Lying in the Sun

Jerry Lawton Journalist?

Jerry Lawton - Journalist?

Daily Star (British newspaper)


'The paper predominantly focuses on stories largely revolving around celebrities, sport, and news and gossip about popular television programmes, such as soap operas and reality TV shows.'  

***Please note the 'bolding' in above statement is Wiki's!

I really don't want to spend much time over Jerry Lawton nor do I plan to praise him, give him credit or thank him for his piece in the Daily Star, in respect of the Fund set up for Dr Goncalo Amaral.  

Many good, kind, decent, law abiding people, from all walks of life, from various countries, chose to donate.   Many had not followed closely the case of missing Madeleine McCann.  Not all have the same thoughts, theories, beliefs as to what became of this little girl while in the care of her parents and their buddies, who left her night after night, in what they say was an unlocked, holiday apartment.

What those who donated do have in common abhorrence at the treatment of this now retired police officer at the hands of
Kate and Gerry McCann.  An overwhelming sense of injustice at how this man has been treated, an attack on the human rights of all, an attack on our freedom of expression.

Lawton states that those who donated included

When one wants to be derogatory about another, it would appear that troll is the 'in' word.   And it would seem too that 'troll' sells papers!
'sick' or 'vile' to this as an attention grabber.  

Troll is tiresome and infantile.

In the case of missing Madeleine McCann there are of course persons who behave very badly.  

Persons who support the parents, and persons who don't - In each group persons behaving equally appallingly. 

These people by nature will behave badly in all things in life attach themselves to causes which they have no interest, other than to cause disruption, division.  Twitter in particular provides them the perfect platform.

Others who have behaved extremely badly in the case of this missing child , their conduct at times, shameful, sickening at best:

  • The MSM 
  • The McCanns, 
  • Clarence Mitchell
  • Jim Gamble
  • Summers and Swan
  • Murdoch
  • Martin Brunt  

One therefore might ask why the derogatory term 'troll' is attached ONLY to those:

  • Who DO NOT believe the story of abduction as told by the McCanns.
  • Who support Dr Goncalo Amaral, freedom of expression, decency.

Seems too, that no one can define what is meant by the use of 'troll' but what those who use this ridiculous term, do know, is that to apply it to anyone with opposing views to their own, it will have the desired effect.

Jerry Lawon/Daily Star know this too.   And that is why they use it.

So very easily Lawton could have referred to the people who donated to the Fund for Dr Goncalo Amaral, simply as what they are, ordinary members of the public from far and wide, from all walks of life, good people who support a cause.  A cause which they believe in, and their right to support that cause.


Lawton, like most others in press chose to infer that those who support Dr Amaral, the right to freedom of expression, are some sort of sub culture.

Of course some are happy with his reporting and have every right to their opinion, they feel he has drawn attention to the Fund for Dr Amaral.  

But ask yourselves, did he do it in a good way?  

Quite frankly, I think not!

  • What prevented Lawton/Daily Star from simply saying that many people donated to this Fund? 
  • What prevented him from describing those who did so, as what they are, decent human beings who made a choice, which is their right, to support whatever and whomever, and in this case, to support Dr Amaral?
  • What prevented Lawton from describing those people as supporters of this cause, and not 'trolls?

Would he refer to those persons who donated,  to say for instance, the Madeleine Fund, or any other as 'sick trolls?'  

Of course he woudn't!  

So why would he think it was okay to describe others in this way?

'No such thing as bad publicity'  some say.

I have to disagree in this instance.

It was an appalling piece.

Lawson threw a little morsel out there for those good people he describes as 'trolls' sick or otherwise, and astonishingly, to me at least, most grabbed it with both hands, thanked him, praised him, hailed him as their messiah...

I truly struggle to see why that would be.  That someone pours scorn insult on others, and those said others, some of, jump up and down so happy that he has given them mention.  Thank him, tell him how grateful they are to him!

Perhaps I am missing something here.   Grateful for what exactly?

And grateful to a guy like Lawton cut from the same cloth as McCann, and all the others.

If Gerry McCann was today, have his spokesperson Clarence Mitchell mention this Fund for Dr Amaral, but in his piece, still refer to those who donated as trolls - would those labelled in this derogatory way, jump up and down, and thank Gerry McCann and Mitchell for mentioning the Fund?

I guess nothing in this case can now surprise me.

The cyclists will be taking to the road very soon.

In one of my previous blogs I stated that the reporting of this, the campaign, would have been long in the planning.

The Fund for Dr Amaral, was however something quite unexpected, something those organising the promotion of Kate McCann in this sponsored cycle could not possibly, in their wildest dreams have foreseen.   But we would be fools to believe for an instant that since its conception, that Team McCann have not been working day and night on how they would deal with this
'interruption' in their plans.  

The 8th Anniversary of Madeleine's disappearance, all carefully planned.

The disgraced Martin Brunt wheeled out to announce the police would take no action against those named in the dossier (what a relief for the McCanns, that was a huge piece of shit they needed buried and buried quickly.  Brenda Leyland died as a result of this they could not have that one hanging over them, not when Kate was about to get on her bike ) and of course, they leaked to press (before Dr Amaral's legal team had been informed)  the outcome of the trial in Lisbon.

All that remained was this cycle for Missing People.

They had it all wrapped up or so they thought...

The Fund for Dr Amaral - a spoke in the plans!   

For sure they will since have pulled out all stops as to how they are going to now deal with this, how they will now present her.   


Does anyone really think that he is now onside with those he describes as trolls?

Does anyone really believe that someone who describes them as trolls is a "buddy"

Not a doubt in my mind, that Lawson and the rest are just waiting to press the submit button on pieces already written in respect of the sponsored cycle, where 'trolls' will take a trashing...and no prizes for guessing who will be crowned Queen of Bikes!  

This is a five day event - brace yourselves!

Lawton I have to say, just another guy who fires off gossip and nonsense in the tragic case of a missing child where lies, deceit are ignored.  Where money appears at all times to be top of the agenda.

Where a little girl, Madeleine Beth McCann, rather sadly, fast became, not second to her parents, but somewhere way down the list of priority.  Money way higher up the scale than Madeleine.

This case should never have been allowed to come to this.  Nonsense about 'trolls' making the headlines.

There will always be differences of opinion on any case/matter that's life, that is normal.

What there should never be is indifference.   A journalist should seek to report on the truth, should challenge that which is clearly suspicious, should become fully informed as to the case on which he is reporting.

In the Madeleine case, where a child has vanished off the face of the earth, real investigation and reporting by MSM has been horribly lacking.

His hands are tied, some say of Lawton.  It was not him who came up with the dreadful headline in his sickening troll piece.

I say Lawton, like all in press have choices.  Choices as we all have. The choice to do what is right and proper.

chose to attach his name, his words to that headline.

chose to refer to those donating in a derogatory way.

chose not to say:

Hell, why did Gerry McCann change his story?  Why did McCann tell the police one thing then seven days later come up with a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT VERSION OF THE EVENTS OF THE NIGHT HE REPORTED HIS DAUGHTER AS MISSING?'

That is what a journalist would do.  That is what anyone would do. Ask the questions in this case that need asking!

He, Brunt, and others choose to write as they do.   They choose to fail a little girl who lost her life, in the most suspicious of circumstances. They choose to print the lies which they do about this case, about Dr Amaral.  They choose not to challenge the far fetched stories told by the McCann group.

They are not friends of truth, honesty, integrity, justice or freedom of expression.   Their lives, their careers it seems built on lies!

God help any other child, missing, abused, when so many sit in silence!

But Lawton and the Daily Star, don't deal in doing what is right or proper.  Don't deal in highlighting in a proper way the disappearance of this little girl.

Daily Star:

'The paper predominantly focuses on stories largely revolving around celebrities, sport, and news and gossip about popular television programmes, such as soap operas and reality TV shows.'
3rd June 2015
Website Builder