Re: The meeting between DCI Roe, Essex Police and Tony Bennett, 17 Dec 2009

by Guest 06.01.10 13:11

What with Bennett's crusading and coming down hard on the law breakers, maybe there is no crime in Harlow.

by Guest 06.01.10 13:14

In light of all the campaigns that Tony Bennett has affiliated himself with, I wonder how many hours of police time he has actually "used", not to mention the laborious hours the officers concerned had to waste actually writing it all up and recording it?

What makes Tony Bennett more important that he receives this treatment? The fact that he is a serial complainant? Then surely Baroness Scotland has ruled incorrectly when she said that unfortunately they could not rule Bennett as vexatious under the criteria? Or perhaps it was not the attorney general, 'Baroness Scotland' who ruled on this personally?

by DCB1 06.01.10 13:17

What The Papers Never Say wrote:In light of all the campaigns that Tony Bennett has affiliated himself with, I wonder how many hours of police time he has actually "used", not to mention the laborious hours the officers concerned had to waste actually writing it all up and recording it?

What makes Tony Bennett more important that he receives this treatment? The fact that he is a serial complainant? Then surely Baroness Scotland has ruled incorrectly when she said that unfortunately they could not rule Bennett as vexatious under the criteria? Or perhaps it was not the attorney general, 'Baroness Scotland' who ruled on this personally?

I believe there is a big difference between a serial litigant and a serial complainer.

by vaguely 06.01.10 13:22

rockyrobin wrote:What with Bennett's crusading and coming down hard on the law breakers, maybe there is no crime in Harlow.

That's a nice thought. But actually crime in Harlow is above that of the British average sadly. Maybe it's because they investigate it so fully.

by Guest 06.01.10 14:47

The criteria up for vexatious litigant, does not necessarily imply that all of his complaints would have to involve litigation.

by Perelli 06.01.10 15:47

Can anybody make any sense of what has been posted on Deborah's Message board? Is this an imagined conversation or is she claiming that she has spoken to the DS involved?

http://deborahbutler.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=4101407&trail=150

Quote:
Originally Posted by deborahbutler
Update re police involvement in Madeleine Foundation matters Tony Bennett Today at 8:26 pm

UPDATE.
A Detective Sergeant called at home on Sunday at 9.15am and was here till 2.00pm

The Detective Sergeant:
No no...it was just 1 hour..if it was 1 hour.

..taking a long statement with 11 exhibits detailing the various acts of harassment by Ms Butler.
No.

He was given evidence that this harassment campaign had now llsted over 10 weeks without let-up.
No.

He was especially concerned that she had set up a forum apparently witb the sole purpose of attacking me publicly

No..That is YOUR concern.

.. and when I showed him messages on there from Ms Butler and one other hinting that I had convictions or had been arrested for sex with under-age girls he very quickly sadI: "That comes under the Malicious Communications Act".

Now now Mr.Bennett....I did not say that at all. YOU said that. I don't even know that article..And do I have to remind you what we have in our files on you..(cough)??

He was given the name fo five other Madeleine Foundations members and supporters who have been harassed by her in one form or another and wish to make formal statements.

Yes. A Henry Grenville - Old Nick; A Helen Grenville -Autumn;
A Jkh-Jill Havern; A SharonL-Jolie. And another fruitcake anti who completely lost touch with reality. She saw the sun come shining from Amaral's arse.... marigold:
Re: Amaral - hero or villain?

Post marigold on Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:36 am
Amaral is snowy white in comparison to the Mccanns. He is a man of honesty and integrity who doesn't hide like a coward behind PR experts as the Mccanns do. They aren't fit to lick his boots.

He said he will speak to Det Chief Inspector Roe this week when decisions will be taken on what further action, if any, to take.

No. I did not say that.I said: Mr.Bennett, you have no leg to stand on. You haven't got a case..Again you are waisting police time. Remember?

Menawhile the Police has still not got permission from the MF's banbkers to look at the two cheques

That is correct

.. that Ms Butler thinks, wrongly, that were signed without her signature.

That is for us to decide, not you.

I am given to understand that once they have had sight of those cheques, their investigation will be over.

At this point yes..

Just for the record I might add that it was Ms Butler who first invoked the police, hours after she learned on 4 November 2008 that she had been expelled from membership of The Madeleine Foundation.

Tony Bennett

Not in our files Mr.Bennett...Ok, enough of your nonsense.
I am on my way to some really serious police work .
Thanks for the tea mrs.Bennett..

by Perelli 06.01.10 15:49

Double post - Sorry

by Jolie 06.01.10 15:58

This is an excerpt from the above post, allegedly written by Debbie Butler on her new forum:

QUOTE

He was given the name fo five other Madeleine Foundations members and supporters who have been harassed by her in one form or another and wish to make formal statements.

Yes. A Henry Grenville - Old Nick; A Helen Grenville -Autumn;
A Jkh-Jill Havern; A SharonL-Jolie.

END QUOTE

***

I would like to set the record straight that I am not Sharon L. nor a member of the Madeleine Foundation, although I have been a supporter. I have never received any personal communications from Debbie Butler.

I do believe that Debbie Butler lost the plot quite a long time ago.

by DCB1 06.01.10 16:04

"I do believe that Debbie Butler lost the plot quite a long time ago."

It seems so.

by Finally 06.01.10 16:05

Hi
If Old Nick is really Mr Bennett's good pal Grenville, why did Mr Bennett put Nick's name on his little list of troublemakers?

Personally, I couldn't care who he is - just enjoy the way he lightens some of the threads - just seems odd that Tony Bennett would do that to a friend if Deborah is correct with what she claimed.

As for the police involvement - some of what has been done to Mr Bennett by Amber et al was pretty cruel but maybe if you reigned yourself in a little Mr Bennett you might not attract that sort of attention and the police could get on with catching proper criminals rather than need to spend time on this.

Take care

by Jolie 06.01.10 16:16

Finally wrote:Hi
If Old Nick is really Mr Bennett's good pal Grenville, why did Mr Bennett put Nick's name on his little list of troublemakers?

Personally, I couldn't care who he is - just enjoy the way he lightens some of the threads - just seems odd that Tony Bennett would do that to a friend if Deborah is correct with what she claimed.

As for the police involvement - some of what has been done to Mr Bennett by Amber et al was pretty cruel but maybe if you reigned yourself in a little Mr Bennett you might not attract that sort of attention and the police could get on with catching proper criminals rather than need to spend time on this.

Take care

Are you blaming the victim here, Finally? Is it Tony's fault that Debbie Butler and company having been waging an all-out campaign to destroy Tony's reputation with false allegations? He has every right to defend himself against libel. While murders and rapes are more serious crimes than this type of crime, libel and harrassment are crimes and are entitled to be addressed by the police, too.

To address someone's earlier remark about filing a civil suit instead of using up valuable police time: why should Tony Bennett have to pay out of pocket for a lawyer to defend himself, if he has rights under the law that can be addressed through the police?

by vaguely 06.01.10 16:21

Jolie wrote:
Finally wrote:Hi
If Old Nick is really Mr Bennett's good pal Grenville, why did Mr Bennett put Nick's name on his little list of troublemakers?

Personally, I couldn't care who he is - just enjoy the way he lightens some of the threads - just seems odd that Tony Bennett would do that to a friend if Deborah is correct with what she claimed.

As for the police involvement - some of what has been done to Mr Bennett by Amber et al was pretty cruel but maybe if you reigned yourself in a little Mr Bennett you might not attract that sort of attention and the police could get on with catching proper criminals rather than need to spend time on this.

Take care

Are you blaming the victim here, Finally? Is it Tony's fault that Debbie Butler and company having been waging an all-out campaign to destroy Tony's reputation with false allegations? He has every right to defend himself against libel. While murders and rapes are more serious crimes than this type of crime, libel and harrassment are crimes and are entitled to be addressed by the police, too.

To address someone's earlier remark about filing a civil suit instead of using up valuable police time: why should Tony Bennett have to pay out of pocket for a lawyer to defend himself, if he has rights under the law that can be addressed through the police?

If I was the police I'd suggest they both sat down and talked about the whole embarrassing and very public fall out and never bother the police again. I might also suggest they review what has been done and said about the McCanns, their extended family and their supporters and ask if either of them had any self awareness at all.

Tony Bennett and Debbie Butler = domestic dispute.

Madeleine = forgotten.

by Jolie 06.01.10 16:33

How does this fall in the category of a domestic dispute, unless you know something more than what has been published?

This was a business relationship and resulting friendship in reality, as far as I know, that ended badly.

I wouldn't sit in a room with someone who had done to me what Butler has done to Bennett. I wouldn't expect that anything could be worked out with someone who would resort to such low moral behavior and who might have some psychological condition.

The police are there to put an end to criminal activity, large or small.

ETA: Tony Bennett hasn't forgotten about Madeleine McCann. He is still very much active on her behalf. I can't say the same for Debbie Butler, though.

by Finally 06.01.10 16:42

No Jolie I am not blaming a victim.

A victim is surely somebody who is innocently decieved, cheated, hurt or harmed by another. I think some of what Mr Bennett has endured at the hands of Amber and Deborah is terrible but as time has gone by and I have read more here I do not see Mr Bennett's actions in this sorry affair as being totally innocent. I therefore do not view him as a victim in the same way that I would an old lady coming out of the bank, minding her own business and causing no offence to anyone, with her weekly pension who was jumped on from behind and beaten about the head for her money by some unknown and nasty thug.

I agree that all crimes are deserving of our police forces time and attention. Unfortunately, the money needed to fund this is finite and comes from people like you and me. Under those circumstances I would hope that those budgeting and managing our forces funding prioritise how it is spent. In this case using it on somebody who could have switched their computer off and taken a little responsibility themselves for the attention that they draw would be very low priority if I had my hands on that money compared to the old lady I have already mentioned, countless rapes, murders, assaults, houses being burgled, RTA's etc etc etc.

Having said the above, I still believe that Mr Bennett has been treated very badly by this pair but there are those who are enduring worse.

Take care

by Guest 06.01.10 16:43

Old Nic = Grenville Green (yuk)..............NO WAY !!!

by preciousramotswe 06.01.10 16:44

I wouldn't sit in a room with someone who had done to me what Butler has done to Bennett.

I wouldn't sit in a room with someone who had passed on, by email, an allegation that I had 'bought' my adopted son, either.
The infighting got considerably worse after that repulsive episode and Mr Bennett must take his share of the blame.

Not that he will, he never does.

by scampi 06.01.10 17:05

Neither Butler nor Bennett will come out of this smelling of roses.

Bennett is very definitely not a victim here.

Autumn is Not Helene Grenville aka Bugalugs.

by Guest 06.01.10 20:24

PearlB wrote:Old Nic = Grenville Green (yuk)..............NO WAY !!!

I don't think so either. He's too much fun.

by Guest 06.01.10 20:56

badmanners wrote:I wouldn't sit in a room with someone who had done to me what Butler has done to Bennett.

I wouldn't sit in a room with someone who had passed on, by email, an allegation that I had 'bought' my adopted son, either.
The infighting got considerably worse after that repulsive episode and Mr Bennett must take his share of the blame.

Not that he will, he never does.

I missed that. Do tell !

by Guest 06.01.10 20:58

Molly wrote:
PearlB wrote:Old Nic = Grenville Green (yuk)..............NO WAY !!!

I don't think so either. He's too much fun.

And I don't see him as someone who hides underneath his helmet whilst desecrating with "leaflets" a Constant light in Rothley to remind us all of a missing little girl Madeleine McCann.

by preciousramotswe 06.01.10 21:21

PearlB wrote:
badmanners wrote:I wouldn't sit in a room with someone who had done to me what Butler has done to Bennett.

I wouldn't sit in a room with someone who had passed on, by email, an allegation that I had 'bought' my adopted son, either.
The infighting got considerably worse after that repulsive episode and Mr Bennett must take his share of the blame.

Not that he will, he never does.

I missed that. Do tell !

It was what indirectly started this forum off Pearl. When Jill contacted Mr Bennett to ask if it was true that he had sent it, it started a row which saw her booted off the MM.

But I don't intend giving it any more airtime than that as it was a scurrilous and nasty rumour which should never have been repeated.

by Guest 06.01.10 21:48

badmanners wrote:
PearlB wrote:
badmanners wrote:I wouldn't sit in a room with someone who had done to me what Butler has done to Bennett.

I wouldn't sit in a room with someone who had passed on, by email, an allegation that I had 'bought' my adopted son, either.
The infighting got considerably worse after that repulsive episode and Mr Bennett must take his share of the blame.

Not that he will, he never does.

I missed that. Do tell !

It was what indirectly started this forum off Pearl. When Jill contacted Mr Bennett to ask if it was true that he had sent it, it started a row which saw her booted off the MM.

But I don't intend giving it any more airtime than that as it was a scurrilous and nasty rumour which should never have been repeated.

Oh my god ! Bennett actually did that ?