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!

McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January  - Page 3 Mm11

McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January  - Page 3 Regist10

McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Go down

McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January  - Page 3 Empty Re: McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January

Post by Woofer on 06.01.13 18:02

Tony - tcat is not the only worrier - as I`ve said before, I do worry that you `show your cards` too often. I think you replied that you don`t show all of them or words to that affect - I`m hoping you are keeping something back.

____________________
The constant assertion of belief is an indication of fear - Jiddu Krishnamurti
Woofer
Woofer

Posts : 3390
Join date : 2012-02-06

Back to top Go down

McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January  - Page 3 Empty Re: McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January

Post by saltnpepper on 06.01.13 18:54

Echo the 100% support like the newcomer & would like to appeal to the visitors here to please join the forum if they feel strongly about this case or feel strongly about how Mr Bennet is being treated for having same/similar views as we do...scary that you can have the threat of being jailed or losing your home for having an opinion,who likes a bully?

McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January  - Page 3 145395
saltnpepper
saltnpepper

Posts : 154
Join date : 2012-04-30
Location : wales

Back to top Go down

McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January  - Page 3 Empty Re: McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January

Post by Guest on 06.01.13 19:33

@Tony Bennett wrote:
tcat wrote:Your strategy is either brilliant, or the most disastrous one ever.

What makes you think I have any strategy?

Or you're not well with all the stress.

That's true. But losing a stone-and-a-half in a few months isn't all bad news.

I still can't work you out.

Try not to worry too much about it. Few people can.

But if you aren't well, tell the court before it's too late.

Your advice is appreciated to an extent you cannot imagine.
There's a difference between not knowing what to do when you're facing Carter Ruck (I fully empathise) and not ensuring you're aren't making your situation even worse (by making further statements like those on the Aussie forum which you acknowledge were incorrectly written - you could acknowledge to them or the court, privately, you know they were incorrectly written. That's not weakness, that's prudence.)

Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January  - Page 3 Empty Re: McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January

Post by ShabbyTiger on 12.01.13 18:47

@aiyoyo wrote:
@ShabbyTiger wrote:
Jean wrote:I didn't see it that way myself. I doubt we will be troubled by that poster again - a one-trick pony (or tiger) you could say.

All the best to Tony whenever the court dates are.



Not a one trick pony Jean... just someone who is trying to steer Tony away from the iceberg. I probably joined up here long before you did. Many moons ago I tried to give Tony some sound legal advice but it was ignored.

Then it can't be deemed to the "sound" then?

What do you think of team Mccanns stalking TB every post then; that they spend every penny left of other people's money to sue people left right centre just to preserve their reputation?
You don't sillyly believe they did it for Madeleine, or DO you?
Have you also written the Mccanns to steer away from their maiden trip to Court heading towards iceberg ?
If not, why not? Do you approve of their disgusting actions?

None of us has posted in our birth given name nor taken a proactive stance. TB is the only one brave enough to put his head above the parapet against all odds and in a way he represents all of us who want Justice for Madeleine. So he does not deserve any one trick pony coming on (in guise probably) dishing out criticism then claiming it is to help him?
Constructive criticism may be a different thing but yours is anything but constructive if I may boldly say so.

You seem to think the verdict is a foregone one. Why I wonder?
If any writing is in the wall, the mccanns chances are scribbled on the walls in language their sheeples understand, that they may take cover from a catastrophic that's about to come their direction.
My opinion anyway for what it is worth!





aiyoyo. Are you condoning the attempt to get Gerry McCann struck off the medical register then? Tony Bennett has been given sound legal advice from forum peeps and also professionals (Kirwans, Liverpool) yet he has continued.



It might just be that the McCanns are pissed off about the leaflet campaign, the nasty letters to the GMC, the attempted prosecution neglect ... and have decided to take action.



Tony Bennett is not doing this forum any favours.

____________________

ShabbyTiger
ShabbyTiger

Posts : 42
Join date : 2010-12-28

Back to top Go down

McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January  - Page 3 Empty Re: McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January

Post by Guest on 12.01.13 18:56

Not again please! Can we at least agree to differ over whether or not Tony Bennett is doing the forum any favours AND THEN MOVE ON?

McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January  - Page 3 935245
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January  - Page 3 Empty Re: McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January

Post by aiyoyo on 12.01.13 20:42

@ShabbyTiger wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@ShabbyTiger wrote:
Jean wrote:I didn't see it that way myself. I doubt we will be troubled by that poster again - a one-trick pony (or tiger) you could say.

All the best to Tony whenever the court dates are.



Not a one trick pony Jean... just someone who is trying to steer Tony away from the iceberg. I probably joined up here long before you did. Many moons ago I tried to give Tony some sound legal advice but it was ignored.

Then it can't be deemed to the "sound" then?

What do you think of team Mccanns stalking TB every post then; that they spend every penny left of other people's money to sue people left right centre just to preserve their reputation?
You don't sillyly believe they did it for Madeleine, or DO you?
Have you also written the Mccanns to steer away from their maiden trip to Court heading towards iceberg ?
If not, why not? Do you approve of their disgusting actions?

None of us has posted in our birth given name nor taken a proactive stance. TB is the only one brave enough to put his head above the parapet against all odds and in a way he represents all of us who want Justice for Madeleine. So he does not deserve any one trick pony coming on (in guise probably) dishing out criticism then claiming it is to help him?
Constructive criticism may be a different thing but yours is anything but constructive if I may boldly say so.

You seem to think the verdict is a foregone one. Why I wonder?
If any writing is in the wall, the mccanns chances are scribbled on the walls in language their sheeples understand, that they may take cover from a catastrophic that's about to come their direction.
My opinion anyway for what it is worth!





aiyoyo. Are you condoning the attempt to get Gerry McCann struck off the medical register then? Tony Bennett has been given sound legal advice from forum peeps and also professionals (Kirwans, Liverpool) yet he has continued.

shabbytigger,
First and foremost I notice you did not answer any of my questions. No surprise there.

I really shouldn't be arsed answering what you sprout again from your arse , but I will.

Yes I do think Gerry who has admitted on National TV to having neglected his children, and who has lied while under oath, lacks the 'above reproach integrity' required of a doctor and therefore not fit to serve the public.
More pertinently he was suspected of involvement in his daughter disappearance and has yet to be exonerated in a Court of Law, so at the very least he should be suspended, if not completely strike off, until the mystery is solved and perpetrator prosecuted.

Tony''s action was just to protect the public interest - nothing wrong with that.
At least he has the courage to do what most people feel should be addressed but can't be arsed to be proactive.


It might just be that the McCanns are pissed off about the leaflet campaign, the nasty letters to the GMC, the attempted prosecution neglect ... and have decided to take action.

Well!........that's just your narrow minded opinion.
I believe you when you said they are pissed - they often are (pissed) in more than one way. They even went out to get pissed leaving their children unattended. They're also easily pissed as in furious when they didn't like what they hear or when they are not believed, but that does not mean they have to sue people just because they are pissed. Otherwise how would you explain why they didn't take on the PJ?
Kate was pretty damn pissed when she labelled them "fucking tossers". Now I would say that's a bloody big PISS because she states it in her bewk for her readers.

Dont deceive yourself, and more importantly dont try and fool us - it wont work.
Their suit against TB was because he did not believe their porkie pies, and they fear his campaign for the Truth, no more no less.




Tony Bennett is not doing this forum any favours.

Well, shabbytigger. it's you who are showing yourself up, and not doing yourself or those whose stance you represent any favour by beating round the bush with drivels.


aiyoyo
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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