Re: Carter-Rucks's costs: £288,503 for fighting McCanns v Bennett

by Guest 02.02.13 14:46

Saltnpepper, the McCs have said of late that it's not really a coloboma, but more some kind of little fleck, which one can only notice when seeing her from nearby ....

by Guest 02.02.13 14:49

Châtelaine wrote:Saltnpepper, the McCs have said of late that it's not really a coloboma, but more some kind of little fleck, which one can only notice when seeing her from nearby ....

Here is what she said on Piers Morgan................

From Piers Morgan Interview...........

MORGAN: Madeleine had a very distinctive eye pattern, didn't she? Tell me about that, Kate, in case people see somebody they think may be Madeleine. Tell me about her eye.

K. MCCANN: If I'm honest, we haven't put too much emphasis on her eye, because I think you have to be very close to her to see it. But her eyes are slightly different colors, and one of them has this brown fleck in it. But you do notice, particularly on photographs, but --

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1105/11/pmt.01.html

by saltnpepper 02.02.13 14:53

Châtelaine wrote:Saltnpepper, the McCs have said of late that it's not really a coloboma, but more some kind of little fleck, which one can only notice when seeing her from nearby ....

Hi...yes i remember watching ~~Gerry~~ Kate say that on tv interview? was replying to the picture above which shows how much attention TM did make of the coloboma,there was a reason for this & i was suggesting at the possibility of non harassment of similar looking girls & non disturbment of the McCanns

by Guest 02.02.13 14:56

monkey mind wrote: [...]

It would be interesting to know if they still have a mortgage wouldn't it?

If not, how so?

***
There's been a lot of discussion about that, elsewhere too. Some are convinced that they paid off the mortgage with money from the Fund [or benefactors]. However, with their minimal, not to say shady year accounts, it's difficult to say ...

by sallypelt 02.02.13 14:59

Lately, I've been going over old ground in regards to the McCann's, and what I found interesting was how photographs of Madeleine POSTCARD SIZE, were available immediately on Madeleine's "abduction". The question I ask myself is, for what reason would any parent be carrying postcard size photographs of their kids on holiday?

by Guest 02.02.13 15:01

Carter-Rucks's costs: £288,503 for fighting McCanns v Bennett - Page 4 2690696675

Just noticed this thread has gone way off topic to coloboma and fund paying mortgage etc. It is about the CR costs, so please can we keep to this topic. There are a few threads on coloboma, etc. so please could you search for them and post there. I apologise too, as I posted to give info re coloboma, so will tell myself off Carter-Rucks's costs: £288,503 for fighting McCanns v Bennett - Page 4 110921

Carter-Rucks's costs: £288,503 for fighting McCanns v Bennett - Page 4 110921

by saltnpepper 02.02.13 15:07

Will the judge have prior knowledge of the costs involved?& if so can he giggle before turning to the claimants & ask...'are you taking the pi$$'

by **Tony Bennett** 02.02.13 15:13

saltnpepper wrote:Will the judge have prior knowledge of the costs involved?

This matter (amongst others) was covered in a letter I sent to the judge and to Carter-Ruck by e-mail late yesterday afternoon

by ShuBob 02.02.13 17:49

candyfloss wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:Saltnpepper, the McCs have said of late that it's not really a coloboma, but more some kind of little fleck, which one can only notice when seeing her from nearby ....

Here is what she said on Piers Morgan................

From Piers Morgan Interview...........

MORGAN: Madeleine had a very distinctive eye pattern, didn't she? Tell me about that, Kate, in case people see somebody they think may be Madeleine. Tell me about her eye.

K. MCCANN: If I'm honest, we haven't put too much emphasis on her eye, because I think you have to be very close to her to see it. But her eyes are slightly different colors, and one of them has this brown fleck in it. But you do notice, particularly on photographs, but --

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1105/11/pmt.01.html

Apologies Candyfloss for going off-topic but I feel I have to respond to this point.

How is Kate McCann able to sit there and lie with impunity without spontaneously combusting? It's unbelievable that this woman is able to tell such a blatant lie on such a stage with the world's eyes on her. If she can do this with a straight face, she has to forgive me for asking what else she's hiding.

by worriedmum 02.02.13 18:05

Carter-Rucks's costs: £288,503 for fighting McCanns v Bennett - Page 4 Maddiesbirthday-1

ermmm

by jd 02.02.13 18:16

monkey mind wrote:
aquila wrote:Oh my, things have come a long way in the last 5 years. The McCanns need to remember (my opinion) that the Fund of donations given by the public paid their mortgage a couple of times when they were in need of support (see link below). .
And they had just moved house back then.

It would be interesting to know if they still have a mortgage wouldn't it?

If not, how so?

Well the mccanns were still using the old Queniborough address some 17 months after moving out...As is proven, gerry mccann used a false address to Budget rent-a-car and should be made accountable for giving false information. gerry mccann also had the old Queniborough address written in his wallet when it was stolen, why not the current Rothley address? Why are they still using the old Queniborough address?

Carter-Rucks's costs: £288,503 for fighting McCanns v Bennett - Page 4 Carhireagree

Carter-Rucks's costs: £288,503 for fighting McCanns v Bennett - Page 4 Carhireagree

by Guest 02.02.13 23:57

A long list of jokes about lawyers to brighten the night - not of course that I'm suggesting that they could be applicable to any particular firm!

http://www.stromer.com/jokes/185jokes.html

by **PeterMac** 03.02.13 8:06

jd wrote:

Well the mccanns were still using the old Queniborough address some 17 months after moving out...As is proven, gerry mccann used a false address to Budget rent-a-car and should be made accountable for giving false information.

It would of course also mean that the Insurance cover was invalid.
So we can add "Driving without Insurance" to the Indictment ! !