BENNETT GETS HIS DAY IN COURT

lily wrote:I get what you are saying Sabot. He has to mete out what is correct according to the laws of the land, but he is still a human being. I do not see him as unfeeling somehow.

I completely agree with you in that he has the wisdom to be light years ahead of us and he will do the right thing.

Who knows, Lily. He might think it is best to allow Bennett to completely destroy himself. He does have some leeway of thought.
But won't a Libel Trial have a Jury? That will give The Judge a right to direct The Jury. But I am jumping the gun. I don't think there will be a Libel Trial. And believe me, I am looking at this from a purely Legal point of view. I don't actually care about what happens to Bennett. It won't change my mind about the innocence of The McCanns, which happens to be based on logical thinking and logistics.

I know a few people who argue that they simply do not know, and they are not wrong. But I obviously know a bit more about what happened than they do. It was simply not possible logistically for the McCanns to have disposed of the body of their daughter.

JT interjected to point out that an Order of Court must be obeyed. If there is disagreement, then it should go back to court, but must still be obeyed in the meantime. JT referred to the "great difficulty in understanding" and that whilst TB was "not without skill", he was arguing things which he had been told many times he could argue in a libel action if it ever happened in the future.

Judge Tugendhat must have felt like tearing his hair out, attempting to get Bennett to grasp even the basics of why he was standing in the High Court.

http://stopthemyths.prophpbb.com/topic4667.html

Judge Tugendhat must have felt like tearing his hair out,

I can think of quite a few judges who would not have been so 'lenient' with him. LL

Seriously, what is wrong with these people. Look at this, from a forker:

Having just read the account of the court proceedings as provided by Little Morsals, the most important thing the poster mentions, in my opinion is, "If the McCanns version of events is unproven, then how can Mr. Bennett have breached anything?"

Or, am I over-simplifying?

What? Are they incapable of grasping that it had little to do with the McCanns? Judge Tugendhat had to tell Bennett that repeatedly, and he seemed incapable of grasping it.

It IS simple, though.

Bennett made a binding, legal agreement with the court in 2009 to cease from a certain course of action. Bennett then blithly ignored that binding, legal agreement.

No wonder Judge Tugendhat had to repeatedly tell Bennett things like:


JT asked TB what he was talking about and what this had to do with the hearing.

http://stopthemyths.prophpbb.com/topic4667.html?sid=86f946e2b4041feb892d439d9e6052f4

Have you noticed that they are also unable to grasp that it didn't matter if Mike Gunnill called himself Madame Frou Frou Pixie Dust when he bought a copy of Reasons?

Bennett had promised not to sell it to anyone, not to Madame Frou Frou, NO-ONE.

But especially not one of the partners in Carter Ruck.

ETA, Bennett is actually very lucky that the two specimen sales were to respectable, successful and intelligent members of the community.

I doubt if he would have enjoyed that foul-mouthed lunatic he passed them on to for sale being called as a witness..

Bonny, the reason why they cannot grasp the whole matter is that Bennett deliberately and with malice aforethought mislead them by wilfully mixing up the contempt case with the possible libel one. Most of them are totally ignorant on matters of law, they swallow everything he tells them - ergo the trial was the libel trial. Until someone forces bennett to admit he deliberately told them porkies and that the McCanns were not involved in this case, they will continue to believe his version of everything. LL

Wot? That foul mouthed Welsh woman? And for Christ's sake, he even had to tell her how to collect the money without involving him. Now her I would have liked to see in Court.

Lamplighter wrote:

Sabot wrote:
Wot? That foul mouthed Welsh woman? And for Christ's sake, he even had to tell her how to collect the money without involving him. Now her I would have liked to see in Court.

I remember her too. She shrieked on MM that I was a poof, I took it, didn't give it and I was obviously a f*king c**t. Just after that I think she got sent down for fraud, or trying to kill someone, she lived in Barry, Wales? LL

Let's hope they drag her out if there is ever a Libel Trial, LL. Not that they actually need to. The Emails are all documented. Bennett telling her how to beat The Ban, and send the money to him.
I wonder if she ever did send him the money?

I thought it was over non-payment of council tax? Maybe not, I just remember it was something to do with money.

Yes, should Bennett be foolish enough to further ensnare himself, I do hope she is one of his witnesses at any future libel trial.

bb1 wrote:I thought it was over non-payment of council tax? Maybe not, I just remember it was something to do with money.

Yes, should Bennett be foolish enough to further ensnare himself, I do hope she is one of his witnesses at any future libel trial.

It was stealing from her sister, Bonny.

But she is more likely to be Prosecution Witness. Hostile or otherwise.

A wonderful report from V8:

http://stopthemyths.prophpbb.com/post149891.html?sid=dec7b5107ced710ea9727f1aca6e85f0#p149891

Quote:

Several more times the judge had to remind him that whatever the McCanns have said or done is irrelevant, the case was all about Bennett, and if he had broken the undertakings. Bennett came across as very ‘Uriah Heap’ in his dealing with the judge, in my opinion.



Incidentally, is it starting to dawn on the forkers and hounders yet - there were rather a lot of 'Evil Pros' in court watching Bennett's debacle?

Incidentally, isn't it odd how many people have remarked on Bennett's scruffy appearance? And after him telling his cult how to behave, go to the toilet, etc?

Blimey. How many "pros" were in court?

At this rate, we will have outnumbered the antis

The only assumption I can make is that they were all the people Bennett thought were there to support him.

Jacqueline Cowan ‏@ThePlebian
Interesting that in another court report from an apologist there's no mention of Bennett divulging any doubter's names to the judge #mccann

*sigh*

Don't these people even know it was over two days, and not everyone was at both sittings?

Every report from Tuesday confirmed Bennett did just that.

He even admitted it himself.

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/did-their-illustrious-leader-rat-on-his.html

When is it going to sink in with them that Bennett ratted on his fan club-----
Look, judge, all these other people are doing it! Look what Stella said! Why am I being picked on?

Seventeen pages of it. As confirmed by SharonL:


Tony then referred to the vast number of people, bloggers, websites etc. That were McCann sceptics and asked how many of theses (he issued a sample, 17 sides of A4) had they attempted to remove from the internet.

It's in the informal reports, and will be in the official transcripts, too:

6. List of other people who have expressed scepticism.

WAKE UP, STUPID PEOPLE!

Hopefully when the transcripts are released the press will be checking on the trolls

Ah yes, of course! THAT is when

Today, the hounders are aiming their spite at smiffy and the Morais forum, led by those mighty thinkers, yoyo and tiny:

Yeap, he's just so full of himself. If he's in so interested in TB's work that he follows it so closely why didn't he go to court himself instead of being so derogatory when he said "So we don't know what else they've deliberately corrupted. Some summaries! I wouldn't trust this lot to give an accurate account of the time of f****** day."

He reminds me of MCF Board who forbids it members to discuss TB (yet his work is followed closely by them) but allows discussion of the court case in its technical aspects. They object to TB using the translation without permission even though they know it is for a legitimate purpose, and the purpose is of the same objective as them ie Justice for Madeleine. And even though they also copy and paste from here freely especially those of TB's posts without asking permission., yet no one objects because of shared common objective.
So why the petty mindedness and hypocrisy?

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

good post, as for the mfc ,can you believe it,at one time tony's name would not be allowed to be mentioned on there,now they have a thread ,how to faced can you get.

Dunno. Two-faced enough to be members of a site they hate? They must be members, or they wouldn't know the Harlow Martyr is being discussed - unlike them, Morais has a strict entry policy.

What do you call a clutch of nutters, Bentites.

The whole lot of them appear to have mental health issues, Tony. And like Bennett himself, they seem incapable of sorting out what is relevant and what isn't.

No wonder they sold a Reasons to Isabel Martorell, nee Hudson - it wouldn't actually surprise me if they had made her a mod.

No wonder they sold a Reasons to Isabel Martorell, nee Hudson -
Now that one, stunned me into silence for a minute; after which, I couldn't stop laughing. Honestly, how could anyone be so stupid?

I was, No, no, they can't have, I must be reading this wrong....

Then I hurt my ribs laughing, that they could do something so utterly, totally, stupid.

Incidentally, it was pointed out on Myths that Bennett attached a copy of Reasons to his spurious whine to the ECHR - further proof that he did NOT keep his word.

The man is an idiot!

oh yes he is: "The man is an idiot!".

http://coachdawnwrites.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/loser-hand-sign.jpg