As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

by **Tony Bennett** 02.03.10 23:11

On Sunday evening (27 February), Debbie Butler posted a photo of the front of my house on the 'Tony Bennett Activities' section of the 'Missing Madeleine' Forum. So proud was she of it, that she gave it a new thread, in capital letters, 'THE REGISTERED OFFICE OF THE MADELEINE FOUNDATION'.

Now, as I've said elsewhere here, Debbie Butler was in Harlow on Thursday 25 February answering a series of questions put to her by Essex Police Officers.

Now, one detail on the photo Butler took proves it was taken on or after Wednesday 24 February, namely the removal the previous day of a small hanging basket outside the main door. There is no doubt in my mind that she took it (or an accomplice took it) on Thursday.

Whether before or after her police interviews, I cannot say.

Ironically, this was the same day that the new Madeleine Foundation books arrived and we were finalising preparations for a successful two-day conference.

Strange that the normally talkative Ms Butler has remained (as far as I'm aware) completely silent about just what the police asked her about - and about her taking that photo.

For the botanically-minded, the large climbing plant that grows rampantly over our two front doors is the Passion Flower (no jokes please) - it's fruit is the bright orange, non-edible variety.

It looks nice in summer, which would have been a better time for Ms Butler to take her photo.

The plants in the foreground include Piraes and Veronica.

Now, while we were busy organising the distribution of an informative booklet about what Clarence Mitchell on 19 February called 'a complete mystery', and a two-day conference to discuss the same issue, what was Ms Butler up to?

Answering questions from Essex Police about harassment and taking photos to start a new hostile thread against me on Susan Menez' forum.

Really sad.

Finally, and in the light of the above...

...thank you so much to all who contributed so fully in so many ways to a good and fruitful two-day series of discussions about what really happened to Madeleine McCann.

by bunny 02.03.10 23:16

She hasnt remained silent about it. She says she was asked to confirm that the two cheques were not signed by her I beleive. She confirmed that they were not.

by **Tony Bennett** 02.03.10 23:21

bunny wrote:She hasn't remained silent about it. She says she was asked to confirm that the two cheques were not signed by her I believe. She confirmed that they were not.

Let's see what happens. Do you think Ms Butler is telling you the truth? One hundred and twenty miles to tell Police Officers that she hadn't signed two cheques? When the police had seen those cheques weeks ago?

Sometimes I think McCann-believers will believe almost anything.

by Cath 02.03.10 23:26

She's also said it was someone else who took the photo.

by bunny 02.03.10 23:27

I would have thought she would need to identify them...no? she hadnt seen them had she!

If she was arrested why was she taking photos of your house? did the police give her a lift to yours to take them do you think?

I also am amazed that you believe that calpol is a sedative when the proof has been posted all over this forum. im also amazed that you didnt check this out before you posted it. You did say that the people who attended the conference had done research...obviously not very well.

by bunny 02.03.10 23:28

Inyx wrote:She's also said it was someone else who took the photo.

The police who gave her a lift when she was arrested big grin

by **Tony Bennett** 02.03.10 23:45

bunny wrote:I would have thought she would need to identify them...no? She hadn't seen them had she!

Let us see what the final answer is about whether her name was on those cheques.

If she was arrested why was she taking photos of your house? Did the police give her a lift to yours to take them do you think?

You are making assumptions. It is perfectly possible to drive to a police station and be arrested on arrival there. Let me put it this way. The usual alternative is to have a marked police car call at your house and cart you off. Which would you do if you were offered the choice?

I also am amazed that you believe that Calpol is a sedative when the proof has been posted all over this forum.

Not as amazed as I am since I haven't said it. If you took more care you would see that what I actually said was that many parents use it as a sedative.

I'm also amazed that you didn't check this out before you posted it. You did say that the people who attended the conference had done research...obviously not very well.

What I said was that the point about Calpol having been raised, we would be researching it and only after then possibly post something about it on our website. Did you misread that bit as well?

by Cath 02.03.10 23:56

Tony Bennett wrote:Thursday 25 February: New book published by The Madeleine Foundation, several dozen copies sold already, and on the same day Ms Deborah Butler arrested and questioned at an Essex Police Station

Tony Bennett wrote:5. The Essex Police Inspector who last week (twice) told me about Ms Butler being taken to Harlow Police Station (both before and after the event) said he would be calling round by arrangement this week for 'a cup of tea and a chat'. If he has an arrest warrant with him, I'd be surprised and annoyed. And he won't get his cup of tea. But it's a strange old world at times. Especially if you upset the 'wrong' people.

Tony Bennett wrote:
bunny wrote:If she was arrested why was she taking photos of your house? Did the police give her a lift to yours to take them do you think?

You are making assumptions. It is perfectly possible to drive to a police station and be arrested on arrival there. Let me put it this way. The usual alternative is to have a marked police car call at your house and cart you off. Which would you do if you were offered the choice?

I wonder who's making assumptions... popcornandcola

by Ruby 03.03.10 0:51

Oh dear.
Wonder if she'll make the front page of the Express again.
Is she still pursuing justice for Madeleine or has she taken up stalking full time now. thinking

by Pascal 03.03.10 1:23

Ruby when she was on the front page last time - did you feel the same sentiment?

Frankly I find the whole Bennet/Butler debacle embarrassing to watch. Sorry. I'm in a bad mood.

by Ruby 03.03.10 1:27

Hi Pascal - no, not really.
Sleep tight and wake up refreshed.
Night, Ruby.

by bunny 03.03.10 7:58

Oh for goodness sakes. How can it be used as a sedative when it hasnt any sedatives in it!

Right, you need to re word your posts more carefully. Let me help.

1. Calpol is NOT a sedative
2. Calpol night was NOT even released on the market till after Madeleine was abducted.

Therefore your posts on here are incorrect and conjecture. I wonder if you deliberately try to mislead? This has been proven with links.

As for Debbie, well you said she was arrested and taken to the police station. Personally, I dont give a flying fig if you both end up in prison. I am more concerned about valuable police resources being used by the pair of you in your feud against each other.

Now may I politely suggest that you research your information BEFORE posting on forums. That applies to both Calpol and Debbie.

Thanks in anticipation.

by **Tony Bennett** 03.03.10 8:15

bunny wrote:Personally, I dont give a flying fig if you both end up in prison. I am more concerned about valuable police resources being used by the pair of you in your feud against each other.

I agree with your basic point re police resources, but would ask you to note the following:

1. It was Essex Police's decision to put a Fraud Officer on the case despite there being not a shred of evidence of any fraud. In doing so, they rejected the advice of Sgt. Ryder of Kent Police to whom Ms Butler spoke originally. He had determined that her complaint had no substance and was malicious. The decision of Essex Police to even embark on a fraud investigation in this case may well be the result of an adjudication by the Independent Police Complaints Commission in due course.

2. It is Ms Butler's continuing vendetta that is now taking up police time.

by Mgunnill 03.03.10 10:20

JoMc wrote:As you know Essex police have more information and files on this topic than Kent. Essex are looking at the whole situation whereas Kent were just looking into one complaint from Butler. It therefore follows that Essex are in a better position to make an informed judgement. It may be that another complaint is lodged against Essex police, but then again it may also result in your arrest. I am sure you know all of this, of course having worked at one time in the legal profession.

After Robert Green was arrested on the streets of Aberdeen on 12 February as he was about to hand out a few leaflets, was locked in a police cell for three nights, whisked off to a secret Sheriff's hearing on the Monday at Stonehaven, had Grampian Police Officers make an 800-mile round trip to walk into his Cheshire home and seize his computer, disks, CDs and piles of documents, plus his mobile 'phone, quite honestly nothing would surprise me.

I'm not popular with certain powerful parts of Essex Police, having made and sustained complaints about them on behalf of various people in the past few years. But there are many good officers working for them and in this matter I have to have confidence that eventually the wisdom of those good officers will prevail. IT's no secret that I believe that Sergeant Ryder of Kent Police called this matter correctly while Essex Police, for whatever reason, did not.

The fact that it was Ms Butler who was questioned at Harlow Police Station last Thursday (25 February), as she has now been forced to admit, though originlly she kept quiet about it - while the Inspector leading the twin enquiries in this matter is about to knock on my door and ask for a cup of tea (he'll get Yorkshire Tea of course) - is, for me, a hopeful sign.

But I agree, you can never be too sure.

'Hope for the best, prepare for the worst'.

Hence all my important documents and memory sticks are stored safely away at different addresses.

by Guest 03.03.10 10:55

imo it does not matter if Debbie took the photo or someone else took the photo - the fact is she should not have posted it on a public site, what on earth was the purpose of doing that. It smacks to me of nothing but stalking and harrassment of TB for her to put this on a public forum and I would hope the Police have been informed of what she has done. What has what Tony's house looks like anything to do with the Madeleine case?

by hedge 03.03.10 10:56

Is it not the headquarters of the foundation then?

by Cath 03.03.10 10:59

It is Hedge.
But I agree she shouldn't have posted that photo, even if it was first posted by someone else.
And Tony shouldn't have said she's been arrested if he can't prove that's true.

by Guest 03.03.10 11:06

It doesnt matter if it was the HQ of the foundation it should not have been posted imo, there was no reason for it to be posted and it tells us a lot about the person who posted it.

by hedge 03.03.10 11:08

It's reminiscent of stevo, he liked to post pictures of peoples houses if they disagreed with him, how unlucky that two thirds of the foundation turned out to have such underhand tactics.

by bunny 03.03.10 11:11

Who was it that took photos of the McCanns house?

I know Photon posted them but who took them?

This does seem to be a rather popular tactic doesnt it?

by Guest 03.03.10 11:13

I dont agree with anyone posting photos of a person's house, whoever it is, there is no need to do so.

by bunny 03.03.10 11:14

Cherry wrote:I dont agree with anyone posting photos of a person's house, whoever it is, there is no need to do so.

Not only that but it's a flipping odd thing to do as well wow

by Chinagirl 03.03.10 11:16

Cherry wrote:I dont agree with anyone posting photos of a person's house, whoever it is, there is no need to do so.

Absolutely agree, Cherry - or people making accusations that they can't substantiate.

by vaguely1 03.03.10 11:19

bunny wrote:
Cherry wrote:I dont agree with anyone posting photos of a person's house, whoever it is, there is no need to do so.

Not only that but it's a flipping odd thing to do as well

Was there not a very similar post about the HQ of McCann operations (brian kennedy link) posted by someone a couple of months back?

Did I imagine that?

by hedge 03.03.10 11:22

vaguely1 wrote:
bunny wrote:
Cherry wrote:I dont agree with anyone posting photos of a person's house, whoever it is, there is no need to do so.

Not only that but it's a flipping odd thing to do as well

Was there not a very similar post about the HQ of McCann operations (brian kennedy link) posted by someone a couple of months back?

Did I imagine that?

I think that was one of Tony's interests maybe he can remember?

As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

A question of belief

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Amazement

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

It was Essex Police's decision to waste time investigating the fraud allegations

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Re: As she's questioned by Police, Debbie Butler sneaks a photo of 66 Chippingfield

Log in for more topics