OK, so who is the Carter Ruck Mole on haverns?

What sort of barstard tries to deplete a search fund for a missing child?

A very sick one, Sabot.

Unfortunately for Bennett, he doesn't like how this is going......

Yes, I would say everyone is more than happy to let the law take its course. I think I actually hope Bennett DOES get Legal Aid.

He will never, ever be able to whinge about being 'unfairly treated' then, will he?

Anyway, Legal Aid isn't a gift. It's a loan, and the Treasury has a nasty habit of wanting every single penny accounted for.

They won't be impressed if he fails to repay them because he wants a winter jolly in the Canaries.

And they certainly won't pay CR's bill for him - that is on his head, as is the £25,000 bill from Ed Smethurst. Maybe he should ask ZoeTroll for a contribution to that, as she helped him get in this mess. Allegedly.

Here's one of the reasons he is stalling:

REPLY: Once they decide whether my case comes under Civil or Criminal Legal Aid, I can then approach Solicitors and tell them which category the LSC has decided my case comes into.

He hasn't even found anyone willing to commit career suicide by representing him.

He says he's taken legal advice, but can't afford anyone to represent him.

Do you HAVE to have a barrister at such serious court cases? Surely he isn't going to jump up and represent himself?

Isn't there a scheme whereby The Court can appoint someone to represent him? Or isn't that good enough?
Besides, we all know he isn't going to prison, at least not at this stage, and then only if he persists. Which he probably will.

I am not sure of a Solicitor's or Barrister's right to refuse because everyone is entitled to Legal Representation if they want it. But it seems to me that he wants the very best, but for peanuts. Although I doubt he will take advice anyway.
That'll be his next trick. He will sack the Barrister, if he finds one.

He says he's taken legal advice, but can't afford anyone to represent him.

Well, those winter holidays in the Canaries don't pay for themselves, Rhodes. He can't go wasting money on lawyers when he needs to catch a few rays.

rhodes wrote:He says he's taken legal advice, but can't afford anyone to represent him.

Do you HAVE to have a barrister at such serious court cases? Surely he isn't going to jump up and represent himself?

That's what he's been doing since visiting the lawyers in Liverpool when this all kicked off, rhodes.

You know, the only people this farce is fooling are the forkers and Bennett cult.

Seriously, what would be the point of him getting even the finest barrister, the most eloquent QC, in the land?

Bennett's position is untenable. All anyone will tell him is, Settle and STFU hereafter.

He will agree with his fingers crossed behind his back, then merrily carry on as before. His past bad legal acts are a testimony to it being impossible to trust him.

Any junior at the CAB will tell him exactly the same as the most expensive barrister in the land. All Bennett is doing is trying to postpone the inevitable, dragging more and more irrelevancies into this - note Nottinghamshire Legal Aid is now being targetted by him.

He seems to think he can bully Civil Servants into doing as he wants; he can't. They will do what they always do to the likes of him - shove him from department to department, tie him up in red tape, and no doubt hold their hands until they find an excuse to launch a full investigation into his finances.

Anthony Bennett ‏@zampos
@RealHumptyB Don't think #McCann v Bennett is heading for a draw, their King & Queen seem invincible, I'm merely a pawn, so maybe K>g5 Chq



Fool's mate, more like

I'm merely a pawn

Do you believe he thought that when he started his campaign of harassment?

Only Bennett would think it was GOOD news that Legal Aid may now be treating him as a potential convicted criminal.

It sounds to me as though Bennett is about to bite the hand that is prepared to feed him. So nothing new there.

I'm not posting the whole self-centred bleat here, but look at this:

Under the Criminal Legal Aid scheme, it looks like I will be required to make a significant contribution towards any legal help received from public funds. I have never queried or disputed that for one moment.

The real point is this. This country - the UK - allows the wealthy and powerful to spend vast amounts of money to slience their critics, by using the device of a libel claim. In the vast majority of cases, defendants have to give in, because they have no chance of matching the legal resources of the wealthy and powerful

No, that isn't the real point.

The real point is that he made a solemn and legally binding agreement with the High Court of England and Wales.

He then proceeded to ignore that binding agreement, indeed, driving a coach and horses through it.

He's kidding himself if he thinks any court is going to pay heed to these endless diversions and irrelevancies - it may wash with thicko haters, but thankfully, no-one cares what they think in the real world.

And note - he still hasn't found anyone to represent him. Is he hell-bent on delaying as long as possible, in the hope that some miracle is going to save him?

Because he is only fooling himself if he thinks that.

Notice he's going to have to stick his hand in his own pocket under Criminal Legal Aid? No holidays in the Canaries for him next year, then.

Not that it matters. Criminal or civil, all any lawyer will tell him to do is:

1. Settle.

2. STFU for ever more.

I just don't get why he is doing this. He agreed to The Undertaking because he was told by A Lawyer that he had committed Libel. That much was plain. So he agreed to The Undertaking. Right. He then proceeded to break The Undertaking. This is at least two offences.
I am not sure what he thinks this coming trial is about, but he appears to want the right to Libel whoever he likes, and for The State to pay for this right. That isn't going to happen. He can't win on either of the offences that he has committed.
So why proceed? Unless he thinks he is dealing with a bunch of idiots who will be flummoxed by his attempts at confusion.

So why proceed? Unless he thinks he is dealing with a bunch of idiots who will be flummoxed by his attempts at confusion.

I think that is exactly what he's doing, Sabot. He's got so used to getting worshipped by a bunch of reality-challenged haters, he thinks he can get away with it in the real world, too.

In fact, his irrelevant waffle will simply be blue-pencilled and binned.

It needs a better legal mind than mine to follow it, but I think he has dropped himself in it big-time by seeking CRIMINAL legal aid?

I think he has, in effect, admitted the allegations by doing that, and admitting he will be facing criminal, not civil, penalties?

And The Legal Aid Board think it is Criminal. Very interesting.

Why does he never see it when people are trying to help him? But it will be fascinating to discover what his Significant Contribution will amount to.

No barrister in the land is going to give him any advice other than:

1. Settle NOW - even if it does mean goodbye to winter in the Canaries.

2. Hold your tongue for evermore.

IMO, by seeking CRIMINAL Legal Aid, he has jumped the gun on the High Court and admitted Contempt.

*Disclaimer - none of the above is to be taken as indication that I give a flying one about Bennett's self-inflicted woes*

He is admitting that he has committed a Crime.

Yes, that's it! He should have stood his ground in the CIVIL courts, but chose not to. In seeking CRIMINAL legal aid, he is admitting his activities have progressed to CRIMINAL law.

Amazing. He has just moved the goal posts all by himself. Another own goal.

Hilarious! The ever-loyal yoyo is snarling hate and lecturing the Legal Aid people now.


What should have been very simple and relatively straight forward has turned out to be a farcical. Someone in the higher hierarchy if not the highest should stand out and tender an apology letter to TB acknowledging the organisation's mistakes, at the same time ensuring TB that no further mistake will incur or recur, but NO, it seems no one wants to be accountable for this.

It seems they don't or won't learn from their mistakes. It is truly a disgrace!

What mistakes?

Here's another hilarious one:


I would find it quite insulting to receive such information from such a junior staff member.



Who do they think they are? Who do they think Bennett is?

Bennett is going to cause these people a massive amount of aggravation. You wait and see.

Here's another delusional hounder:

It comes to something when a legal department doesn't know the law

Oh, I think they will find that the legal department of the Civil Service knows the law down to the last comma

What Bennett says:

Tony Bennett
Monday 27 February 2012 at 1:10 pm

I informed Carter-Ruck on 23 February that I would be making no further comment of any kind about the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann until after the conclusion of the committal-to-prison trial.

What Bennett is still doing:

Anthony Bennett ‏@zampos
@kikoratton @GaeMar01 @StellabyLight Why did #LadyHodge s nephew Phil Edmonds jet back to Switz'land hrs after Maddie #McCann went missing?

Never mind, I am sure CR have a complete record of every single instance of him breaking the promise he made to them back in February.

Doesn't bode well for the Contempt of Court hearing, does it? I wonder if samples of his recent utterances will be entered into court as proof that he simply cannot be trusted to keep his word?

No wonder he can't find anyone to represent him - allegedly.