The truth about Tony Bennett and the two Harlow Credit Unions

badmanners wrote:Apart from pointing out that I have never yet in this thread uttered the name of the person that you clearly believe to be Muratfan...

A blog run by muratfan began the New Year with this message:

Bennett Previous History To Be Investigated Regarding His Credit Unions

The HMRC are apparently investigating if Tony Bennett mis-used the funds in his now disbanded Credit Unions he set up. They are investigating complaints of more than one bank account was used for the accounts and for peoples money.

There is no mention of him defrauding customers, just syphoning away some money into his private accounts.

If you care to respond Bennett fire away please and i will retract it.

This message was subsequently reposted on JATYK by muratfan with this message:

Just been busy over Chrimbo

http://brenryanandco.blogspot.com/2010/01/bennett-previous-history-to-be.html

Anyway sent this, dunno how true it is but sod it anyway.


And so here we have a perfect example of McCann-believers and McCann-supporters at work. They simply do not care one jot if their posts are true or not. Mud is liberally hurled in the hope that some of it will stick or at least raise doubts in some people’s minds.

There’s no truth whatsoever in the above story. But since my interest in Credit Unions is out in the open, here’s a few brief facts about my involvement.

Credit Unions, very popular in the U.S. and Ireland, but less so here, are community-based banks, usually of interest to those on lower incomes, including those without bank accounts.

The idea is for people with a common interest to club together to form a sort of ‘people’s bank’. Thrift and the savings habit is encouraged by asking people to save a regular sum each week or month. Once you have been saving for an initial period, usually 10 weeks or so, you can then borrow up to 3 times that amount at a rate of interest that legally may not exceed 1% per month. People with a common interest might include e.g. people who live in a certain area, people who work in the same place, people who attend the same place of worship etc.

In 1979/80, whilst working as Harlow Council’s Principal Welfare Rights Adviser, in my own time I got a few people together to form a Community Credit Union, known initially as Harlow Credit Union, and based on the commonality of living in Harlow. It developed slowly but surely.

In 1985, the then General Manager of Harlow Council, Harry Platt (good man) invited me to his office to discuss forming a Council Credit Union for Council employees. He and I got a few people together, including the Chairmen of N.A.L.G.O. and N.U.P.E., the two Council trades unions (now merged as UNISON), and within a few months a successful Council Credit Union was launched. I was thus a founder Committee member of both Credit Unions. As member number 0002 I am its longest-running member and still save regularly with it.

Several years later, these two Credit Unions were merged to form what is now the Harlowsave Credit Union, along with two others. It’s a continuing success story; you can read a summary of its history on its website here:

http://www.harlowsave.coop/outline.html?http://www.harlowsave.coop/history.html

I didn’t do this for the money, I did it because I saw a need. I made no money out of it, and there is of course no HMRC investigation as muratfan claims. I’m glad it has been a success and has been of benefit to so many people.

When you review your life and what you’ve done and not done, you realise you’ve made some mistakes. But this is something that worked out O.K., anyway.

So who is muratfan, anyway? Some say he’s Norwich photographer Ian West. Some say it’s someone who works for Deutsche Bank. Some say muratfan is a ‘she’ not a ‘he’. Perhaps someone knows who muratfan really is, I don’t know. All I can say is that when our article about Robert Murat comes out shortly, s/he may not be quite such a fan as s/he is now.

Oh, and one other thing.

Since the allegation about an HMRC investigation is wholly untrue, both muratfan and bonnybraes/ms marbles ought to delete that posting forthwith.

As strong McCann-supporters, they wouldn’t want to be thought of as promoting an outright lie.

Would they?

Stephanie wrote:I deal in facts Mr. B and that post is nothing less than libellous and out of order!

Tony Bennett wrote:

Is it established as a fact that Eddie was trained to alert to the scent of a human coprse by barking, is it established as a fact that in around 200 previous outings he had never once given a false alert, and is it established as a fact that he alerted by barking at where a corpse had been adjacent, in the McCanns' living room below the window, in the McCanns' bedroom by the wardrobe, on the veranda, in the garden, on two of Dr Kate McCann's clothes, on a child;s red T-shirt, on Cuddle Cat, around the door of the hired Renault Scenic, and on its car key.

Yes. These are facts.

I've read all that Martin Grimes has to say about Eddie and I've seen the vidoes of Eddie alerting in Apartment 5A and in the underground car park.

rockyrobin wrote:Mr bennett once again it was you who POSTED IT UP ON YOUR OPENING POST AND HERE IT IS...SO THE UNDERLINED BOLD BIT IS NOT FROM YOUR OPENING POST THEN, where you mentioned the Photographers name. You really are ((cough)) Toony . Are you hoping people will not refer back to the OP and hope to spread dis-information about.

rockyrobin wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

Is it established as a fact that Eddie was trained to alert to the scent of a human coprse by barking, is it established as a fact that in around 200 previous outings he had never once given a false alert, and is it established as a fact that he alerted by barking at where a corpse had been adjacent, in the McCanns' living room below the window, in the McCanns' bedroom by the wardrobe, on the veranda, in the garden, on two of Dr Kate McCann's clothes, on a child;s red T-shirt, on Cuddle Cat, around the door of the hired Renault Scenic, and on its car key.

Yes. These are facts.

I've read all that Martin Grimes has to say about Eddie and I've seen the vidoes of Eddie alerting in Apartment 5A and in the underground car park.

Toony, Eddie is also trained to alert to BLOOD, you never mention that bit do you. Why do you always miss that bit out?

Tony Bennett wrote:
For quite a few reasons, including these:

1. Martin Grime states time after time that Eddie is alerting to 'cadaver scent', NOT blood. You've read that as well, I take it?

2. Keela did not find blood at most of the 10 locations where Eddie located what Grime calls 'cadaver scent'.

Tony Bennett wrote:

Stephanie wrote:I deal in facts Mr. B and that post is nothing less than libellous and out of order!

I also deal in facts. Occasionally we all make mistakes and get our facts wrong. And then we should admit it.

The whole issue in the Madeleine McCann case is: what are the facts?

Is it established as a fact that Madeleine was abducted? - I don't think so.

Is it established as a fact that Eddie was trained to alert to the scent of a human coprse by barking, is it established as a fact that in around 200 previous outings he had never once given a false alert, and is it established as a fact that he alerted by barking at where a corpse had been adjacent, in the McCanns' living room below the window, in the McCanns' bedroom by the wardrobe, on the veranda, in the garden, on two of Dr Kate McCann's clothes, on a child;s red T-shirt, on Cuddle Cat, around the door of the hired Renault Scenic, and on its car key.

Yes. These are facts.

I've read all that Martin Grimes has to say about Eddie and I've seen the vidoes of Eddie alerting in Apartment 5A and in the underground car park.

Tony Bennett wrote:
Is it established as a fact that Madeleine was abducted? - I don't think so.

Is it established as a fact that Eddie was trained to alert to the scent of a human coprse by barking, is it established as a fact that in around 200 previous outings he had never once given a false alert, and is it established as a fact that he alerted by barking at where a corpse had been adjacent, in the McCanns' living room below the window, in the McCanns' bedroom by the wardrobe, on the veranda, in the garden, on two of Dr Kate McCann's clothes, on a child;s red T-shirt, on Cuddle Cat, around the door of the hired Renault Scenic, and on its car key.

Raffle wrote:Just for starters, if you listen to what Grimes SAYS on the dog footage, he does not AT ANY TIME say the dog had indicated a corpse in the bedroom by the wardrobe. I sincerely hope, to save yourself from being dragged though the courts that you will LISTEN to what grimes says about that.

Raffle wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

Stephanie wrote:I deal in facts Mr. B and that post is nothing less than libellous and out of order!

I also deal in facts. Occasionally we all make mistakes and get our facts wrong. And then we should admit it.

The whole issue in the Madeleine McCann case is: what are the facts?

Is it established as a fact that Madeleine was abducted? - I don't think so.

Is it established as a fact that Eddie was trained to alert to the scent of a human coprse by barking, is it established as a fact that in around 200 previous outings he had never once given a false alert, and is it established as a fact that he alerted by barking at where a corpse had been adjacent, in the McCanns' living room below the window, in the McCanns' bedroom by the wardrobe, on the veranda, in the garden, on two of Dr Kate McCann's clothes, on a child;s red T-shirt, on Cuddle Cat, around the door of the hired Renault Scenic, and on its car key.

Yes. These are facts.

I've read all that Martin Grimes has to say about Eddie and I've seen the vidoes of Eddie alerting in Apartment 5A and in the underground car park.

Just for starters, if you listen to what Grimes SAYS on the dog footage, he does not AT ANY TIME say the dog had indicated a corpse in the bedroom by the wardrobe. I sincerely hope, to save yourself from being dragged though the courts that you will LISTEN to what grimes says about that.

Stephanie wrote:

Raffle wrote:Just for starters, if you listen to what Grimes SAYS on the dog footage, he does not AT ANY TIME say the dog had indicated a corpse in the bedroom by the wardrobe. I sincerely hope, to save yourself from being dragged though the courts that you will LISTEN to what grimes says about that.

What on earth are you going on about "I sincerely hope, to save yourself from being dragged though the courts that you will LISTEN to what grimes says about that"

Are you not quite with it, are you so completely deluded? Anyone can drag me through any court in the land I have no qualms I do not have to go to bed each evening wondering what the post will bring in the morning! And if I were to be dragged through the courts Mr.B with my O/H working in Holborn do you honestly think I would be worried? What a load of absolute tosh you write.

Tony Bennett wrote:

Stephanie wrote:

Raffle wrote:Just for starters, if you listen to what Grimes SAYS on the dog footage, he does not AT ANY TIME say the dog had indicated a corpse in the bedroom by the wardrobe. I sincerely hope, to save yourself from being dragged though the courts that you will LISTEN to what grimes says about that.

What on earth are you going on about "I sincerely hope, to save yourself from being dragged though the courts that you will LISTEN to what grimes says about that"

Are you not quite with it, are you so completely deluded? Anyone can drag me through any court in the land I have no qualms I do not have to go to bed each evening wondering what the post will bring in the morning! And if I were to be dragged through the courts Mr.B with my O/H working in Holborn do you honestly think I would be worried? What a load of absolute tosh you write.

Um, Stephanie, the 'tosh' you spoke about was written by Raffle, not me.

Look back and check.

You asked me: "Are you not quite with it?"

Maybe you should ask yourself the same question.

After all, it is late

Tony Bennett wrote:

Raffle wrote:Just for starters, if you listen to what Grimes SAYS on the dog footage, he does not AT ANY TIME say the dog had indicated a corpse in the bedroom by the wardrobe. I sincerely hope, to save yourself from being dragged though the courts that you will LISTEN to what grimes says about that.

The report of expert dog handler, Martin Grime, August 2007

OPERATION TASK CANINE SEARCH REPORT - August 2007 SUBMITTED TO MINISTERIO PUBLICO DE PORTIMAO

Personal Profile

[SNIPPED]

OPERATION TASK CANINE DEPLOYMENTS 1-8 AUGUST 2007

On the instruction of the Director of the Portuguese Police (Policia Judiciara = ‘PJ’), the PJ kept all search records concerning the deployment of the search dogs. All dog searches were recorded by video. The following searches were conducted:

Five apartments at a complex in Praia da Luz

a) Mr. Murat's property at Praia da Luz
b) Mr. McCanns’ villa at Praia da Luz (where they are living at present)
c) Articles of clothing from Mr. McCann's residence
d) Western Beach, Praia da Luz
e) Eastern Beach, Praia da Luz
f) 10 Vehicles screened at Portimao.

All five apartments were searched using the EVRD. The only alert indications were at apartment 5a, the reported scene, as follows:

[NOTE: We in places omitted some of these findings where we have reproduced them already, see pages 11 & 12 above].

The EVRD alerted in these places:

(a) The rear bedroom of the apartment in the immediate right hand corner by
the door
(b) Living room, behind sofa
(c) Veranda outside parents' bedroom
(d) Garden area directly under veranda.

My observation of the dog's behaviour in this instance was that the dog's behaviour changed immediately upon opening the front door to the apartment. He will normally remain in the sit position until released and tasked to search. On this occasion he broke the stay and entered the apartment with an above average interest.

His behaviour was such that I believed him to be 'in scent' and I therefore allowed him to free search without direction to allow him to identify the source of his interest. He did so alerting in the rear bedroom. I released him from this and tasked him to continue to search. He did so, alerting in an area to the rear of the sofa in the lounge.

The dog's behaviour for these alerts led me to the following opinions. The first alert was given with the dog’s head in the air without a positive area being identified. This is the alert given by him when there is no tangible evidence to be located [i.e. a physical corpse], only the remaining scent.

The second alert was one where a definitive area was evident. The CSI dog was therefore deployed who gave specific alert indications to specific areas on the tiled floor area behind the sofa and on the curtain in the area that was in contact with the floor behind the sofa.

This would indicate to the likely presence of human blood. The forensic science support officers were then deployed to recover items for laboratory analysis.

There were no alert indications from the remaining properties. I did however see the dog search in the kitchen waste bins. These contained meat foodstuffs including pork and did not result in any false alert response.

Canine search of Mr Robert Murat’s property:

[SNIPPED]

Canine search of the McCanns’ villa (where they are living at present, August 2007):

The villa interior, garden, and all property within were searched by the EVRD. The only alert indication given was when the dog located a pink cuddly toy (‘Cuddle Cat’) in the villa’s lounge. The CSI dog did not alert to the toy when screened separately.

It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to cadaver scent contamination.

No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.

Boxes of clothing: Property from the McCanns’ residence

At a suitable venue, numerous boxes of clothing and property taken from the McCanns’ present residence were screened using both the EVRD and the CSI dog. The venue was screened by both dogs prior to introducing the clothing/property. Neither gave an alert indication. The screening then took place with the contents of each box being placed around the room in turn. The process was recorded by video and written records were taken by PJ officers. The only alert indication was by the EVRD on clothing from one of the boxes. I am not in possession of the details as these were recorded by the PJ officers present. It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to 'a cadaver scent' contaminant.

No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.

Western Beach

[SNIPPED]

Eastern beach

[SNIPPED]

Canine vehicle searches

Ten vehicles were screened in an underground multi-storey car park at Portimao. The vehicles, of which I did not know the owner details, were parked on an empty floor with 20-30 feet [6 to 9 metres] between each. The vehicle placement video recording and management of the process was conducted by the PJ.

The EVRD was then tasked to search the area. When passing a vehicle I now know to be hired and in the possession of the McCann family, the dog's behaviour changed substantially. This then produced an alert indication at the lower part of the driver’s door where the dog was biting and barking. I recognise this behaviour as the dog indicating scent emitting from the inside of the vehicle through the seal around the door.

This vehicle was then subjected to a full physical examination by the PJ and no human remains were found. The CSI dog was then tasked to screen the vehicle. An alert indication was forthcoming from the rear driver's side of the boot area. Forensic samples were taken by the PJ and forwarded to a forensic laboratory [the Forensic Science Service] in the UK.

It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to 'cadaver scent' contaminant or human blood scent. No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence. The remainder of the vehicles were screened by the EVRD without any interest being shown. Therefore the CSI dog was not further deployed.

The odour target of cadaver is scientifically explained through 'volatile organic compounds' that in a certain configuration are received by the dog as a receptor. Recognition then gives a conditioned response 'ALERT'. Despite considerable research and analytical investigation, the compounds cannot as yet be replicated in laboratory processes. Therefore, the 'alert' by dogs without a tangible source cannot be forensically proven at this time.

Cadaver scent cannot readily be removed by cleaning as the compounds adhere to surfaces. The scent can be 'masked' by bleach and other strong smelling odours but the dog's olfactory system is able to isolate the odours and identify specific compounds' and mixes. Cadaver scent contamination may be transferred in numerous scenarios. Any contact with a cadaver which is then passed to any other material may be recognised by the dog causing a 'trigger' indication.

EVRD

'Eddie', the Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (E.V.R.D.), will search for and locate human remains and body fluids including blood in any environment or terrain. The initial training of the dog was conducted using human blood and still-born decomposing piglets. The importance of this is that the dog is introduced to the scent of a decomposing body not foodstuff.

This ensures that the dog disregards the 'bacon sandwich' and 'kebab' etc that is ever present in the background environment. Therefore, the dog would remain efficient searching for a cadaver in a café where the clientele were sitting, eating bacon sandwiches. He has additionally trained exclusively using human remains in the U.S.A. in association with the F.B.I. The enhanced training of the dog has also involved the use of collection of 'cadaver scent' odour from human corpses using remote technical equipment which does not contact the subject.

This method is comparable to the simulation of cross-contamination. It does, however, differ in that the remote scent samples recovery does not involve subject matter and therefore is a 'pure' scent sample. The dog has, since initial training, gained considerable experience in successfully operationally locating human remains and evidential forensic material.

The E.R.V.D. has successfully in training and in operational casework located human cadavers, whether in the whole or parts thereof, deposited surface or sub-surface to a depth of approximately 1 metre [3 feet] shortly after death (though precise times are not determinable) to the advanced stages of decomposition and putrefaction through the skeletal. This includes incinerated remains even if large quantities of accelerant have been involved. The dog has successfully in training and in operational casework, located human cadavers in water, either from river bank-sides or when deployed in a boat.

The dog has also been trained to identify cadaver scent contamination where there is no physically retrievable evidence, due to scent adhering to previous material such as carpet or the upholstery in motor vehicles. This may be achieved by the dog being deployed directly to the subject area, or by scent samples being taken by remote means on sterile gauze pads. The gauze pads are then 'screened' in a line - up formation with the inclusion of a number of control samples and blank sterile pads.

The dog will alert to the presence of cadaver scent whether it is at source or some distance away from a deposition site. This enables the use of the dog to identify the venting or exhaust channels of the scent through fissures in bedrock or watercourses. A geophysical survey of the area will then reduce the size of the search area. The dog may be used to screen clothing, vehicles or property in a suitable environment. This is completed in a scent discrimination exercise where controls may be included to increase confidence in the dog’s findings.



Note, if Eddie the EVRD dog alerted in a place and the CSI dog Keela did not, the conclusion must be that in those places Eddie was alerting to corpse scent not blood. He is trained to alert to the scent of a corpse.

Did Eddie alert to Cuddle Cat?

Yes.

Did Keela alert to Cuddle Cat?

No.

Conclusion therefore: There was no blood on Cuddle Cat but a corpse had been in contact with Cuddle Cat for at least 90 minutes.

Slartibartfast wrote:Also worth noting is Eddie failed to alert to the toy until it was hidden away....

aiyoyo wrote:Oh dear, there you go, by not alerting to every cuddlecat the dog had proved their brilliant ability to differentiate cavaderine and non-cavaderine contamination cuddle cat.