Dr Arthur Cassidy, a psychologist who specialises in social media, said Mrs Leyland appeared to have a middle class upbringing which was unusual in trolling.

He said: "In this particular case, her whole repertoire of trolling is slightly different from those of well-seasoned trolls because of her uniqueness and the way she has done this.

"It would signify to me that she has been quite a novice at this."

Dr Cassidy said typically, trolls sought and enjoyed a response from their victims but that did not appear to have been the case here.



....I'm not sure that this would deter a 'determined' troll though..maybe it was easier to expose her because she made it easy because she wasn't a 'typical troll' and maybe someone who wasn't mentally healthy and would have needed help but the method in which she was 'exposed' prevented that...what he did and how he did it would have no doubt probably have led to her receiving abuse herself if that had not already started, so where is the irony in that...and how does it do anything but actually encourage more trolling and more abuse...

A side question, it is reported that the police are investigating all posts "attacking" Kate and Gerry

Various theories on this forum have been discussed in other threads, some of which when voiced by certain tabloids, precipitated legal action which was successful.

Is this forum considered a private place or a public place?

Should those who voiced certain opinions here about what happened in this case be worried about the possibility of arrest?

To be honest.....I don't think the police will be able to look at all posts, there are endless forums where this case has been discussed and to dedicate manpower to investigate them all would be ridiculos. I would imagine it is posts like those seen on twitter that are aimed directly at the McCanns rather than in open discussion that they will be looking into.

It is Niamh, and I didn't know half of it until following up links. Now I've swung the other way, I don't think the McCanns are being upfront.

Nobody on here has personally attacked anyone, it is an objective debate which as far as I know isn't illegal... yet.

Problem is, what does one deem as "attacking" the McCanns? That's where things get messy and people could be arrested for stupid comments that can be perceived in multiple ways.

I doubt the police will push manpower towards going through internet forums though. It's just all talk to make the public aware of police presence. In reality the already overstretched police force will be concentrating on more serious cases they have in hand.

The only things they will look at are direct messages towards the McCanns. Not the opinions of a dozen or so people on a Big Brother forum... nothing for people like us to worry about. Just more of something for people to keep in mind who might be sending hate mail to the McCanns directly via Twitter, email and other means.

How can an opinion be considered a direct attack though, it wasn't to them personally was it?

A comment made on a general site/forum/twitter I fail to see how that is a direct attack, unless you stated ' I X intend to attack X'.

I will attack them
Get the Fecklers Off My HD News




OK Copper

I Marsh intend to attack you Fizzy Kizzy!

You Dirty Devil

That's why I said how does one make a difference between an opinion and an 'attack'. It's not so black and white.

It doesn't really matter in this context though.

It does
a SkyNewsHD reporter
got her on Live News
she admitted doing the attacks
then sadly few days later
topped herself

That's nothing to do with my post...

OK
ignore it.

This thread changed after this

Something does feel a little off about it, that's for sure

It's sad she died.