McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Page 3 of 26 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 14 ... 26  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post  Kololi on Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:20 pm

I think Mr Bennett has already said that postage was additional to the £5.

Kololi

Posts: 677
Join date: 2010-01-10

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post  candyfloss on Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:34 pm

Kololi wrote:I think Mr Bennett has already said that postage was additional to the £5.


This is on the forum..............

1) A courier this morning at 08.00 collected the envelope, 60 Reasons book, 10 Reasons leaflet, a receipt signed by Anthony Bennett plus emails between myself and Mr Bennett. The book was purchased by contacting Mr Bennett directly via email. The money was posted to his home address in Harlow. Cash was sent ( £5 ) as payment, because I didn't want to send a cheque made payable to Mrs Bennett as requested by Anthony Bennett at the same address.

____________________



candyfloss
Super duper Moderator

Posts: 11753
Join date: 2009-11-27
Age: 60

Back to top Go down

Waste of what exactly?

Post  Portia on Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:37 pm

The documents I received were also remarkable for a 19-page Affidavit
from Carter-Ruck Partner Isabel Hudson, who in 100-plus paragraphs,
sub-paragraphs and sub-sub-paragraphs, attempted to prove that I had
either authored each publication i nquestion, or at least consented to
its publication on our website. This was a wholly unnecessary exercise,
as in correspondence with Carter-Ruck I have always conceded authorship
of all the postings and articles they have referred to, or at least in
some cases to jointly consenting with Madeleine Foundation Committee
members to publish them. My claim has always been simply that the right
to circulate facts, freedom of speech, and the right to make fair
comment if you have an 'honest belief' in the truth of what you are
saying have justified all the statements I have made about the reported
disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

What a waste of time and effort!


Antony Bennett, you are very much mistaken. No time was wasted. No effort was superfluous: on the contrary, my learned friend!
Come on now: as one lawyer to another: what better sort of client to have than a vindictive one without any legal expertise and a mint of money to spend?


Portia

Posts: 840
Join date: 2012-02-06

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post  ShuBob on Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:28 pm

FWIW, I think Gunnill's antics in trying to get TB to breach his undertaking in order to earn himself some cash is comparable to the journalists who commissioned Glenn Mulcaire to hack people's phones though the latter is a criminal act in the law books while the former was a voluntary act taken by TB albeit under duress. Mulcaire was found guilty for committing the act and the journalists who allegedly used his services are being arrested. TB may be found guilty for selling the book but Gunnill may also find himself facing censure.

PS: After sending a courier to collect the package from Gunnill first thing in the morning, did the Express run a story on his findings? If not, is that why he went to the McCanns and Carter-Ruck so he could perhaps get payment that way? But really, if his story is to be believed and he wanted to run a story via the Express, why would he expose his behind on the internet BEFORE getting any sort of confirmation that the story would be run? Another newspaper could have got the story and run it meaning the Express may no longer be interested which = no cash for Gunnill. IMO he's backtracking. He messed up big time and he knows it

ShuBob

Posts: 993
Join date: 2012-02-07

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post  Gillyspot on Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:19 pm

candyfloss wrote:
Kololi wrote:I think Mr Bennett has already said that postage was additional to the £5.


This is on the forum..............

1) A courier this morning at 08.00 collected the envelope, 60 Reasons book, 10 Reasons leaflet, a receipt signed by Anthony Bennett plus emails between myself and Mr Bennett. The book was purchased by contacting Mr Bennett directly via email. The money was posted to his home address in Harlow. Cash was sent ( £5 ) as payment, because I didn't want to send a cheque made payable to Mrs Bennett as requested by Anthony Bennett at the same address.


As Gunnill stated he was prepared to pay considerably more then Tony can surely say that the £5 was simply a postage & packing charge not a sale price for the book particularly if it was secondhand (if this was so).

It does amaze me that 1000s of people actively share their doubt of the McCann couple (myself included) daily, yet K & G and Carter-Ruck just pick on a retired solicitor (Tony). I would imagine if they picked on us ALL who doubt their story they wouldn't find it easy to intimidate a "class action" of people. Ergo they are scared. Only my opinion of course.


____________________
Kate McCann "I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances"

Gillyspot

Posts: 1269
Join date: 2011-06-13

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post  rainbow-fairy on Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:39 pm

I agree with Shubob. Mr Gunnill IMO is furiously back-pedalling, as he knows he's messed up and this could open a BIG can of worms. Didn't he originally boast that he bought the book on behalf of a 'third party'?
I wonder - Tony. As Gunnill has signed his affidavit, would it be possible to get a witness from the Express? After all, he said he'd had some form of agreement to 'running a story' - Who, if anyone, gave him that notion?
I find it unlikely. It has the hallmarks of Team McCann and CR.
FWIW, imo journo's going 'undercover' to expose abuse in care homes etc is in the public interest. Inciting a retired solicitor to sell a book that didn't deserve to be banned in the first place is hardly in the same vein, is it?

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts: 1616
Join date: 2011-05-26
Age: 38
Location: going round in circles

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post  candyfloss on Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:59 pm

1) A courier this morning at 08.00 collected the envelope, 60 Reasons
book, 10 Reasons leaflet, a receipt signed by Anthony Bennett plus
emails between myself and Mr Bennett. The book was purchased by
contacting Mr Bennett directly via email. The money was posted to his
home address in Harlow. Cash was sent ( £5 ) as payment, because I
didn't want to send a cheque made payable to Mrs Bennett as requested
by Anthony Bennett at the same address.


2) Mr Bennett has admitted selling a copy of 60 Reasons to me. There
are two further examples but I only required proof of one sale.

3) I am grateful to this forum for allowing me to make public and open
contact with Mr Anthony Bennett.

4) The third party has asked me not make any further comment or
postings, which I have agreed to do. I have also agreed to make a
personal statement to the third party
.



The bit in red does not sound like a newspaper does it. thinking

____________________



candyfloss
Super duper Moderator

Posts: 11753
Join date: 2009-11-27
Age: 60

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post  tigger on Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:02 pm

candyfloss wrote:
Kololi wrote:I think Mr Bennett has already said that postage was additional to the £5.


This is on the forum..............

1) A courier this morning at 08.00 collected the envelope, 60 Reasons book, 10 Reasons leaflet, a receipt signed by Anthony Bennett plus emails between myself and Mr Bennett. The book was purchased by contacting Mr Bennett directly via email. The money was posted to his home address in Harlow. Cash was sent ( £5 ) as payment, because I didn't want to send a cheque made payable to Mrs Bennett as requested by Anthony Bennett at the same address.


From the above I would infer that the P & P is included in the cash payment, otherwise he would have had to send loose change with it.
He also states that HE didn't want to pay by cheque. TB presumably didn't mind if he did pay that way and so the cash payment was MG's idea.
Imo the cost of the booklet/paper/ink/enveloppe and the time spent sending it, must just about be covered by that payment.

Imo also - I am thinking more of 'entrapment' such as was thrown out by a judge in the Wimbledon murder case, years ago.

____________________
What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account? Macbeth Act V

tigger

Posts: 4994
Join date: 2011-07-20

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post  ShuBob on Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:08 pm

Had the "third party" being the Express or someone acting as a middleman on their behalf, no way would Gunnill have been allowed to give the game away by immediately posting the details on the internet BEFORE the story went to press. His behaviour is reminiscent of the actions of the infamous Lori Campbell of the Sunday Mirror who chose to speak to Sky News about her "scoop" instead of giving it to her employers who presumably were paying for her to be in Portugal in the first place lol!

ShuBob

Posts: 993
Join date: 2012-02-07

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post  rainbow-fairy on Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:28 pm

Nope, Candyfloss, doesn't sound like a newspaper to me, either!

Just found this on the front of February's parish newsletter. Whilst I'm not a Christian, the sentiment seems to cover what is happening to Tony right now;

Thoughts from the Rectory, taken from Acts chapter 7: verses 51-60

It's difficult to be the one who brings bad news. The TV weather presenter can upset people just by telling them it is going to rain the next day, yet he did not make the weather - he just tells us.
On a more serious note, when Stephen addressed the religious leaders of Israel, he incurred their wrath because he boldly told them the truth about themselves. He criticised their ancestors and implicated the whole council in the murder of Jesus. Everything he said was true. So what did they do with this indictment? They "gnashed their teeth at him" (Acts 7:54). They threw him out of the city and put him to death. Because he told the truth, Stephen died under a barrage of stones.
When we speak out for purity, righteousness, justice and godliness in a sinful, pleasure-loving world that seems destined to self-destruct, we too will be criticised. But no matter what happens to us, we can call on God as Stephen did. We can take comfort in knowing that we belong to him.
As Christian people trying to follow God, let us hope and pray that we have the courage to face discrimination and other injustices and tell it like it is.


Be strong Tony. You are in the right. There is more than freedom of speech stake here. My thoughts are with you and if there is anything I can do to help (however small) please don't hesitate to ask.

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts: 1616
Join date: 2011-05-26
Age: 38
Location: going round in circles

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 26 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 14 ... 26  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum