Re: Harlow Star covers the McCanns' application to put me in jail

by **Tony Bennett** 01.11.12 16:15

candyfloss wrote:Yes, of course Tony.

But it is books standing proud on Britain's bookshelves about this case, available for all to see...where are they?

Indeed.

'Tis because of our sickenly oppressive libel laws, so oppressive that nasty foreigners even make special journeys to our world-famous High Court to serve their libel writs here - The Royal Courts of Justice in The Strand is the most sought-after destination on the planet to try to bully your opponent into silence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2142707/New-law-stop-libel-tourism.html

[NOTE: The day after the Daily Mail published the above article, the paperback edition of 'madeleine' by Dr Kate McCann was published]

by Ciawoman 01.11.12 17:34

Tony Bennett wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
candyfloss wrote:In 2008 Mr Bennett published a controversial book – What Really Happened to Madeleine McCann – in which he made a number of allegations relating to the case

Just reading that I googled books on Madeleine McCann and as we know, there have hardly been any...
candyfloss, you missed out quite a few...

1. Dr Christian Ludke, German Forensic Psychologist:...
My goodness, I am being too modest.

I missed out this one:

The Madeleine McCann Case Files: Volume 1, with introduction by Tony Benentt, [February 2010]. ISBN 978--0-9563351-1-1, paperback

* Still available via The Madeleine Foundation website ( www.madeleinefoundation.org.uk) , price £4.00 inc. postage (pay via PayPal) or order by post

* Never banned

* Still available

* 108 pages of selected material from the officially-released Portuguese Police files

* But...

...depending on how the court cases against me go, it could end up being the third book on Madeleine McCann to be banned...

I just started reading your book today and finding it good as it has lots information in one place rather than reading bits and bobs on the forum..

by jay2001 01.11.12 19:51

Just refreshed the page and still no comments! I've sent a polite message which states it's a disgrace that this man (didn't want to appear to familiar) is facing jail because he disputes the abduction story and I thought we lived in a democracy.

Long live the internet because if we had to rely on the poor press in this country we'd be totally in the dark. Perhaps that so vile pervert would have been caught out while he was alive if Twitter and bloggers were able to write things the 'enablers' have kept covered up for years.

by Pershing36 01.11.12 23:58

No disrespect Tony but that picture is all wrong. I know that is the only expression that the McCanns want published but it is not you. You usually look so much stronger and confident. Don't let them get that over you.

by **Tony Bennett** 02.11.12 10:57

jay2001 wrote:Just refreshed the page and still no comments! I've sent a polite message which states it's a disgrace that this man (didn't want to appear to familiar) is facing jail because he disputes the abduction story and I thought we lived in a democracy

There are 22 published comments on the Harlow Star website so far, including yours. The majority support me. May I thank all those members of this forum who troubled to send their comments to the Star, it's obvious a number of you have done so. Believe me, this does make a difference because editors and reporters of the paper do read these comments (as do the public of course!)

And it's not too late so add some more...

http://www.harlowstar.co.uk/News/Harlow-news/Former-Harlow-solicitor-could-face-jail-over-McCann-allegations-31102012.htm

by Guest 02.11.12 11:05

One or two trolls there ("UnaWinchester" also briefly graced this forum with her presence) but generally a good reaction. Pam Gurney obviously hasn't got whiff of the story yet!

Well done to the paper for printing the comments.

by Nina 02.11.12 13:17

Spoke too soon Jean, she has posted a lengthy piece supporting the McCanns. They are also saying now that what we are basing our beliefs on are badly translated and not correct.

by Guest 02.11.12 13:32

Yes I knew she'd soon appear. Where would she and the rest of the pros be without this site to alert them to all the publications that aren't toeing the party line?!

by Guest 02.11.12 13:39

Yep, files mistranslated. Same old spiel. The rogatory interviews were here in England conducted by British Police, and errr in English Harlow Star covers the McCanns' application to put me in jail - Page 2 110921

Tony your tweet seems to have mobilised them into the usual attack mode. Harlow Star covers the McCanns' application to put me in jail - Page 2 110921

by ShuBob 02.11.12 14:13

It would appear these people have little sense because if they did, they'd know that by commenting on stories the way they do, they attract curious bystanders to the case Harlow Star covers the McCanns' application to put me in jail - Page 2 110921

. Surely, even the McCanns know that these people do not help their cause Harlow Star covers the McCanns' application to put me in jail - Page 2 1287980906

Harlow Star covers the McCanns' application to put me in jail - Page 2 1287980906

by Miraflores 02.11.12 14:15

Umm - difficult language to translate. Don't think so. I can even work out bits of it from my knowledge of Spanish. I don't think it has a reputation for particular difficulty, not like Hungarian say.

by Guest 02.11.12 17:33

As far as I know, Shubob, the McCanns have never publicly distanced themselves from the troll fraternity, not even the real dregs like muratfan.

So it doesn't appear that they care what these people do or say. I'd be horrified if they affiliated themselves to me!

Comments are no longer being allowed on the article. Poor Pam has been cut off in her prime!

by Nina 02.11.12 17:47

Jean wrote:As far as I know, Shubob, the McCanns have never publicly distanced themselves from the troll fraternity, not even the real dregs like muratfan.

So it doesn't appear that they care what these people do or say. I'd be horrified if they affiliated themselves to me!

Comments are no longer being allowed on the article. Poor Pam has been cut off in her prime!

Ah bless, but she'll find another platform I am sure. I wonder if she is paid per post, or hour?

by Bob Southgate 02.11.12 17:51

Una Winchesters initial comments are disgraceful. Describing those who don't believe that the McCanns are 100% innocent as "either a bit unhinged, or just very nasty" demonstrates a total lack of tolerance towards those who do not support her assertions. Does she honestly believe that the actions of the McCanns in leaving three children under the age of four in an apartment alone without a babysitter while they wined and dined are acceptable?

by Guest 02.11.12 17:52

Nina, she always has HiDeHo to fall back on!

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t5835p40-a-message-to-britain-s-media-from-the-forum-owner

What a Trojan is our Pam.

by Nina 02.11.12 17:55

Jean wrote:Nina, she always has HiDeHo to fall back on!

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t5835p40-a-message-to-britain-s-media-from-the-forum-owner

What a Trojan is our Pam.

don't remind her.

by jay2001 02.11.12 18:16

I hope Graham Perry has informed the relevant authorities that he has potential proof that Madeleine is alive. Why is he telling a local newpaper? This information should not be given in a comment to a newspaper.

Some of the comments just appall me - the supporters have to trash the dogs and can never, ever give a valid reason for no evidence of an abductor. The ridiculous sighting at 9.15pm couldn't be corroborated by GM or Jez and neither saw her and no-one seems to know which side of the road they were on. If one person could tell me where is the evidence of an abductor I'd be willing to listen. I don't have tunnel vision or a closed mind, but the discrepancies in this tale just make the abduction story hard to believe.

Did the British police state there was an abduction? I must have missed that quote, but at least one of the commenters stated that. I remember Redwood saying she was either dead or alive.

by Bob Southgate 02.11.12 18:25

jay2001 wrote:
Did the British police state there was an abduction? I must have missed that quote, but at least one of the commenters stated that. I remember Redwood saying she was either dead or alive.

I have no recollection of any such statement being made but I am the wrong side of 50 now and the memory is perhaps not quite as sharp as it once was. But if anyone could point to any press release from Scotland Yard which shows such a statement has been made (bearing in mind the investigation is still ongoing) it would be appreciated.

by Guest 02.11.12 18:32

D C I Redwood is quoted in this article as saying that he believes that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/apr/25/madeleine-mccann-case-reopen-call

by Bob Southgate 02.11.12 19:11

Jean wrote:D C I Redwood is quoted in this article as saying that he believes that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger.

[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/apr/25/madeleine-mccann-case-reopen-call

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/apr/25/madeleine-mccann-case-reopen-call[/quote[/url]]

So that is his belief, rather than the conclusion of the investigation. Thanks for the link Jean.

by Nina 02.11.12 19:23

Bob Southgate wrote:
jay2001 wrote:
Did the British police state there was an abduction? I must have missed that quote, but at least one of the commenters stated that. I remember Redwood saying she was either dead or alive.

I have no recollection of any such statement being made but I am the wrong side of 50 now and the memory is perhaps not quite as sharp as it once was. But if anyone could point to any press release from Scotland Yard which shows such a statement has been made (bearing in mind the investigation is still ongoing) it would be appreciated.

Didn't Andy Redwood say something like they were investigating it as though the abduction had happened in the UK?

by **Tony Bennett** 02.11.12 19:59

Nina wrote:
Bob Southgate wrote:
jay2001 wrote:
Did the British police state there was an abduction? I must have missed that quote...

...if anyone could point to any press release from Scotland Yard which shows such a statement has been made (bearing in mind the investigation is still ongoing) it would be appreciated.

Didn't Andy Redwood say something like they were investigating it as though the abduction had happened in the UK?

Nina, Bob Southgate, here is your answer.

This is what the Met Police issued as their official 'remit' for their investiagtion - only after I asked an FoI Act question to get it out of them, mind you.

"Our remit is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional, new investigative approaches we would take..."

Most of us knew from the beginning that D.C.I. REdwood's review would be an expensive cover-up, or whitewash job. This simply confirmed it.

Obvious question: Why did they not say: 'as if the disappearance occurred in the UK...'?

They had plainly stated that this was an abduction.

Gillyspot placed it on the forum, here's the discussion about it:

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t4145-operation-grange-remit?highlight=remit

The whole Scotland Yard Review exercise, when coupled with myriad other examples of Met Police bungling, incompetence and worse, only served to reveal what a corrupt state the senior officers in our most senior police service had got themselves into

by Bob Southgate 02.11.12 20:18

Thanks Tony.

It concerns me that instead of doing an evidence led investigation that DCI Redwood has effectively ruled out the McCanns as suspects. If he has good evidence to support his views that that is the case then all well and good. But he shouldn't be making such statements if the investigation is still ongoing and all leads and possibilities are being examined.

To me there are only 3 possibilities:-

1. Maddie was abducted by a stranger and is still alive

2. Maddie was abducted by a stranger and is now dead

3. Maddie died in the apartment either accidentally or with malice aforethought and her body has been concealed/disposed of.

I don't believe that DCI Redwood should be publicising his personal beliefs until such time as the evidence supports such beliefs and that they have come to such conclusions after a thorough investigation of all evidence available to them.

by Ribisl 02.11.12 20:35

Bob Southgate wrote:Thanks Tony.

It concerns me that instead of doing an evidence led investigation that DCI Redwood has effectively ruled out the McCanns as suspects. If he has good evidence to support his views that that is the case then all well and good. But he shouldn't be making such statements if the investigation is still ongoing and all leads and possibilities are being examined.

To me there are only 3 possibilities:-

1. Maddie was abducted by a stranger and is still alive

2. Maddie was abducted by a stranger and is now dead

3. Maddie died in the apartment either accidentally or with malice aforethought and her body has been concealed/disposed of.

I don't believe that DCI Redwood should be publicising his personal beliefs until such time as the evidence supports such beliefs and that they have come to such conclusions after a thorough investigation of all evidence available to them.

Far fetched perhaps but it has also been suggested as another possibility

4. Maddie was taken alive by somebody known to her parents

To anyone with an average IQ all the evidence points to 3, but not to DCI Redwood.

by PauliPevsner 02.11.12 20:40

A saw the News Article on this matter in the Harlow Star. I had not taken much interest in this case recently as it seems to have dropped out of the news, but seeing it again on the news I was moved to comment.

I posted:

This whole case has become an example of how the Internet can be MISused. There are sets of forums on each side- pro and anti McCann which both claim the high ground. They all thrive on half truths, misunderstandings, conspiracy theories and inadequate understanding of processes, forensics and science. The only important facts are: 1/ Madeleine is not where she should be. 2/ No legal authority has found enough evidence to charge anyone with anything (whether neglect or something worth) 3/ Competing groups of Internet Nutters, Conspiracy Theorists, Trolls, Busy-bodies and people with no interest in real life, are in a stupid battle on the Internet which causes plenty of heat but no light to fall on the matter. Why don't you all go home, stop turning a sad event into something for your personal amusement and leave it to the COMPETENT authorities to act on the matter. I am sick of the lot of you.

Why are you (and your opponents) still rehashing this- no-one is really interested. There is Free Speech and then there is licence; both pros and antis are now taking licence.

No-one has been charged with anything (neglect or worse). The Portuguese and British authorities have investigated it to the nth degree. Isn't it time to put away your toys (both sides) and get on with real life. Conspiracy sites on the internet never changed anything in the real world. Get over it.