Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

by tiny 30.01.13 10:33

Oh dear,bet kate and gerry didnt want this little nugget to be found out,that THEY had Madeleine removed from the missing persons website.

by Cristobell 30.01.13 11:31

tiny wrote:Oh dear,bet kate and gerry didnt want this little nugget to be found out,that THEY had Madeleine removed from the missing persons website.

Which of course begs the question, why did Missing People want her as ambassador if she wasn't interested in the assistance they provided?

by tiny 30.01.13 11:39

Cristobell wrote:
tiny wrote:Oh dear,bet kate and gerry didnt want this little nugget to be found out,that THEY had Madeleine removed from the missing persons website.

Which of course begs the question, why did Missing People want her as ambassador if she wasn't interested in the assistance they provided?

perhaps they thought they could make some money out of Madeleine the same as her parents have,other than that i have know idea

by Guest 30.01.13 11:49

tiny wrote:
Cristobell wrote:
tiny wrote:Oh dear,bet kate and gerry didnt want this little nugget to be found out,that THEY had Madeleine removed from the missing persons website.

Which of course begs the question, why did Missing People want her as ambassador if she wasn't interested in the assistance they provided?

perhaps they thought they could make some money out of Madeleine the same as her parents have,other than that i have know idea

***
This is not about "Missing People" but "Missing Abroad". There are apparently quite a number of "Missing" organisations and/or charities ...

by tiny 30.01.13 11:56

Châtelaine wrote:
tiny wrote:
Cristobell wrote:
tiny wrote:Oh dear,bet kate and gerry didnt want this little nugget to be found out,that THEY had Madeleine removed from the missing persons website.

Which of course begs the question, why did Missing People want her as ambassador if she wasn't interested in the assistance they provided?

perhaps they thought they could make some money out of Madeleine the same as her parents have,other than that i have know idea
***
This is not about "Missing People" but "Missing Abroad". There are apparently quite a number of "Missing" organisations and/or charities ...

Thank you ,i stand corrected.

by Liz Eagles 30.01.13 12:25

aiyoyo wrote:Inspectorfrost wrote this in another thread which I though it will be appropriate here.

I hope CR is taking note that it is his clients who are hindering the search.

I don't know how Missing Abroad could have put Madeleine up on their website when she went missing in 2007. According to their 'about us' information the website didn't commence until 2008.

Email quoted deleted at request of poster

by Guest 30.01.13 12:28

Can posts on this email please go on the other thread please and keep this on topic.[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I will try and split the posts.

by aiyoyo 30.01.13 14:38

aquila wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:Inspectorfrost wrote this in another thread which I though it will be appropriate here.

I hope CR is taking note that it is his clients who are hindering the search.

I don't know how Missing Abroad could have put Madeleine up on their website when she went missing in 2007. According to their 'about us' information the website didn't commence until 2008.

Email quoted deleted at request of poster

Why not, Maddie was still missing in 2008, and still is!
Would imagine any newly set up missing person organisation can include past cases...

by aiyoyo 30.01.13 14:48

tiny wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
tiny wrote:
Cristobell wrote:
tiny wrote:Oh dear,bet kate and gerry didnt want this little nugget to be found out,that THEY had Madeleine removed from the missing persons website.

Which of course begs the question, why did Missing People want her as ambassador if she wasn't interested in the assistance they provided?

perhaps they thought they could make some money out of Madeleine the same as her parents have,other than that i have know idea
***
This is not about "Missing People" but "Missing Abroad". There are apparently quite a number of "Missing" organisations and/or charities ...

Thank you ,i stand corrected.

From what I know, Kate's name is missing from the Missing Charity Organisation.
Wonder whether they'd removed her as ambassador? Wont be surprised if they'd done that after exposure of the debacle of BBC over Savile.

by Liz Eagles 30.01.13 14:50

@aiyoyo. Check your inbox. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by **PeterMac** 30.01.13 14:51

russiandoll wrote:What an inequality of arms. They are for sure fearful of something. Or someone.. . .

I tend to agree. They are terrified of something.
This is clearly more than a couple of unremarkable and previously virtually unknown doctors from a village in the Midlands trying to send an old man to prison overnight as punishment for having a view about something.
By their own actions they increase the likelihood of people believing that somewhere behind this is a massive conspiracy.
And the only consequence of that will be that those same people will re-double their efforts to find out what that involves, and who it involves.

Now consider who and how many would have heard of this if they had simply left TB's stuff in the "loony" box.
Or had done the Christian thing and forgiven him his alleged trespasses ?
How many web sites would be dedicated to the subject, how many acres of newsprint would have been generated.

They have brought this, and continue to bring this on their own heads.

And even more paradoxically, if they win, and TB is sent down overnight, the papers and the world wide web will explode with comment and opinion.
They cannot stop it.

by aiyoyo 30.01.13 15:02

It's also heartening to see people joining this thread just to express support for TB.

If they win, the public will turn against them as generally people like to support underdog. People will be furious they sent an old man to prison just for having views. People will sit up and notice they are hiding something.
Going to prison does not stop a man his voice or view; and TB has nothing more to lose after that so more so there is nothing to stop him.

by russiandoll 30.01.13 15:09

Elephants needed to trample a mouse, sledgehammers [pl] to crack a nut [ no offence TB!] overkill when the hotshot lawyer image suggests one should be sufficient. Not comparing you to my favourite saint TB but didn't Joan of Arc have 60 of France's finest against her in her trial? They were scared ****less of her !!

Must be method somewhere in the madness.

2 quotes from Jeanne..... "Ha! You take great care to put down in your trial everything
that is against me, but you will not write down anything that
is for me!"

"children say that people are hung sometimes for speaking the truth"

by russiandoll 30.01.13 15:25

time for a bit of dark humour......from Catch 22

1. "They're trying to kill me," Yossarian told him calmly.
"No one's trying to kill you," Clevinger cried.
"Then why are they shooting at me?" Yossarian asked.
"They're shooting at everyone," Clevinger answered. "They're trying to kill everyone."
"And what difference does that make?"

Yossarian explains to his friend why he is not crazy for thinking people are trying to kill him.

2.
"There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified
that a concern for one's own safety in the face of dangers that were
real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy
and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did,
he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions."

Doc Daneekas explains why he cannot ground either Yossarian or Orr due to insanity.

3. "Major Major never sees anyone in his office while he's in his office."

Sergeant Towser explains why Appleby can only go in to see Major Major when he is not in the office.

4. There was a much lower death rate inside the hospital than outside
the hospital, and a much healthier death rate. Few people died
unnecessarily."
p. 175

Why Yossarian prefers being inside the hospital to being outside.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by monkey mind 30.01.13 15:54

To be honest, if the McCanns are successful in their endeavours against Tony next week, for a number of reasons I’m not convinced we will see any mention of it in the press or mainstream media at all. Nada. Save maybe a line buried here or there.

I hope I’m wrong.

But if we don’t, and bearing in mind the outrageous arsenal trained on Tony at this very moment, what implications will that have for Grange do you think?

by Smokeandmirrors 30.01.13 16:07

Grange has been very slow on the news front, I cannot imagine it is going the Mc's way, and it might be why they are trying to negotiate with Amaral. Perhaps Grange is being fairer and more comprehensive than we have dared to hope....

by **Tony Bennett** 02.02.13 6:48

UPDATE:

I will find out the Court room number round about 3pm Monday and will place the information on this thread. At the same time, I will find out if it is Mr Justice Tugendhat or someone else who will be hearing the case. As far as I know, the hearing will begin at 10.30pm Tuesday. In terms of seating, I expect to be placed on the right-hand side of the court, with the Carter-Ruck forces ranged against me on the left, so if you're coming on my side, sit to the right somewhere.

I shall have a McKenzie friend sitting next to me on the front bench, and all being well two scribes behind who will take notes and hopefully write up an account of the proceedings afterwards.

I would like to thank very warmly a very kind and long-standing friend on this forum who has sent me a donation specifically for the purpose of buying food & drink on the day for anyone coming to support me. She would like to have come herself but is unable to. If you want to know which cafe we'll be meeting at, please contact me privately.

Finally, I have won one small preliminary skirmish. Adrienne Page Q.C. had set out for the judge a recommended order of proceedings, which finished as follows:

Defendant's summing-up, then

Claimants' summing-up.

I am happy to report that my request to reverse this has been accepted, therefore, like all defendants in criminal proceedings facing a possible prison term, my arguments as to why I should not be found in contempt will be heard last.

by spring flower 02.02.13 8:25

Is there to be no end to their attempts to manipulate proceedings!

by mydadsanastronaut 02.02.13 10:08

spring flower wrote:Is there to be no end to their attempts to manipulate proceedings!

Agreed. And this naked display of legal 'dirty tricks' would indicate to me a certain grim desperation to try to use a giant hammer to try and nail Tony Bennett at every turn. Fortunately, that attempt has been thwarted and at least the closing statements can' t be dominated by them.

Justice, or equally injustice should not be allowed to be done according to the depths of your pockets , or those of your supporters.

by Woburn_exile 02.06.13 10:24

I'm not fully up on legal processes but just to take things back to basic level.

GA's Book is based upon the police files. Certainly any of the admissable evidence is in the police files and that includes the Kate McCann lies about the window being open.
It is extremely rare for a claimant to make an out of court application, to do so is tantamount to an admission of guilt or perhaps they have just run out of money. Unlikely for the McCanns as they have the government to bail them out.
Out of the box thinking: If GA were to accept 1 cent in compensation in whatever form beit the cost of the trial then in the eyes of the media it could be spun that he was accepting money to deny the content of those police files he was responsible for collating.

"PORTUGUESE POLICE CHIEF ACCEPTS MONEY FROM THE McCANNS NOT TO PUBLISH HIS BOOK ON THE CASE"
"Goncalo Amaral the bungling police chief at the heart of the Madeleine McCann investigation has agreed to accept an undisclosed sum not to publicise secret police interviews in relation to the case for fear it may alert Madeleine McCanns abductors and prevent the search for the whereabouts of the missing child who is believed is being held somewhere not unlike the recent case in Cleveland this year. A friend of the McCanns (its always a fucking friend) has said that Kate and Gerry McCann are 95% certain that Madeleine will back home with them by 2014"'.

Sound implausable? Not if you read the Sun, The Mirror, The Star, The Mail, The Express or listen to the Lorraine kelly or Piers Morgan interviews.

I hope GA hangs in there to expose the truth through the courts.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by pennylane 02.06.13 10:34

Woburn_exile wrote:I'm not fully up on legal processes but just to take things back to basic level.

GA's Book is based upon the police files. Certainly any of the admissable evidence is in the police files and that includes the Kate McCann lies about the window being open.
It is extremely rare for a claimant to make an out of court application, to do so is tantamount to an admission of guilt or perhaps they have just run out of money. Unlikely for the McCanns as they have the government to bail them out.
Out of the box thinking: If GA were to accept 1 cent in compensation in whatever form beit the cost of the trial then in the eyes of the media it could be spun that he was accepting money to deny the content of those police files he was responsible for collating.

"PORTUGUESE POLICE CHIEF ACCEPTS MONEY FROM THE McCANNS NOT TO PUBLISH HIS BOOK ON THE CASE"
"Goncalo Amaral the bungling police chief at the heart of the Madeleine McCann investigation has agreed to accept an undisclosed sum not to publicise secret police interviews in relation to the case for fear it may alert Madeleine McCanns abductors and prevent the search for the whereabouts of the missing child who is believed is being held somewhere not unlike the recent case in Cleveland this year. A friend of the McCanns (its always a fucking friend) has said that Kate and Gerry McCann are 95% certain that Madeleine will back home with them by 2014"'.

Sound implausable? Not if you read the Sun, The Mirror, The Star, The Mail, The Express or listen to the Lorraine kelly or Piers Morgan interviews.

I hope GA hangs in there to expose the truth through the courts.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Goncalo Amaral has first-hand experience of how sleazy the McCanns and their entourage are, and as a result he wouldn't trust them further than he could throw them. They destroyed his life for a period of time, but now Goncalo is holding ALL the cards, and he's not about to let them slither off happily into the sunset unscathed. No way on earth that's going to happen (imho).

by plebgate 02.06.13 11:33

Woburn_exile wrote:I'm not fully up on legal processes but just to take things back to basic level.

GA's Book is based upon the police files. Certainly any of the admissable evidence is in the police files and that includes the Kate McCann lies about the window being open.
It is extremely rare for a claimant to make an out of court application, to do so is tantamount to an admission of guilt or perhaps they have just run out of money. Unlikely for the McCanns as they have the government to bail them out.
Out of the box thinking: If GA were to accept 1 cent in compensation in whatever form beit the cost of the trial then in the eyes of the media it could be spun that he was accepting money to deny the content of those police files he was responsible for collating.

"PORTUGUESE POLICE CHIEF ACCEPTS MONEY FROM THE McCANNS NOT TO PUBLISH HIS BOOK ON THE CASE"
"Goncalo Amaral the bungling police chief at the heart of the Madeleine McCann investigation has agreed to accept an undisclosed sum not to publicise secret police interviews in relation to the case for fear it may alert Madeleine McCanns abductors and prevent the search for the whereabouts of the missing child who is believed is being held somewhere not unlike the recent case in Cleveland this year. A friend of the McCanns (its always a fucking friend) has said that Kate and Gerry McCann are 95% certain that Madeleine will back home with them by 2014"'.

Sound implausable? Not if you read the Sun, The Mirror, The Star, The Mail, The Express or listen to the Lorraine kelly or Piers Morgan interviews.

I hope GA hangs in there to expose the truth through the courts.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I understood that one of their millionaire backers has pledged to help with their legal costs.

Hamilton the MP(Al fayed case) also had backers who pledged their support and to pay any legal costs, until that is Hamilton lost the case and then his backers failed to stump up the money.

Fortunately for them the Hamilton couple had a flat in Christine Hamilton's name which she had owned for many years and so that was not taken into account when they had to sell up to settle legal bills. As far as I remember that is. So not made homeless but could have been.

Dodgy business court actions and I would never trust anybody who said they would cover my legal bills as they can always pull out.

Edited to add - good post Pennylane

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?