The Examiner’s Chelsea Hoffman, misdirection and sleight of hand journalism

Following on from the Basher Gun controversy,  Chelsea Hoffman of the Examiner wrote a heavily subjective piece in an attempt to readdress the balance of bad press. The story made headlines in Europe including Portugal, and Hoffman does her level best to marginalize the threat by creating a diversion and concentrating on what supporters of Madeleine’s family have alleged to have done.

The key word here being alleged. It is also very apparent from her piece that Hoffman knows little of the origins of the nearly six years of fighting that has taken place across the internet all in the name of giving Madeleine a chance to be found. She gets her own opinion in early by saying Madeleine ‘probably won’t ever be found’. As I would like to emphasize again, Hoffman’s piece is subjective and not objective journalism. From there her comments slowly decline into an all too familiar anti Madeleine mantra that is feverishly repeated like a religious edict.

Hoffman does admit that she has done only a little research into the fighting and bases her opinion purely on these meager findings. Citing personal attacks that have taken place on Facebook which are not death threats like Basher made, but as she concludes, still horrendous attacks in her opinion.

The sad fact of the matter is the high percentage of online threats come from the very people Hoffman seeks to justify in her article; those who through an ignorance of forensic evidence and police procedure condemn Kate and Gerry McCann as guilty of Madeleine’s disappearance. Had she researched more than just a little she would have discovered a legacy of online abuse stretching back to within days of Madeleine going missing. These threats were just not confined to Facebook or twitter, they were forced into their private lives, their places of employment and even threats made against their children.

The worst of all the sites that engaged in organised online attacks and threats was the now deleted 3 Arguidos. Recently I had reason to approach the former administrator of the site, Brenda Ryan over twitter regarding the legacy of the site. Her replies were very blunt and telling. She regrets ever starting it, and she will only talk to the police in regards to what actually took place in the public and especially hidden areas of that site.

There is clearly more Ms Ryan would like to talk about but with the appropriate authorities. Given the amount of abuse and coordinated internet attacks that were made on the site, including a BBC website having to be taken down, I would imagine if Hoffman wants to get the “exclusive” she claims her article is, then she should start with Ms Ryan and the legacy of the 3 Arguidos.

Not mentioned in this article is an influential group called the Assasins which this site has mentioned before in regards to the link between the Madeleine Foundation and violent threats made against people. The Assasins deal exclusively in violent intimidation normally involving not just the individual targeted but also their family, especially children. The Assasins were responsible for threatening Clarence Mitchell and his children. They carried out a sustained campaign against website owner Jill Havern and have also made direct threats against the McCann family including murdering the twins.

The ‘McCann Assasin’ Sean Hyland left a journalist in no doubt regarding how he and the group carry out their work, and that they cannot be stopped. The warning is as chilling as it clear “The only way to shut me up is to jail me or kill me.”

What is also a specialty of the Assasins is that they care nothing for Madeleine and are quite happy to carry out threats and intimidation against anyone no matter what their opinion on the case. For example while acting as enforcers for the ‘Madeleine Foundation’ the Assasins carried out an attack against Tony Bennett while he was employing their services to protect him and the Foundation. Dr Vanessa Sluming was caught carrying out the attack against Bennett in which she was later branded deceitful, conniving and a liar.

Hoffman is either ignorant to this historic catalogue of abuse or simply glosses over it with sleight of hand in the hope that readers will take her at face value and not do any research of their own.

The past shows clearly, that when it comes to threats, hate campaigns and organised web attacks, it is almost always the people who obsessively spend each day attacking the McCann family. The very people that Hoffman seeks to normalize in the article for the Examiner. The fact that she  also points the finger at Kate and Gerry McCann for Madeleine’s disappearance does not make her immune to threats and intimidation from people she probably perceives as being in agreement with her flawed thinking.

Clearly it doesn’t. It is a very naive view to also immediately jump to the conclusion that the person who made threats to her was in support of the McCann family. As has been proven time and time again, this is the strategy of many different anti Madeleine groups including the Assasins who specialize in such attacks.

In concluding, Hoffman and I do agree on the one thing. Such threats and intimidation have no place in any aspect of the Madeleine McCann case. At the center of all this is a missing child cherished by her family who only want to see her back safe with them. It can only be about Madeleine and not the massive egos or right wing groups who day after day attempt to hijack Madeleine’s name and her memory for their own selfish gain.

Addendum: For those interested to delve a little deeper into Ms Hoffman, then they could start with this revealing Facebook page from which I quote;

Chelsea Hoffman has been making paticulary offensive posts about Down syndrome and abortion and is posting on our feed and those of our supporters. She has been blocked from the SavingDowns site. As a rule we don’t censor, but were happy to make an exception when there is hate speech directed against our community. As always we uphold the basic right of human dignity to all, including those with Down syndrome.

Charming to the end does Ms Hoffman appear to be.

This entry was posted in Chelsea Hoffman, McCann family threats and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to The Examiner’s Chelsea Hoffman, misdirection and sleight of hand journalism

  1. anon says:

    Hoffman has also attacked people who have down’s syndrome, saying they should all be aborted and referring to them as being broken ( she actually said it to parents in a very spiteful manner and she has also made other foul mouthed attacks on crime victim’s families). Hoffman also refers to herself as a criminal profiler, but what is interesting is that in the USA there are no rules as to who can call themselves a profiler, so anyone can call themselves a profiler regardless of skills, experience, or qualifications. Pat Brown is also of this ilk. Neither of them are actual criminologists, have taken part in police investigations, have academic positions as criminologists etc.

  2. J Elles says:

    There are some blog articles about Hoffman here:-

    http://exposingthemyths.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=chelsea

    And the following is a site set up by the family of a crime victim who clashed with Hoffman:-

    http://downwithchelseahoffman.blogspot.co.uk/

    I have read her article about “pro-McCann trolls” and will say just one thing – the piece is notable by it’s signature lack of detail. There re just vague references to “insults” and ” stalking” which, if you are familiar with Chelsea Hoffman at all, you will know is pretty much what she accuses all of her critics of. I’ve also seen much more profanity and below-the-belt insults coming from Hoffman herself. On one occasion she described England as a “nation of inbreds”. Incidentally, “inbred” is one of her favourite insults.

    Her “pro-McCann troll” article, like her “analysis” of the McCann case (she never did explain what she meant by “cadaver oil”!) is therefore a bit of a YAWN……

  3. Marly Williams says:

    It’s also important to realise that Chelsea Hoffman is not a journalist, and is not really ‘of’ The Examiner. She is not paid to write. She is just an ignorant blogger who takes up a lot of blog-space on The Examiner and other online magazines that anyone can join, and blog away on to their heart’s content! She really shouldn’t be taken seriously because she is profoundly ignorant, uneducated, and well… basically, a fraud. She sets herself up as some kind of crime expert, when in reality she has no background in this area at all.

  4. Eleanor Ramsay says:

    I read this ‘article’ by Chelsea Hoffman and it was a joke. She was accusing someone called ‘Josephine’ of being some kind of threatening pro-McCann troll, who was to be feared in some way. But when I read the emails ‘Josephine’ had sent to Chelsea Hoffman, it became clear that “Josephine” was simply extremely angered by Chelsea’s ongoing attack on Kate and Gerry McCann. “Josephine’s” anger at this injustice may have been out of control, (or else “Josephine” had a bit too much red wine… who knows?). but the real point is that she/he was standing up for justice and standing up to a shocking bully. Chelsea Hoffman wants attention at any cost. She does not care who she hurts in the meantime.

  5. Margaret Sinclair says:

    In many ways, Chelsea Hoffman is to be pitied. She gives herself away pretty much every time she ‘writes’ something on the net. She brags about her IQ of 156 whne it is abundantly clear that she cannot even decipher the difference between fact, theory and assumption. On top of this, if she had an IQ anywhere remotely in the vicinity of 156, she would clearly not be spending her life writing baseless articles that have no intelligent argument to them whatsoever. It’s just a shame that the internet gives pea-brains like hers an opinion at all. Of course people like Kate and Gerry McCann are going to fuel the Chelsea Hoffman’s of the world with rage. How can you expect someone like Chelsea to be able to cope with anyone who is intelligent, successful and attractive. She sees them has ‘having it all’ because they are getting the attention she craves. It’s what Freud referred to as projection. Chelsea Hoffman is desperate to be a famous celebrity, and just cannot fathom the obvious fact that Kate and Gerry McCann are two of the world’s most reluctant celebrities, who have only ever sought a profile for themselves and Madeleine with the aim of finding their daughter.

  6. Georgia Hellingman says:

    I have read some of Chelsea Hoffman’s comments about the McCanns and other vulnerable people. I’ve also (unfortunately) seen photographs of Ms.Hoffman and she has a very nasty looking expression in her eyes, and looks quite unstable. You have to wonder why a young woman spends all her time writing ignorant, unresearched comments on the net. And of course, there’s an obvious stupidity in claiming titles that are so easy to disprove. It’s clear she has no professional background in crime analysis, or anything else!

    • P. V. deSpencer says:

      Chelsea owed my fiance money for rent and when she didn’t pay, my fiance filed a law suit. She then conspired with some of her “friends”, one of whom accused my fiance of molesting her. He has done 10+ years of a 40 year sentence for crimes that never happened. I moved out of Arizona before he was arrested, and eight years after his incarceration, she sent me vulgar, life threatening emails, one of which says, “do you want me to ask Little Vic (the supposed victim) if you helped Joel molest her those first few times?” Chelsea Hoffmans’ actions have been described to me by a Ph.D in psychology as “probably a psychopath.”

      • Seymour says:

        I think Chelsea, Victoria and your fiance should all take polygraphs to find out who is telling the truth. I read the story on wrongly convicted and think maybe this would help.

  7. anon says:

    spencer,
    I suggest you show copies of said emails to police and your partners defence lawyer.

  8. mark strangelove says:

    chelsea hoffman is just another reason we need to repeal laws which hold web site publishers of liability when someone posts on their page.

  9. N3 says:

    Good to see that the author of this article is on the ball in the case of this horrible little keyboard warrior (Chelsea Hoffman) who calls herself a journalist and criminal profiler. I’ve read many of her articles and as well as being consistently incorrect with the facts almost ALL the time, she has a horrible attitude. All her ‘work’ on the Madeleine McCann case is subjective, opinionated, poorly researched, defamatory and offensive. She (as your article points out) is in a closed little world bursting with many other like minded hateful people who give each other strength to continue a wave of falsity because they have the power to do so. Power without responsibility = Trolls.

  10. stevepope says:

    Yeah in my opinion she is a total disgrace and fake. If you read the reviews of the garbage she calls book on Amazon, they are horrible. She DOES NOT have an undergraduate degree, doesn’t even have an Associates Degree. She has, according to one website misrepresented her education. She self-promotes some of her “books.” Really if you stop and think about it, why does she continue to offend so many people? Well one possibility is that she seeks fame so bad she will settle for negative publicity. I wonder if anyone of credibility or common sense would take her the least bit serious? I don’t think so. I have said this and I will say it again, Hoffman will simply disappear in this redncek NV town she calls home if everyone SIMPLY IGNORES HER. Yes, I believe that is the simple, most effective solution, IGNORE HER. Stop letting her comments bother you and inflame you. She is a complete idiot and possible sick, in my opinion so why let what she spews effect you. IGNORE HER and withing a year or so, no more Chelsea Hoffman.

  11. stevepope says:

    Oh yeah here is another perfect example look at the mere length of her ridiculous “lectures” on that silly crime course she is “teaching.” I have a Bachelors in Journalism and can you believe how short they are? Take a look.

  12. raphaeldiv says:

    It is really good to read such clear documenting about this case. I have looked at Chelsea Hoffmans comments on all voices and what is most frightening about them is her acknowledgement in response to me, that ‘ she made money writing about the McCanns’ There was no despite repeated efforts I could get her to have idea of the hurt she was inflicting on a woman who expressed the wish to be dead at times in the avalanche of adversary that was visited upon her, on top of the loss of her daughter. My view is that Chelsea Hoffman needs tp be contained- until courts decide on matters pertaining to the McCanns and their libel action are concluded. Some whose main claim to writing about the McCanns is that she will make money out of it, doesn’t have a credibility rating you can trust.
    Tavares de Almeida and another chief inspector got 2.5 year suspended prision sentence and a 80 euro month fine for the same duration – in relation to the torture of Vigolino Borges.

    and chief Inspector Goncalo Amarai the investigators former co-ordinator stepped down amid separate allegations that he concealed evidence of the torture of a woman jailed for the murder of her daughter.
    Courts in Portugal agreed that Leanor was tortured but by whose hands they can’t know and at the hearing at corfu with regard to her torture, Goncalo Amarai was found guilty of perjury and falsifying documents – another officer too was found guilty of falsifying evidence. (Evening Standard 29 May 2009)

    All of this is documented and gives a much fairer picture when it is presented.Allowing people to arrive at informed conclusions from informed research that is balanced and fair.

    I would like people to consider whether the writing of somebody who says she writes about the McCanns for money can be considered credible and whether you should therefore seek better balanced accounts so that you are not inflamed by a daffy female who describes herself as a ‘ work in progress’ . This case is too serious for such nonsense and she should not be tolerated.
    The pain of the McCanns is evident to anybody with two eyes in their head.

    The Courts agree that Leanor (the lady who was accused of killing her daughter) was tortured.
    Amarai has been found guilty of perjury and falsifying documents- only Chelsea Hoffman could follow this information and the evidence of it and still blithely pour accusation upon the McCanns.

    My view is the McCanns have more than enough to deal with. It is beyond belief that when somebody is suffering the loss of her child and still does not know where that child is or what her situation might be, that somebody with such a small brain should be allowed to rant and rave and attack her. if these were physical attacks in the street Chelsa Hoffman would be restrained for her aggression and her violence against somebody she does not know, and whose life is none of her business. A thought that obviously has never occurred to her.
    But because there are on the internet a medium that allows loose cannons to fly where they will she is not as she so clearly needs to be restrained, educated and redeployed in some usual capacity in society though I’m hard pressed to think what that could be.

    Its great to read your clear commentary, and I would just like to add for those readers who would like to look at things in a clearer way:

    Tjavares de Almeida got 2.5 years suspended sentence for the torture of Virgolino Borges.

    Goncalo Amarai was found guilt of perjury and falsifying documents.

    Chelsea Hoffman ‘ writes about the McCanns because she makes money out of them’

    Thats all you need to know abut her credibility.

    • tu anciana abuela says:

      “The group’s initial informal statements given during the initial stages of the investigation immediately introduced the abduction hypothesis. But even simple things were the subject of misinformation:
      1) was the window open or closed?
      2) was the shutter up or down?
      3) was the balcony door open or closed?
      4) was the front door merely shut or locked with a key?
      Because, they said, they needed counselling and support, Madeleine’s parents asked at between 2.00am and 3.00am on 4 May for the presence of a priest.”

      (the-report-of-tavares-de-almeida-10-sep-2007)

  13. Chelsea Hoffman just cannot stop. I don’t get it. The more info I find, and the more crap she posts, I am just blown away. She is just a horrid individual. I just posted a blog about her and her repulsive behavior.

  14. Reck Less says:

    There is a group of (currently) 395 like-minded people on a face book page called “Chelsea Hoffman Sucks.” We have exposed a lot of lies on Hoffman’s part, including her own criminal record. If we do nothing but tip her over the edge it will be a success. Please consider joining us to expose and stop her. She does, in fact, make most of her money by writing about the McCann’s while she knows nothing about the case. At the very least, please cinsider giving the page a “like.”

    Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s