MCCANNS, SMETHURST COMMENCE LEGAL ACTION AGAINST BENNETT

I can just imagine what Carter Ruck thought of that piece of filth from Bennett and pretendyplod:

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.com/2011/12/petermac-i-would-shut-hell-up-if-i-were.html

It is actually too disgusting for the UK tabloids - they will just have to refer to it as, The obscene post, or something, when it's used in court.

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.com/2011/12/i-have-just-realized-why-mr-smethurst.html

Yup, he sure did - remember all that business with the 'Luzlady' sock? If Bennett thinks anyone is going to forgive or forget anyone who launched a vile, cowardly attack like that on his family, he is sadly mistaken.

It's called consequences. Bennett should have thought about that.........he is now having to pay the piper.

The forum idiot Aiyoyo has the answer.
_________________________

Petermac
Dont give her idea how to do her job as in should have stated "alleged" etc. Because if there is no abduction the mccanns have no case against TB.

IH should know better - its incredulous that she spent hours on this forum just to end up as witness for mccanns abduction theory.
This is what the mccanns were pre-empting when they talked about gagging the internet at the LI no doubt. Sly of them as usual.

TB should persuade a Police involved in the investigation or a crime expert to come and act as his witness.
Best invite Martin Grime to be his witness. Martin Grime just have to tell the Court about the dogs alerts and it should suffice.

In mccanns case we are not talking about dogs given only one venue to work over as may be the case with other cases where the mccanns discredit the dogs claiming inaccurate alerts or unsupported by forensics blah blah blah.

In their case, dogs were given numeral venues to work with, including those apartments of their holiday friends,and Murat's residence. NOTE that only spots in mccanns' apt specifically and things belonging to mccanns family [u]in particular were marked. And not one spot/thing in those other venue where dogs worked over was marked.

Also a dozen or so cars were lined up for the forensics with the result the dogs alerted to ONLY mccanns' hired car. In that sort of circumstances can people realistically say the dogs markings were merely accidental - out of so many venues and objects given the dogs alerted to only things specific to mccanns? Can the mccanns explain why only their belongings were marked?

They can discredit the dogs as much as they like, but when it comes to the crunch, people including Expert in that area and Court Judges or Jury should decide for themselves how to explain the coincidence of 11 markings specific to only mccanns belongings bearing in mind the fact that the dogs were given more than the mccanns belongings and living quarters to work with.

.
aiyoyo


Posts: 2810
Join date: 2009-11-28

To aiyoyo:

know this, the car was rented 25 days following the abduction, so, it was impossible for an abducted child (abducted much earlier) to be in that car, the car was only used when they moved from an house to another, was only used in their shoppings, was only used in their campaign, it was also impossible to carry a body, because of these reasons:

it was their first trip to Praia da Luz,

they had no idea about streets, geographic location, citizens, expats, OC staff,

they never met anybody there, except from the moment the abduction happened,

they were constantly under heavy surveillance of the press, expats, tourists, OC staff, surely that PJ had someone in disguise watching them day and night,

no trace in the beach or body was found,

it was the summer season, full of tourists in every corner of Praia da Luz, surrounding areas, every second, minutes, hours.

under extensive searches from locals (seconds, minutes, hours, days, months, years), expats, GNR, firemen, tourists, OC staff, etc, no body was found,

I also don´t understand this:

why were the stickers removed from the Renault, if dogs can´t read.

I wonder if the car was another Renault with false planted evidences? Nothing surprises me. I´m not saying that another car was used, I just find this very weird.

So, I believe that it is a bit stupid your nasty comments.

Dont give her idea how to do her job as in should have stated "alleged" etc. Because if there is no abduction the mccanns have no case against TB.

Actually, this is a fantastic idea:


Best invite Martin Grime to be his witness. Martin Grime just have to tell the Court about the dogs alerts and it should suffice.

It sure would; by the time Grime has finished explaining about Eddie alerting to spots of dried blood, tennis balls, people having sex, kitchen rubbish bins, coconuts and carpets, the court will happily send Bennett to Devil's Island - and all the Dogs Don't Lie
parrots along with him.

True Bonny. But I fear in this instance it has fallen on deaf ears:
___________________

aiyoyo Today at 10:13 am

.Does this tantamount to CR entrapment of TB?

How can a law firm staff give a sworn affidavit as to whether there is an abduction or not; or that Madeleine didnt die in the apt, when that is strictly down to investigator's process evidence and court to decide on which way the evidence points to?

Since when a law firm's staff is allowed to assume the innocence or otherwise of their client. In that case, what is the whole point of a judiciary system if law firm is allowed to interfere with the system by being biased and claiming the innocence of their client, without a shred of evidence to support abduction theory apart from their client's words.

Every perpetrator denies their deed until they are prosecuted then it becomes a different story altogether and suddenly police's theory have been right all along. Look at Tabak's case or Prout's case for example. Despite the dogs marking Prout's killer denied killing her and look what's the outcome now? So who are the CR to decide on their client's innocence and who is Isabel Hudson to assume anything based on the entrapment of her 'well wishers'.

If mccanns wish to force people to stop from positing the view that Maddie died in the apt and they were involved then they should place a worldwide ban on that. First of all, they should ask Portugal to remove all their investigation process, then they should apply for a worldwide injunction forbidding people from having that view of discussing that view. Why target TB and suppress his voice ONLY when all others under the sun can have a view against the mccanns theory?

Yoyo:

Maybe yoyo and the gang will grasp this?

http://regretsandramblings.com/2011/12/05/this-is-seriously-hardwork/

I don't know why they struggle to understand something so simple. Scrub that, I do - they're stupid.

1. The woofs are totally irrelevant to the matter concerning the McCanns. Bennett gave a solemn vow before HM the Queen, in the shape of the High Court, and has repeatedly broken that vow. It is regarded as a very serious matter indeed, as it is seen as someone mocking the legal authorities - contempt of court, in other words.

2. The woofs are totally irrelevant to the matter concerning Ed Smethurst. Bennett stalked him, and his family, and made up disgusting, filthy stories about them.

If Bennett starts shouting about Dogs not lying, if he starts demanding to know if the judge is a mason, if his hounders cause trouble or disruption in court, then they will find themselves cooling off in the cells and the trial proceeding in their absence.

Time they all woke up and smelled the coffee.

aiyoyo, this is not a question of targeting TB, the true issue here is to stop lies, smears, defamation. Think this aiyoyo (if your brain can): if you were subjected to lies, smears, defamations from a vile person like TB, what would you do? Do you allow such nasty person to continue to spread lies , smears, defamation, or would you talked with authorities about such disgusting person? But perhaps, you are the kind that allows it, because it is a way to feed your sick fantasies.

Oh Gosh. Do you think they might turn up at Court to support Bennett with placards and things? They could even arrange a coach trip. And then they could go into Court and shout at the Judge. That would be fun.

I´ll bet that if Grimes would appeared in court, I´ll bet that a lawyer would show him that what he told (according GA´s sick fantasies) are unproven theories which it would be against TB, proving again what TB truly is.

But Grime himself has never said, Woof, dogs don't lie - as they would know if any of them ever bothered to actually LEARN TO READ.

It is truly stunning that they are basing their entire hate campaign on a. Ignoring the results of the forensic tests b. Thinking they know what a barking spaniel is saying.

One can only assume that they are so wrapped up in their hate, have so much invested in their hate, that truth is the very last thing any of the Truthseekers are interested in.

So, Bennett's lot are playing with their socks again, this time pretending to be anonymous legal experts....this, on myths:

http://stopthemyths.prophpbb.com/post46808.html#p46808

COWARDS TO THE VERY LAST!!

I can't be bothered copying it over, it's not worth the effort, as it is just more stupid games from the Hounders.

From myths, a sample of the anonymous legal expert's talents:

Page 11 item 34
“Goncalo Amaral, a discredited Portuguese police officer”
discredited ? Perhaps Goncalo Amaral would like to know what Isabel is writing
in her sworn affidavit. Is she here not guilty of promulgating the hearsay and
damaging reports in UK newspapers against this man.

It would be interesting to see if she gets ‘Carter Rucked’ by Goncalo Amaral for
the above statement in her sworn affidavit.

He's a convicted criminal - he was convicted of COMMITTING PERJURY. And he is facing - I forget how many other charges.

You don't get much more discredited than that.

bb1 wrote:So, Bennett's lot are playing with their socks again, this time pretending to be anonymous legal experts....this, on myths:

http://stopthemyths.prophpbb.com/post46808.html#p46808

COWARDS TO THE VERY LAST!!

I can't be bothered copying it over, it's not worth the effort, as it is just more stupid games from the Hounders.

From myths, a sample of the anonymous legal expert's talents:

Page 11 item 34
“Goncalo Amaral, a discredited Portuguese police officer”
discredited ? Perhaps Goncalo Amaral would like to know what Isabel is writing
in her sworn affidavit. Is she here not guilty of promulgating the hearsay and
damaging reports in UK newspapers against this man.

It would be interesting to see if she gets ‘Carter Rucked’ by Goncalo Amaral for
the above statement in her sworn affidavit.

He's a convicted criminal - he was convicted of COMMITTING PERJURY. And he is facing - I forget how many other charges.

You don't get much more discredited than that.

“Goncalo Amaral, a discredited Portuguese police officer”
discredited ?

Yes dear, Goncalo Amaral, was shamed as a discredited Portuguese police officer, by Paulo Rebelo having to take over Gonc's crooked dealings with journo's and drug addicts.

ETA ONLY TWO MORE SLEEPS BENNETT. Don't forget to pack that trolley with those beautiful binders.
I hope he gets sent down, I really do. There will be some lovely people having a chat with him,
Hope he takes plenty of clean underware, cos imo he'll be shi***g himself on Wednesday, with no women to hide behind.

No Maggs, what would be really perfect would be if Scotland Yard managed to locate Madeleine alive and well on Wednesday.

Just as Bennett takes the stand....

She would be home, and safe, he would be relegated to the back pages, forgotten about, a nasty joke for evermore and unable to hurt any other vulnerable people.

Rumours are flying that LaffinThug wants Bennett's head for a wall ornament over his missing £400. And the odd thing is, that is exactly the same sum as Bennett's first court fees - remember the big fuss he made about it being £440 to start with, but he got £40 back?

And we never did mind out why he went all the way up to Liverpool to get legal advice, did he?

Wonder if Kirwans moved in Liverpool Uni circles?

So, Bennett's lot are still playing pretendy lawyers, are they? I hope he does listen to their advice - he will end up being sent to the cells till he agrees to keep quiet and keep to the point.

They seem to have no grasp whatsoever of the concept of relevancy.

As for Stella demanding to know:

Do you know what was in the original undertaking?

Yes, everyone does, it's all over the internet.

Bennett has driven a coach and horses through it; his word is as worthless as his idol Gonc's.

veniviedivici nobby-Lobby
@
@abuseofpower You + Bennett aren't averse to conncocting a pack of lies if it suits your needs ! #McCann #scammers !

Definitely annoyed about something...

bb1 wrote:veniviedivici nobby-Lobby
@
@abuseofpower You + Bennett aren't averse to conncocting a pack of lies if it suits your needs ! #McCann #scammers !

Definitely annoyed about something...

Oooooooooooooooooh, don't you just lurve it when people fall out and a mammoth punch-up ensues? As I am not on facebook or twitter please keep posting up the latest insults! I shall break open a new JD and put me feet up and watch the and the anyone? LL

If I was really, really cynical, I would say LaffinThug pointed Bennett in the direction of Kirwans, and his £400 to Bennett nicely covered Bennett's £400 court fee....

Good job I'm not really, really cynical, isn' it?

Call me cynical.

Re: Isabel Hudson's Affidavit
candyfloss Today

Me wrote:
Certainly I feel there’s a salient lesson for all vocal opponents of the McCann’s. Stick to the facts, stick to the already validated theories but cast no direct accusations against them and don’t get put in a position where you have to sign something which restricts your ability to ask honest and important questions that need answers.


An excellent point from Me, and a timely reminder, please think before you post, as I mentioned on another thread earlier.

Stable door, horse, bolted, dear

Who was it that pointed Bennett to Mr. Smethurst's Facebook page?