The fact remains that it has been widely reported, & never publicly contradicted, that a brick was thrown through her constituency office window, even though it wasn't thrown through her constituency office window.
If there were threats of bricks, or notes tied to bricks, those would most definitely have been reported, wouldn't they? The anti-Corbyn brigade doesn't miss the minutest opportunity to fan the flames of opposition to him.
Incidentally the claim that she had to cancel a meeting at a hotel in Luton due to threats also wasn't true (& that hasn't been publicly contradicted by her side either). The hotel don't hold political meetings at all & they cancelled it when they found out what the booking was for.
m.luton-dunstable.co.uk/hotel-pulls-the-plug-on-angela-eagle-meeting-in-luton-this-afternoon/story-29502451-detail/story.html
There is nastiness on both sides, I don't like it, but I don't see how anybody can stop it - I mean seriously, he's supposed to have control over anybody who likes to send nasty emails? Maybe there'd be a bit less nastiness if there was less hype reported as fact?
(I have only heard of one use of "coxed" & that was in the letter allegedly delivered to one of the Portland PR people.)