It's Bennett Of The Yard!

sans_souci wrote:He does seem to be strangely unfamiliar with the law and police procedures.

If you are going to claim you are someone important, lawyer, copper, doctor etc at least make sure you know what you are talking about. If not, perhaps try and be a little less lofty, unemployed, road sweeper, pop picker upper or even semi-educated twat! LL

Oh dear.
__________________________

STATEMENT BY THE METROPOLITAN POLICE 6 OCTOBER 2011

Reproduced below without comment.

STATEMENT by Steve Bentley, Inspector, Directorate of Professional Standards, Metropolitan Police/Scotland Yard

QUOTE

My understanding is that the [Scotland Yard Madeleine Mc Cann Review Team] would welcome any evidence that would assist with the enquiry. You state that you have a first hand information from an insider from the McCann's private investigators. This information would obviously be of interest to the team and they would welcome details of this individual to allow them to interview her if she is able to provide relevant evidence. However, information regarding peoples views and suspicions do not constitute evidence. The team are obliged to consider evidence rather than repetition of the myriad of views and beliefs that individuals choose to interpret from the available information.

UNQUOTE

sans_souci wrote:
Oh dear.
__________________________

STATEMENT BY THE METROPOLITAN POLICE 6 OCTOBER 2011

Reproduced below without comment.

STATEMENT by Steve Bentley, Inspector, Directorate of Professional Standards, Metropolitan Police/Scotland Yard

QUOTE

My understanding is that the [Scotland Yard Madeleine Mc Cann Review Team] would welcome any evidence that would assist with the enquiry. You state that you have a first hand information from an insider from the McCann's private investigators. This information would obviously be of interest to the team and they would welcome details of this individual to allow them to interview her if she is able to provide relevant evidence. However, information regarding peoples views and suspicions do not constitute evidence. The team are obliged to consider evidence rather than repetition of the myriad of views and beliefs that individuals choose to interpret from the available information. UNQUOTE

Lawd, I nearly destroyed another keyboard when I read that, I was drinking coffee at the time!! Is that what they call the 'Sex and Travel' option, ie shutta da face? LL

It looks as though the posters on Haverns forum who suggested that Bennett had been given the brush off were right. THis statement makes the police position very clear. They dont think much of crap gossip.

Does Bennett's sauce in team McCann exist? Will he protect his "sauce"? Does he want to appear more of a fool than he does now? Decisions. Decisions.

(1) Does Bennett's sauce in team McCann exist? (2) Will he protect his "sauce"? (3) Does he want to appear more of a fool than he does now? (4) Decisions. Decisions.

1) No way, José
2) Not if he feels threatened
3) Is that possible? Answers on a torn out page of Morons for Dummies, please
4) Unfulfilled, unfulfilled!!!!

LL

Oh my very dear

I feel this really deserves a new thread

ETA, this disaster for the Truthseekers can be discussed with all the solemnity it merits here:

https://jatyk2.forumotion.co.uk/t564-scotland-yard-gives-bennett-sex-and-travel-option#14940

Hmm, I wonder what Bennett will say to that? He's either got a credible sauce or he hasn't.
He can hardly scream Cover Up if he refuses to disclose the name of this person, and isn't that a criminal offence anyway? With holding information?
On the other hand I very much doubt it is more than Coco peering through the window of the house in Knutsford.

This could get interesting. Time to put up or shut up, Mr. Bennett.