"Flagrant" breaches of your undertakings, say Carter-Ruck in their letter of 4 January in the case of McCanns v Bennett. Here's my reply sent to them today
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Legal Issues :: Carter-Ruck: McCanns v Bennett Contempt of Court
Page 6 of 6 • Share
Page 6 of 6 • 
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Re: "Flagrant" breaches of your undertakings, say Carter-Ruck in their letter of 4 January in the case of McCanns v Bennett. Here's my reply sent to them today
by Inspectorfrost 18.01.13 21:43
Châtelaine wrote:Right. And whatever the source, somehow this contamimant of a corpse was related to Apartment 5A and McCs clothing only ... Sh*t happens, but not always and exclusively ... IMO, of course ;-)
Well quite. That is where all arguments fall down. Even if it wasnt a body the dog was alerting to, how come none of the other fanciful things that some say he was alerting to never appeared anywhere else either
Inspectorfrost- Posts : 841
Activity : 878
Likes received : 3
Join date : 2012-12-09
Re: "Flagrant" breaches of your undertakings, say Carter-Ruck in their letter of 4 January in the case of McCanns v Bennett. Here's my reply sent to them today
by sonic72 18.01.13 21:56
So many people on the internet say the McCann's killed their child, and Tony has not even said that, so why are they not going after them instead?!
The McCann's are just singling out their biggest threats. What next, Blacksmith on a libel charge?!
The McCann's are just singling out their biggest threats. What next, Blacksmith on a libel charge?!
____________________
sonic72- Posts : 342
Activity : 416
Likes received : 72
Join date : 2012-09-09
Re: "Flagrant" breaches of your undertakings, say Carter-Ruck in their letter of 4 January in the case of McCanns v Bennett. Here's my reply sent to them today
by Guest 18.01.13 22:05
***sonic72 wrote:So many people on the internet say the McCann's killed their child, and Tony has not even said that, so why are they not going after them instead?!
The McCann's are just singling out their biggest threats. What next, Blacksmith on a libel charge?!
I don't know him, but .., IF such thing would happen, IMO it might be quite a spectacle ...
Guest- Guest
Re: "Flagrant" breaches of your undertakings, say Carter-Ruck in their letter of 4 January in the case of McCanns v Bennett. Here's my reply sent to them today
by Inspectorfrost 19.01.13 20:22
http://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t22544p15-free-speech
I am not a member of that forum but was dying to ask the questioner which bits of the translated files they were complaining about and that Mr Bennett can't use. If it is the dog evidence, then translation does not come into it one iota as Mr Grimes report is in ENGLISH
I am not a member of that forum but was dying to ask the questioner which bits of the translated files they were complaining about and that Mr Bennett can't use. If it is the dog evidence, then translation does not come into it one iota as Mr Grimes report is in ENGLISH
Inspectorfrost- Posts : 841
Activity : 878
Likes received : 3
Join date : 2012-12-09
Page 6 of 6 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Similar topics» Carter-Ruck's costs in the case of McCanns v Bennett exceed £120,000 already
» Carter-Ruck's letter to T Bennett, 15 Jul 2010
» T Bennett's letter to Carter-Ruck, 21 July 2010
» McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25
» SOME FORUM POSTS MAY BE REMOVED DUE TO A CARTER-RUCK LETTER
» Carter-Ruck's letter to T Bennett, 15 Jul 2010
» T Bennett's letter to Carter-Ruck, 21 July 2010
» McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25
» SOME FORUM POSTS MAY BE REMOVED DUE TO A CARTER-RUCK LETTER
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Legal Issues :: Carter-Ruck: McCanns v Bennett Contempt of Court
Page 6 of 6
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
