McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Welcome :: Carter-Ruck / McCanns / Amaral / Bennett / Smethurst / Kennedy Libel Trials and Lawsuits
Page 3 of 26 •
1, 2, 3, 4 ... 14 ... 26 
Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Kololi- Posts: 677
Join date: 2010-01-10
Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25
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
Waste of what exactly?
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
Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25
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
Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25
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
Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25
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
Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25
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.

candyfloss- Super duper Moderator
- Posts: 11753
Join date: 2009-11-27
Age: 60
Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25
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
Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

ShuBob- Posts: 993
Join date: 2012-02-07
Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25
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
Page 3 of 26 •
1, 2, 3, 4 ... 14 ... 26 
Similar topics» 'Bennett was duped by the McCanns' - thentherewere4
» MCCANNS v BENNETT - The committal to prison trial will take place for 1 or 2 days, sometime in April or later
» TRIAL DATE McCanns v Bennett 9 & 10 May 2012
» VIDEO - Tony Bennett faces PRISON at the Request of the McCanns!
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Welcome :: Carter-Ruck / McCanns / Amaral / Bennett / Smethurst / Kennedy Libel Trials and Lawsuits


