Telegraph:Retired lawyer faces jail for 'harassing' Kate and Gerry McCann

My friends, this was taken from J4:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/9046508/Retired-lawyer-faces-jail-for-harassing-Kate-and-Gerry-McCann.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/9046508/Retired-lawyer-faces-jail-for-harassing-Kate-and-Gerry-McCann.html

Retired lawyer faces jail for 'harassing' Kate and Gerry McCann

A retired lawyer who has repeatedly accused Kate and Gerry McCann of covering up their daughter Madeleine's death is facing jail for harassment.

For almost five years, Kate and Gerry McCann have suffered the anguish of not knowing what happened to their daughter Madeleine.
Through it all, they have also had to contend with a sustained campaign of harassment conducted by a small band of fanatics convinced they had a hand in their daughter's disappearance.
Now, one of their main tormentors is facing jail for refusing to leave the McCanns' alone.
Tony Bennett has waged a campaign since 2007 against the couple – repeatedly accusing them of covering up the girl's death in leaflets, books and on internet postings.
On one occasion, the Madeleine Foundation, which he runs, handed out 1,500 pamphlets in Rothley, the couple's home village in Leicestershire, entitled "10 key reasons which suggest she was not abducted."

Another booklet has been posted by registered delivery to the McCanns' home.
Next month, a court will decide whether to jail Mr Bennett, 64, for contempt of court.
The action is being brought by Mr and Mrs McCann who have grown increasingly disturbed by Mr Bennett's attacks on them.
Mr Bennett is accused of flouting an agreement in the High Court – made in November 2009 – that he would stop repeating allegations that the McCanns were in some way involved in their daughter's abduction.
Since then, Mr Bennett, a grandfather-of-two from Harlow in Essex, who is obsessed with the case, has posted on the subject of Madeleine McCann's disappearance an astonishing 3,800 times on one website alone.
Lawyers acting for the McCanns accuse him of breaching the undertaking on at least 149 occasions. The list of alleged breaches is not exhaustive.
The McCanns' spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "This has gone on for a long time and Kate and Gerry now feel enough is enough. It is obviously very distressing for them. The fact they are taking legal action speaks for itself.

"Tony Bennett is his own worst enemy by persistently doing what he does, he has brought this action on himself."
The couple, both doctors, live in hope their daughter may still be alive and continue the search for her.
A Metropolitan police review of the evidence, put together by Portuguese detectives, continues but is not thought to have produced any significant new leads in the search for Madeleine.
A draft order seen by The Sunday Telegraph, which a judge is expected to rule upon at a hearing in February, includes an option for Mr Bennett to be "committed to HM Prison for a period" to be determined.
Mr Bennett could also be fined and ordered to pay costs that are likely to bankrupt him.
The undertaking Mr Bennett signed – he will now claim he only agreed it under duress – prevents him from making a number of claims in relation to Madeleine's disappearance from her parents' holiday apartment in the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz on May 3rd 2007.
At the time she was just three-year-old.

The agreement signed in court states: "The defendant [Mr Bennett] undertakes not to repeat allegations that the claimants are guilty of, or are to be suspected of, causing the death of their daughter Madeleine McCann; and/ or of disposing of her body and/ or of lying about what happened and/ or of seeking to cover up what they had done."
The undertaking also included the destruction of a book "What really happened to Madeleine McCann? 60 key reasons which suggest that she was not abducted" and a leaflet "What really happened to Madeleine McCann? 10 key reasons which suggest that she was not abducted."
But since that November 2009 undertaking, Mr Bennett has continued many of his activities.
The list of 149 alleged breaches, compiled by the McCanns' lawyers Carter Ruck, includes a book: "The Madeleine McCann Case Files: Volume 1" and a series of postings on the social networking website Twitter.
Mr Bennett runs the Madeleine Foundation, whose website has been subject to scrutiny by the McCanns' legal team, while also putting up 3,800 posts on another website The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann at a rate of about five a day.

Speaking to The Sunday Telegraph, Mr Bennett was largely unrepentant and seemingly happy to repeat some of the allegations that put him under threat of contempt.
He first became interested in the case while watching it unfold on television in 2007.
He attempted to bring a private prosecution against the couple in November 2007 for child neglect – on the grounds the couple were eating dinner with friends when Madeleine was abducted – but the case was thrown out in a magistrates' court.
Mr Bennett said: "I have done my best to comply with the undertaking but I would argue to the courts it was an unreasonably wide undertaking to sign.
"In the last two years I have not written specifically about the details of how she [Madeleine] might have died or how the body was hidden.
"It is my sincere conviction that one day I will be proved right. I truly believe that one day the truth will be told. And yes I am risking a breach of the order by saying that."

Asked how he felt about harassing a couple, grieving over the disappearance of their daughter, Mr Bennett replied: "The thing that came closest to harassment was when we distributed the '10 reasons' leaflet in Leicestershire in August 2009.
"Three of my colleagues in the Madeleine Foundation distributed a small quantity of leaflets in Rothley. I would honestly say that perhaps that was a leaflet distribution too far.
"If Madeleine was abducted I would accept what I have done is a wicked campaign of harassment. If I am wrong I am evil. But if I am right, I am a victim of simply having the desire to pursue the truth."

==========================

Words fail me....he has only gone and admitted harrassment, and repeated the contempt, to the Telegraph.....

And he is wrong, which makes him very evil indeed.

Oh, look, he is trying to pass the blame for this onto the rest of the hounders and forkers:


Your witness statements are etched on the internet
Tony Bennett Today

Joelle T wrote:
As Mr Bennett is speaking for so many of us and has perhaps even used our words, thoughts and research the court should ask for our witness statements too. He is a representative for those who expect freedom of speech and do not believe Maddie was abducted, he didn't persuade us to do so, we did already could see there was a cover up.

Thank you Joelle T and good morning. What you've said is correct, I just wish someone else was up in the High Court instead of me, and I truly wish you all had a better representative than I am. Information, analysis, ideas, opinions, discussion, debate - the internet does it pretty well. And, yes, I've used others' words, thoughts, research and translations - just as some have also maybe used mine. Your witness statements are in effect, of course out there on the internet where (at the moment) anyone can read them. I'm sure the Court will be made aware that there are more then a few others out there who share my views, not least of course Goncalo Amaral, Tavares de Almeida and others, without whose reports and books we would have much less to go on.


Anyone fancy a small wager he is about to drop the rest of the hounders and forkers right in it?

Oh, and niether Arguido Almeida nor Arguido Amaral, the criminally-convicted LIAR, are particularly good character witnesses.

As no doubt the judge will know.

I do not believe this. Has he got a death wish? Now let's see them spin this.

"Well done Tone, you go boy. We are right behind you. Hiding."

Sabot, I thought I'd seen it all from Bennett. I was wrong.

Not only is he trying to spread the blame for his own woes to the hounders (and serves them right) he has only gone and given the world proof-positive of his harrassment and obsession via the Telegraph.

And of all papers, he picks the one which is the favorite reading matter of the entire English judiciary to do it in.

Absolute madness - he's sunk himself now.

Deluded forker:

No prizes for guessing the source of that story!

Yes, Bennett himself, from the enthusiasm with which he has babbled to the Telegraph - and oddly, there still doesn't seem to be a mention of this catastrophe on Bennett's own site.

Something he's scared to tell them, mayhap?

Sorry, forgot to add the pic that went with it earlier.



Tony Bennett has waged a campaign since 2007 against the Kate and Gerry McCann Photo: PAUL GROVER

I don't recall Bennett mentioning to the faithful that he had been posing in front of the law courts?

Asked how he felt about harassing a couple, grieving over the disappearance of their daughter, Mr Bennett replied: "The thing that came closest to harassment was when we distributed the '10 reasons' leaflet in Leicestershire in August 2009.

"Three of my colleagues in the Madeleine Foundation distributed a small quantity of leaflets in Rothley. I would honestly say that perhaps that was a leaflet distribution too far.

Can the hounders and forkers see what he has done? He has publically admitted harrassment - BUT BLAMED IT ALL ON OTHER PEOPLE.

Oh well, they were all warned about him

If The Telegraph have taken this up then it has got to be serious. The Telegraph is not known for careless gossip or sensationalism.

Quite; and it is required reading for judges in England and Wales.

I really cannot imagine what Bennett thought he was doing, besides trying to drop everyone else in it.

I like this bit...

a sustained campaign of harassment conducted by a small band of fanatics

Can't see it going down too well with the forkers and hounders, though.

I agree with you bb1:

"a sustained campaign of harassment conducted by a small band of fanatics

Can't see it going down too well with the forkers and hounders, though."

"a small band of fanatics", this is what antis truly are.

I agree with Mobyra:

"They should really stop posing for photos - it does them no favours whatsoever"

Another deluded forker:


Clarrie could have written that himself!

So, Evil Clarrie forced Bennett to babble away to the Telegraph.

Evil Clarrie forced Bennett to stand here:



and pose for photos....

I really don't think so.

And no sooner have the pixels dried...

Re: Retired lawyer faces jail for 'harassing' Kate and Gerry McCann - Telegraph
Tony Bennett Today at 11:17 am

This article arose out of a telephone call out of the blue from the Telegraph's Robert Mendick on Tuesday this week.

As it happens, I had an invitation from the British Museum to a free showing of the Hajj exhibition which opened at the Museum on Wednesday - interesting occasion, met the Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the U.K. there. Fine exhibition, but left out of the exhibits was any reference to the tragic loss of lives which have happened in recent years as the numbers of Muslim pilgrims making the annual Hajj pilgrimage has risen to 3 million; thousands have been crushed to death in the milling crowds. It does seem an awful bother to go all that way to walk 7 times anti-clockwise around a 30-foot high black cube (the Ka 'Ba) and then collect exactly 49 pebbels and fling them with all your might at three pillars.

I also that day handed in a letter to Sir John Thomas, President of the Queen's Bench Division at the High Court, setting out the difficulty faced by defendants who are forced to act in person to defend themselves because they can't come near to matching the resources of litigants like the McCanns who can call on huge financial resources - and recommending changes that would assist litigants-in-prson in the future.

Then it was on to Carter-Ruck. On the last day of my holiday, I got a frantic 'phone call from Debbie at Carter-Ruck. By mistake, she had sent me TWO identical thick large Lever Arch files for the next (and I hope final) Court hearing (on 29 february) re Smethurst, when he will deliver Carter-Ruck's claim for costs against me. When I got back, there was another frantic call from Mary at Carter-Ruck wanting to send up a courier to collect the extra file which they needed back urgently. To save Carter-Ruck the expense of a courier, I offered to deliver the file back to them in person and did so later that afternoon. They actually said 'thank you'.

The photographer who took my pic was Paul Grover.

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

If you can wade through the irrelevant waffle - Bennett happily volunteered. And doesn't he seem taken with Carter Ruck?

PS - Isn't Paul Grover the photographer the hounders have been accusing of all sorts of deviancy?

Doesn't seem to have bothered Bennett when he was posing in front of the law courts.

Deluded forker:

It is unhelpful and hurtful that they refer to the MF and JH's websites. Some of their readership might take a look.

Yes, and run away screaming in horror at the obscene 'theories' and the conspiraloon rubbish. Telegraph readers don't like that sort of thing - who does?

Oh, and weren't the hounders desperate for Apeman Hardy to be in the press gallery, hopefully without his giant bar of soap, because the press wouldn't mention this because of some 'superinjunction' that only exists in their imagination?

I do hope it is now sinking in that there is no 'superinjunction', and that they are likely to get lots and lots of press coverage.

Just not the kind they are going to enjoy reading

I realise I am pointing out the obvious here: There is absolutely no way to view that article as anything other than an attack on bentit and the freaks and yet he doesn't seem to be having a problem with it.

He'll be writing as we speak to the PCC about the article making him look bad.

It's really quite good news he has REPEATED the stuff he UNDERTOOK not to repeat, to the Telegraph reporter, it's a massive cock-up for him.

I note he's had a haircut. He looked almost tidy in that photo. Is he getting worried about his tramp image? Has he bought a new suit?

Agree with you both; it is the worst thing he could possibly have done.

The photographer has, in the past, been the subject of the usual abuse and sicko speculation from them; he had to join and politely put them right about one or two things.

Offhand, I would say he has been keeping an eye on Bennett's site, and he and his colleague saw a golden opportunity for a bit of payback.

And notice the way Bennett has tried to dump the blame for the Rothely Stalking on other people and pretend he wasn't there?

Only to be expected from him, of course, but I shouldn't think the other three are any too happy.

Do we have any of those posts and mails Muratfan (I believe) had when we proved bentit was hiding in the bushes? Wasn't the creosoted one insistent he was? There are photos of him with his 3 "colleagues" at a cafe weren't there? Didn't he eat cut price at Gerry's hospital?

He's publically saying "They went too far", I think we should remind everyone he went along too.

Here we are!

http://thestalkingworldofbennettbutler.blogspot.com



Anyone fancy a small wager he is going to name them in court?

bb1 wrote:Here we are!

http://thestalkingworldofbennettbutler.blogspot.com



Anyone fancy a small wager he is going to name them in court?

AH HA! That's why he took the photo. Proof it was them wot dun it. But NO Photo of him.

But butler was shouting loud enough he was there wasn't she?

(By the way, I'm not totally convinced that CR are "frantic" at this or any time. Especially not when bentit claims they are, I rather fancy the boot is on the other foot in that scenario)

Yes, Butler confirmed he was there, all right. And if he takes it into his head to try to blame her when he is in the dock, I can see Carter Ruck getting a surprise new witness.

It's very telling that the hounders and forkers are barely commenting in public on this truly spectacular own goal from Bennett.

Or maybe they are just running scared that he is going to name them all to 'prove' he has support?

I think they should all go and give evidence on his behalf, and tell The Judge it was them as well.