Havern CR-d too?

Last time he was in this position he folded and cravenly gave an undertaking to the high court. I do not think smethurst will be so lenient this time.

Bennett betrays a curious lack of confidence in the strength of his own case for one so keen to see the mccanns etc in court. And his boasts of 'sue and be damned'. It will be interesting to see what happens..

As, so far, Bennett has passed the CR letters to HLM without telling Havern about the second one; carried on posting and twitting after telling CR he was on holiday; left Havern to carry the can - and wide open for a writ herself;

He has scarcely covered himself in glory, has he?

I am surprised that MM are happy to let Stinky aka the banned jmuck spam their site with filth, lies and libel; they are heading the right way for a CR letter too.
On the other hand, do I care? No

sans_souci wrote:Last time he was in this position he folded and cravenly gave an undertaking to the high court. I do not think smethurst will be so lenient this time.

Bennett betrays a curious lack of confidence in the strength of his own case for one so keen to see the mccanns etc in court. And his boasts of 'sue and be damned'. It will be interesting to see what happens..

But Bennett gets his filth out there while he waits to be told to Cease and Desist. And he knows how long it will take. Meanwhile, it gets Twitted all over the place.
Of course he will cave in. He has long given up on getting The McCanns into Court because he knows that he has nothing with which to accuse.

There is something seriously wrong with British Libel Laws that demand a Cease and Desist Notice before a Victim can proceed. It takes at least two weeks, by which time the damage is done.
So anyone can say whatever they like, and so long as they Cease and Desist when told to, then there is nothing that anyone can do.
And one lone person can do this several times so long as they slightly alter the Libellous Accusations, or even the person that they are Libelling by association.

Well, what a revelation. But I do suppose that it works both ways. Not that I have any desire to Libel Anthony Bennett. Anything that I might have to say about him will be true. Be sure of that.

So, Bennett is on holiday is he?



Then why is he showing as having been online at some time in the last 24 hours - that is some time after 4pm on Saturday, UK time?

There are only two explanations:

1. Bennett told a pack of lies to CR.

2. Havern is fiddling her forum stats.

Oh, actually,

3. Both.

Correct me if I am wrong; Bennett was told by C & R that they had never received a penny from the fund, wasn't he?

I believe you are correct, Tony; certainly, Kate McCann made it crystal clear in her book that Ms Hudson and Mr Tudor did not charge.
It is probably an impossible concept for those eaten up with hatred to grasp, but decent people are happy to help victims without payment.

So after being told he still went ahead and accused C & R of receiving monies children had given to the fund

Oh look, Tony; this is on:

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id336.html




we have never been paid a penny by the Find Madeleine Fund

Seems clear to me; so, Bennett has libelled the libel lawyers?

How strange - it appears that the only people who have actually seen these dreadful messages to do with Bennett's latest victim are---

BENNETT AND SWALK

I smell rats.

Well, well, well. Look at the date on the letter and then look at the date on Bennett's tweets.
August 2010 for the letter. June 2011 for Bennett's tweets.
ETA Thanks Bonny.

I am waiting for an explanation as to why only two people seem to have seen all this filth - Bennett and SWALK.

And if they were both so seemingly appalled, why did they do nothing about it except try to smear someone who, by sheer coincidence, was being stalked and harrassed by Bennett anyway?



Looks pretty suspicious, doesn't it?
This has been going on for months, according to Bennett, so why didn't he get in touch with the police as soon as he saw the posts.
Oh, and how did Bennett manage to see them to begin with?
Never mind, I am sure FB will happily hand over the relevant ISPs at any future court date.

Well, that's what Bennett wants - isn't it?

The messages I have quoted are dated and timed, I have a record of them, and they are directly attributable to Messrs Halley, Bailey and Murphy.

For example, in addition to the comments made on the thread referred to, there is:

James Halley to Greg Bailey: '[Too depraved to re-publish here - T.B.]'.

James Halley to Greg Bailey: '[Too depraved to re-publish here - T.B.]'.

Greg Bailey to James Halley: '[Too depraved to re-publish here - T.B.]'.

Our research on Edward Smethurst's former Facebook friend Ben Murphy showed that his profile included his listed interest as '[withheld, too depraved to mention - T.B.]' and '[withheld, too depraved to mention - T.B.]', which in turn linked to Facebook groups where people clearly share these depraved interests. The [2nd of the above two] Facebook groups links directly to what are called '[withheld, too depraved to mention - T.B.]'.

That is part of Bennett's letter to CR dated August 4, 2011.

Is it just me, or would a libel lawyer expect to see those 'too depraved to re-publish here' posts? So, if they demand to see them, what will Bennett and HML do?

Perhaps Bennett told Carter Ruck what these depraved posts were all about. But one might wonder how Bennett would know, since I doubt that Bennett has ever been a "Friend" of Edward Smethurst.

Dated and timed?
So, was Bennett somehow reading his victim's FB, waiting for the posts to appear?
That stunt has been done before - some 'concerned' troll managing to find something shocking no-one else knew anything about.

Or some resident in Rothley shocked about the McCanns who actually foresaw Bennett and Co posting leaflets and registered on Havern's before the leaflets were dispatched and mentioned on radio.

Brilliant those pitchforkers

Never mind, isn't it good that Bennett and HLM are going to get the chance to prove their allegations in a law court?

It seems inevitable now, Bonny. Bennett did want that, didn't he?

muratfan wrote:Or some resident in Rothley shocked about the McCanns who actually foresaw Bennett and Co posting leaflets and registered on Havern's before the leaflets were dispatched and mentioned on radio.

Brilliant those pitchforkers

Oh, him who was a Newbie, and was so impressed with Bennett lurking in the shrubbery.
Sheesh, they must think we all came up The Clyde on a water biscuit.

lily wrote:It seems inevitable now, Bonny. Bennett did want that, didn't he?

Course he did, Lily. This is what his four year long campaign has been all about. The fact that The McCanns won't even be there is entirely beside the point.

They are heading for more trouble with outright lies like this:


Re: We've Been Cart Rucked!
HotlipsHealy Today
Dr_Evil wrote:
Sorry what pictures show Madeleine suffered violenence or death?




Did I say pictures?

The crime scene: blood on the walls, under the floor tiles, hem of curtains, back of sofa. Eddie and Keela alerting to blood and death scent.

1. There was NO blood on the walls.

2. There were traces of blood UNDER the tiles which appeared to have been linked to a Portuguese man, presumably the tiler.

3. There was NO blood on the curtains.

4. There was NO blood on the back of the sofa.

Eddie and Keela correctly alerted twice -

Once to the Portuguese tiler's blood.

Once to Gerry's blood on the keyfob.

And that is it.

There was nothing else - as they would know if they spent as much time reading the police files as they do regurgitating forum myths.

I suppose Bennett does know that screenshots were taken of all those posts about people meeting in pubs to discuss mutual interests, as well as the prurient speculation about barns with no windows.

Yes, he must do! I am sure he will have no problem defending all that in court!

Oh, and banning Ringo because some sock stamped its hooves wasn't very clever either...


Re: Admin-A Question
Admin Today at 8:41 am

Ringo has left the building

Ringo's presence was supposed to show how tolerant and Free Speach-y Hellhole is.

Never mind, I am sure Bennett will be able to explain everything in court.

And no doubt he is perfectly happy for his libel and filth to have been spread all over the internet by the likes of jmucky stinky.

He'll be able to explain all that in court, too.

Re: Admin-A Question
PeterMac Today at 11:15 am

Was he not also several other people ?

_______________________________________________



Re: Admin-A Question
Admin Today at 11:25 am

Yes, Ringo did have several socks....including 'JohnPaul'

As did the other McCann supporter Garth/Xaus/RBxHN and his numerous other socks.

What out for George registering next


Why not just hand out his ip and be done with? Oh, I expect that's already been done behind the scenes.

BTW, when is hellhole going to stop this pretence that it has over 1,000 members? Divide by ten and it would be nearer the truth.

Re: Admin-A Question
Stella Today at 11:38

The thing is jd, if these people were instantly banned, we would be seen as a forum that does not allow a voice for the other side. As irritating as it is and trust me I feel the same way as you, we do need to be seen to be fair and at least give them a chance to debate sensibly. Once debate turns into overstepping the line, they are then shown the door.

The poster 'ME' has been extremely busy and I'm sure we will see more of him in the future. He really likes chatting with the Ringo's and Garth's of this world.

If you're looking in ME, we all miss you and hope everything is going ok !!




Stop it, my ribs are hurting

we do need to be seen to be fair and at least give them a chance to debate sensibly



I think she means, A chance to say Yes, Mr Bennett, No, Mr Bennett, How high would you like me to jump, Mr Bennett? Yes, Mr Bennett, of course I agree with your filthy imaginings and libel, how dare anyone serve you with papers just because you are posting disgusting smears and lies about them?

Hypocrites.

She does know she has a mouth, doesn't she?
Can someone please tell her she doesn't have to keep speaking out of her butt?