BENNETT STARS IN HARLOW STAR

http://www.harlowstar.co.uk/News/Harlow-news/Former-Harlow-solicitor-could-face-jail-over-McCann-allegations-31102012.htm

Former Harlow solicitor could face jail over McCann allegations


A RETIRED lawyer from Harlow is facing the threat of a jail sentence for contempt of court following his latest run-in with the parents of missing schoolgirl Madeleine McCann.
Tony Bennett (65), of Chippingfield, Old Harlow, has been accused of multiple breaches of formal undertakings he signed in November 2009 in which he agreed to stop making allegations that Madeleine’s parents – Kate and Gerry McCann – were involved in covering up their daughter’s death in 2007.


Tony Bennett
Three–year-old Madeleine went missing in May 2007 from an apartment complex in Praia da Luz, Portugal, where her parents had been holidaying with friends.

The McCanns believe their daughter was kidnapped and have mounted a high-profile campaign in a bid to find her. But despite widespread investigations by both the Portugeuse and British police, she has never been found.
In 2008 Mr Bennett published a controversial book – What Really Happened to Madeleine McCann – in which he made a number of allegations relating to the case
Last Wednesday lawyers acting for the McCanns went to the High Court in London to argue that Mr Bennett had persisted in spreading false allegations against them both online and in print and as a result they were now seeking his imprisonment – or other punishment – for alleged contempt of court.

For his part, Mr Bennett is asking the court to vary the undertakings he gave in 2009 so he can publish what he claims is "credible evidence" that Madeleine died in the holiday apartment, that her parents have covered this up and have lied about matters connected to her reported disappearance.
The court heard the McCanns denied there was any truth in any of the allegations which Mr Bennett "wishes to be free to make" and argued that his continued publication of "numerous grave and actionable libels" against them amounted to harassment.
Mr Justice Tugendhat underlined the vital importance of court orders and undertakings being obeyed and directed that the couple’s case against Mr Bennett should be heard "as soon as practicable".
Speaking to the Star this week, Mr Bennett vowed to fight for his right to free speech and said he believed he had "valid" arguments for his defence.
"Britain’s libel laws are so oppressive that I had no alternative but to agree to the terms of the formal undertakings set out by the McCanns’ lawyers in November 2009," he said.

"Of the 16 undertakings I signed there are only three which have been broken. I want to make it absolutely clear that I have never claimed the McCanns killed or were responsible for Madeleine’s death."
He added: "I believe that in a country where freedom of speech is valued so highly I should have the right to publish what I believe to be credible evidence about what happened to Madeleine."

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

He's actually ADMITTED breaking three undertakings, to his local newspaper.

Anthony Bennett ‏@zampos
News item from local paper #HarlowStar re #McCann s attempt to jail me. They omitted most of what I told them #libel

Well, they probably didn't have space for a fifty thousand word diatribe about the Smethursts' choice of interior decor....

And really, it should demonstrate to him the folly of believing everything you read in the papers.....

I think a case of "be careful what you wish for".

The photo is, er, less than flattering.

If his credible evidence is from the officially translated files; why have the UK law enforcement not found it?

If however, his credible evidence is taken by word of mouth and or, the files on the Internet; Bennett, is up the creek without a paddle.

The only parts of the Dodgy files which are reliable are things like the forensic reports, as it is hard to mistranslate numbers, etc - but even in those, that Ines person has altered the report about the so-called 'handprints' on the window.

The rest - well, anyone who bets the farm on those is a fool and a madman. They are full of mistranslations, with key sections omitted. And he seems to think every word that appears in Portuguese tabloids is 100% accurate and true.

This is a gem, though - he actually said this on the record.


Of the 16 undertakings I signed there are only three which have been broken.

Hark! Do I here peals of laughter coming from a law office in St Andrews Lane? Is that a judge I hear, practising banging his gavel down?

Correct me if I am wrong but, doesn't it take just one breach of the undertaking for him to be guilty?

Yup. And he has publically admitted THREE.

bb1 wrote:Yup. And he has publically admitted THREE.

HoHum

Hounder:


The bigger papers trawl thru the regional/local publications looking for inspiration. This is a story worthy of a national daily if not a weekender


Couldn't agree more. Especially if the same photo is used:



He wouldn't have needed any makeup for Hallow'en.

He's whinging already:




Tony Bennett Today at 10:41 am

Da Troof wrote:
Was is wise to admit in a newspaper interview that you have broken three of the sixteen undertakings?

Da Troof, very good point, and that illustrates one of the risks of talking to journalists. Let me make it plain, on the record, without further delay, that:

...what I told Chris Moss, Chief Reporter for the 'Harlow Star', was that "I was only accused of breaking three out of the 16 undertakings"


ETA: Please feel free to add careful, polite comments to the article that will not embarrass the 'Harlow Star' and force them to pull the comments

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

So, he is now claiming that the reporter printed words he simply did not say? Pull the other one - Bennett 'misremembers' everything.

Who can forget him attributing words about dogs and witnesses, etc., to Judge Tugendhat

WHICH WERE ACTUALLY SAID IN COURT BY A CARTER RUCK LAWYER?

I'm sure Judge Tugendhat won't forget his personal experience of Bennett 'misremembering'.

And why is he encouraging the Hounders to spam the Star with flattering comments? Not very democratic, is that.

It will be good if haters do sound off. The media will then give Bennett a wide berth in future.

I think they do already, unless it's got words like VILE and STALKER in front of them, Tony. One good thing about their constant attention-seeking -if Bennett hadn't been so keen to mouth off to the press, he wouldn't have dropped himself in it yet again.

Delusional hounder:


The story isn't opening up. it's just a blank page, although the heading is still on their website. Has CR had it whooshed, I wonder?

1. The link works perfectly well.

2. Why on earth would CR 'whoosh' it? It's priceless - Bennett has publically admitted committing contempt of court.

Also, he looks like one of the Addams Family. Lurch, I do believe.

He looks so ridiculously awful in that photo that maybe Tone himself wanted it whooshed.

I must apologise, it was wrong of me to compare Lurch to Bennett...



Lurch has more hair, and is better-dressed. And as I recall, is also devoted and loyal.

Sorry, Lurch!

That's better, Bonny.

Do you suppose Bennett will now start a harrassment campaign against the Harlow Star for making him look like, well, a ghoul:




After what they did because Mike Gunnill couldn't make Tango look like a normal human being?

Yes bb1, you´re right about Lurch. TB is exactly the opposite.

I see someone's knitted Bennett a nice new sock.

Oh so they have. Quite amazed at the content of the forum too.

Well, well, what a surprise.

Seems to know about as much about the Official Secrets Act as pretendypete did about custody law. Still, it will give them hope.

They do need loads of hope at the moment. Although, it will get worse.

Can you imagine what Gonc's libel trial will bring?

What is amazing is that they think it's good that Bennett got himself in the local paper, looking like a leftover from a Hallow'een party.

They don't seem to understand the meaning of the words, or how they will be understood by normal people - which clearly lets them out.

They certainly don't grasp the disaster that is Bennett admitting to contempt of court on three separate occasions.

Do they not understand that once is bad enough?