Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

by Cheshire Cat 08.12.11 8:20

Smokeandmirrors wrote:Yes, I just whizzed off and checked out Facebook FAQ's, Mr Smethurst definately would have had to accept a friend request. I would strongly contest the assertion that he had no control as it simply NOT TRUE! I think it grossly unfair that they would mention this without checking their facts, a lie must not enter the case!!

Facebook prompts that you have a friend request and asks if you wish to accept the friend. Smethurst had a relatively small amount of FB friends.

by Guest 08.12.11 8:56

Carter Ruck would have known this and at the end of the day they are paid to help their clients, hoping Tony didn't know this, which is precisely why I do not trust anything they have to say.

by jd 08.12.11 9:08

Yes you have to personally confirm a Facebook friend, though I think one of the 3 was a friend of one of the friends. But didn't another family member of smethurst have the same 1 or 2 Facebook friends too?

The very best of luck Tony

by Guest 08.12.11 9:21

Stella wrote:Carter Ruck would have known this and at the end of the day they are paid to help their clients, hoping Tony didn't know this, which is precisely why I do not trust anything they have to say.

What I should have said is, "hoping Tony and the Judge didn't know this".

What's the betting the Judge does not use FB and like me and many others, have no idea about these sorts of things.

by jd 08.12.11 9:28

Stella wrote:
Stella wrote:Carter Ruck would have known this and at the end of the day they are paid to help their clients, hoping Tony didn't know this, which is precisely why I do not trust anything they have to say.

What I should have said is, "hoping Tony and the Judge didn't know this".

What's the betting the Judge does not use FB and like me and many others, have no idea about these sorts of things.

the judge would have done his homework and will know. But its not about this, these rich folk look after each other in an unwritten law so to speak

by Guest 08.12.11 9:34

I'm not sure about that one JD, how could any Judge have the time to do all the homework on every aspect of every case, they have to preside over? Would time allow this?

Tony needs to address this with her.

by jd 08.12.11 9:40

Stella wrote:I'm not sure about that one JD, how could any Judge have the time to do all the homework on every aspect of every case, they have to preside over? Would time allow this?

Tony needs to address this with her.

The judge will have assistants etc to find all the info they need for any case and situation

by Guest 08.12.11 9:46

It was when the topic about E S started that I decided to access Facebook for the first time to try to understand more about the "friends" issue. I'm not sure if I'm much the wiser now - it really does seem to me to be aimed more towards the younger generation (I'm showing my age I know) and as such I'm having trouble with keeping up.

When I log into my entry, I'm greeted with a section called "add people you know" and there's a long list of people, some with photos, whom I don't know from Adam but are connected with someone else whom I have heard of. I can if I choose then access information about those people who for all I know may have some very strange interests which I certainly don't share.

I take it that this is not the situation we are talking about?

I

by jd 08.12.11 10:22

This post has been removed from the forum by Tony Bennett at the request of Edward Smethurst.

by littlepixie 08.12.11 10:29

I agree that no-one can become your friend on facebook without your express action of physically pressing the button to add them. I vet my friends carefully and reject more than I add.

Why aren't the Police interested in the activity of these people on Facebook?

Best Wishes Tony btw. Seems some of the nutters on twitter (who claim to know the McCanns) were lying about what happened yesterday.

by happychick 08.12.11 10:37

And, of course, Smethurst is a director of a Fund where the parents ask for money to search for their daughter who they say has been taken by a paedophile gang who, says Kate in the book she wrote for her kids, might be ripping apart her perfect genitals.

It does seem most bizarre that a director of the Fund should have these characters as friends on his FB page and, like you say, when it's brought to his attention he sues the person who told him.

Aren't these characters also friends on Smethurst's daughter's FB page? Isn't Smethurst worried about that at all? Does he dismiss outright that these awful characters could be part of the paedophile ring the McCanns say took Madeleine?

I find it odd that Smethurst did nothing about it other than ask libel lawyers to take action against TB.

by Guest 08.12.11 10:43

jd wrote:
Stella wrote:I'm not sure about that one JD, how could any Judge have the time to do all the homework on every aspect of every case, they have to preside over? Would time allow this?

Tony needs to address this with her.

The judge will have assistants etc to find all the info they need for any case and situation

Precisely, so why didn't they advise the Judge accordingly?

by jd 08.12.11 10:47

Stella wrote: Precisely, so why didn't they advise the Judge accordingly?

They would have done if the judge didn't know, its their job to. I think we know why the judge played dumb on this point winkwink

by dragonfly 08.12.11 10:57

Smokeandmirrors wrote:Yes, I just whizzed off and checked out Facebook FAQ's, Mr Smethurst definately would have had to accept a friend request. I would strongly contest the assertion that he had no control as it simply NOT TRUE! I think it grossly unfair that they would mention this without checking their facts, a lie must not enter the case!!

This is correct , YOU HAVE EVERY CONTROL OVER WHO BECOMES YOUR FRIEND,
a- you request someone to be you friend
b someone requests you to be their friend
c a mutual friend sends 'a friend suggestion' which comes up as a red icon in both persons notifications/ friends add list/ and again you still have to take the steps of either a or b above you then have to request them or they request you,

NO one can just be your friend , YOU have to AUTHORISE this ,

sorry if i have repeated what others have said many posts have come through while writing this

by jd 08.12.11 11:02

This post has been removed from the forum by Tony Bennett at the request of Edward Smethurst.

by pennylane 08.12.11 11:49

I do hope your day in court was not too stressful Tony LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 6 442775674

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 6 442775674

Many thanks for explaining the days events to us!

You have shown enormous courage, and I hope the final costs will be significantly low, if not waived altogether due to irregularities in the claimant's case against you. LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 6 3934901622

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 6 3934901622

by bobbin 08.12.11 11:52

'Ignorance of the Law is no defense'.

I
don't know if this is appropriate here, since face book is not the law,
but it has set rules, which are the laws by which it administers its
business.

Surely it is up to Smethurst's lawyer and the judge to
be informed of the conditions for being a friend on face book if they
are going to use or accept, reference to Facebook friends, as a
condition for apportioning blame and therefore costs, against an
individual, here, Tony Bennett.

As stated, if Smethurst is
director of a fund etc. and has accepted questionable friends on Facebook, and then
shoots the messenger (Tony Bennett) for pointing out the clash of
interests here, instead of removing the 'friends' then it is all not quite right.

Tony, bon
courage !!

As with the now exposed 'Webb' ex police officer, investigator for NI, seeking '
to 'destroy' the lawyer for Milly Dowler's parents, it would be wrong
to have to accept a breach of the law, or ignorance of it, permitting
an unjust outcome, because it is feared that a worse agreement would be
imposed if one kicks up dust.

Mark
Lewis, the Dowler's lawyer refers to the investigation against him on
the thread 'James Murdoch's lawyers confirm Tom Watson was put under
surveillance"

Post a reply

by Xavier 08.12.11 11:53

Mercifully I know little about facebook. And less about twitter.

Carter Ruck overclaiming? And being a bit creative with their costs? You will be telling me that bears s**t in the woods next.

by **PeterMac** 08.12.11 13:53

This post has been removed by Tony Bennett at the request of Edward Smethurst.

by bobbin 08.12.11 14:32

Wow ! PeterMac,

Put like that, I'd say your summary is very succinct. LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 6 259100

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 6 259100

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 6 609562

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 6 110921

by happychick 08.12.11 14:47

It's fantastic to have an experienced policeman as a member of this forum LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 6 259100

by Guest 08.12.11 15:06

Way to go PeterMac. LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 6 321268

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 6 281194

by tiny 08.12.11 15:11

This post has been removed from the forum by Tony Bennett at the request of Edward Smethurst.

by jd 08.12.11 15:18

tiny wrote:just seen on another blog an entry for smethurst friends on facebook for feb 2009 and all i can say is yuk,

i hope some one has shown this to the police its that disgusting.

and seeing as smethurst had these friends...

Remainder of post deleted. The Facebook conversations in question took place between James Halley and Greg Bailey. A Mr Ben Murphy had links on his Facebook profile to Facebook groups for 'Fisting' and for 'Bestiality'. However, Mr Smethurst has made no admissions as to being friends of these people or even of knowing them - ADMIN

All those comments are utterly vile and would send serious alarm signals to any decent honest being who had friends with these views and tastes

by **PeterMac** 08.12.11 15:30

It is no secret. Nor is it difficult to find.
It also does not happen by accident.

https://www.facebook.com/help/friends/requests

"Adding friends
How do I add a friend?
Search for your friend’s profile (timeline) using the search bar at the top of any Facebook page. Find the person you know and click on the Add as Friend button to the right of their name.

A friend request will be sent to that person. Once they confirm that they actually are friends with you, they will show up on your list of Facebook friends.

Please note that privacy settings may limit your ability to see the "Add as Friend" link for some users."

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2