The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Mm11

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Regist10

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Page 5 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Guest on 04.12.11 8:45

If Goncalo Amaral is cleared of Libel 9th-10th of Feb and Tony's hearing is delayed until after that, surely it would blow the case against Tony WI---------------------------DE open. LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 50899 LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 609562 LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 50899 LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 609562

Bring it on !!!!
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Guest on 04.12.11 9:18

Carter Ruck remind me of the Titanic. The biggest and most impressive of it's kind, or so they thought. LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 181154

But we all know what happened when they took their eyes off those annoying little icebergs. LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 110921

I hope they have enough life boats between them. LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 1135810427
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by pennylane on 04.12.11 10:18

I despise those high-priced bullies at CR and their fat cat, sleazy clients. TM are nothing but a bunch of serpents and vipers.

The McCanns and their ilk within the British establishment make me loathe this country.



Very best of luck to you Tony! I do hope you will keep us informed. I am praying for you to prevail against such injustice, and also for Goncalo and Pat to prevail. LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 725573
avatar
pennylane

Posts : 2770
Join date : 2009-12-07

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by AskTheDogsSandra on 04.12.11 11:15

Wow. So even when there is enough evidence to put someone in jail over the death of a child as long as you've got money and friends in high places then you can use the justice system to destroy people safe in the knowlege that the people you set out to destroy cannot defend themselves because they don't have enough money. And that's all it boils down to:- the McCanns have more money than Mr Bennett. And yet before their daughter died I bet they didn't have more money than Mr Bennett until Mr Kennedy came along.
AskTheDogsSandra
AskTheDogsSandra

Posts : 134
Join date : 2011-05-22

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Xavier on 04.12.11 11:29

Well lets look it from another perspective. Tony has finally succeeded in provoking the McCanns into taking action against him. Posters here complaining that this has now happened is daft - from his actions Tony clearly knew exactly what he was doing. And he has said on a number of occasions that he wants to get the McCanns into court.

The proceedings will be for contempt of court, for breaching an undertaking given to the high court in 2009.

It is interesting that he says he intends to defend the action, but not by arguing that he has not libelled the McCanns. Instead he is apparently going to argue that the original undertaking was too widely drawn, or that he signed it under duress.

If the former, then he should have taken steps to have the undertaking set aside soon after it was signed. To do so at this stage is unlikely to impress the court. He signed it and is bound to abide by it until such time as it is formally set aside.

As for duress - he had at the time the choice of defending the libel action brought by the McCanns or agreeing to sign an undertaking to the court to refrain from doing certain things. He was I believe advised by his lawyers at the time that he risked losing - ie that libel could be proved - and that he should seek an alternative. So again unlikely to impress the court.

If he is relying on the intention of government to reform libel law, then this is also in my view doomed to failure. Libel law is long overdue for reform. However, it is not the intention of Parliament to allow defamation willy nilly in the interests of freedom of speech. It is levelled at the misuse of the lible laws by the rich and powerful to surpress inconvenient facts emerging. It is more concerned with super injunctions (not a feature of this case) and the use of threats of libel by large corporations and even government departments (step forward and take a bow Carter Ruck and others) as a way of restricting articles or internet forums hosts with threats of having to defend a libel action, even where no such libel actually exists.

There is interesting information on evernote, which may provide more information.

https://www.evernote.com/pub/englishpen/libel#b=d69c80e0-286e-483c-b778-0a3ffcfdb004&n=29f3e1d4-9f3e-4b34-bbaf-bf40fc2b0444

I wish Tony luck in this, but nobody here should underestimate the seriousness of what he is facing. In my view he should be seeking urgent and proper legal advice, as deliberately breaching an undertaking to the High Court will have repercussions.
avatar
Xavier

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-08

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Costly

Post by Tony Bennett on 04.12.11 11:41

@Xavier wrote:Well lets look it from another perspective. Tony has finally succeeded in provoking the McCanns into taking action against him. Posters here complaining that this has now happened is daft - from his actions Tony clearly knew exactly what he was doing. And he has said on a number of occasions that he wants to get the McCanns into court...

REPLY: I have taken a vow of silence on this forum from now on until the court case. But I cannot allow that incorrect statement to stand. I have never, ever, said I 'want to get the McCanns into court', and nowhere will you be able to find any such statement I have ever made.

It would be good if you would please respond and accept that.

What I may have said is that IF the McCanns were to take me to court, then I would be prepared for that, or e.g. that I would defend statements about the case that I have made. No-one in the right mind WANTS to face a committal to prison or other libel action, facing lawyers who rack up their costs at £562.50 an hour (£9.37 a minute; £4,500 for an 8-hour day).
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 15592
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 72
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Xavier on 04.12.11 12:13

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Xavier wrote:Well lets look it from another perspective. Tony has finally succeeded in provoking the McCanns into taking action against him. Posters here complaining that this has now happened is daft - from his actions Tony clearly knew exactly what he was doing. And he has said on a number of occasions that he wants to get the McCanns into court...

REPLY: I have taken a vow of silence on this forum from now on until the court case. But I cannot allow that incorrect statement to stand. I have never, ever, said I 'want to get the McCanns into court', and nowhere will you be able to find any such statement I have ever made.

It would be good if you would please respond and accept that.

What I may have said is that IF the McCanns were to take me to court, then I would be prepared for that, or e.g. that I would defend statements about the case that I have made. No-one in the right mind WANTS to face a committal to prison or other libel action, facing lawyers who rack up their costs at £562.50 an hour (£9.37 a minute; £4,500 for an 8-hour day).

If you want to play semantics, that is fine. And I am actually firmly on your side. Just a realist.

Of course I will respond. I rather gathered that you went to the extent of attempting to bring a private prosecution against the McCanns in 2007.

From wikipedia: On 1 August 2007, three months after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Lagos, Portugal, Bennett set up a fund called The Madeleine Foundation to fund a private prosecution for alleged child neglect.[30] In November 2007, he started such a prosecution against the parent of Madeline - Gerry and Kate McCann.[31] The initial hearing was at Loughborogh Magistrates Court where the application was dismissed on the grounds that it was a matter for the Poruguese authorities, and thus beyond the jurisdiction of British courts.[32]

And the Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2270467/Madeleine-McCann-Kate-and-Gerrys-fury-at-club-devoted-to-prosecuting-them.html

Have these two got it wrong? You could argue that you have not used those exact words. But any reasonable person would draw the conculsion that if you dont want to get the McCanns into court, then bringing a private prosecution against them is a curious way to go about it.
avatar
Xavier

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-08

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Cheshire Cat on 04.12.11 13:44

@AskTheDogsSandra wrote:Wow. So even when there is enough evidence to put someone in jail over the death of a child as long as you've got money and friends in high places then you can use the justice system to destroy people safe in the knowlege that the people you set out to destroy cannot defend themselves because they don't have enough money. And that's all it boils down to:- the McCanns have more money than Mr Bennett. And yet before their daughter died I bet they didn't have more money than Mr Bennett until Mr Kennedy came along.



Jersey springs to mind. And also brave Robert Green and what is happening to him.
Cheshire Cat
Cheshire Cat
Madeleine Foundation

Posts : 676
Join date : 2010-08-16

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by aiyoyo on 05.12.11 2:18

Stella wrote:If Goncalo Amaral is cleared of Libel 9th-10th of Feb and Tony's hearing is delayed until after that, surely it would blow the case against Tony WI---------------------------DE open. LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 50899 LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 609562 LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 50899 LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 609562

Bring it on !!!!
I wonder how the mccanns are going to spilt themselves to be in two places attending two hearings running almost simultaneously.
How can they in UK on 8th Feb and expected to be in Lisbon on the following day. One has to give surely.

aiyoyo
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Gillyspot on 05.12.11 7:05

If Pat Brown's libel case against the McCanns' occurrs in 2012 then they are going to have a very busy (expensive) year next year.

____________________
Kate McCann "I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances"
Gillyspot
Gillyspot

Posts : 1470
Join date : 2011-06-13

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by aiyoyo on 05.12.11 7:59

@Gillyspot wrote:If Pat Brown's libel case against the McCanns' occurrs in 2012 then they are going to have a very busy (expensive) year next year.

Money is least of their concern because they are sitting on plenty of other people's money, which they set up for this very purpose. And before they run out they just have to wheel kate out in a silly frock as a damsel in distress and beg for more, which is what they had done so far - no nothing new there.

They concern should be where to find Maddie and it certainly isn't going to be in the Courtroom. What would be interesting however is what would be their next step after they lost to Amaral and Pat Brown. Is kate going to "climb" (her own word) into a hole from her unsalvageable reputation? By then it (her rotten reputation) would stink to the next planet - Maddie's planet !
aiyoyo
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Xavier on 05.12.11 8:31

@aiyoyo wrote:
Stella wrote:If Goncalo Amaral is cleared of Libel 9th-10th of Feb and Tony's hearing is delayed until after that, surely it would blow the case against Tony WI---------------------------DE open. LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 50899 LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 609562 LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 50899 LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 609562

Bring it on !!!!
I wonder how the mccanns are going to spilt themselves to be in two places attending two hearings running almost simultaneously.
How can they in UK on 8th Feb and expected to be in Lisbon on the following day. One has to give surely.




I do not think the McCanns will need to be in court. So that is unlikely to be a problem for them.
avatar
Xavier

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-08

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by aiyoyo on 05.12.11 13:24

@Xavier wrote:
@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Xavier wrote:Well lets look it from another perspective. Tony has finally succeeded in provoking the McCanns into taking action against him. Posters here complaining that this has now happened is daft - from his actions Tony clearly knew exactly what he was doing. And he has said on a number of occasions that he wants to get the McCanns into court...

REPLY: I have taken a vow of silence on this forum from now on until the court case. But I cannot allow that incorrect statement to stand. I have never, ever, said I 'want to get the McCanns into court', and nowhere will you be able to find any such statement I have ever made.

It would be good if you would please respond and accept that.

What I may have said is that IF the McCanns were to take me to court, then I would be prepared for that, or e.g. that I would defend statements about the case that I have made. No-one in the right mind WANTS to face a committal to prison or other libel action, facing lawyers who rack up their costs at £562.50 an hour (£9.37 a minute; £4,500 for an 8-hour day).

If you want to play semantics, that is fine. And I am actually firmly on your side. Just a realist.

Of course I will respond. I rather gathered that you went to the extent of attempting to bring a private prosecution against the McCanns in 2007.

From wikipedia: On 1 August 2007, three months after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Lagos, Portugal, Bennett set up a fund called The Madeleine Foundation to fund a private prosecution for alleged child neglect.[30] In November 2007, he started such a prosecution against the parent of Madeline - Gerry and Kate McCann.[31] The initial hearing was at Loughborogh Magistrates Court where the application was dismissed on the grounds that it was a matter for the Poruguese authorities, and thus beyond the jurisdiction of British courts.[32]

And the Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2270467/Madeleine-McCann-Kate-and-Gerrys-fury-at-club-devoted-to-prosecuting-them.html

Have these two got it wrong? You could argue that you have not used those exact words. But any reasonable person would draw the conculsion that if you dont want to get the McCanns into court, then bringing a private prosecution against them is a curious way to go about it.

So you equate filing a case against them for child neglect same as attempting to take them to court to argue over the alleged murder (albeit accidental) of their daughter as posited by the Police? It seems your legal knowledge is at par with the rest of us if not worst.

It's as if saying child neglect charge is same as homicide charge? hmmm..........



aiyoyo
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Daisy on 05.12.11 16:31

I'd rather not give the snarling lapdogs of Carter Ruck the opporunity to read my personal thoughts on TB's latest announcements; the less info we give them the better.

So I'll just dedicate a favourite poem of mine to Mr Bennett, to show my respect to a MAN that stood up for justice for Madeleine, in the face of bullying, indimidation, harrassment, threats of finiancial ruin & imprisonment - IMPRISONMENT for questioning and speaking your mind? Is this just the beginning, is TB being made an example of? Today Tony Bennett - tomorrow the rest of us?

No doubt this will give those same snivelling little minions something to hold up and ridicule but do I care LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 172348 - i'm sure the words & meaning will be lost on them.

'if' by rudyard kipling


If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing
theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt
you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not
be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being
hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too
wise:

If you can dream - and not make dreams your master,
If you
can think - and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and
Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to
hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for
fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and
build 'em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it
all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your
beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;
If you can force
your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are
gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which
says to them: "Hold on!"

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk
with kings - nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends
can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can
fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance
run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And - which is more
- you'll be a Man, my son!

Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936)

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche
Daisy
Daisy

Posts : 1245
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

Back to top Go down

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Xavier on 06.12.11 9:47

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Xavier wrote:
@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Xavier wrote:Well lets look it from another perspective. Tony has finally succeeded in provoking the McCanns into taking action against him. Posters here complaining that this has now happened is daft - from his actions Tony clearly knew exactly what he was doing. And he has said on a number of occasions that he wants to get the McCanns into court...

REPLY: I have taken a vow of silence on this forum from now on until the court case. But I cannot allow that incorrect statement to stand. I have never, ever, said I 'want to get the McCanns into court', and nowhere will you be able to find any such statement I have ever made.

It would be good if you would please respond and accept that.

What I may have said is that IF the McCanns were to take me to court, then I would be prepared for that, or e.g. that I would defend statements about the case that I have made. No-one in the right mind WANTS to face a committal to prison or other libel action, facing lawyers who rack up their costs at £562.50 an hour (£9.37 a minute; £4,500 for an 8-hour day).

If you want to play semantics, that is fine. And I am actually firmly on your side. Just a realist.

Of course I will respond. I rather gathered that you went to the extent of attempting to bring a private prosecution against the McCanns in 2007.

From wikipedia: On 1 August 2007, three months after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Lagos, Portugal, Bennett set up a fund called The Madeleine Foundation to fund a private prosecution for alleged child neglect.[30] In November 2007, he started such a prosecution against the parent of Madeline - Gerry and Kate McCann.[31] The initial hearing was at Loughborogh Magistrates Court where the application was dismissed on the grounds that it was a matter for the Poruguese authorities, and thus beyond the jurisdiction of British courts.[32]

And the Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2270467/Madeleine-McCann-Kate-and-Gerrys-fury-at-club-devoted-to-prosecuting-them.html

Have these two got it wrong? You could argue that you have not used those exact words. But any reasonable person would draw the conculsion that if you dont want to get the McCanns into court, then bringing a private prosecution against them is a curious way to go about it.

So you equate filing a case against them for child neglect same as attempting to take them to court to argue over the alleged murder (albeit accidental) of their daughter as posited by the Police? It seems your legal knowledge is at par with the rest of us if not worst.

It's as if saying child neglect charge is same as homicide charge? hmmm..........




Perhaps if you bothered to read this in context you might see that I am simply answering TBs question.

I have never, ever, said I 'want to get the McCanns into court', and nowhere will you be able to find any such statement I have ever made.
avatar
Xavier

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-08

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Me on 06.12.11 12:46

I have to say i think people are jumping on Xavier too much here. For me, he has provided a relatively accurate and fair analysis of what TB's up against in his court action.

However inconvenient it may seem it does seem a pretty spot on surmation.

____________________
What is certain is that since the start of the investigation there were  incongruent and even contradictory situations concerning the witness statements; the telephone records of calls that were made and received on mobile phones that belonged to the couple and to the group of friends that were on holidays with them; the movements of people right after the disappearance of the little girl was noticed, concerning the state in which the bedroom from where the child disappeared from was found (closed window? open window? partially open window?) etc., and the mystery would only become even thicker due to the clues that were left by the already mentioned sniffer dogs. - The Words of a JUDGE in relation to the McCanns
avatar
Me

Posts : 683
Join date : 2011-05-22

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by jd on 06.12.11 14:02

On 23rd November 2011, Gerry McCann told the Leveson Inquiry infront of the country that he strongly believes in freedom of speech and doesn't have a problem with anybody purporting a theory, at the same time he is paying Carter-Ruck to take legal action to silence those who purport a theory based on the official Portuguese police files

____________________
Who pulled the strings?...THE SYMINGTONS..And the Scottish connections...Look no further if you dare
jd
jd

Posts : 4151
Join date : 2011-07-22

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Angelique on 06.12.11 14:04

TB

My sympathies to you for this awful situation - you have my support if needed.

I don't know the law to any great extent - but surely this was a form of "entrapment". The fact that a ruse was used by a person so obviously employed by the McCanns would surely be a useful point.

Daisy

Nice one.

Unfortunately I think a certain section of the population have no conscience at all!

jd

Yes - I was just about to edit my post with this in mind. This also could used to a certain extent by TB.


____________________
Things aren't always what they seem
Angelique
Angelique

Posts : 1396
Join date : 2010-10-19

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Xavier on 06.12.11 14:23

It may be underhand, Angelique. But it is not entrapment. And such a claim would not be a defense.
avatar
Xavier

Posts : 130
Join date : 2011-09-08

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Smethurst's libel claim settled

Post by Tony Bennett on 08.12.11 6:59

Libel cases update:

SMETHURST

Update - Summary: Edward Smethurst’s claim against me has been settled on the following agreed terms:

a) I will pay the sum of £2,500 agreed damages to Mr Smethurst, without any formal admission of liability. Mr Smethurst has said via Carter-Ruck that he will pay this sum into the Find Madeleine Fund
b) I will in addition pay Mr Smethurst’s reasonable legal costs to date, to be assessed by the court if not agreed between me and him (see below)
c) Carter-Ruck will draw up an undertaking for me to sign which will cover the contents of anything that I may or may not publish about him in the future; the terms of that undertaking to be agreed between us.

The hearing yesterday (7 December):

Carter-Ruck had four people representing them at yesterday’s hearing, which was in Room E117, the chambers of Master Victoria McCloud. They were:

(i) Jacob Dean, barrister
(ii) Isabel Hudson, Senior Partner of Carter-Ruck
(iii) Two female assistants.

Mr Smethurst’s claim, issued by the court on 9 August 2011, was originally for £100,000 damages.

This was primarily a costs management hearing in which Carter-Ruck were asking the Master to approve their ‘costs budget’. This set out, in a series of complex tables, how they had calculated their costs to date (£28,390) and their likely future costs (£143,086.50), which totalled £171, 476.50.

Discussion about Carter-Ruck’s costs bill took up most of the 1¾ hour hearing. The Master queried the very high amount of costs in Carter-Ruck’s budget. The end result was that Carter-Ruck’s costs budget schedule, most unusually, was rejected by the Master, who ordered Carter-Ruck at their own expense to submit another one. Carter-Ruck were given leave to appeal if they wished.

The hearing opened with Jacob Dean, for Mr Smethurst, being able to make a half-hour opening summary of the case. In this address, he set out that the following legal issues to be settled in the case:

a) whether any or all of the comments I made about Mr Smethurst were justified (strictly true)
b) whether, if not justified, they were ‘fair comment’
c) what was the actual meaning of some of the words I used
d) whether I had acted promptly to remove any offending words.

He also claimed that Mr Smethurst had no control on Facebook over who became his friends on his Facebook page. That meant that I would have to have proved to the court that certain named friends of his were there as a matter of his conscious decision. Jacob Dean claimed that anyone could become Mr Smethurst’s ‘Facebook Friend’.

At the hearingk the barrister produced and served on me a new application, running to several hundred more pages, with exhibits, for ‘Summary Disposal’ of the case. The application contended that I had no arguable case and that the case should be disposed of at a 1-day hearing without the matter ever going to trial. If the case had proceeded, there would have been a 1-day summary trial before a judge. If at that hearing the judge thought that I had an arguable case, the matter would have been set down for a 3-day trial at which all the legal arguments mentioned above would have been considered.

The Master was especially interested in the following aspects of the matter:

a) whether or not I had promptly removed any offending material
b) whether or not Mr Smethurst had followed the Pre-Action Protocol on Defamation, which requires libel claimants to give potential defendants an opportunity to remove any allegedly libellous publications. The Protocol sets out quite clearly that court action should be ‘a last resort’
c) whether or not Mr Smethurst should have issued proceedings on 9 August when I had met all the demands of Carter-Ruck’s initial two letters of 4 August
d) whether Mr Smethurst’s claim for £100,000 damages was ‘proportional’: i.e. whether such a large claim was reasonable in respect of comments made on a small internet forum and which were removed on request
e) whether the steps taken in the proceedings to date by Carter-Ruck were proportionate, having regard in particular to my prompt removal of any offending material.

At the conclusion of the case, the Master said that she was “fully seized of all the issues relating to the need for claimants to follow the pre-Action Protocol and as to proportionality”.

In terms, this may well mean that a large part of Mr Smethurst’s costs claim may be disallowed by the court.

Edward Smethurst, via his lawyers Carter-Ruck, has asked me to remove the last two sentences from this statement, and I have agreed to do so and removed them today, 4 February 2012 - Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 15592
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 72
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 08.12.11 7:10

Tony, re: the statement that Mr Smethurst has no control over his Facebook friends, as far as I am aware having used Facebook, people have to send a friend request which you can accept, or ignore. People can't just make themselves your friend, so I would question that as it may well help your case.

Apart from that, good luck with the it all and hope it is not too stressful.

____________________
The truth will out.
Smokeandmirrors
Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2427
Join date : 2011-07-31

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Gillyspot on 08.12.11 7:13

Thanks Tony for sharing that.

As you say given the inequality of the case (i e ££''s) you were in between a rock and a hard place.

By the way as regards facebook you have to accept friends before they appear on your account so any friends he may have had he (or someone else using his account) would have had to consciously accept them.

____________________
Kate McCann "I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances"
Gillyspot
Gillyspot

Posts : 1470
Join date : 2011-06-13

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Re: LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 08.12.11 7:20

Yes, I just whizzed off and checked out Facebook FAQ's, Mr Smethurst definately would have had to accept a friend request. I would strongly contest the assertion that he had no control as it simply NOT TRUE! I think it grossly unfair that they would mention this without checking their facts, a lie must not enter the case!!

____________________
The truth will out.
Smokeandmirrors
Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2427
Join date : 2011-07-31

Back to top Go down

LATEST on the 3 libel actions - alleged contempt of court x 1, and alleged libels x 2 - Page 5 Empty Facebook friends

Post by uppatoffee on 08.12.11 7:35

This post has been removed from the forum by Tony Bennett at the request of Edward Smethurst.
uppatoffee
uppatoffee

Posts : 626
Join date : 2011-09-14

Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum