BENNETT TRYING TO WRIGGLE OUT OF CONTEMPT OF COURT CHARGES

Excuse me, but why has Bennett said nothing about his offer to the McCanns, which he claimed he was not at liberty to disclose?



Turned down, was it?

I am much more interested in the "Onerous" terms from Carter Ruck. But I don't expect to find out what they are because Mr. Bennett will settle. And neither Carter Ruck or The McCanns will be telling us what they are.

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.com/2012/02/posting-lying-conniving-shame-j-s.html

Sabot wrote:
I am much more interested in the "Onerous" terms from Carter Ruck. But I don't expect to find out what they are because Mr. Bennett will settle. And neither Carter Ruck or The McCanns will be telling us what they are.

I have just spent an idle hour wondering what Bennett would consider 'onerous'.

They've insisted that he shut up?

Confine himself to two or less paragraphs in future letters to them?

Actually does what he says he is going to do?

What could be the Bennett definition of onerous - your starter for ten...

brilliant, I really enjoy this: "will the real tony bennet please stand up?" Also at J4, Myths.

Yoyo again:

Without saying TB priority must be to protect himself and his family. However, there is something more important than that that needs to be put right once and for all in this whole farcical, and that is, for TB to get the Court to rescind the undertaking. Else simply caving in or settling out of court wont solve the root of the problem. The mccanns will use the general undertaking to sue him again. The undertaking must be narrowed down to specifics at the very least.

So IMO it must be the mccanns who sought the back down due to the implication for them of the MG debacle.
This did not start well for them and looks unlikely to end well for them. As it stood they have already initiated the back down by their withdrawal of their paramount allegation ie the sale of the book, which was the backbone to this bundle of allegations.

==========

NO !! NO!! NO !!!

How many times do they have to be told - the selling of the leaflet is the TOP BREACH.

The undertaking must be narrowed down to specifics


It has been, which is why the selling of the leaflet is Number One on the list.

Neither the McCanns nor Carter Ruck have anything to worry about over that - why should they? They weren't involved.

It is BENNETT who is going to end up all over the tabloids, when the court hears how he, Stevo, Butler and others tried to wreck Mr Gunnill's business after it proved impossible to take a decent picture of Butler.

Why can these people never grasp reality?

annaraccoon wrote:

Sabot wrote:
I am much more interested in the "Onerous" terms from Carter Ruck. But I don't expect to find out what they are because Mr. Bennett will settle. And neither Carter Ruck or The McCanns will be telling us what they are.

I have just spent an idle hour wondering what Bennett would consider 'onerous'.

They've insisted that he shut up?

Confine himself to two or less paragraphs in future letters to them?

Actually does what he says he is going to do?

What could be the Bennett definition of onerous - your starter for ten...

10,000 Quid in Court Costs. And a threat to pursue The Libel if he does it again.

I wonder why he is totally invisible at haverns? Even people who are hidden at time of logging in, show in the online in last 24 hours, stats.

Except Bennett

I wonder why the members of haverns think it is big and clever to carry on insulting Mr Gunnill - and who knows, a judge might see their use of his image on their banner as an attempt to intimidate a witness.

I don't think any of them realise what perilous ground they are on.

They don't seem to realise this is real, happening in real life, and isn't one of their stupid forum games.

Bennett has already had his knuckles rapped for being 'extremely foolish' by Judge Tugendhat; his supporters are not helping him one bit.

Which is good, now I come to think of it

Bennett only cares that they are on his side, because that is where the cash will come from.

You have to laugh because they all succumb to The Fund in the end. The one thing they most hate The McCanns for. Could we be told how much they have raised, do you think?

I don't think we have ever seen anything even vaguely resembling accounts from either the houndation or Gonc, have we?

bb1 wrote:I don't think we have ever seen anything even vaguely resembling accounts from either the houndation or Gonc, have we?

Nope. None of our business, or so it would seem. Pensioners notwithstanding. The hypocrisy beggars belief. There is Bennett with £90,000 in savings, and a house, but they demand that The McCanns sell their own house which probably has No Equity, so nothing would be gained.

Seriously, can't these people read? Look at this forker on the Brunty blog:

Posted by: JL3 on February 28, 2012 4:27 PMThis is interesting yet haven't seen it posted here:

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html

"I can add one other matter, namely that the McCanns have withdrawn the claim that the sale of one book to Michael Gunnill breached Part A of my undertakings (not to sell or distribute '60 Reasons'). However, the act of sending this book to Michael Gunnill is still retained by the McCanns as alleged breach of undertaking No. 1 on a list of 25 alleged breaches of Part C"

Nobody found it interesting that after TB requests Gunnell be called as a witness for his claim of 'entrapment' the McC's DROP their claim he sold it to him?
A more cynical minded person might think there was something in the suggestion that Gunnell was acting on behalf of the team?

Hmmm all this subterfuge

Perhaps in the words of Miss Brooks

Oh a horse, a horse my kingdom (or at least my papers kingdom) for a horse.

What part of:

the act of sending this book to Michael Gunnill is still retained by the McCanns as alleged breach of undertaking No. 1 on a list of 25 alleged breaches of Part C

means 'dropped'?

And no, I have no idea what the relevance of all that horse stuff is.

I think Richard the Third got killed after he lost his horse, so technically Bennett is dead because The McCanns nicked his horse. Tis them dastardly McCanns again.

Rebekah Brooks was "loaned" a Met Police Horse from 2008 - 2010 according to reports.

However it was probably just the regular way in which the Met retires their horses and looks for good homes for them.

Oh, is that all? I wondered what on earth the big deal was.

Hounder ranting at Kololi:


Why even do that? For the life of me I don't get why you come here if you find it all so abhorrent? I don't post read or join JATYK or 'writing the wrongs' as they make me so angry.

Liar

If it doesn't read either site, then how does it know they make it angry?

And the arrogance! Thinking the likes of it would be allowed through our doors!

1. This is a forker-free area.

2. Our members have IQs greater than their shoe size.

Of course they read here. They probably spend more time reading here than posting on their own Sites.
Angry? Bad one. We don't get angry, we just get even. The days of us being ineffectual against them and their lying sheit are long past.

The McCanns are never going to be even arrested, let alone charged. And Madeleine will not be taken away from them when she is found. And she will be found one day.

I don't post read or join JATYK or 'writing the wrongs' as they make me so angry.

Good. I reckon that is because they don't like reading the truth about their heroes and also about themselves.

More odd things I cannot find a source for:

Firestarter ‏ @FairFred1 Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
@zampos I'm hearing u had 2 pay a lot of money. U were told u would have 2 pay substantial amounts but u ignored #mccann PMSL

I have no idea if it is true or not; if anyone hears anything, do let us know, pretty please

Firestarter ‏ @FairFred1 Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
@IWILLNOTGOAWAY why is he keeping it quiet debs? think about it #mccann
In reply to deborah butler
2h Firestarter ‏ @FairFred1 Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
@IWILLNOTGOAWAY No earlier case with Smethurst I believe #mccann
In reply to deborah butler
2h Firestarter ‏ @FairFred1 Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Bennetts had to pay out a lot in the latest court action. Antis, ask urself why he isn't telling you ; ) #mccann

Now this is interesting. And I would love to know how much.

Yes, I would love to know just how much Bennett has donated to the Find Madeleine Fund.

He surfaced to post on haverns about libel reform or something - I didn't actually read it. He seems to have some kind of extra-special membership there.

bb1 wrote:Yes, I would love to know just how much Bennett has donated to the Find Madeleine Fund.

He surfaced to post on haverns about libel reform or something - I didn't actually read it. He seems to have some kind of extra-special membership there.

Look and see if there is a tent in his front yard.