B$OWN TELLS LIES IN PUBLIC

B$own has whinged at great length about how hard-done by she is:

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com/2011/11/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-truth.html

There is a complete, total LIE in there; the gullible idiots who hang on her every word may be fooled by this rubbish, but no-one else needs to be:

As I head into a legal battle with my attorney, Anne Bremner (read my Women in Crime Ink blog post on the issue) with Gerry and Kate McCann over having their solicitors, Carter-Ruck, threaten Amazon with a libel lawsuit (okay, it was a notice of defamation but if you get a letter from the biggest libel attorneys in the world saying a book is defamatory and the letter is a clear warning that there will be legal action if the book is not removed from sale, it certainly is a threat of a libel lawsuit) if they didn't pull my book, Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann, from the market (ebook still available at B&N and Smashwords), I am sure the attacks on me will increase. I have already received a label of publicity whore and scumbag who makes money off the blood of murdered and missing children; I'll live. But, there is something very important at stake here in my upcoming lawsuit against the McCanns; Freedom of Speech and Justice for Children.
-----------------------------

Gerry and Kate McCann over having their solicitors, Carter-Ruck, threaten Amazon with a libel lawsuit

LIAR!


Here is the letter she received:

Dear Pat,

We have received a notice of defamation from Carter-Ruck Solicitors that says the content of Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann (UPDATED) B0055WYVCQ, contains defamatory statements regarding their clients, Gerry and Kat McCann.

Because we have no method of determining whether the content supplied to us is defamatory, we have removed the title from sale and will not reinstate it unless we receive confirmation from both parties that this matter has been resolved.

Carter-Ruck can be reached at:

6 St Andrew Street

London EC4A 3AE

T 020 7353 5005

Best regards,

Robert F.

Bennett has received sterner letters than that, and behaved better.

All B$own had to do was find out what the cause of the problem was, and find a solution - I am surprised Ms Bremner didn't advise her to do that, instead of jumping straight to Defcon 1.

The McCanns have not mentioned her name in public - I am surprised Ms Bremner didn't advise her that that is rather a barrier to legal action.

Her Freedom of Speech has not been taken away; her leaflet is freely for sale:

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Profile-of-the-Disappearance-of-Madeleine-McCann/Pat-Brown/e/2940013117815?itm=2&usri=madeleine+mccann&cm_mmc=AFFILIATES-_-Linkshare-_-je6NUbpObpQ-_-10:1

That it is in sales position 63,701 is an indicator of its true market position; B$own has no right to dictate what Amazon may or may not sell.

As for Justice for Children - the further away B$own stays from children, the better.

Just look at this child:




Brown thought she had been 'asking for it':

Victoria may have suffered a good deal of fear and pain during this slap down but, if she were my kid, the first thing I would have asked her is "Did you deserve it?" And if she did, I would have told her I hope she learned her lesson.

I hope Victoria learned hers.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

B$own is one sick puppy.

http://regretsandramblings.com/2011/11/06/i-await-your-replies-pat-brown/#disqus_thread

quote:

she reminds me of a middle-aged woman going through a mid-life crisis and having a flaming tantrum because she can't have her own way.

It is rather pathetic to watch to be honest. And as for her latest piece of garbage, well I just don't know what to say at the precise moment.

B$own is undeniably coming unglued at a rapid rate. If she is like this over criticism on a few blogs, what is she going to be like when the UK tabloids start chewing on her?

I hope she isn't deluding herself that the UK press are going to have an iota of sympathy for her?

Pat Brown herself say that her leaflet is on sale elsewhere, so what is she on about.
Her trash was linked to Kate's Book, that was the real problem.

I suspect she has got away with talking down to her halfwit fans for years, Sabot - she cannot handle anything but lavish praise.

Look at the rubbish she has spouted today - and that was sparked by criticism in a US blog.

She's outright LIED about Carter Ruck - beyond stupid. It was up to her to sort the problem out like a grown up. Instead, she threw a giant hissy fit.

I am torn over this supposed 'lawsuit'. On one hand, the McCanns do not need hassle from an attention-seeking nonentity like B$own.

On the other, and rather selfishly, I almost hope she carries on destroying herself in public; she has got away with exploiting crime victims for far too long.

I hope she has deep pockets, as she will end up paying the costs for bringing vexatious legal action. Not to mention having no 'career' left after the tabloids have finished with her.

Here is where the Internet becomes open season for propaganda and disinformation, lies and half-truths that are spread without concern of any penalty, often spread by people whose names are never known. These untruths may be repeated over and remain on the Internet for decades.

How is that for gall? Just think of the disgusting filth about the McCanns - and others - SHE has put on the internet for all time.

Gerry McCann mummifying his child and smuggling her corpse into the UK like bushmeat ringing any bells?

Accusing innocent people of committing crimes when they have already been cleared without charge?

The hypocrisy is stunning - and B$own has done all that, and worse, for $$$$$$$$.

No wonder she gets called a GRIFTER in the States.

I've just noticed this bit in that hysterical rant:

If I really wanted to get great publicity and make good money, I would have profiled the West Memphis Three (WM3) as innocent of the murder of three little boys and I would have profiled the Madeleine McCann case as nothing but an abduction.

Excuse me? The WM3 were innocent - she seems to have managed to put that small detail out of her mind. Verdict overturned due to fresh, proper evidence? None of that ringing bells with B$own?

She gained, financially, by repeatedly coming out with hysterical garbage about them, and ignoring the small detail about REAL evidence pointing to someone very different indeed, with a real, genuine motive.

One of those young men nearly went to the death chamber because of lynch-mobbers like B$own.

She is clearly attempting to do the same thing to the McCanns, regardless of this:

b) The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.


The likes of her, who go around accusing innocent people of crimes they haven't committed, deserve to be held in utter, total contempt by the rest of the world.

PS - they aren't 'profilers' either - they are gossiping witch-burners.

Tony's view of Ms B$own's whopper:

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.com/?zx=bd7d5ff2f7285e1a

bb1 wrote:I've just noticed this bit in that hysterical rant:

If I really wanted to get great publicity and make good money, I would have profiled the West Memphis Three (WM3) as innocent of the murder of three little boys and I would have profiled the Madeleine McCann case as nothing but an abduction.

Excuse me? The WM3 were innocent - she seems to have managed to put that small detail out of her mind. Verdict overturned due to fresh, proper evidence? None of that ringing bells with B$own?

She gained, financially, by repeatedly coming out with hysterical garbage about them, and ignoring the small detail about REAL evidence pointing to someone very different indeed, with a real, genuine motive.

One of those young men nearly went to the death chamber because of lynch-mobbers like B$own.

She is clearly attempting to do the same thing to the McCanns, regardless of this:

b) The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.


The likes of her, who go around accusing innocent people of crimes they haven't committed, deserve to be held in utter, total contempt by the rest of the world.

PS - they aren't 'profilers' either - they are gossiping witch-burners.

__________________

I am afraid Bonny that it is infinitely worse than that. They were released on a device that would never see light of day in a british court, an Alford Plea. (Which means they are, in the eyes of the state, guilty)

The main purpose of which was to get them their freedom, while avoiding the tiresome business of paying compensation for wrongful conviction having to go through the due process to quash the convictions.

My view is that the courts played on the desperation of the three men for their freedom to con them into a dreadful deal.

Yes, that was badly put on my part, sans. I watched a documentary about this not long ago - it was stunning how bitterly and totally ashamed of themselves the locals who had previously been demanding the death penalty for all three boys were, in the face of new evidence.

They were disgusted with themselves, on seeing footage of how they had been behaving years before. Not least because they knew that the real killer/s were walking around free, because public hysteria had targetted the wrong people. It's no secret who science, in the form of DNA evidence, says was the real killer, but as it is unlikely there will ever be a trial, no need to name names.

I personally hold the likes of B$own responsible for a lot of their suffering, from the wrongful conviction to the death sentence. She and her ilk whipped up mob hysteria which very nearly got one of the WM3 put to death, so I can quite see why they just wanted out of prison. In an ideal world, they would have gone through the whole thing again, but I can understand why they didn't, they must have been glad to get out alive.

Here's a thing - B$own had a financial stake in insisting, wrongly, that the WM3 were guilty, and churned out a great deal of hysterical rubbish to that end. Her career has taken rather a lot of knocks recently, and I suspect she saw latching onto the McCann case as easy money.

That is, as a disgraced ex solicitor would put it, "beyond doubt"

I knew I'd seen an aricle about criminal profiling becoming something of an unreliable resource after Paul Brittain's part in the capture of Colin Stagg. Wiki has something

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offender_profiling

Murder inquiries may be misled or delayed by psychologists who see themselves as real-life Crackers, researchers claim.

Police forces routinely ask behavioural scientists to draw up profiles of killers who are still at large, based on a knowledge of the victim and details recorded at the crime scene.

But according to a team of psychologists at Birmingham City University, the practice of offender profiling is deeply unscientific and risks bringing the field into disrepute.

In many cases, offender profiles are so vague as to be meaningless, according to psychologist Craig Jackson. At best, they have little impact on murder investigations; at worst they risk misleading investigators and waste police time, he said.

The Home Office holds a register of psychologists and other professionals who are qualified to give offender profiles to police forces after reviewing details of a crime.

"Behavioural profiling has never led to the direct apprehension of a serial killer, a murderer, or a spree killer, so it seems to have no real-world value," Jackson said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/14/psychological-profile-behavioural-psychology

It's fascinating how many of these snake-oil salesmen like B$own HATE science-based evidence being used in criminal investigations; I suppose it does away with the need for assigning guilt by the wearing of earrings or red trousers, by ear-scratching and reverse speech, and what shape people's lips are.

I like this snippet in the Wiki entry on 'profiling':


The origins of profiling can be traced back to as early as the Middle Ages, with the inquisitors trying to “profile” heretics.

Hasn't really changed much, has it?

bb1 wrote:I like this snippet in the Wiki entry on 'profiling':


The origins of profiling can be traced back to as early as the Middle Ages, with the inquisitors trying to “profile” heretics.

Hasn't really changed much, has it?

Parfait.

bb1 wrote:

EARLY 'PROFILERS' DISPLAY THEIR SKILLS

OMG fantastic.

bb1 wrote:

EARLY 'PROFILERS' DISPLAY THEIR SKILLS

this is brown´s nose:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_I5Ezm3xNF5k/TA-eTJNFstI/AAAAAAAAC-8/8DPHL1DiUcs/s1600/MENTIRA...NARIZ...GRANDE_(M%C3%89DIO).jpg

Pedro Silva wrote:this is brown´s nose:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_I5Ezm3xNF5k/TA-eTJNFstI/AAAAAAAAC-8/8DPHL1DiUcs/s1600/MENTIRA...NARIZ...GRANDE_(M%C3%89DIO).jpg

Ooh, that's a good one, Pedro



You've got to be really stupid, or desperate, or both, to come out with a whopper like B$own's.

Amazing how readily the LIE came to her, though - she must be used to dealing with people who never bother to check if she is telling the truth.

bb1 wrote:

Pedro Silva wrote:this is brown´s nose:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_I5Ezm3xNF5k/TA-eTJNFstI/AAAAAAAAC-8/8DPHL1DiUcs/s1600/MENTIRA...NARIZ...GRANDE_(M%C3%89DIO).jpg

Ooh, that's a good one, Pedro



You've got to be really stupid, or desperate, or both, to come out with a whopper like B$own's.

Amazing how readily the LIE came to her, though - she must be used to dealing with people who never bother to check if she is telling the truth.

Wonder why Brown is deleting perfectly reasonable questions from her blog? Questions like:

Anonymous said...
Pat you say "I have worked with numerous law enforcement agencies over the years. I have "solved" cases in the sense that I strongly believe my profile of the case was accurate."

perhaps you would like to state:

1. how many cases you have worked on with law enforcement agencies over the years and provided profiles for?

2. how many of those cases that you provided profiles for were "solved" because of your profile.

3. details of the cases in point 2.
November 15, 2011 12:24 PM

I would have thought she would have the relevant details at her fingertips, ready to silence the doubters? Instead, it looks like she's got something to hide.....

The fawning adulation is still there, though

I would have thought she would have the relevant details at her fingertips, ready to silence the doubters? Instead, it looks like she's got something to hide...

Don't you think that she should be so proud of such accomplishments as to want to share the details with anyone who cared to ask?

Look forward to reading, Jayelles

Thing is, B$own has had this giant melt-down because she came under fire in a US blog. She is now hastily deleting adverse remarks from her own blog.

So, how does she think she is going to face an INTERNATIONAL court case? When she is under fire from the INTERNATIONAL press?

No deleting that!



That is how she will be portrayed, she need not kid herself anyone is going to be interested in her leaflet, any more than they were in Bennett's.

She will be on the receiving end of even worse; she has done something far, far worse than Bennett - she has stated openly that her leaflet is just business, for $$$$$$$$$$$. She needn't bother trying to tell the tabloids what she has decided she meant by:



Her lack of credentials will be laid bare for millions on both sides of the Atlantic to see; her many, epic foul-ups and failures repeated and repeated.

If she reacts like this over a blog, what is she going to do when she is faced with far worse in the real world?

HB, they probably couldn't be bothered with all the hassle of sorting out US law from UK law (though B$own seems to think they are one and the same) and acted to protect themselves, in the expectation that B$own would act like a grown-up and deal with whatever the issues were.

This is all over a leaflet costing a couple of dollars, remember, and everyone can see that it is, well, not in great demand.

IMO, B$own fully intended to make mega-bucks off it, however, as it was listed on the same Amazon page as Kate McCann's SUCCESSFUL book, like a parasite feeding off a healthy host.