
Brunt Bit by Bit Part 6 - and attackers.


Brunt made it perfectly clear that Gerry Mccann had been less than truthful when he described the distance between the tapas bar and the vacation apartment.


Does that make Brunt an attacker?


Indeed it does not!


It makes Brunt the same as most a person who recognises the lies the inconsistencies, the deceit this case is riddled.


Does it make him a critic of the parents ? Absolutely!
Critical of the parents not fully co-operating with police authorities? Absolutely! Critical of how the monies in the Fund have been spent?  Absolutely!

And critical of so very much more to boot!


Does it make Brunt and those he refers to as McCann critics,
attackers?

ABSOLUTELY NOT!


The comments by these so called attackers as Brunt describes them above,in the comments he has used for his special report, they are not attacking Kate McCann.


Perhaps Martin Brunt is privy to these persons having attacked the McCanns in other twit/tweet comments which he has not used,but how likely would that be that there would be any real evidence of these person attacking the McCanns that he did not use?

I will stand corrected if Brunt can produce any such twit comments!


In the ones he used for his report this part of his report they have not attacked the McCanns!


As in the other comments he used in his special report he has blanked out their 'handle' as he refers to their Twitter name.


Interestingly in this batch he does however leave the name Kev in the content.


The games being played here by Brunt are quite outrageous.  Don't think for a moment that Brunt's special report blanked out the names of all others except Brenda Leyland and left the name Kev in the content section by accident.  No Siree!


Is Kev being lined up as their next target?


Absolutely if there is ANY threat AGAINST ANY PERSON on Twitter, Facebook or whatever it is a matter for the POLICE absolutely NOT for Martin Brunt, Sky, and a bunch of vigilantes who no one knows if they themselves are decent sorts or simply trouble makers.


Here below are the twit comments posted which Brunt showed in his special report.


Oh and prepare to shake in your boots folks so scary they are!  Brunt is needing the rest I think!


If people don't like what they see on twitter or read about themselves - stay off would be my advice, or toughen up.  


1st Tweet/Twit

Saw KM at the gym today gave her a look of utter disgust managed to hold my tongue though.


2nd

Kev you are so good being able to hold your tongue I usually can in most cases but not so sure with her.


3rd

You're better than me kev, I couldn't hold my tongue.


4th


Kev where was that


5th

I was in the post office earlier, she was (?) in there saw her go in Peacocks then she vanished went looking.

-------


Oh lordy, lordy Brunty -  Kate McCann writes worse than that and spouts worse than that.


Can you imagine if she saw Dr Amaral in the post office?  Would she have been able to hold her tongue?

I rather think not!


Would that look of disgust which was mentioned wonder how it compares to those Kate McCann pulled on the Court steps in Lisbon on her last visit at the mere mention of Dr Amaral?


Could this twitter person have pulled off one better?


I think NOT!  One would have to put a lot of practice in to beat some of the faces Kate McCann has pulled!


Well Brunt has shocked me to the core.


Some person was at the gym at the same time as Kate McCann!  Oh boy that must be stamped out with immediate effect. In fact send all who do to the chair!


The UK cannot allow that, someone in the gym at the same time as Kate McCann and pulling faces.  It might turn into one of those face pulling contests. 


The person did not say anything to Kate McCann.  A look of disgust though was the order of the day!


Are the public not to look at Kate and Gerry McCann now keep their eyes downcast when in their midst.  Can hardly write that for laughing.


My old mother used to say that a cat can look at the queen.

How right she was...


And until the law tells us differently I take it the UK public can look at Kate McCann when they are going about their lives in the town they live?  That they can be present in the gym, in the post office, in Peacocks the clothes shop, at one and the same time as Kate McCann?  That they can step outside after her if they want a second look?


I really cannot take Brunt seriously on this count. Gamble, McCanns Mitchell the Dossier Dame are all up to their necks in this affair including the odious pair that are Summers and Swan...and I'm getting to them!


Now the McCanns are known around the world.

If any of you spotted them in a department store, in your home town which may be their home town also, would you not take a second look?

(perhaps not, you may though run for the hills or grab a sick bucket, who knows each to their own)


If you spotted them just as they were leaving a store perhaps - would you not go after them to see if it was in fact them who you saw?


Would you do this so as to threaten them?


I very much doubt that.


There may be the odd nutter out there and not necessarily anyone who is on Twitter who may want to threaten them or others but I really don't think Rothely is  under attack!


This person who saw Kate McCann, sounds to me that this person lives in the same town.  Is that not allowed either?


For Brunt to say that there are twitter comments that
suggest some people have been physically close to the McCanns is one of the most comical things I have heard.


Of course there are!  How can there not be?  Are these people to stay indoors when the McCanns are not.


So very funny!


But what is NOT funny is that Brunt also said that there is evidence that some of the McCann attackers are closer to their home (the McCanns home) all said in the same breath as when speaking of this person who happened to spot Kate McCann in the post office in the gym in Peacocks or wherever.


Is Brunt suggesting that this person who quite obviously lives in Rothley or close by is an attacker?


No wonder Brunt blanked out the names of those he is accusing - I think he and Sky anticipated a spot of trouble if they printed them.


Brunt/Sky and the others in this mucky matter sailing close to the wind?


Now if Brunt has evidence hard evidence that any of these persons has threatened the McCanns, attacked them as he has stated in this section of his report with regards this person Kev and those others whose names for some reason or other he chose to blank out, he would do better to speak with police rather than play silly buggers with these games.


If Brunt truly thought these people had attacked the McCanns (as they most certainly have not done so in the above tweets) then Brunt had better speak with the police, and not busy himself putting together the nonsense which he has.


If those comments above are his evidence of 'attack' then he better get back to the drawing board.


They are but a conversation.  There is no hint of attack.


Brunt tried to sensationalise this by saying that one twitter person was trying to find Kate McCann.


As we can see from the tweet comment, the person said they had seen her then she disappeared - 'went looking.'


This person did not say they had set out on that day to find Kate McCann and threaten her in any way as Brunt is insinuating.


This person in fact said s/he had held their tongue when they had seen her earlier, made no comment whatsoever but had pulled a face.


I ask again How in heaven's name did someone like Martin Brunt a guy once respected get mixed up in what is the murky world now associated with McCann?


We can see from the articles he wrote in the earlier days of this case that they were far more balanced, not a lot of stuff and nonsense.



l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com
2nd November 2014

Website Builder