Interesting article on Facebook from Steve M

Steve Marsden
19 mins
Two of the most powerful law firms in England are Kingsley Napley and Carter Ruck. These firms cater for Royalty and anyone with unlimited sums of money who is up to their neck in it. Got a tricky libel case? Been charged with sex abuse? No problem. These guys have got you covered.
Serious followers of the McCann case are already aware of the power of Carter Ruck in silencing people and making their lives misery but what of Kingsley Napley?
When Kate and Gerry scuttled back home from Portugal in September 2007, the first heavyweight lawyer on the scene was Michael Caplan QC. With the title "QC" one would think Caplan was a barrister. Nope - this bloke is in the extremely rare group of solicitors awarded that title.
Caplan had been a solicitor for 25 years when he was hired to defend the McCanns. Most people debating this in forums thought Caplan's work in defending General Pinochet against extradition was the logical reason to defend the McCanns. Personally, I doubt this very much and put that down as the least likely reason he was hired.
Alongside Caplan at Kingsley Napley is Angus McBride. This solicitor also represented the McCanns and he even made house calls to the family in Rothley. McBride appears to specialise in defending people against sexual allegations. People like Prince Charles' servant Michael Fawcett - accused of raping George Smith after Smith also claimed Fawcett was in a homosexual relationship with Charles. People like Chris Langham - found guilty on August 2, 2007 of possessing prepubescent child pornography as part of Operation Ore, and Premier League footballers accused of rape and violent assault.
If you've got the money and you've got sexual charges hanging over your head, Kingsley Napley are the go-to guys in England. This isn't anything new either. The firm have been "protecting lives" for over 75 years. The Profumo Affair (sexual relations), the Jeremy Thorp murder plot (sexual motives), Dr. David Kelly's murder (Operation Ore threatened to bring the Blair government down if Britain didn't go to war on Iraq) and Greville Janner on charges of sexual abuse in Leicestershire all give a glimpse of what this firm is about.
In 2007, the London Evening Standard described Angus McBride as "scrupulously honest and dedicated." Shame then that McBride drove Kate and Gerry away in his BMW with an out of date road fund license!

The VERY same Angus McBride that DEFENDED, now convicted and jailed, paedophile Chris Langham, who downloaded extreme child abuse' images and videos', for er, hum, 'reseach' purposes, so he 'says'!

Still convicted sent 'down' for 10 months jail time though!



The McCann's TELL the WHOLE WORLD their child has been 'abducted' by a PAEDOPHILE and the first thing they do (2007) is 'hire' a solicitor (Angus McBride) who DEFENDS 'peadophiles' for a 'living'!

Flags, RED, springs to mind!

The very LAST person you'd 'hire' IF your child was 'abducted' by a 'paedophile' IS a chap who DEFENDS 'paedophiles'!

Wouldn't it?

Unless, of course, i'm 'missing' something!

Off topic a bit but I had dealings with Kingsley Napley in an employment case where i had no representation. Their client settled out of court with me. Their bullying tactics were, I thought, rather extreme ...

Jamming wrote:Off topic a bit but I had dealings with Kingsley Napley in an employment case where i had no representation. Their client settled out of court with me. Their bullying tactics were, I thought, rather extreme ...

That is the definition of a GOOD lawyer ! !

Law is a zero sum game.
One loses and is therefore GOOD
The other loses, and is therefore BAD
Both get paid.

A "successful" lawyer, therefore is one who wins more than, say, 52% of his cases . . .
And to achieve that accolade, they will do almost anything, or so it seems to the rest of the laity

PeterMac wrote:

Jamming wrote:Off topic a bit but I had dealings with Kingsley Napley in an employment case where i had no representation. Their client settled out of court with me. Their bullying tactics were, I thought, rather extreme ...

That is the definition of a GOOD lawyer ! !

Law is a zero sum game.
One loses and is therefore GOOD
The other loses, and is therefore BAD
Both get paid.

A "successful" lawyer, therefore is one who wins more than, say, 52% of his cases . . .
And to achieve that accolade, they will do almost anything, or so it seems to the rest of the laity

I think you have it in one there.

When 'clients' have been economic with the actualite though there is no legal recourse to the perjurers assistants.

If I was to stand in the witness box and told deliberate porkies I'd be done for Perjury.

Ignorance is no Defence?

They are a law unto themselves.

No Win No Fee?

How many Fees have they not gained?

Opinion though as always.

XTC wrote:
When 'clients' have been economic with the actualite though there is no legal recourse to the perjurers assistants.
If I was to stand in the witness box and told deliberate porkies I'd be done for Perjury.
Ignorance is no Defence?
They are a law unto themselves.
No Win No Fee?
How many Fees have they not gained?

And we have the perfect example of that in Mrs Martorell who, under oath and on the record in the High Court of England stated, three times, that Madeleine had been abducted
only to have to issue a grovelling apology when she was one asked just ONE question, and had to admit, under oath and on the record in the High Court of England, that she had no evidence of any such thing.

In contrast TB was warned that if just ONE sentence or phrase in his book could be shown, merely on the balance of probabilities, to be defamatory, he would be liable to costs of a third of a Million pounds.

All professions are conspiracies against the Laity (GBS)

I hadn't seen this one before.

I'll include Steve's rubric from Facebook to explain its provenance.

Steve Marsden
24 mins · Charleston, WV, United States
When I wrote Faked Abduction in 2009, I was in contact with various people connected with the case. One such character was Joe Moura - a former FBI detective based in Boston, USA. Joe appeared on CBS several times giving his opinion on the case. The reason he was involved is simple: Joe is bilingual, English and Portuguese.
Joe actually went to Praia da Luz to speak to the Tapas staff.
For contractual reasons, Joe wasn't able to allow me to interview him about the case but still, his views are pretty robust and credible.
Watch this video. He is adamant that Jane Tanner lied and she never left the table on the night of the 3rd.
(Oh, and ignore the nonsense from Francisco Marco - another of the many charlatans employed by the McCanns).

PeterMac wrote:I hadn't seen this one before.

I'll include Steve's rubric from Facebook to explain its provenance.

Steve Marsden
24 mins · Charleston, WV, United States
When I wrote Faked Abduction in 2009, I was in contact with various people connected with the case. One such character was Joe Moura - a former FBI detective based in Boston, USA. Joe appeared on CBS several times giving his opinion on the case. The reason he was involved is simple: Joe is bilingual, English and Portuguese.
Joe actually went to Praia da Luz to speak to the Tapas staff.
For contractual reasons, Joe wasn't able to allow me to interview him about the case but still, his views are pretty robust and credible.
Watch this video. He is adamant that Jane Tanner lied and she never left the table on the night of the 3rd.
(Oh, and ignore the nonsense from Francisco Marco - another of the many charlatans employed by the McCanns).

That was like a breath of fresh air watching that. No nonsense interview with a strong intelligent person who says it like it is.
Can we sign him up for grange? The whole job will be boxed off for Feb.

Spanish private investigator said: "she was 100% abducted"............ha ha ha.....!

Can one be 90.125% abducted or even 37.5% abducted ?

Which psychoanalyst says Kate and Gerry are 100% innocent? vs what ? 0.10%?