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.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!


Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Page 6 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by Guest on 07.02.13 17:32

I'm fairly sure it's a he and that he was or is registered in other names as well.
I hope to be able to attend court again whenever the judge delivers his verdict. Tony, I'm sure that, whatever it might be, your own personal strength and the support of your friends will get you through.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by sardinehater on 07.02.13 17:37

@aiyoyo wrote:
@MaryB wrote:I explained the situation to a person who had little interest in this case and asked their opinion as to why sudden change of mind over prison sentence. They said it was because the McCanns were afraid of losing public sympathy if somebody went to prison over this. But that is probably the effect it would have. Why would somebody spend £260,000 trying to get somebody sent to prison and then change their minds and say that isn't what they wanted. Was it mentioned in the actual court application. I think it was but not sure.


Well, it must be stated in the initial dispatch to TB, else how did he learn of it? The committal to prison if that is what you are asking.

It is not up to the pair of lying doctors what punishment should be melted out. That is the purview of the Judge.
The mccanns might have applied for that hoping to frighten TB into giving up.
They did not reckon he would persevere all the way to Court.
Most of all, I think they least expected TB to support his arguments so brilliantly with references and documents during the back forth exchanges of documents with CR and always cc to Court, that they panicked when they realised their bunch of big guns is just an incompetent lot and no match for TB, hence the roping in last min of the Silk to troubleshoot.

Of course they'd to U-turn when they realised things are not all smooth for them in Court, especially when their lawyer Isabel whatever her other name is was caught out lying on oath. So might was well make it appears as if they didnt really want him to be imprisoned, just for him to desist. That must have made them look excessively stupid to the Judge because if they had simply wanted him to desist why expend so much time energy and such an astronomical cost just for something as simple as that. When they could have sent him a warning letter to cease and desist which should suffice, and if not, then to ask the Court to intervene, without all these unnecessary chucking up of the costs by having Isabel whatever scanned the forum, imo set entrapment for him etc etc, back forth of truckload full of documents, and last min hire of Silk so on and so forth.

I hope the Judge sets aside the judgement, while at the same time order a lift of stay of libel for a fast-track trial because the extraordinary circumstances of this unprecedented case justifies it, without TB having to apply for the undertakings to be revoked or varied, and be subjected to the long drawn out process again.

The original draft order from Carter Ruck for Committal indicated that it was for a Prison sentence but added that such a sentence should be suspended and only applied if the defendant broke the suspension terms. That is what the McCanns through their lawyers requested but it is a Court decision what the punishment will be as the offence is technically against the court.

sardinehater

Posts : 28
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by aiyoyo on 07.02.13 17:43

Châtelaine wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:She did gain some admirers (not many, just a few) and was chuffed about it.
***
A SHE? You may be thinking about the same person ...

Nope, I have no one in mind.

Just thinking some dodgy people deliberately use a masculine name just to fool people about their gender. Besides, there is an initial before the name so likely it is just to create confusion. My intuition tells me it is a "she". I don't think she's speaking for herself, her scripts were drafted for her.
avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Reputation : 324
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by bobbin on 07.02.13 18:00

@aiyoyo wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:She did gain some admirers (not many, just a few) and was chuffed about it.
***
A SHE? You may be thinking about the same person ...

Nope, I have no one in mind.

Just thinking some dodgy people deliberately use a masculine name just to fool people about their gender. Besides, there is an initial before the name so likely it is just to create confusion. My intuition tells me it is a "she". I don't think she's speaking for herself, her scripts were drafted for her.

I tend to agree. The hidden message this time, don't let Tony take it to Libel or we're truly *****d. Nicely placed alongside the sincere concern for Tony's well being. As we have seen over the long haul, same old same old.

bobbin

Posts : 2053
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by Bob Southgate on 07.02.13 18:43

@C.Edwards wrote:There's still an overwhelming lack of understanding on here about how contempt of court (and other legal issues) work.
That's a very arrogant and insulting statement to make about members of the forum.

____________________

avatar
Bob Southgate

Posts : 161
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-11-01
Age : 56

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by Tony Bennett on 07.02.13 18:50

@Grande Finale wrote:Hi, BBC TV East Midlands reported about the trial on Tuesday 5th 6.30pm programme
with footage of TB entering court.

Lasted about 2 mins and advertised the Madeleine Foundation.
As a result of which I understand that the book 'The Madeleine McCann Case Files Volume 1' has sold several more copies in the past 24 hours...

____________________

The amazing symbiosis between bees and flowers:

https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/god-created-plant-pollinator-partners/  

avatar
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 14939
Reputation : 3019
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by Guest on 07.02.13 18:52

Tony, you're supposed to be having a rest!
I hope that the support from everyone here will help to cheer you.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by Guest on 07.02.13 18:59

@Bob Southgate wrote:
@C.Edwards wrote:There's still an overwhelming lack of understanding on here about how contempt of court (and other legal issues) work.
That's a very arrogant and insulting statement to make about members of the forum.
***
But that's exactly one of the points that made me [think to] recognise her. The "overwhelming lack of understanding" of the law by us underlings ... Very arrogant indeed.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by tigger on 07.02.13 19:11

@Bob Southgate wrote:
@C.Edwards wrote:There's still an overwhelming lack of understanding on here about how contempt of court (and other legal issues) work.
That's a very arrogant and insulting statement to make about members of the forum.

Ah Bless! He's instructing MM members now - you can't stop the man from doing good!

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

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 50
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by Bob Southgate on 07.02.13 19:45

" Admittedly I was over-sarcastic"
So he admits it and then goes moaning to another forum. Mr Edwards is coming across as a petulant moaner, and because he hasn't got the reception he thought he should (loads of tea and sympathy) and some members over there have put him right he is now asking to have the thread deleted.

____________________

avatar
Bob Southgate

Posts : 161
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-11-01
Age : 56

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by picard on 07.02.13 22:37

Good Luck Tony, hope you can find some rest and recoup. Myself and Family are behind you..

picard

Posts : 15
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-07-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by aiyoyo on 08.02.13 3:46

@bobbin wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:She did gain some admirers (not many, just a few) and was chuffed about it.
***
A SHE? You may be thinking about the same person ...

Nope, I have no one in mind.

Just thinking some dodgy people deliberately use a masculine name just to fool people about their gender. Besides, there is an initial before the name so likely it is just to create confusion. My intuition tells me it is a "she". I don't think she's speaking for herself, her scripts were drafted for her.

I tend to agree. The hidden message this time, don't let Tony take it to Libel or we're truly *****d. Nicely placed alongside the sincere concern for Tony's well being. As we have seen over the long haul, same old same old.

Hmmm...I dont know what her hidden agenda is (if any), but if she's on a mission here then she has done herself a disfavour by being so FULL of herself.

All I noticed is that her last few posts were very technical law-aspect-wise, and in some details specific to this case. So probably not wrong to deduce she must have got Court process inside info from a source. What she'd posted was definitely not general stuff derived from having googled "Contempt of Court" genre.
avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Reputation : 324
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by Karen Pinto on 08.02.13 8:31

@Bob Southgate wrote:" Admittedly I was over-sarcastic"
So he admits it and then goes moaning to another forum. Mr Edwards is coming across as a petulant moaner, and because he hasn't got the reception he thought he should (loads of tea and sympathy) and some members over there have put him right he is now asking to have the thread deleted.

Mr Edwards has now joined MM site
avatar
Karen Pinto

Posts : 85
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-11-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by Guest on 08.02.13 9:00

Unfortunately new members are no longer allowed there; he (I'm still thinking "he") actually registered in May 2011 but has made only a handful of posts until now.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by plebgate on 08.02.13 10:21

PeterMac posted yesterday in reply to my post:


Judge T is also aware of a lot of other stuff.
Documents sent to TM's lawyers were copied to him.
The
QC will also have had a chance during the day of research to see all
the documents about the many documented examples of lying, changing
stories, the impossibly short window of opportunity, sedation of the
children, reliability of dogs, and so on.
And will also have realised
that those documents were all based on what the McCs and their friend
had said in the statements or on record. Nothing was invented or
supposed. Everything was referenced, and in many cases the extract from
the source material was appended
Hardly surprising under the circumstances that she chose to water it all down at the end.
QCs may be many things, but they are not stupid."

I agree with what you say above Peter Mac.
I gave a very short post re. Enid O'dowd's assessment of the fund as I was fed up reading from C. Edwards that we did not fully understand what TB's hearing was all about.
I understood what it was about but my post was a way of reminding him that despite the hearing being about Contempt of Court - Judge T signalled that Enid's and other documents showing their changing stories etc could well be brought into evidence if a full libel trial goes ahead.
Seems my short post hit a nerve as straight away C. Edwards posted yet again that most of us didn't understand proceedings.
Seems we understand a lot more than s/he thinks. ha ha.

plebgate

Posts : 6199
Reputation : 1852
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by bobbin on 08.02.13 10:35

@plebgate wrote:PeterMac posted yesterday in reply to my post:


Judge T is also aware of a lot of other stuff.
Documents sent to TM's lawyers were copied to him.
The
QC will also have had a chance during the day of research to see all
the documents about the many documented examples of lying, changing
stories, the impossibly short window of opportunity, sedation of the
children, reliability of dogs, and so on.
And will also have realised
that those documents were all based on what the McCs and their friend
had said in the statements or on record. Nothing was invented or
supposed. Everything was referenced, and in many cases the extract from
the source material was appended
Hardly surprising under the circumstances that she chose to water it all down at the end.
QCs may be many things, but they are not stupid."

I agree with what you say above Peter Mac.
I gave a very short post re. Enid O'dowd's assessment of the fund as I was fed up reading from C. Edwards that we did not fully understand what TB's hearing was all about.
I understood what it was about but my post was a way of reminding him that despite the hearing being about Contempt of Court - Judge T signalled that Enid's and other documents showing their changing stories etc could well be brought into evidence if a full libel trial goes ahead.
Seems my short post hit a nerve as straight away C. Edwards posted yet again that most of us didn't understand proceedings.
Seems we understand a lot more than s/he thinks. ha ha.

And as I then posted, the whole concealed message in that most arrogant explanation, which actually was also a rather jumbled and waffly affair, was something like "oh hell, at all costs we must dissuade Tony from going ahead to a full libel trial."
I was also interested (I was going to say 'amused') at who came out in immediate and sycophantic support of how wonderful and 'informative' the C.Edwards post(s) had been.
It was only 'informative' as to what the hidden agenda was, that he was employed in touting the trade of the other side, and has 'avid supporters' to boot. AIMO of course.

bobbin

Posts : 2053
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by garfy on 08.02.13 14:43

@cass7 wrote:
@garfy wrote:
@Inspectorfrost wrote:
@stargazer59 wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
@AskTheDogsSandra wrote:
@russiandoll wrote:can someone please tell me what this is all about, a brief interview with TB outside court.

http://t.co/eg2WNXqg

It's Tony saying that he's giving up his campaign.

Yes, I have just watched it, rather shocked.

Is it just me who is not shocked?

He could say nothing else, he had just left court and is waiting on a ruling, he could not repeat the things he has been rebuked for. If he'd said i will continue the Judge would not have been at all happy.

Poor man is exhausted and drained, good luck to him i say he did Madeleine proud.

Ditto!!!

He has worked tirelessly for years and had to put up with this crap, wouldnt blame him if he sat back now.


tony thank you...where do you start to give you the praise you so much deserve ...for all you have done ..and then have to end up suffering like this...when all you wanted like so many of us to get to the truth..
i have done over the years ...the best i could possibly do ...alert people to web pages bought your books dished out leaflets ..have shown my lack/zero of any sympathy for the mccs often going above and beyond of what i think of them ..[they always brought the worst out in me]...an like many others took a lot of terrible verbal/posts abuse from the so called pro mccs....but like many others ..did it behind an avatar and computer screen [but i always stood by what i said and posted and still do]
butt you put everything on the line-you did every thing you could ...not behind an aviator/computer because you had the power and used it ...
you did look so alone on the clip ...but at the end of the day even though you had so much support ....you were alone ...you would face any punishment alone [prison your family suffering]...and all we could give you was support ...that is not enough now ...
to finally get to my point ...it may now be time to step right back you can only do so much ...and you have well exceeded that...you are now a target ...i so so hope the outcome of this will be the best one possible ...the one you so deserve.....and you can give up your campaign with your head held high

you have done maddie proud....you cared ...relax enjoy your well deserved break....xx
well said garfy like you i have abuse thrown at me over the years -- but i can turn my comp off and go back another day -- i think tony has gone beyond trying to get justice -- i still have my beliefs and always will -- but would i have the courage to put my home and my familys needs at contunued risk no -- and tbh if everyone thought about it not many would -- well done tony and thankyou --true gentleman

cass...........yes i know ..we go back many years........i have pmd you.........lost all info when the S closedxx
avatar
garfy

Posts : 160
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2010-07-08
Location : humberside

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Report from McCanns v Bennett 6 Feb 2013

Post by plebgate on 08.02.13 22:28

Hi Bobbin,
AIMO also.

plebgate

Posts : 6199
Reputation : 1852
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Feel free to move this

Post by flaxyard on 09.02.13 1:23

We are not mad. Though some would think so. (my wife has been brainwashed!). I would LOVE MM to be found alive unharmed. A theft fuelled by an unyielding wish for a child. But we know too much, The floodgates are now opening. I HATE the british press. Please put me out of my misery and bring this charade to a close. Tony Bennett = Legend

flaxyard

Posts : 37
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-02-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 6 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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