Re: The four top London libel lawyers now lined up to crush a pensioner from Harlow

by Guest 01.02.13 2:12

aiyoyo, you seem determined to drive people away with all this 'I know what you're really up to' nonsense. I think myself and C.Edwards made our points. I won't be going on and on about it. Promise. But just because we see things differently to you tactically doesn't mean we don't care what happens in the Court. You should be encouraging anybody who has any agreement with our side of the case to stay here and maintain their interest, instead of trying to pick fights with them and drive them away. I know it isn't just me who is tired of the bullying (and it isn't just you doing it.)

by cass7 01.02.13 8:18

oh eck -- ok everyone might have their own op of what the outcome will have next week -- but dont feed the trolls --everyone here wants the same i am sure

by cass7 01.02.13 8:31

times are hard -people are having to tighten their belts a bit around the world -- the mcanns have been afforded all these expensive lawyers -- what kind of message does this send out to the uk public and portugal -- not good

by aiyoyo 01.02.13 9:00

tcat wrote:aiyoyo, you seem determined to drive people away with all this 'I know what you're really up to' nonsense. I think myself and C.Edwards made our points.

Indeed, so you are saying you're on same stance as C. Edwards is it - so that we are clear on that?

I won't be going on and on about it. Promise.

GOOD!
I was getting bored with the persistent and unrelenting spirit destroying comments when TB least needs it at this moment.
There is no need for that and no point in it. The case is going to trial whether you like it or not.

But just because we see things differently to you tactically doesn't mean we don't care what happens in the Court. You should be encouraging anybody who has any agreement with our side of the case to stay here and maintain their interest, instead of trying to pick fights with them and drive them away. I know it isn't just me who is tired of the bullying (and it isn't just you doing it.)

by C.Edwards 01.02.13 9:11

I'm not going to just sit here repeatedly answering questions from snarky members having a pop at me as I'm not prostrating myself at Tony's feet. If you want to keep making vague allusions and insinuations about whatever you think my motives are then feel free. If Candyfloss thinks I'm "batting for the other side" (see what I did there? winkwink

) then I'm pretty sure she'll sort me out soon enough. Take a look at yourselves though - this nudge nudge, wink wink stuff and vague statement making (without firm evidence) in the hope of portraying that you're "in the know" about something (in this case it's some invented tripe about me on some kind of secret mission it would appear?) is exactly the sort of crap that the McCann supporters love as it makes those of us with half a brain look stupid by association.

Some time ago I made a conscious decision to stop simply believing everything that's posted here or on any other boards, pro or anti, without some kind of evidence or reasonable inference to back it up. Just because I now question what is said rather than blindly accept it doesn't mean I'm a secret plant (bloody hell I was inactive for a long time if that was the case!) or on a mission to destroy or disrupt, it means I am attempting to actually unmuddy some of the water surrounding this whole case. It does appear as if it's a fruitless task though as I'm attacked by a high percentage of the pro or the anti camp whenever I post on either board as too many people on both sides of the argument are of the opinion that they know better, despite what the available evidence may show. I used to be quite active (newintown) on amazon but, to the best of my recollection, I've not posted on there in a long time. I haven't even read it in a long time, it descended into puerile name calling and got tedious. To imply that I'd even bother to go and find, let alone delete (can you even delete posts?) on there is so pathetic it's ridiculous!

Back to the subject on hand, Sharoni's thread title, "The four top London libel lawyers now lined up to crush a pensioner from Harlow" is an emotive one, which is understandable at a time of considerable pressure. The conversation moved onto areas where I have a little knowledge and, hey, as forums are meant for discussion, I joined in the discussion. Just because I don't post "oh my god tony you're so amazing and such a brave man and those mccanns and their evil lawyers are just wrong and we should protest and stuff" at every opportunity does not mean (aiyoyo) that I don't support him, but if your version of events has to be that I don't support him as much as YOU do, then hey, I'm glad to accept that you are holier than me in that regard. I have simply contributed by pointing out (and it has to be repeated as new people keep joining the thread and they're obviously not reading all the way through it first) that the legal system does not work in the way that many on here obviously think it does. Those under the misapprehension that the judge will take one look at the case next week and imperiously decide that there has been a huge miscarriage of justice and simply toss the whole kit and caboodle out of court are hugely mistaken. Yes, it may not be as clear cut as the McCann side wish it to be, which is why they are going in with the big guns, but 9 times out of ten, David doesn't slay Goliath, he gets the crap knocked out of him so to sit here behind your screens goading Tony into massive decisions about full libel trials and "standing up to them" when it's not your house, money or dangly bits on the line is all well and good but it needs to be tempered with reason as well.

Don't expect miracles and if one happens then you can be pleasantly surprised. And just think of the fun you can have with the "told you so" angle to me, tcat and "Me" when it happens, eh?

by Woofer 01.02.13 9:33

C. Edwards - I`m sure Tony is aware of all that, so it was unncessary to descend into arguments on who is right or wrong on legal outcomes. Most people are trying to remain positive and its hardly helpful to Tony to try and sabotage that. It`s not giving Tony any help to paint a picture of doom and gloom. If you can`t say anything positive at this time, its probably best to say nothing at all until after the hearing when you can crow all you want if you were right.

by Guest 01.02.13 9:44

I have just logged in to find the same old being pushed by certain members. Members and Tony, heard you the first time, you made your point, so there is no need to keep pushing it. I'm sure Tony is well aware of what the case is about, he knows far more than you do, so please let's give it a rest now. I do not want to see anymore argument or bickering - it is the last thing Tony needs.

by russiandoll 01.02.13 9:44

C Edward, I welcome realism being injected in an effort to bring us down to earth. We are not in a Hollywood film where the little guy takes on and beats the big shots. There is sadly a lot of evidence that justice is not always done, regardless of a right v might battle.
From a careful re-reading of your posts I do not see an attempt to throw cold water on proceedings or to be disruptive. It is a sad fact that the power of hot- shot lawyers could well destroy a man who is continuing to stand his ground against them.

What I am convinced of is that such shock and awe tactics would not be necessary unless the McCanns were fearful of something, all those big guns ranged against a lone voice who has a small audience in relation to their own?

The McCann supporters say that " crushing " TB will send out a powerful message to those who seek to question their account of what happened. That train left the station long ago and will not be stopped. What was that famous saying..." We know how to use a spoon."

I was called stupid or a moron by a McCann supporter for suggesting CR are using intimidation in an 11th hour attempt to force TB's hand. Argument, he can't retreat due to this being a case of contempt of court and not libel Althought not well-versed with the law I thought any defendant in any case could make some sort of offer to prevent a court case proceeding, in this case an offer to stop talking, to make a payment to the fund. If it were the case that TB had to appear in court now whatever stance he were to take on the McCann issue, the massive overkill would not be happening, there would not be any need for it.
It is bullying and intimidation, it can't reasonably be viewd in any other way. But behind bullying is cowardice and this is no exception.

p.s. seconded, candyfloss and it is not what the forum needs either. We all have one thing in common- let's remember that when disagreements arise....this case arouses very strong emotions from anger to despair, that is the reason for the bickering.
Divide and conquer is a well known tactic, lets just agree to disagree on issues where we know there will not be a meeting of minds after pages and pages of debate....and ignore the obvious troublemakers.

by C.Edwards 01.02.13 9:46

Woofer wrote:C. Edwards - I`m sure Tony is aware of all that, so it was unncessary to descend into arguments on who is right or wrong on legal outcomes. Most people are trying to remain positive and its hardly helpful to Tony to try and sabotage that. It`s not giving Tony any help to paint a picture of doom and gloom. If you can`t say anything positive at this time, its probably best to say nothing at all until after the hearing when you can crow all you want if you were right.

Tony is undoubtedly aware of all that, many posters on here undoubtedly aren't. Guess who I'm aiming my posts at? I will take no pleasure if I am proved right either and sincerely hope that Tony isn't sentenced harshly if it comes to that.

by whatsupdoc 01.02.13 10:15

The legal lineup is crazy against TB. The coverup using legal cases by the #mccans has gone ballistic.Somebody important or something the govt don't want out must have happened to go to such lengths.

Not read all the threads yet but will do a lot of catching up l8tr.

Good luck Tony. The four top London libel lawyers now lined up to crush a pensioner from Harlow - Page 5 759815

The four top London libel lawyers now lined up to crush a pensioner from Harlow - Page 5 759815

by Woofer 01.02.13 10:37

C.Edwards wrote:
Woofer wrote:C. Edwards - I`m sure Tony is aware of all that, so it was unncessary to descend into arguments on who is right or wrong on legal outcomes. Most people are trying to remain positive and its hardly helpful to Tony to try and sabotage that. It`s not giving Tony any help to paint a picture of doom and gloom. If you can`t say anything positive at this time, its probably best to say nothing at all until after the hearing when you can crow all you want if you were right.

Tony is undoubtedly aware of all that, many posters on here undoubtedly aren't. Guess who I'm aiming my posts at? I will take no pleasure if I am proved right either and sincerely hope that Tony isn't sentenced harshly if it comes to that.

Jolly good.

Personally I`ve never seen the point of arguing - all it means is that one is trying to alter someone else`s views - best just to accept people have their own views.

by **Tony Bennett** 01.02.13 10:37

Woofer wrote:C. Edwards - I`m sure Tony is aware of all that, so it was unncessary to descend into arguments on who is right or wrong on legal outcomes. Most people are trying to remain positive and its hardly helpful to Tony to try and sabotage that. It`s not giving Tony any help to paint a picture of doom and gloom...

C.Edwards painting a picture of doom and gloom is just water off a duck's back. There's been a veritable flood of such water off the duck's back in the last few days. I find his/her protestations of support for mm, well, interesting

by cass7 01.02.13 10:43

by having these top lawyers they are sending out a statement -- that anyone questioning anything regarding what they say happened on 3rd of may 2007 -- this is what you are up against -- it is a message to portugal and to sy -- i hope sy and portugal are taking all this case in

by david_uk 01.02.13 11:23

cass7 wrote:by having these top lawyers they are sending out a statement -- that anyone questioning anything regarding what they say happened on 3rd of may 2007 -- this is what you are up against -- it is a message to portugal and to sy -- i hope sy and portugal are taking all this case in

Do you not think that if SY and PJ where coming anywhere close to the conclusion we would all hope they would be, that they would of stepped into this whole fiasco by now and put a hold on preceding?.

by jozi 01.02.13 11:30

whatsupdoc wrote:The legal lineup is crazy against TB. The coverup using legal cases by the #mccans has gone ballistic.Somebody important or something the govt don't want out must have happened to go to such lengths.

Not read all the threads yet but will do a lot of catching up l8tr.

Good luck Tony.

Hasn't it just, lets not forget the government have been complacent in this scam from the word go !!! What are they trying to hide ?

Good Luck to you Tony The four top London libel lawyers now lined up to crush a pensioner from Harlow - Page 5 281194

The four top London libel lawyers now lined up to crush a pensioner from Harlow - Page 5 281194

by bobbin 01.02.13 11:32

cass7 wrote:by having these top lawyers they are sending out a statement -- that anyone questioning anything regarding what they say happened on 3rd of may 2007 -- this is what you are up against -- it is a message to portugal and to sy -- i hope sy and portugal are taking all this case in

Yes, it is such an imbalance in force and this must make any clear-thinking individual ask, what is so great that it needs to be protected at all costs.
The nay-sayers try to spread their one sided doom and gloom. Are they just obsessively committed to trying to force their view repeatedly on others in the hope that they may persuade them to think their way, or are they perhaps paid to cast this gloom.
If it were a simple case of proving 'breach of undertaking' then no more than one legal bod, for either side would be needed to argue before the judge.
So why are 'all the kings horses and all the kings men' being wheeled out for the one side against one tiny little commoner?
Just a casual aside.
Yesterday I was watching a programme about killer whales using their enormous weight and cunning to target a seal. It was fascinating to watch the tricks they used to try to dislodge the seal from his little ice floe and hence become vulnerable to capture.
What the killer whales might not have noticed, whilst they pursued their own agenda (and were thus not keeping an eye out to watch over their shoulder) was the huge whaleing boat, moving towards them, harpoons primed and ready to go.
However big one bully might appear to be, there are greater things out there which can dwarf the big bullies.
In all the time that the mighty McMachine has been trying to roll over any that got in its way, there are thousands and thousands of eyes watching their every move.
They don't know where these eyes are coming from but they know they are being watched.
Time is on the side of the watchers. All is being noted. The bullies know that this can't be controlled and it causes great fear.

by Woofer 01.02.13 11:35

Tony Bennett wrote:
Woofer wrote:C. Edwards - I`m sure Tony is aware of all that, so it was unncessary to descend into arguments on who is right or wrong on legal outcomes. Most people are trying to remain positive and its hardly helpful to Tony to try and sabotage that. It`s not giving Tony any help to paint a picture of doom and gloom...
C.Edwards painting a picture of doom and gloom is just water off a duck's back. There's been a veritable flood of such water off the duck's back in the last few days. I find his/her protestations of support for mm, well, interesting

Glad you`ve got a thick skin (or a nice oily set of feathers!). Its just what`s needed when going into battle for justice. I`m sure it`s not just this recent battle that brings out the agitators, but other unjust cases you have exposed.

by david_uk 01.02.13 12:36

C.Edwards wrote:I'm not going to just sit here repeatedly answering questions from snarky members having a pop at me as I'm not prostrating myself at Tony's feet. If you want to keep making vague allusions and insinuations about whatever you think my motives are then feel free. If Candyfloss thinks I'm "batting for the other side" (see what I did there? ) then I'm pretty sure she'll sort me out soon enough. Take a look at yourselves though - this nudge nudge, wink wink stuff and vague statement making (without firm evidence) in the hope of portraying that you're "in the know" about something (in this case it's some invented tripe about me on some kind of secret mission it would appear?) is exactly the sort of crap that the McCann supporters love as it makes those of us with half a brain look stupid by association.

Some time ago I made a conscious decision to stop simply believing everything that's posted here or on any other boards, pro or anti, without some kind of evidence or reasonable inference to back it up. Just because I now question what is said rather than blindly accept it doesn't mean I'm a secret plant (bloody hell I was inactive for a long time if that was the case!) or on a mission to destroy or disrupt, it means I am attempting to actually unmuddy some of the water surrounding this whole case. It does appear as if it's a fruitless task though as I'm attacked by a high percentage of the pro or the anti camp whenever I post on either board as too many people on both sides of the argument are of the opinion that they know better, despite what the available evidence may show. I used to be quite active (newintown) on amazon but, to the best of my recollection, I've not posted on there in a long time. I haven't even read it in a long time, it descended into puerile name calling and got tedious. To imply that I'd even bother to go and find, let alone delete (can you even delete posts?) on there is so pathetic it's ridiculous!

Back to the subject on hand, Sharoni's thread title, "The four top London libel lawyers now lined up to crush a pensioner from Harlow" is an emotive one, which is understandable at a time of considerable pressure. The conversation moved onto areas where I have a little knowledge and, hey, as forums are meant for discussion, I joined in the discussion. Just because I don't post "oh my god tony you're so amazing and such a brave man and those mccanns and their evil lawyers are just wrong and we should protest and stuff" at every opportunity does not mean (aiyoyo) that I don't support him, but if your version of events has to be that I don't support him as much as YOU do, then hey, I'm glad to accept that you are holier than me in that regard. I have simply contributed by pointing out (and it has to be repeated as new people keep joining the thread and they're obviously not reading all the way through it first) that the legal system does not work in the way that many on here obviously think it does. Those under the misapprehension that the judge will take one look at the case next week and imperiously decide that there has been a huge miscarriage of justice and simply toss the whole kit and caboodle out of court are hugely mistaken. Yes, it may not be as clear cut as the McCann side wish it to be, which is why they are going in with the big guns, but 9 times out of ten, David doesn't slay Goliath, he gets the crap knocked out of him so to sit here behind your screens goading Tony into massive decisions about full libel trials and "standing up to them" when it's not your house, money or dangly bits on the line is all well and good but it needs to be tempered with reason as well.

Don't expect miracles and if one happens then you can be pleasantly surprised. And just think of the fun you can have with the "told you so" angle to me, tcat and "Me" when it happens, eh?

For what it is worth C.Edwards I agree with your comments and view on recent events. I just keep my head down as I have been banned before now for not going with the flow. I might be in for it again now! beware

Despite what one might think of his methods and current situation, Tony's hard work, dedication and resolve on this case has been outstanding and I honestly wish him the best of luck next week.

by C.Edwards 01.02.13 12:36

Tony Bennett wrote:
Woofer wrote:C. Edwards - I`m sure Tony is aware of all that, so it was unncessary to descend into arguments on who is right or wrong on legal outcomes. Most people are trying to remain positive and its hardly helpful to Tony to try and sabotage that. It`s not giving Tony any help to paint a picture of doom and gloom...
C.Edwards painting a picture of doom and gloom is just water off a duck's back. There's been a veritable flood of such water off the duck's back in the last few days. I find his/her protestations of support for mm, well, interesting

"mm"? Interesting in what way? Tony, I really don't think you are getting the right end of the stick. I'll leave it at (genuinely) wishing you good luck for the hearing. These backhanded insinuations of skullduggery are really odd.

by Guest 01.02.13 13:26

Just catching up with some info on this forum.

I think Jill's letter to the media pointing out so clearly the conclusions both the British and Portuguese

Police came to in relation to this case, illustrates very well, that any judge who has common sense and wants justice to be seen to be done, should be throwing this case out of court and finding no case to answer. The fact that Mccanns have not pursued either the British Police or Portuguese Police in the same manner also indicates this would appear to many to be a case of harrassment against Tony. We have seen the bully boy tactics these people use along with methods of what could be described as entrapment. the time and effort put into attacking Tony should have been put into answering Police questions, co-operating with the Portuguese Police, taking part in a reconstruction. The public many of whom have become aware of some of the facts of the case, are seeing for themselves by the mccanns own behaviour in pursuing someone like Tony, where their priorities really lie. Of course many have known that for years, but good to see more of the public making themselves familiar with the PJ files, the Fund accounts, watching HIdeHo's videos, and all working together to get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine.

by Woofer 01.02.13 13:33

I`m sure all judges are aware of CR`s tactics ......... and reputation !

by aiyoyo 01.02.13 16:51

C.Edwards wrote:I'm not going to just sit here repeatedly answering questions from snarky members having a pop at me as I'm not prostrating myself at Tony's feet. If you want to keep making vague allusions and insinuations about whatever you think my motives are then feel free. If Candyfloss thinks I'm "batting for the other side" (see what I did there? ) then I'm pretty sure she'll sort me out soon enough. Take a look at yourselves though - this nudge nudge, wink wink stuff and vague statement making (without firm evidence) in the hope of portraying that you're "in the know" about something (in this case it's some invented tripe about me on some kind of secret mission it would appear?) is exactly the sort of crap that the McCann supporters love as it makes those of us with half a brain look stupid by association.

Some time ago I made a conscious decision to stop simply believing everything that's posted here or on any other boards, pro or anti, without some kind of evidence or reasonable inference to back it up. Just because I now question what is said rather than blindly accept it doesn't mean I'm a secret plant (bloody hell I was inactive for a long time if that was the case!) or on a mission to destroy or disrupt, it means I am attempting to actually unmuddy some of the water surrounding this whole case. It does appear as if it's a fruitless task though as I'm attacked by a high percentage of the pro or the anti camp whenever I post on either board as too many people on both sides of the argument are of the opinion that they know better, despite what the available evidence may show. I used to be quite active (newintown) on amazon but, to the best of my recollection, I've not posted on there in a long time. I haven't even read it in a long time, it descended into puerile name calling and got tedious. To imply that I'd even bother to go and find, let alone delete (can you even delete posts?) on there is so pathetic it's ridiculous!

Back to the subject on hand, Sharoni's thread title, "The four top London libel lawyers now lined up to crush a pensioner from Harlow" is an emotive one, which is understandable at a time of considerable pressure. The conversation moved onto areas where I have a little knowledge and, hey, as forums are meant for discussion, I joined in the discussion. Just because I don't post "oh my god tony you're so amazing and such a brave man and those mccanns and their evil lawyers are just wrong and we should protest and stuff" at every opportunity does not mean (aiyoyo) that I don't support him, but if your version of events has to be that I don't support him as much as YOU do, then hey, I'm glad to accept that you are holier than me in that regard. I have simply contributed by pointing out (and it has to be repeated as new people keep joining the thread and they're obviously not reading all the way through it first) that the legal system does not work in the way that many on here obviously think it does. Those under the misapprehension that the judge will take one look at the case next week and imperiously decide that there has been a huge miscarriage of justice and simply toss the whole kit and caboodle out of court are hugely mistaken. Yes, it may not be as clear cut as the McCann side wish it to be, which is why they are going in with the big guns, but 9 times out of ten, David doesn't slay Goliath, he gets the crap knocked out of him so to sit here behind your screens goading Tony into massive decisions about full libel trials and "standing up to them" when it's not your house, money or dangly bits on the line is all well and good but it needs to be tempered with reason as well.

Don't expect miracles and if one happens then you can be pleasantly surprised. And just think of the fun you can have with the "told you so" angle to me, tcat and "Me" when it happens, eh?

Tze Tze Tze....oh dear, such a long rant and continued harping over and over (again) the same negative about TB, and painting of doom and gloom. Where are all these going? So full of yourself, hope you have enough by now.
Your continued bashing of TB is getting no where. TB will do what he does.

BTW, it is not fair to include "Me" in your dramarama, as unlike you, Me did not paint gloom and doom.

Cherry wrote:'for one thing Tony would
have to convince the court that his Spiller vs. Joseph (honest comment)
citation has merit and relevance'.

I would have thought that any
court would not need too much convincing that this has merit and
relevance and they would use their common sense and see the charges
against Tony are totally ridiculous.
C Edwards wrote:
That, I'm
afraid, is just wishful thinking. It's a complex legal argument and to
try and make it sound as though it's a simple done deal is misleading,
I'm afraid.

C. Edwards, can you not make up your mind?
Some posts back you implied this is simple done deal as clear as black and white- that the only thing incumbent upon the Judge is to deliberate whether Breach occurred or not, and that whatever the Mcccanns had said or done does not come into the equation.
Now you are saying otherwise, that there can be complex legal arguments involved.

by C.Edwards 01.02.13 17:09

Aiyoyo, all I've had enough of is you. Your basic failure to comprehend what is being said speaks volumes to those of us with the intelligence to work it out. I shan't be entering into any further debate with you as you've already made yourself look worse than I could ever manage. Plus I'll get told off by Candyfloss if I carry on the argument now so I'm done on this point. Toodles.

by aiyoyo 01.02.13 17:18

Oh dear, C. Edwards, showing yourself up again.
Wise to stop your bullshitting. No one is fooled by you.
Phew, at last, and I thought we will never see the end of this pretentious nonsense from you.

by Guest 01.02.13 17:28

Don't tempt fate please Aiyoyo!

Ding ding, pass farther down the bus and let's all move on.......

Positive thinking from everyone now please.

The four top London libel lawyers now lined up to crush a pensioner from Harlow