We've Been Cart Rucked!

by jd 06.08.11 14:16

The Edward Smethurst topic has been deleted!

Sure Tony will explain shortly but we can guess whats happened

by pauline 06.08.11 14:29

jd, I just can't believe this.

the posts on the thread were reasonable and we had seen the return of Ringo to champion Mr Smethurst and the McCanns.

Like you, I eagerly await clarification.

by Guest 06.08.11 14:32

It hasn't been deleted, it has been moved into Admin for the time being until this issue with Carter Ruck is resolved one way or the other.

by jd 06.08.11 14:34

Thanks Admin for that info

We shall wait to see what happens

by aiyoyo 06.08.11 18:35

Admin wrote:It hasn't been deleted, it has been moved into Admin for the time being until this issue with Carter Ruck is resolved one way or the other.

Why? Are they also objecting to it been discussed here?

I thought it was only TB Smethurst is targeting for obvious reason because he's thorn in mccanns eyes.

by Guest 06.08.11 19:02

Today I was made aware of a 2nd letter from Carter Ruck that was sent to Tony on 4th August. I didn't know anything about this letter until I saw it on someone's blog.

Part of the letter states:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Recently we have seen Carter Ruck have Pat Brown's book banned on Amazon without any notice whatsoever to her, so the thread will not be back on the forum.

by lj 06.08.11 19:06

It's so funny, most people work on their reputation by doing good deeds and behaving good (well normally).

CR, the McCanns and their disciples, do it by strongarming anyone who points out the obvious.

It is sad if that's your only possible defense.

by Big Vern 06.08.11 19:18

This is a corrupt, stinking and oppressive regime we live under in the UK...... the time has surely come for people to begin to fight back.

by happychick 06.08.11 19:24

Big Vern wrote:This is a corrupt, stinking and oppressive regime we live under in the UK...... the time has surely come for people to begin to fight back.

It certainly is Big Vern.

The McCanns have libelled Dr Amaral, but that's ok.

Muratfan has libelled Mr Bennett in a gross way, but that's ok. Muratfan has also libelled Pat Brown and indeed anyone who takes his fancy on any given day if it helps him fill his blog up.

But when something as abhorrent as the comments posted on Smethursts FB is made public then it's not ok.

Providing you are wealthy then your reputation will be defended.

by Guest 06.08.11 19:31

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Muratfan doesn't hesitate to libel anyone...that is what he posted on twitter about me.

by jd 06.08.11 19:33

Its the sick society we now live in, the ones who enjoy high profile public positions hide behind their lawyers to clamp down on anyone that challenges them. Its a subtle form of dictatorship in my eyes using litigation as the weapon

No allegations were made against the client, what was questioned was the clients responsibility, as would anybodies be in the same position. By their actions, we obviously got very close to the truth because it was only a topic on a forum which hasn't escaped outside in the open world and never likely to either. But this is great news as they have proven themselves in a big big way so I can only say a big thank you for that

I could kiss you!
thanks

by lj 06.08.11 19:34

Well, reputation can be positive or negative.
The fact that they choose for the choking method iso showing it is not true shows they are not defending a squeaky clean reputation.

by lj 06.08.11 19:36

jd wrote:Its the sick society we now live in, the ones who enjoy high profile public positions hide behind their lawyers to clamp down on anyone that challenges them. Its a subtle form of dictatorship in my eyes using litigation as the weapon

No allegations were made against the client, what was questioned was the clients responsibility, as would anybodies be in the same position. By their actions, we obviously got very close to the truth because it was only a topic on a forum which hasn't escaped outside in the open world and never likely to either. But this is great news as they have proven themselves in a big big way so I can only say a big thank you for that

I could kiss you!

subtle??? :iconbiggrin:

you're too kind jd!!

by happychick 06.08.11 19:36

The pro's are saying that the comments on ES's FB were lies and made up by anti's, that the anti's probably created accounts to set up ES.

by jd 06.08.11 19:40

happychick wrote:The pro's are saying that the comments on ES's FB were lies and made up by anti's, that the anti's probably created accounts to set up ES.

But ES closed the FB account himself, his spotter said so

by Guest 06.08.11 19:47

I would like to know how this letter appeared on someone's blog, asking for posts to be removed, and not bothering to inform the forum owner? How did the screenshot get on that blog, when no-one here has seen or heard of it?

by happychick 06.08.11 19:50

I don't know candyfloss but muratfan has been claiming to be sponsored by carter ruck.

by Ringo 06.08.11 20:27

jd wrote:Its the sick society we now live in, the ones who enjoy high profile public positions hide behind their lawyers to clamp down on anyone that challenges them. Its a subtle form of dictatorship in my eyes using litigation as the weapon

No allegations were made against the client, what was questioned was the clients responsibility, as would anybodies be in the same position. By their actions, we obviously got very close to the truth because it was only a topic on a forum which hasn't escaped outside in the open world and never likely to either. But this is great news as they have proven themselves in a big big way so I can only say a big thank you for that

I could kiss you!

if there were a discussion taking place somewhere on the internet in which it was being insinuated that you were friends with paedophiles would it be a sign of your guilt if you took legal action to have that discussion to removed? Or is it more likely that you would have done this because the insinuations were completely unfounded and defamatory?

by Ringo 06.08.11 20:29

candyfloss wrote:I would like to know how this letter appeared on someone's blog, asking for posts to be removed, and not bothering to inform the forum owner? How did the screenshot get on that blog, when no-one here has seen or heard of it?

Was that letter not originally sent to Tony Bennett and is he not actually admin on this forum? Why did he not tell the forum owner about it?

by Guest 06.08.11 21:00

Ringo wrote:Was that letter not originally sent to Tony Bennett and is he not actually admin on this forum? Why did he not tell the forum owner about it?

Tony is not admin, but he does have mod status.

by Ringo 06.08.11 22:10

Admin wrote:
Ringo wrote:Was that letter not originally sent to Tony Bennett and is he not actually admin on this forum? Why did he not tell the forum owner about it?

Tony is not admin, but he does have mod status.

The question still stands.

by jd 07.08.11 1:07

Tonight is one of celebration! (more than you realise) Lets get into the party spirit
drinks

by lj 07.08.11 1:08

I'm always in for a party!
What are we celebrating??

by jd 07.08.11 1:22

One analogy would be its like a game of chess...and the king is on his own and there are no pawns, knights or horses to protect him

Or you have a flush of cards....ready to play them at the appropriate time...however long it takes, they are ready to play...woo hoo!

Lets party...open the new zealand wine and put on the music

by lj 07.08.11 1:37

I'll stick to the tequila or dos XX, thank you. The new zealand wine has a kind of bitter taste since 2007.

Poor CR lawyers: the future must look bleak in many ways.