Telegraph:Retired lawyer faces jail for 'harassing' Kate and Gerry McCann

Very '80's.

bb1 wrote:

Think it's one of the pointy bits on the railings, Sabot.

You don't often see glasses like that nowadays, do you?

I like my explanation better.

On the face of it, it does look mad for someone to be warned of ruinous libel action, then sign an undertaking, and then appear to break it.

Is that a confession from Bennett, then? Carter Ruck must be enjoying every minute of his cabaret today.

I shudder to think what the judge is making of it.

bb1 wrote:
On the face of it, it does look mad for someone to be warned of ruinous libel action, then sign an undertaking, and then appear to break it.

Is that a confession from Bennett, then? Carter Ruck must be enjoying every minute of his cabaret today.

I shudder to think what the judge is making of it.

He could have challenged the court document at anytime after the signing of it.
And, he did get a Liverpool lawyer's advice. The lawyer told him, it would be better for Bennett to sign and have done with it.
Did he forget this?

Mr Bennett said: "I have done my best to comply with the undertaking but I would argue to the courts it was an unreasonably wide undertaking to sign.

Then why did he sign it? Oh yes, I know - because he was given excellent legal advice.

Does he really think he is helping himself with this behaviour? Does he have any concept of the damage he has done himself by mouthing off to the Telegraph, of all the papers to pick?

You won't know its readership, Tony - but I doubt if there is a single judge in the UK who doesn't get it delivered every morning. He would have been better moaning to the Star, there is less chance of it being seen by the people who matter, legally....

How was it "Wide?" You either Libel The McCanns or you don't. You can't half libel them, or sort of not libel them.

Take a closer look at this - and thanks, Tony, for saving it



Now, from the Debs email, it looks as if Bennett was claiming money was owed to Kirwans long after the account had been settled.

What's that all about?

If Bennett has a gripe about signing the document, he should take it up with Kirwans.
He is after all saying, they gave him bad advice. He should ask for the foundation's 400 GBP back. Oops, it was 500.

Bonny, though I did save it, it is also on display here http://anthonybennett-fraudster.blogspot.com/
Where I saved it from.

Tony, Bennett should not have signed the Undertaking if he had reservations about it. He should have instructed his solicitors to sort it all out. It is always better to spend a bit at the start than spend loads afterwards. That's what he's now doing. You would think that he should have known this as a *cough* retired *cough* solicitor?

Debbie said that Bennett said that Kirwans wanted more money, so Debbie asked Kirwans who said No they didn't.
No one ever got to the bottom of that.

There was all that fighting across cyberspace with them both stating that they had been to the police. Who was going to be in the most trouble?

Oh, please don't remind me - the horror of it! The waste of taxpayers' money!

Anyway, as she was last seen threatening to demonstrate outside the court, I assume they have made up?

Well she did love the bones of the guy.

lily wrote:Well she did love the bones of the guy.

See The Jaws photo on Myths. Butler is about to take a lump out of Bennett with her filed teeth, done special just for Tone.

Sabot wrote:

lily wrote:Well she did love the bones of the guy.

See The Jaws photo on Myths. Butler is about to take a lump out of Bennett with her filed teeth, done special just for Tone.

They are so fabulous, Sabot.

Bonny gets credit for finding the specs (on Roy Scheider - Bennett should be so lucky)

lily wrote:

Sabot wrote:

lily wrote:Well she did love the bones of the guy.

See The Jaws photo on Myths. Butler is about to take a lump out of Bennett with her filed teeth, done special just for Tone.

They are so fabulous, Sabot.

Bonny gets credit for finding the specs (on Roy Scheider - Bennett should be so lucky)

So should Butler. I can think of a few people who would like to get that close with razor sharp teeth. And I don't mean to give him a Love Bite neither.

Sabot, I know.

Bennett doesn't need enemies - he's doing a fantastic job of self-destructing. You know, I wince every time I look at that interview - what on earth was he thinking of?

Did the prospect of getting himself in a 'posh' paper drive all reason from his head?

I think that because he considers himself 'right' he wanted to get his 'truth' out there, so he decided to ask the most august of British newspapers to do the job. I think he's trying to get some 'respectability' to his cause because he's desperate. Since his back is definitely against the wall, maybe he thought 'what do I have to lose'?

Answer........ he's lost it. Period.

I see it, but I can scarcely believe it - he has attacked the McCanns all over again on the hounder site proper. I am not repeating what he has said in public.

Question - when you are facing a huge court date, which could cost you many ££££££££, could even lead to your being jailed...

JUST HOW CLEVER IS IT TO TELL THE JUDGE HOW HE SHOULD THINK AND WHY HE SHOULD DO WHAT YOU WANT?

I keep on thinking about The Judge and his Cornflakes this morning when he picked up The Sunday Telegraph.

bb1 wrote:And no sooner have the pixels dried...

Re: Retired lawyer faces jail for 'harassing' Kate and Gerry McCann - Telegraph
Tony Bennett Today at 11:17 am

This article arose out of a telephone call out of the blue from the Telegraph's Robert Mendick on Tuesday this week.

As it happens, I had an invitation from the British Museum to a free showing of the Hajj exhibition which opened at the Museum on Wednesday - interesting occasion, met the Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the U.K. there. Fine exhibition, but left out of the exhibits was any reference to the tragic loss of lives which have happened in recent years as the numbers of Muslim pilgrims making the annual Hajj pilgrimage has risen to 3 million; thousands have been crushed to death in the milling crowds. It does seem an awful bother to go all that way to walk 7 times anti-clockwise around a 30-foot high black cube (the Ka 'Ba) and then collect exactly 49 pebbels and fling them with all your might at three pillars.

I also that day handed in a letter to Sir John Thomas, President of the Queen's Bench Division at the High Court, setting out the difficulty faced by defendants who are forced to act in person to defend themselves because they can't come near to matching the resources of litigants like the McCanns who can call on huge financial resources - and recommending changes that would assist litigants-in-prson in the future.

Then it was on to Carter-Ruck. On the last day of my holiday, I got a frantic 'phone call from Debbie at Carter-Ruck. By mistake, she had sent me TWO identical thick large Lever Arch files for the next (and I hope final) Court hearing (on 29 february) re Smethurst, when he will deliver Carter-Ruck's claim for costs against me. When I got back, there was another frantic call from Mary at Carter-Ruck wanting to send up a courier to collect the extra file which they needed back urgently. To save Carter-Ruck the expense of a courier, I offered to deliver the file back to them in person and did so later that afternoon. They actually said 'thank you'.

The photographer who took my pic was Paul Grover.

--------------------

If you can wade through the irrelevant waffle - Bennett happily volunteered. And doesn't he seem taken with Carter Ruck?

PS - Isn't Paul Grover the photographer the hounders have been accusing of all sorts of deviancy?

Doesn't seem to have bothered Bennett when he was posing in front of the law courts.

Just a few comments.

Anyone even slightly impressed about Bennett getting an invitation to this private viewing at the British Museum last Monday night needn't be. I got one too as did ALL the people who have paid their £52 to get annual membership/free entry for a year. I visit London occasionally and like having the membership card that lets me into all the exhibitions for free and without queuing. It also gives access to these members evenings which happen about once a month. There are usually distinguised guests there to "meet".

Secondly I wonder if Bennett actually managed to speak to the Ambassador when he "met" him and if so did he spout his pathetic comments about a major tenet of the Islamic faith? His comments show just how nasty a mind he has not only about the McCanns but also about religious belief. It brings to mind as well the really nasty racist comments he made about the police desk officer.

I'm not sure if his bad spelling in the phrase "litigants-in-prson" is an unconscious sign (different vowel in different place) of what is really on his mind but have to say I HOPE that Sir John Thomas reads and then drops in his bin any suggestions from Bennett as I have never seen anything he has got right so far and I would hate any changes in English law to depend on him.

And lastly CR could hardly have been so FRANTIC as Bennett theatrically suggests if the call was back at the end of his holiday and the delivery was this week. And of course they said "Thank you." They are decent people doing a decent job, NOT the ignorant morons who Bennett and his idiotic followers like to portray them as. That simple "thank you" proves it.

It does seem an awful bother to go all that way to walk 7 times anti-clockwise around a 30-foot high black cube (the Ka 'Ba) and then collect exactly 49 pebbels and fling them with all your might at three pillars

He's doing that selective thing again. The link gives the remainder of the facts omitted by Bennett.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/practices/hajj_1.shtml