The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann. Please note that your username should be different from your email address!

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

(Please note: if you register with the sole intention of disrupting or spamming, please don't expect to be a member for too long.)

Many thanks,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Page 9 of 11 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by Spaniel on 01.03.12 23:13

@zodiac wrote:
@Spaniel wrote:
@zodiac wrote:
@Spaniel wrote:
@rainbow-fairy wrote:
@Ashwarya wrote:Do Carter Ruck ever win in court, or do they rely on bullying people to stay out of court and to settle with their clients without ever going in front of a judge? Judge Tugendhat seemed pretty dismissive when he told them to reduce the number of breaches to the ten most important ones, and they now seem to have lost their nerve over one of those. Tony is a very brave man, though, and I wish there was some way of supporting him financially, and that I was as rich as some of the McCann backers so that I could do it properly.
Ashwarya, I have wondered this myself. After all, their tag-line is 'the most-feared libel lawyers', NOT 'the most successful'. These are a firm who are used to having newspapers fold and capitulate just on receiving a threatening letter. So for Tony to not only not fold but fight also has probably been a real surprise to them. They will now show whether they are all 'bully and bluster' or have some substance. I favour the former - just the granting of the leave to call Mike Gunnill has them running for the hills withdrawing charges. I really think Tony can press home the advantage now. I have a good feeling about this!

rainbow-fairy and Ashwarya have you researched Carter Ruck? Do you know how many cases that they lost or not? How many times their costs were questioned?

I have a file a mile long here if you wish to read it. Here's a taster. " A lunchtime interview went well, with Carter-Ruck giving a surprising answer to the question ‘what would you do if you came out of lunch to find a policeman standing over your car, which you had parked in a non-parking area?’ The aspiring articled clerk told them he would go home and report that his car had been stolen. "







If you have no idea, I suggest that you get up to date, otherwise far too easy to send Tony to the front line alone to risk all, but you'll wave him goodbye no doubt, and without a backward glance.

The aspiring articled clerk imo seems like a bit of a plonker. Break the law by lying to the police about theft of his/her car.
The aspiring articled clerk was the founder of Carter Ruck. You are the plonker and I feel like giving up. OMG I need a break from some thickows.

Spaniel's taster: "I have a file a mile long here if you wish to read it. Here's a taster. " A lunchtime interview went well, with Carter-Ruck giving a surprising answer to the question ‘what would you do if you came out of lunch to find a policeman standing over your car, which you had parked in a non-parking area?’ The aspiring articled clerk told them he would go home and report that his car had been stolen."


OMG, how rude! What point, exactly, are you trying to make by posting your taster? In reality, It doesn't matter who the articled clerk is/was, he/she would not be above the law in those circumstances. It is wrong to mislead the police by making a written or oral statement. In fact I think it is called perverting the course of justice.

Logged back to try and explain. Zodiac the person I quoted was Peter Carter Ruck, I don't know how else to explain it.
avatar
Spaniel

Posts : 742
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2012-01-24

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by zodiac on 01.03.12 23:25

@Spaniel wrote:
@zodiac wrote:
@Spaniel wrote:
@zodiac wrote:
@Spaniel wrote:
@rainbow-fairy wrote:
@Ashwarya wrote:Do Carter Ruck ever win in court, or do they rely on bullying people to stay out of court and to settle with their clients without ever going in front of a judge? Judge Tugendhat seemed pretty dismissive when he told them to reduce the number of breaches to the ten most important ones, and they now seem to have lost their nerve over one of those. Tony is a very brave man, though, and I wish there was some way of supporting him financially, and that I was as rich as some of the McCann backers so that I could do it properly.
Ashwarya, I have wondered this myself. After all, their tag-line is 'the most-feared libel lawyers', NOT 'the most successful'. These are a firm who are used to having newspapers fold and capitulate just on receiving a threatening letter. So for Tony to not only not fold but fight also has probably been a real surprise to them. They will now show whether they are all 'bully and bluster' or have some substance. I favour the former - just the granting of the leave to call Mike Gunnill has them running for the hills withdrawing charges. I really think Tony can press home the advantage now. I have a good feeling about this!

rainbow-fairy and Ashwarya have you researched Carter Ruck? Do you know how many cases that they lost or not? How many times their costs were questioned?

I have a file a mile long here if you wish to read it. Here's a taster. " A lunchtime interview went well, with Carter-Ruck giving a surprising answer to the question ‘what would you do if you came out of lunch to find a policeman standing over your car, which you had parked in a non-parking area?’ The aspiring articled clerk told them he would go home and report that his car had been stolen. "







If you have no idea, I suggest that you get up to date, otherwise far too easy to send Tony to the front line alone to risk all, but you'll wave him goodbye no doubt, and without a backward glance.

The aspiring articled clerk imo seems like a bit of a plonker. Break the law by lying to the police about theft of his/her car.
The aspiring articled clerk was the founder of Carter Ruck. You are the plonker and I feel like giving up. OMG I need a break from some thickows.

Spaniel's taster: "I have a file a mile long here if you wish to read it. Here's a taster. " A lunchtime interview went well, with Carter-Ruck giving a surprising answer to the question ‘what would you do if you came out of lunch to find a policeman standing over your car, which you had parked in a non-parking area?’ The aspiring articled clerk told them he would go home and report that his car had been stolen."


OMG, how rude! What point, exactly, are you trying to make by posting your taster? In reality, It doesn't matter who the articled clerk is/was, he/she would not be above the law in those circumstances. It is wrong to mislead the police by making a written or oral statement. In fact I think it is called perverting the course of justice.

Logged back to try and explain. Zodiac the person I quoted was Peter Carter Ruck, I don't know how else to explain it.

I know who the person is. It is the posting of your 'taster' that needs explaining. Also please explain why you post that, it is I that is the plonker?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/dec/23/pressandpublishing.comment
avatar
zodiac

Posts : 73
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-01-31

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by littlepixie on 02.03.12 0:13

Can I just say something? I have met TB and he came across in the flesh as nice as he does in his posts, a throughly decent chap. I admire him for standing up for what he believes in.

But let us cast our minds back to the start of the McCann affair. I was on the Mirror Forum, then moved to 3As along with most others who were sceptical of the abduction theory. There were hundreds and hundreds of us. Some fell by the wayside ONLY BECAUSE their real identities were exposed and they were being harrassed at their workplaces and homes AND had their private messages to their friends printed online for everyone to see. I have no doubt that those who ceased to exist didnt just one day choose to "forget" a little 3 year old Madeleine who disappeared. Some changed their poster name and cotinue to post to this very day, 5 years later, and some dont post at all but just read and pop up now and then. They didnt forget her or give up on her. They are still there and always will be there until what happened to her is revealed.

With my hand on my heart I can honestly say that Tony Bennett has never, ever influenced my opinion on the McCann case. I dont even remember him on the Mirror forum and I am sure (and others will agree) that we had been on the 3As for a long, long time before anyone noticed him (sorry Tony) 3As had been thriving for a long time before the leaflet drop was ever thought about or posted about. He was there for a while and then gone. I can't remember the exact timeline of it but I am sure that 3A was there after Tony Bennett had gone. Proof that people had their own thoughts and ideas as they had from day one and wanted to still discuss theories of what might have happened to Maddie.

So that is why I cannot understand WHY the McCanns are going after Tony as if he were a poster-boy. There is evidence that some people who are sceptical of the McCanns do not support Tony at all and make no secret of it and call anyone who speaks highly of him a "Bennett Disciple" as if those people weren't already posting about the disappearance of Maddie before he came along. They were and the evidence is there to see.

They are wasting their money going after you Tony and by that I am in no way denigrating what you have tried to do, I admire you and will support you. I am merely stating that without you it will carry on. People will carry on searching for the truth.

God Bless x
avatar
littlepixie

Posts : 1340
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2009-11-29

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by aiyoyo on 02.03.12 1:36

@Spaniel wrote:After many hours of trying to find something, anything for Tony, I have come to a dead end, today at least, because my head and eyes hurt , but was quickly relieved by walking my dog who is detemined to inspect the poor dead badger down the lane.

A smidging of hope to costs is all I've seen, but I will keep on looking.

To Kololi being here? I like an opposite view. Kololi is upfront and polite, I like them being here.

I sometimes read JATYK for news that never makes it here, but I always wipe my feet on leaving. Eeugh!!


Err...eh I should hardly think so!
Was Kololi upfront before her mask was stripped off? What does that tell people? Well disguised? Deceptive?

Sans Souci was polite too, and not as derogatory as Kololi about TB, and is he now? At least Sans-souci was a good contributor on the legal aspect and didn't hide the side he supports.

Can people say the same about Kololi, someone who admires Kate as her "hero"?
avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by Gillyspot on 02.03.12 7:19

Good point aiyoyo. I suppose what I meant was it is good to get all sides of the argument but as you say posters such as Kololi have been dishonest in previous postings. Mind at least now as are showing their pro McCann feelings it does show up how dishonest all of them seem to be.

Zodiac - thanks for the excellent article on Carter-Ruck roses

____________________
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"
avatar
Gillyspot

Posts : 1470
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2011-06-13

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by rainbow-fairy on 02.03.12 8:18

@littlepixie wrote:Can I just say something? I have met TB and he came across in the flesh as nice as he does in his posts, a throughly decent chap. I admire him for standing up for what he believes in.

But let us cast our minds back to the start of the McCann affair. I was on the Mirror Forum, then moved to 3As along with most others who were sceptical of the abduction theory. There were hundreds and hundreds of us. Some fell by the wayside ONLY BECAUSE their real identities were exposed and they were being harrassed at their workplaces and homes AND had their private messages to their friends printed online for everyone to see. I have no doubt that those who ceased to exist didnt just one day choose to "forget" a little 3 year old Madeleine who disappeared. Some changed their poster name and cotinue to post to this very day, 5 years later, and some dont post at all but just read and pop up now and then. They didnt forget her or give up on her. They are still there and always will be there until what happened to her is revealed.

With my hand on my heart I can honestly say that Tony Bennett has never, ever influenced my opinion on the McCann case. I dont even remember him on the Mirror forum and I am sure (and others will agree) that we had been on the 3As for a long, long time before anyone noticed him (sorry Tony) 3As had been thriving for a long time before the leaflet drop was ever thought about or posted about. He was there for a while and then gone. I can't remember the exact timeline of it but I am sure that 3A was there after Tony Bennett had gone. Proof that people had their own thoughts and ideas as they had from day one and wanted to still discuss theories of what might have happened to Maddie.

So that is why I cannot understand WHY the McCanns are going after Tony as if he were a poster-boy. There is evidence that some people who are sceptical of the McCanns do not support Tony at all and make no secret of it and call anyone who speaks highly of him a "Bennett Disciple" as if those people weren't already posting about the disappearance of Maddie before he came along. They were and the evidence is there to see.

They are wasting their money going after you Tony and by that I am in no way denigrating what you have tried to do, I admire you and will support you. I am merely stating that without you it will carry on. People will carry on searching for the truth.

God Bless x
littlepixie, I totally agree.
Tony wasn't there when I saw on the news two doctors who tried to tell us that their daughter had been abducted. I didn't believe them then, I didn't believe them now and whether Tony fights or not I still won't believe them.
In fact, I think what they are doing is counter-productive, as its been said before the British public love an underdog! His activity for Madeleine has passed largely under the radar as the Media haven't reported it but all this hoo-ha on the internet will bring this to the attention of more people (same as Amazon pulling Pat's book). We must remember, to your average Joe on the street, Tony isn't well-known, in fact if you asked 100 people 'Who is Tony Bennett?' maybe 1 would get it. Most would probably reply 'he's that singer'!
To paraphrase one of Kololi's posts 'if they cut the head off the snake, it will die' - dream on! They are utterly deluded if they think gagging or imprisoning Tony will have a positive effect for them. It is more likely to result in increased numbers of people thinking there must be something VERY wrong with their story if they need to do this to people who don't believe it.
And for all those saying we are 'sending Tony in' or 'egging him on' can you not get it? We are only stating opinion. Tony will do what he decides. I'm not arrogant enough to think that if Tony fights on my opinion that he should will have swayed him even an iota. Do you really think if we told him to stick his head in an oven he would do so?
I'm still suspicious of those so certain he should just give in. Not many seemed to think so before he seemed to be doing so well in court, so why now? For 'Tony's sake' or are they running scared now?

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.
avatar
rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 43
Location : going round in circles

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by david_uk on 02.03.12 8:51

@littlepixie wrote:Can I just say something? I have met TB and he came across in the flesh as nice as he does in his posts, a throughly decent chap. I admire him for standing up for what he believes in.

But let us cast our minds back to the start of the McCann affair. I was on the Mirror Forum, then moved to 3As along with most others who were sceptical of the abduction theory. There were hundreds and hundreds of us. Some fell by the wayside ONLY BECAUSE their real identities were exposed and they were being harrassed at their workplaces and homes AND had their private messages to their friends printed online for everyone to see. I have no doubt that those who ceased to exist didnt just one day choose to "forget" a little 3 year old Madeleine who disappeared. Some changed their poster name and cotinue to post to this very day, 5 years later, and some dont post at all but just read and pop up now and then. They didnt forget her or give up on her. They are still there and always will be there until what happened to her is revealed.

With my hand on my heart I can honestly say that Tony Bennett has never, ever influenced my opinion on the McCann case. I dont even remember him on the Mirror forum and I am sure (and others will agree) that we had been on the 3As for a long, long time before anyone noticed him (sorry Tony) 3As had been thriving for a long time before the leaflet drop was ever thought about or posted about. He was there for a while and then gone. I can't remember the exact timeline of it but I am sure that 3A was there after Tony Bennett had gone. Proof that people had their own thoughts and ideas as they had from day one and wanted to still discuss theories of what might have happened to Maddie.

So that is why I cannot understand WHY the McCanns are going after Tony as if he were a poster-boy. There is evidence that some people who are sceptical of the McCanns do not support Tony at all and make no secret of it and call anyone who speaks highly of him a "Bennett Disciple" as if those people weren't already posting about the disappearance of Maddie before he came along. They were and the evidence is there to see.

They are wasting their money going after you Tony and by that I am in no way denigrating what you have tried to do, I admire you and will support you. I am merely stating that without you it will carry on. People will carry on searching for the truth.

God Bless x



Amen!!

ive been around since ground Zero! I watched the first news reports and immediately thought that the Mccanns didnt add up! I went online that day and found the Mirror forum discussion, I then moved to 3A! I had no idea Tony even exsisted until coming to this forum. And no offense to Tony but I had made my mind up way before than! Ive read TB`s articles and they are interesting but he has never advanced the theory that most of us have already formed! he has done a fantastic job of making sure we dont forget there is a truth in all this that must be uncovered and unlike most of us, to this day he has put his livelyhood on the line for what he believes in and for this im sure he has everyones admiriation and respect. I know its easy to say but I hope he fights till the end!

____________________
“Oh, what a tangled web we weave...when first we practice to deceive.”
Walter Scott, Marmion
avatar
david_uk

Posts : 320
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-01-20

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by rainbow-fairy on 02.03.12 9:04

I loved this part of the article;
"Derek Jameson, as a tabloid editor, had been unwisely advised to sue the BBC over a satirical sketch. Carter-Ruck said Jameson would get £25,000-£50,000. David Eady QC advised Carter-Ruck in writing that Jameson accept the £10 that the BBC had offered in settlement plus his costs. Carter-Ruck concealed this opinion from Jameson. Jameson lost the case and was sent a bill by Carter Ruck for £41,342.50. When he learned by chance of the QC's pessimistic advice, Carter-Ruck told him a string of lies."
Says it all about CR imho, chancers and bully boys.

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.
avatar
rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 43
Location : going round in circles

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by aiyoyo on 02.03.12 9:31

@ShuBob wrote:Please keep on posting, Spaniel. I personally have learnt a lot from your posts

Anyone else remember posters said the same thing to /about sans souci (posts) - well, that was until he was exposed!
avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by Kololi on 02.03.12 9:32

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Spaniel wrote:After many hours of trying to find something, anything for Tony, I have come to a dead end, today at least, because my head and eyes hurt , but was quickly relieved by walking my dog who is detemined to inspect the poor dead badger down the lane.

A smidging of hope to costs is all I've seen, but I will keep on looking.

To Kololi being here? I like an opposite view. Kololi is upfront and polite, I like them being here.

I sometimes read JATYK for news that never makes it here, but I always wipe my feet on leaving. Eeugh!!


Err...eh I should hardly think so!
Was Kololi upfront before her mask was stripped off? What does that tell people? Well disguised? Deceptive?

Sans Souci was polite too, and not as derogatory as Kololi about TB, and is he now? At least Sans-souci was a good contributor on the legal aspect and didn't hide the side he supports.

Can people say the same about Kololi, someone who admires Kate as her "hero"?

Oh for goodness sake Aiyoyo!

I have my doubts about the McCanns and the leaving of the children alone with the "checks" being performed is my greatest doubt. I find however, oogling photos of Madeleine McCann looking for suspected signs of special needs syndromes or all this stuff about linguistics equally as daft and pointless as the theory by some guy that she is the next coming of the Lord. I do not feel that stalking the McCanns or typing crap about Mr Gunnill on the forum simply because he took a photo that made Debbie Butler look a tadge hard and ugly to be useful in "finding what happened" to Madeleine.

I am totally miffed as to how those Xmas carols and poems written by Mr Bennett will lead anybody to either where she is hidden or where her remains are disposed. Perhaps you can enlighten me as to their actual purpose.

Mask my bottom. We get somebody every now and then who joins and posts a point of view that offers balance so that you can see things from a different perspective such as Sans - Soucci or Sabot and they have the crap beaten out of them by the big Aiyoyo stick because it's not what Aiyoyo wishes to hear. I have never claimed to believe one version of events over the other but lately when I see you suggesting that we all oggle a photo of a potentially dead but definitely missing child to see if we can spot signs of her suffering Asperger's Syndrome the version that the McCanns would have us believe seems a tadge more reasonable and a lot less sinister. Do you not have any compassion Aiyoyo? Have you ever thought that she might just be found and as she grows up she might read those awful things that have been written about her on the internet? So what if she had two heads and five feet???? Will scrutinising that really tell us where she was taken that evening or what happened to her on that night? Tomorrow somebody may type something about the fund or the neglect issue and believe it or not I probably might agree with what they are saying.

You do know you can admire some qualities in a person whilst at the same time cringing at some of their not so pleasant traits don't you - think Kate btw.

In consideration of the other people please let's call a truce Aiyoyo. daft1
avatar
Kololi

Posts : 677
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2010-01-10

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by aiyoyo on 02.03.12 9:38

@Spaniel wrote:
rainbow-fairy and Ashwarya have you researched Carter Ruck? Do you know how many cases that they lost or not? How many times their costs were questioned?

I have a file a mile long here if you wish to read it. Here's a taster." A lunchtime interview went well, with Carter-Ruck giving a surprising answer to the question ‘what would you do if you came out of lunch to find a policeman standing over your car, which you had parked in a non-parking area?’ The aspiring articled clerk told them he would go home and report that his car had been stolen. "
.

Err......I dont quite understand the "here's a taster" thing --- hmmm...may I ask is that a friendly warning or scare tactic?

And, BTW why do you have a mile long file about CR cases and costs? Googled by chance or ?
avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by aquila on 02.03.12 10:13

It is my opinion as an average person, that we DO stand in the McCann's shoes when we make comments. We DO think and shudder to think what would we do if our child disappeared. We DO find strange behaviour in the McCanns.

I think (unless I'm mistaken) the whole point of questioning the McCanns is their ability to call in 'the big boys' within hours. The whole PR, media machine etc. activated WITHIN HOURS. The fund WITHIN HOURS.

I think we question why a fairly average couple of doctors had that power at their disposal WITHIN HOURS. I rather doubt Ben Needham's mother had that power at her disposal and probably doesn't have it today after all those years. So forgive me for sticking up for this forum to all the pro team, I don't always agree or believe with everything said on it but I know in my heart and soul something is not right with the Madeleine's disappearance as do most people who are trying to find Madeleine and either bring her home or bring justice for her.

I think we have the right to question Madeleine's disappearance, given the media coverage, the libel suits, the high profile PR and the poor private investigation.

So, if we look at every aspect of this case, we have the right to question in my opinion. Why, after all this money (in whatever way it has been gathered), has nothing turned up?

Just my opinion.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8461
Reputation : 1566
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by zodiac on 02.03.12 10:27

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Spaniel wrote:
rainbow-fairy and Ashwarya have you researched Carter Ruck? Do you know how many cases that they lost or not? How many times their costs were questioned?

I have a file a mile long here if you wish to read it. Here's a taster." A lunchtime interview went well, with Carter-Ruck giving a surprising answer to the question ‘what would you do if you came out of lunch to find a policeman standing over your car, which you had parked in a non-parking area?’ The aspiring articled clerk told them he would go home and report that his car had been stolen. "
.

Err......I dont quite understand the "here's a taster" thing --- hmmm...may I ask is that a friendly warning or scare tactic?

And, BTW why do you have a mile long file about CR cases and costs? Googled by chance or ?

Here's a taster."

aiyoyo,

thumbsup

I've also asked Spaniel to explain why he/she posted his/her taster. I also asked Spaniel to explain what exactly is a taster? Also, who uses language like that? Hopefully Spaniel will also explain why he/she has, so rudely, called me a plonker for stating that anyone who would even consider lying to the police is a plonker.
avatar
zodiac

Posts : 73
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-01-31

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by aiyoyo on 02.03.12 10:40

@Kololi wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@Spaniel wrote:After many hours of trying to find something, anything for Tony, I have come to a dead end, today at least, because my head and eyes hurt , but was quickly relieved by walking my dog who is detemined to inspect the poor dead badger down the lane.

A smidging of hope to costs is all I've seen, but I will keep on looking.

To Kololi being here? I like an opposite view. Kololi is upfront and polite, I like them being here.

I sometimes read JATYK for news that never makes it here, but I always wipe my feet on leaving. Eeugh!!


Err...eh I should hardly think so!
Was Kololi upfront before her mask was stripped off? What does that tell people? Well disguised? Deceptive?

Sans Souci was polite too, and not as derogatory as Kololi about TB, and is he now? At least Sans-souci was a good contributor on the legal aspect and didn't hide the side he supports.

Can people say the same about Kololi, someone who admires Kate as her "hero"?

Oh for goodness sake Aiyoyo!

I have my doubts about the McCanns and the leaving of the children alone with the "checks" being performed is my greatest doubt. I find however, oogling photos of Madeleine McCann looking for suspected signs of special needs syndromes or all this stuff about linguistics equally as daft and pointless as the theory by some guy that she is the next coming of the Lord. I do not feel that stalking the McCanns or typing crap about Mr Gunnill on the forum simply because he took a photo that made Debbie Butler look a tadge hard and ugly to be useful in "finding what happened" to Madeleine.

Oh dear, why the defensiveness now ? Not happy about your exposed position perhaps?

If you really must know, I advocate different views and people are free to purport different theories since her disappearance is a total mystery. I didnt believe the parents for obvious reasons which only the blind "mccanns worshippers" refused to acknowledge.
Sorry I don't believe in that complete bullocks that she's findable. And neither did the Police, that is why no police force is looking for her, and all for a good reason don't you think?
Wasn't it you who showed confidence in the Police services when you said "there is adequate Police services" or do you think that applies only in UK and that the Portuguese counterparts are just useless sardine munchers? I remember reading the PJ and UK Police were unanimous in their theory that Maddie died in Apt 5A, supported also by the dogs evidence? Or do you also doubt the dogs?

I suggest you read back on all my posts - and show me where did you ever find me saying the photos were not natural or photoshopped blah blah blah.
From personal experience of contacts with children born with those mentioned medical condition, and from observations of some of her photos, she looks to ME as if she could be a sufferer of one of those conditions I did posit a theory her accidental death could have something to do with a pre-existing medical condition (reason being denied medical records) that endangers her when she was left alone or if she was mishandled (reason being hidden from autopsy).

As for the linguistics thread you will find that applies to crime investigations, where if deemed necessary, that is one of the methods used to help crack a case.

BTW, do you consider Isobel Hudson close monitoring of this forum "stalking" of TB and the following suing of TB harrassement by Mccanns? Or by your standard, only the mccanns have human rights?




I am totally miffed as to how those Xmas carols and poems written by Mr Bennett will lead anybody to either where she is hidden or where her remains are disposed. Perhaps you can enlighten me as to their actual purpose.

Mask my bottom. We get somebody every now and then who joins and posts a point of view that offers balance so that you can see things from a different perspective such as Sans - Soucci or Sabot and they have the crap beaten out of them by the big Aiyoyo stick because it's not what Aiyoyo wishes to hear. I have never claimed to believe one version of events over the other but lately when I see you suggesting that we all oggle a photo of a potentially dead but definitely missing child to see if we can spot signs of her suffering Asperger's Syndrome the version that the McCanns would have us believe seems a tadge more reasonable and a lot less sinister. Do you not have any compassion Aiyoyo? Have you ever thought that she might just be found and as she grows up she might read those awful things that have been written about her on the internet? So what if she had two heads and five feet???? Will scrutinising that really tell us where she was taken that evening or what happened to her on that night? Tomorrow somebody may type something about the fund or the neglect issue and believe it or not I probably might agree with what they are saying.

Oh dear, such strong reaction - hit a nerve perhaps?
A balance view you said - well, let's see which constructive bits you have said about TB so far? Remind me...since I must have missed that.
If your radical pro-mccanns view is considered "from a different perspective", then shouldnt the same apply the other way round?
Have you come across a pro-forum allowing anti-mccanns-bullocks posters?.
And, do you honestly believe your "role model - kate" or even gerry would allow dissenting views on their website or facebook about the mystery of their missing daughter? What more, people not even posting on their site or facebook are monitored and sued - so in your honest opinion, let's hear what you think will happen to people should they so much as offer views "from a different perspective" on the mccanns website?

P.S. I don't always agree with some of TB style, but the pivotal point is he is a decent, upright and courageous man willing to put his head above the parapet for a little girl who disappeared in mystery circumstances.
By comparison, the mccanns have proven themselves to be liars even under oath, perverse the course of justice by refusing to cooperate with Police to find their missing first born, spin the public for Fund spent largely on legal fees..


You do know you can admire some qualities in a person whilst at the same time cringing at some of their not so pleasant traits don't you - think Kate btw.

In consideration of the other people please let's call a truce Aiyoyo. daft1
avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by jmac on 02.03.12 22:09

Ny primary concern has never been the McCann case and I have always wondered about the obsession now being portrayed in this forum in connection with it. I say that becase injustice is widespread and children are still being abused. Yet most of the forum is concerned about a `dead child`, possibly. I`m sorry to have to say that and I do not say it without emotional feeling.

Look at Hollie demands justice. google hollie demands justice. It is going on now. We need your obvious concern and skills now.

Stop pointificating on the facts of a dead child, and start being concerned about what is being done to the living, right now, as we speak...



I`ve never found that feasible or convincing.

jmac

Posts : 121
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-09-29

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by aiyoyo on 03.03.12 2:56

And, your point being..........? That all fora/blogs pertaining to Madeleine Beth Mccann, including those of mccanns' website and facebook should be shut down to suit you perhaps?

So long as her parents continue to urge people to donate and to buy their merchandise to support the search for her - "a dead child" as you so rightly said - then why shouldn't people object to the mccanns' lies and spins ?

More to the point, if it is a general forum about "missing children" you want to focus on, what are you doing on THIS particular forum, may I ask?





avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by tigger on 03.03.12 7:25

@jmac wrote:Ny primary concern has never been the McCann case and I have always wondered about the obsession now being portrayed in this forum in connection with it. I say that becase injustice is widespread and children are still being abused. Yet most of the forum is concerned about a `dead child`, possibly. I`m sorry to have to say that and I do not say it without emotional feeling.

Look at Hollie demands justice. google hollie demands justice. It is going on now. We need your obvious concern and skills now.

Stop pointificating on the facts of a dead child, and start being concerned about what is being done to the living, right now, as we speak...



I`ve never found that feasible or convincing.


Jmac, this is the second topic in which I find you posting Hollie Creig in, the other one was the Pilley case.
The title of a topic is the clue to what the discussion covers. There is a current topic about the ongoing case of Hollie Creig on this forum. Now wasn't that easy?

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 44
Join date : 2011-07-20

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by Guest on 03.03.12 8:58

Did you mean Hollie Greig, not Hollie Creig?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by rainbow-fairy on 03.03.12 9:29

@jmac wrote:Ny primary concern has never been the McCann case and I have always wondered about the obsession now being portrayed in this forum in connection with it. I say that becase injustice is widespread and children are still being abused. Yet most of the forum is concerned about a `dead child`, possibly. I`m sorry to have to say that and I do not say it without emotional feeling.

Look at Hollie demands justice. google hollie demands justice. It is going on now. We need your obvious concern and skills now.

Stop pointificating on the facts of a dead child, and start being concerned about what is being done to the living, right now, as we speak...



I`ve never found that feasible or convincing.
jmac, the clue to the primary focus is in the title, look at the header. The. Complete. Mystery. Of. Madeleine. McCann! I wouldve thought that it is self-explanatory, frankly.
BTW, what have you 'never found feasible and convincing'?

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.
avatar
rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 43
Location : going round in circles

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by Ribisl on 03.03.12 11:31

@rainbow-fairy wrote:
@jmac wrote:Ny primary concern has never been the McCann case and I have always wondered about the obsession now being portrayed in this forum in connection with it. I say that becase injustice is widespread and children are still being abused. Yet most of the forum is concerned about a `dead child`, possibly. I`m sorry to have to say that and I do not say it without emotional feeling.

Look at Hollie demands justice. google hollie demands justice. It is going on now. We need your obvious concern and skills now.

Stop pointificating on the facts of a dead child, and start being concerned about what is being done to the living, right now, as we speak...



I`ve never found that feasible or convincing.
jmac, the clue to the primary focus is in the title, look at the header. The. Complete. Mystery. Of. Madeleine. McCann! I wouldve thought that it is self-explanatory, frankly.
BTW, what have you 'never found feasible and convincing'?

jmac I don't believe any of us here is 'pontificating' with a possible exception of yourself. Many of the contributors are quite passionate about seeing justice done for Madeleine and that is the prime, if not the only, motive for joining a forum like this. Obsessiveness is not a bad thing when trying to understand such a convoluted case, along with tenacity and rationality, and I am sure any successful detective would have more than a fair share of such traits.

____________________
There is a taint of death, a flavour of mortality in lies... Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad

Ribisl

Posts : 807
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-02-04

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by Guest on 05.03.12 21:21

@PeterMac wrote:It is not my understanding of English law,
that one person may take up a position unsupported by any facts or evidence,
and then have committed to prison any other person who questions the basis for the holding of that position.



Could it be a bluff by the Mccann's and their team with a view to yet another out of court settlement? I understand that Mr Bennett is conversant with the law so I find it hard to believe that he would do anything to jeopardize his personal liberty.



I have wondered in the past if G Amaral was deliberately luring the Mccann's into a court of law in addition to creating more public exposure of the case, could Mr Bennett being doing the same?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by uppatoffee on 11.03.12 6:03

I have been on holiday this week and been missing all the excitement! Managed to log on just to see if there was any news and find that things finally seem to be happening.

I have a couple of questions that i wonder if anyone could answer? With all the new developments taking place will this have any bearing on Tony's court case? Is it likely to get postponed awaiting the results of all this new work?

If it doesn't get delayed and things went against Tony in court, but later, after the completion of the review if the McCanns were charged, what impact might this have on Tony. Would any fines/charges be refunded? Would he be entitled to any compensation?
avatar
uppatoffee

Posts : 626
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2011-09-14

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by PeterMac on 11.03.12 7:40

@uppatoffee wrote:
If it doesn't get delayed and things went against Tony in court, but later, after the completion of the review if the McCanns were charged, what impact might this have on Tony. Would any fines/charges be refunded? Would he be entitled to any compensation?
Enormous. Exemplary and Punitive. To an extent that the complainants would probably not be able to pay in their lifetimes.

____________________

avatar
PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 163
Join date : 2010-12-06

Back to top Go down

Re: McCanns v Bennett: 153 alleged breaches reduced to 25

Post by sharonl on 11.03.12 7:45

I wondered whether the current developments in this case had something to do with the case against Goncalo Amaral being postponed. Surely this is not a good time for the McCanns to have evidence against them read out in a British court?

____________________
"WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER" - Rebekah Brooks to David Cameron
avatar
sharonl


Posts : 4005
Reputation : 682
Join date : 2009-12-29

http://www.cold2012.org.uk

Back to top Go down

Reshuffling the Fraudulent Fund Ltd

Post by Guest on 11.03.12 13:07

@PeterMac wrote:
@uppatoffee wrote:
If it doesn't get delayed and things went against Tony in court, but later, after the completion of the review if the McCanns were charged, what impact might this have on Tony. Would any fines/charges be refunded? Would he be entitled to any compensation?
Enormous. Exemplary and Punitive. To an extent that the complainants would probably not be able to pay in their lifetimes.

Agreed!

In view of this: do we perhaps have a lawyer in the house, who could shed some light on the recent changes of the statutory situation of the Fund? These are by no means random: isn't it the case that the Fund was brought out of reach of anyone claiming compensation from the Fund, be they disgruntled (ex-)donors or people the McCs have run afoul of?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Page 9 of 11 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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