SO BENNETT CLAIMS NO-ONE HAS EVER MISTAKEN HIS HOUNDERS FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO FIND MADELEINE?

Brighton rock group used latest Maddie pic for publicity
Tony Bennett Today

An excited Becky Evans from the Brighton Argus has just 'phoned me to tell me about a local rock group which had been using flyers for a gig this Saturday, using the latest 'age-progressed' picture of Madeleine McCann to publicise the event. Apparently the picture of Madeleine looking 9 was purely used to attract interest in the gig; there was no accompanying message about looking for Madeleine, nor were they proposing to raise a penny from the gig for the hard-pressed Find Madeleine Fund. A local had complained to the Brighton Argus. The group had apparently now agreed to stop distributing the flyer.

She wanted a quote from me.

Alas, the reporter had wrongly assumed that The Madeleine Foundation represented the McCanns; it was really Clarence Mitchell they wanted to speak to. I gave her the right number to call.

That might be a tough one, though, even for Clarence.

Was this (a) a bad thing because it exploited Madeleine? or (b) a good thing because it helps people in the Brighton area to look for Madeleine?

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

If the press can make that mistake, I wonder how many others have mistaken the stalkers and nutjobs for

http://www.findmadeleine.com/index.html

We all know that people did make that mistake, Bonny. Not only did people send money, they also sent information that Mr. Bennett decided was irrelevant.

Best I say no more because I could disgrace myself.

Bennett withheld Very Relevant Information , his words, not mine, concerning missing child Madeleine McCann

And he chose not to pass it on....he's some piece of work.

One thing is for sure. If it had pointed to the involvement of Kate or Gerry he would not have kept it to himself. So the alternative is pretty shocking.

I just noticed this:

the hard-pressed Find Madeleine Fund

Since when? Gerry McCann himself said that the funds were healthy at present, thanks to Kate's book, when he was interviewed at the cycle run.

I think Bennett is being his usual sarcastic self?

Yes, Tony. He withheld something which should have been passed on regardless of how he felt about anything.

: Brighton rock group used latest Maddie pic for publicity
Tony Bennett Today
Jean wrote:
Poor old Becky can't have done a great deal of research to think that the Madeleine Foundation represented the McCanns! I can see a great future for her with a national tabloid as the need to research one's stories has gone completely out of the window in recent years - unlike Madeleine.

Something like this happened before, Tony?

Perhaps five or six times over the past four years we've had journalists or members of the public ring up here thinking they were contacting the McCanns' site. We've had perhaps two or three e-mails as well. I'm satisfied that none of the donations ever made to The Madeleine Foundation over the years (and there haven't been that many) have come from anyone who thought we were really the McCanns' Fund.

Liar, liar, pants on fire. If he says he is 'satisfied' no-one donated to the wrong fund, it is a pretty good bet that they did.

Seen what he's doing now? Only reposting ancient propaganda pieces from the likes of Mouthpiece Morais, but not commenting on them in case he gets into trouble.

Pathetic. He's never, ever going to stop this vendetta unless the law makes him.

And now he is posting bigoted, anti-Catholic rants:

Our Queen had to rummage through her wardrobe for a little black number (plus veil), while the good, pure, virtuous, righteous Cherie Blair could breeze through in white and not bother about a veil. Henry VIII may well have dislodged this country from Roman Catholic control for all the wrong reasons, but he freed us from the Catholic yoke - and after we overthrew the last Catholic monarch in 1688, our country forged ahead and prospered. Even though the Pope made our heads of state wear black when they went to see him. November 5th is this country's 'Liberation Day'.

Not that he's prejudiced or anything

bb1 wrote:: Brighton rock group used latest Maddie pic for publicity
Tony Bennett Today
Jean wrote:
Poor old Becky can't have done a great deal of research to think that the Madeleine Foundation represented the McCanns! I can see a great future for her with a national tabloid as the need to research one's stories has gone completely out of the window in recent years - unlike Madeleine.

Something like this happened before, Tony?

Perhaps five or six times over the past four years we've had journalists or members of the public ring up here thinking they were contacting the McCanns' site. We've had perhaps two or three e-mails as well. I'm satisfied that none of the donations ever made to The Madeleine Foundation over the years (and there haven't been that many) have come from anyone who thought we were really the McCanns' Fund.

Liar, liar, pants on fire. If he says he is 'satisfied' no-one donated to the wrong fund, it is a pretty good bet that they did.

And the donations were too large to ignore. Allegedly.

bb1 wrote:And now he is posting bigoted, anti-Catholic rants:

Our Queen had to rummage through her wardrobe for a little black number (plus veil), while the good, pure, virtuous, righteous Cherie Blair could breeze through in white and not bother about a veil. Henry VIII may well have dislodged this country from Roman Catholic control for all the wrong reasons, but he freed us from the Catholic yoke - and after we overthrew the last Catholic monarch in 1688, our country forged ahead and prospered. Even though the Pope made our heads of state wear black when they went to see him. November 5th is this country's 'Liberation Day'.

Not that he's prejudiced or anything

He is a sectarian racist!

Is this all part of his campaign to show he is insane?

He's giving it his best shot, Rose.

Bennett's perturbed:

The meaning of Paulo Cristovao's 5, 2, 3 and 1
Tony Bennett Today
This is the English translation of the final two sentences of Paulo Cristovao's book, A Estrela de Madeleine, 'The Star of Madeleine':

I don’t usually bet on Euromillions, my friend, but if I ever did, there would be at least four numbers where I would place my little crosses, to hit the winning key. And I bet that at least I would get those four right. As a matter of fact, I would even call it the Luz key.

Those would be the 5, the 2, the 3 and the 1!

The final line has been the subject of a great deal of speculation, with some on this forum in recent days even thinking it might be a reference to the Psalms or a New Testament book......blah blah blah...

I thought everyone knew? It's the start of the combination of Cristovao's safe, the one he keeps his 'dossiers' in.

Bet he's got a 'dossier' on Bennett.

Hounder:


I wonder if Cristovao knew something why he had to be so cryptic.


Oh, Cristovao knows lots of things, just ask Gonc. Anyone seen Gonc recently?

Bennett's take on the Halligen non-event - he just couldn't resist dropping his own name into it:

Halligen farce could continue for years
Tony Bennett Today

Tony Bennett wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
Nothing yet on Halligen??? Have searched and can't find anything.
The first three judgments for today have already been released, here is the link:

http://www.supremecourt.gov.uk/news/latest-judgments.html

Halligen is not one of the three already released, but it shouldn't be long now

My mistake, Peter is right. Look at the SECOND of the three decisions released this morning, which deals with four cases involving time limits for appealing. Halligen's is one of them.

I agree with Peter, the case will go back to the High Court (see paragraph 41 of the full decision), further delaying the extradition request of the U.S. He will presumably stay in Belmarsh prison, or possibly be transferred to another one. Given that if the High Court decides against him again, he may well appeal a second time to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, and maybe thereafter to the European Court of Human Rights. That will perpetuate this legally-aided farce for perhaps years to come.

The Supreme Court's decision was founded not on our own laws in this country, but on Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the 'right to a fair trial' in all criminal and civil cases. Quite how Halligen can claim he was denied a fair trial - after numerous hearings and being legally-aided throughout - can only be understod by reading and re-reading the convoluted reasons in the court's judgment.

It is the very same article - 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights - which led the High Court to postpone the trial listed for 9 and 10 May in the case of McCanns v Bennett.

The Legal Services Commission is reconsidering whether I should be able to apply for legal aid - but the issue seems to be causing them quite a bit of work as I've still had no reply from them. Nor has the Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke yet been able to reply to letters from me and my M.P., back in April, which raised the issue of the overwhelming superiority of legal firepower which the McCanns have been able to bring to the case, having spent 'well over £120,000' in legal costs by 19 April this year.

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

Oh, I see - it's a 'farce' when Halligen doesn't want to exchange his cosy Yuman Rites cell with telly for an orange jumpsuit.

It's of global importance when Bennett is trying to wriggle out of the consequences of his own actions.

And he still hasn't grasped that Carter Ruck's supposed 'legal firepower' is an irrelevance.

Bennett has rather a lot of money in the bank = Bennett can afford to pay a lawyer.

And along comes CSI: Pete to explain Bennett's strategy:

Re: KEVIN HALLIGEN EXTRADITION DECISION - Issued on the internet tomorrow (23 May) around 10.00am
PeterMac Today

There was a lovely Private Eye cartoon some time ago, Silk advising junior.
"If the facts are against you argue that it is a point of law.
"If the law is against you, argue that it is an issue of fact.
If the facts and the law are against you, argue that it is an issue of Human Rights."

=======

Which is, of course, EXACTLY what his boss is doing

about "Anyone seen Gonc recently?", perhaps gonc is again in a tavern, doing this:

https://2img.net/r/ihimizer/img53/6977/drunk1ag8.jpg

Pedro Silva wrote:about "Anyone seen Gonc recently?", perhaps gonc is again in a tavern, doing this:

https://2img.net/r/ihimizer/img53/6977/drunk1ag8.jpg

That is so funny, Pedro. Where do you find these cartoons?

Sabot, I found it at internet.

Legal aid if you may get sent to prison..sometimes
Tony Bennett Today
Woofer wrote:

PeterMac wrote:
If they are going to plead Not Guilty, then today's performance at court might just be difficult for his QC to get round. It is reported that he growled "w*******" at the public gallery after someone shouted abuse at him.I bet his solicitor is really pleased!

Wot!!! he`s actually got a solicitor - brave solicitor risking the lynch mob.

Yes, if you risk getting sent to prison because you may have set light to your house and killed your six children inside this is no problem. But if the country's best-paid libel lawyers spend 'well over £120,000' in an effort to get you sent to jail for questioning the accounts of parents of a missing 3-year-old, it's a different story...

That is one of the most disgusting remarks Bennett has EVER made - and that takes some doing.

Another foul hater who exploits the deaths of six children to score points and attack the McCann family. Nothing seems to be too low for them, does it?