Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

by russiandoll 29.01.13 14:39

re: Gerry....... he looks a bit like Douglas Alexander !

Lord knows what went on, the extent of the cover- up makes it seem very sinister. I think we will find out the truth, but not yet. I have a feeling [based on what I do not know,] that something out of left -field is going to blow the lid of this affair.

by **Tony Bennett** 29.01.13 14:52

mahlersghost wrote:Looks like Tony is up against more than the McCanns - but then again he knows that has always been the case.

Thanks for your comments, mahlersghost; once I had made up my mind that we were not getting the truth about what happened to Madeleine and saw the extent of ambassadorial and government involvement swinging behind the McCanns, never mind the battery of lawyers and public relations advisers, I realised that there must be sinister secret somewhere underlying all this which powerful people were determined to suppress. I knew that if I persisted with it, it would be a rough ride

by mahlersghost 29.01.13 14:53

It just needs one editorial in any major newspaper to tell the McCanns to write to ask for a re-opening of the process. Explain it to the readers in as simple a way as possible even - ie picture of adressed envelope, note paper, stamp and a par avion sticker for the Sun and Star readers. Nothing controversial in that - no libel - just plain old fashioned good advice - nothing CR can wet themselves over - but editor will not do it. It's shameful when virtually everything is up for comment and exploitation in the media today. It's seems easier to play some silly game and pick on those who see the emperor's nakedness is revealed for anyone to see rather than admit they were fooled.

by **Tony Bennett** 29.01.13 15:25

'ME' BACKS DOWN OVER MR JUSTICE TUGENDHAT

I have spoken directly today to the individual who claims to be 'Me' on this forum.

He conceded in our telephone conversation that although he had occasionally seen adverse references to Mr Justice Eady in Private Eye, (along the lines that he, allegedly, unduly favours libel claimants) he could never ever recall doing so in respect of Mr Justice Tugendhat. He was totally unable to back up his false claim about Mr Justice Tugendhat made here last night - and therefore withdrew it.

He could offer me no explanation as to why he would publish an adverse - and false - comment about Mr Justice Tugendhat on this forum, especially one week ahead of my trial.

This may tell us something about the reliability of 'Me'

by Spaniel 29.01.13 16:03

Tony Bennett wrote:'ME' BACKS DOWN OVER MR JUSTICE TUGENDHAT

I have spoken directly today to the individual who claims to be 'Me' on this forum.

He conceded in our telephone conversation that although he had occasionally seen adverse references to Mr Justice Eady in Private Eye, (along the lines that he, allegedly, unduly favours libel claimants) he could never ever recall doing so in respect of Mr Justice Tugendhat. He was totally unable to back up his false claim about Mr Justice Tugendhat made here last night - and therefore withdrew it.

He could offer me no explanation as to why he would publish an adverse - and false - comment about Mr Justice Tugendhat on this forum, especially one week ahead of my trial.

This may tell us something about the reliability of 'Me'

How on Earth does one poster obtain the telephone number of another?

by ShuBob 29.01.13 16:27

I believe Tony has publicly made his phone number available for years.

by Spaniel 29.01.13 17:35

ShuBob wrote:I believe Tony has publicly made his phone number available for years.

Indeed, but when my phone rings tonight, might I expect an angry poster? Also how was it obtained?

by Spaniel 29.01.13 17:39

Spaniel wrote:
ShuBob wrote:I believe Tony has publicly made his phone number available for years.
Indeed, but when my phone rings tonight, might I expect an angry poster? Also how was it obtained?

3 hours have passed, no one has an answer.

by Liz Eagles 29.01.13 17:44

Spaniel wrote:
ShuBob wrote:I believe Tony has publicly made his phone number available for years.
Indeed, but when my phone rings tonight, might I expect an angry poster? Also how was it obtained?

Spaniel, it's pretty obvious you have no respect for this forum. Please stop derailing topics. I shall not reply to you. If you have any issues with the privacy of your details you can contact Admin in a PM. Please stop the nonsense now.

I hope this topic can get back on track.

by Guest 29.01.13 17:44

Spaniel wrote:
Spaniel wrote:
ShuBob wrote:I believe Tony has publicly made his phone number available for years.
Indeed, but when my phone rings tonight, might I expect an angry poster? Also how was it obtained?

3 hours have passed, no one has an answer.

***
Where I come from the difference between 6:35 pm and 6:39 pm is 4 minutes ...

by Smokeandmirrors 29.01.13 17:47

Spaniel wrote:
ShuBob wrote:I believe Tony has publicly made his phone number available for years.
Indeed, but when my phone rings tonight, might I expect an angry poster? Also how was it obtained?

Tony has various info on the web from campaigns, including contact information.

by Guest 29.01.13 17:54

Agreed Aquila. Anyone can ring Tony if they so wish and I admire his courage in publishing his number in view of the abuse this is likely to bring from the sewer rat element of the McCann supporters.

How Spaniel thinks that someone here is likely to ring her up and give her an ear bashing, I don't know.

May I use this opportunity to wish Tony all the best.

by Spaniel 29.01.13 18:53

Châtelaine wrote:
Spaniel wrote:
Spaniel wrote:
ShuBob wrote:I believe Tony has publicly made his phone number available for years.
Indeed, but when my phone rings tonight, might I expect an angry poster? Also how was it obtained?

3 hours have passed, no one has an answer.
***
Where I come from the difference between 6:35 pm and 6:39 pm is 4 minutes ...

Apology, 2 hours. Go back and count.

Still waiting to find how Tony and a poster "the individual who claims to be "Me"" ever came to converse via the phone. I also wonder how a poster can claim to be a username, eg Me?

by GRACEFUL1 29.01.13 18:55

I read here often because of wanting to see justice for Madeleine. This is my first post and made simply and overwhelmingly in support of Mr Tony Bennett for his courage in seeking out justice by standing up for Madeleine's rights. Mr Bennett is a true Christian and as such until he has finished his course in seeking out justice for Madeleine he will proceed no matter what. I feel we are honored to share in his findings and will pray for him with all of my heart that justice for Madeleine will be his reward in the final outcome. Some have a loud voice and do nothing others get on with the job and stand up for those who are innocent without a voice. God Bless you Mr Bennett.

by Cristobell 29.01.13 18:58

Just read on twitter that Tony has asked CR for an adjournment. It comes from Muratfan, so grave doubts as to its authenticity, but I do hope not.

I know this is an agonising time Tony, but please stay strong. Truth will prevail.

by Guest 29.01.13 19:11

Cristobell wrote:Just read on twitter that Tony has asked CR for an adjournment. It comes from Muratfan, so grave doubts as to its authenticity, but I do hope not.

He hasn't. You know what muratfan is like. roll

by Guest 29.01.13 19:17

Spaniel wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
Spaniel wrote:
Spaniel wrote:
ShuBob wrote:I believe Tony has publicly made his phone number available for years.
Indeed, but when my phone rings tonight, might I expect an angry poster? Also how was it obtained?

3 hours have passed, no one has an answer.
***
Where I come from the difference between 6:35 pm and 6:39 pm is 4 minutes ...
Apology, 2 hours. Go back and count.

Still waiting to find how Tony and a poster "the individual who claims to be "Me"" ever came to converse via the phone. I also wonder how a poster can claim to be a username, eg Me?

Shubob answered within a few mins and gave you a reason. What is it to you how Tony and 'Me' came to converse, it is their business. I expect Tony converses with lots of people here.

by Spaniel 29.01.13 19:26

admin wrote:
Cristobell wrote:Just read on twitter that Tony has asked CR for an adjournment. It comes from Muratfan, so grave doubts as to its authenticity, but I do hope not.

He hasn't. You know what muratfan is like.

I hope he has, as would show he has last minute help. I think he will have help, let's hope so.

There are "Champions for lost causes" out there."

Oh BTW Jean, have you ever researched help for Tony and PMd him the results? Thought not.

by nobodythereeither 29.01.13 19:55

I have not posted on this forum for a long time, although I have been following developments. I never feel I have much to add.

However I would like to send my very best wishes to Tony and to thank him for all he has done to bring details of this case out into the open against all the odds.

There are few people who would put the pursuit of the truth above their own wellbeing when it is an issue which does not directly concern them, and I would call them heroes.

Good luck Tony, and please ignore those posters on this thread who are clearly trying to rattle you or derail the thread. If I can see what's going on, so can we all, I'm sure.

I wish I had your courage, and the world needs more people like you.

I hope and trust that truth and justice prevail, for the sake of a little girl so badly let down by her parents, whatever happened.

by Guest 29.01.13 19:57

Great post nobodythereeither Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 12 259100

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 12 259100

Thank you, you should post more often Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 12 160807

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 12 160807

by Guest 29.01.13 20:02

I don't know, but some way or the other, Spaniel is going on my nerves ...

by **Tony Bennett** 29.01.13 20:07

GRACEFUL1 wrote:I read here often because of wanting to see justice for Madeleine. This is my first post and made simply and overwhelmingly in support of Mr Tony Bennett for his courage in seeking out justice by standing up for Madeleine's rights. Mr Bennett is a true Christian and as such until he has finished his course in seeking out justice for Madeleine he will proceed no matter what. I feel we are honored to share in his findings and will pray for him with all of my heart that justice for Madeleine will be his reward in the final outcome. Some have a loud voice and do nothing others get on with the job and stand up for those who are innocent without a voice. God Bless you Mr Bennett.

He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him - Proverbs 18 v 17

by Spaniel 29.01.13 20:11

candyfloss wrote:
Spaniel wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
Spaniel wrote:
Spaniel wrote:
ShuBob wrote:I believe Tony has publicly made his phone number available for years.
Indeed, but when my phone rings tonight, might I expect an angry poster? Also how was it obtained?

3 hours have passed, no one has an answer.
***
Where I come from the difference between 6:35 pm and 6:39 pm is 4 minutes ...
Apology, 2 hours. Go back and count.

Still waiting to find how Tony and a poster "the individual who claims to be "Me"" ever came to converse via the phone. I also wonder how a poster can claim to be a username, eg Me?

Shubob answered within a few mins and gave you a reason. What is it to you how Tony and 'Me' came to converse, it is their business. I expect Tony converses with lots of people here.

candyfloss, you have always been the most fair moderator, and unfailingly polite in how you moderate. (How I remember the 3A) When I see that someone has been contacted by phone, then I start to question security?

No one here could care more about seeing Tony survive this more than me. I have spent hour upon hour searching for any glimmer of a smidge legally that may help him. I was even researching an "unless order" this morning to no avail, but anything to help, even a technicality.

I wish Tony all the best and would like to shake his hand and wish him good luck in London. Not sure if I can make it though. Will try.

If it's their business, why post about it?

I was one of about three posters who tried to make Tony see sense and back down last year. He wouldn't, so I can only keep looking and hoping to help him now. As said earlier, now is the time to support and encourage.

Tony knows, and if he has asked for an adjournment, it will be for a good reason, a hopeful one. Means someone is going to help him.

Keep the faith.

The last thing Tony needs now is us falling apart and squabbling!

by bobbin 29.01.13 20:15

Châtelaine wrote:I don't know, but some way or the other, Spaniel is going on my nerves ...

It becomes quite evident, quite quickly, who is here to disrupt and who isn't.
It does, at one level, get on the nerves, but on a deeper level, it does indicate that the heat might be rising in certain quarters, fear beginning to bring out a heavier sweat, with a renewed command to up the anti.

A good sign, in my opinion.

by **Tony Bennett** 29.01.13 20:22

Cristobell wrote:Just read on twitter that Tony has asked CR for an adjournment. It comes from Muratfan, so grave doubts as to its authenticity, but I do hope not.

I know this is an agonising time Tony, but please stay strong. Truth will prevail.

Cristobell - seriously, and speaking as one who has met you - why does ANYONE believe muratfan = Ian West about ANYTHING?

I have been quietly beavering away today preparing my notes for the trial and for my cross-examination of Isabel Martorell and Mike Gunnill, which will probably take place on Tuesday.

Carter-Ruck are similarly beavering away. An hour-and-a-half ago a courier, da Silva by name, knocked at my door with another two bundles for the hearing: one, a fat bundle with about 250 pages of case law they are throwing at me at the last minute, and another one with their 'Skeleton Argument' of their legal submission to the Court.

My equivalent went in to the Court on Friday, in good time.

I am buying a new toothbrush on Wednesday, since, at a contempt of court hearing, they have officers of the High Court ready to 'take the contemnor down' to the High Court cells - and then on to the nearest available prison.

All for repeating what Tavares de Almeida said, what Dr Goncalo Amaral said, what Dr Ludke is saying, what Pat Brown is saying, for listing the 48 questions that Dr Kate McCann refused to answer in her book, for reproducing Martin Grime's full report and rogatory interview by Leicestershire Police, for 'selling' one book to Michael Sangerte = Peter Tarwin = Jason Peters = Michael Gunnill - and for sundry and similar 'crimes' worthy of punishment.

All the while D.C.I. Redwood and his team of near-pensioners at Scotland Yard eat up millions of pounds of taxpayers' money following up what they claim are '195 new leads'

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?