Bennett playing stupid games with Carter Ruck

Hounders start the comedy early today:

Logically, what Tony says in his reply is correct; there are no factual inaccuracies of any note in his statements.

Oh well, he's got no reason to be running scared of the dock in the High Court then, has he?

Meanwhile, in the real world......his endless repetitions are one long, nasty, libellous 'factual inaccuracy'. As he has been told repeatedly.

Now he pays the price of his smearing and harrassment.

Hens are notorious for having very small 'brains' aren't they?



Ah say Boy you calling a bluff... Ah say a bluff you hear!
The Rooster Today at 1:05 pm

I don't think this case will go to court. In the arena of reputation management I believe this is far too hot a potato for the McCanns and their legal agents to handle.

ORLY? Then how come Carter Ruck have been ready and willing to go to court for a year or so? It's Head Hounder who is running scared and keeping everyone, including the High Court, waiting.

The Rooster wrote:

LISTEN UP TEAM, if you want people to give you some respect agree to a reconstruction. Simple as that!

Headless Chicken has clearly never heard of software that lets the real police - like Scotland Yard - do virtual reconstructions.

Sez Bennett:

On the subject of the McCanns' credibility, I am hoping that the McCanns do not call as one of their witnesses the man whom the Sun variously called 'Veteran Met detective' and 'The former Scotland Yard detective', Ian Horrocks.

He told the Sun (12 June last year) that...

"The thought that Kate and Gerry McCann had anything to do with the death of their daughter, whether being directly responsible or covering it up, is frankly preposterous. There is not one shred of credible evidence, either direct or otherwise, to indicate that this is even a remote possibility".

If the famous Ian Horrocks, with all his decades of experience in one of the top police forces in the world, never mind in this country, says all that to the High Court, what chance have I got?

Or maybe the explanation is more simple.

Is Horrocks on a retainer from News International?

Doubt it very much, but we all know who was, don't we?



TEN GRAND FROM NEWS INTERNATIONAL

And that's just what he's admitted to.

Stones, glass houses.

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/when-will-he-ever-learn-when-will-he.html

Yup; when in a hole - maliciously accuse a former police officer of doing something you've done yourself.

Though it wasn't 30 pieces of silver in Bennett's case, was it? It was at least 10,000.

bb1 wrote:http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/when-will-he-ever-learn-when-will-he.html

Yup; when in a hole - maliciously accuse a former police officer of doing something you've done yourself.

Though it wasn't 30 pieces of silver in Bennett's case, was it? It was at least 10,000.

Just up-dated it

He's self-destructing, the men in white coats will be coming for him if he keeps this up. What's he going to be like if and when Michael Barrymore hits him with a lawsuit?

bb1 wrote:He's self-destructing, the men in white coats will be coming for him if he keeps this up. What's he going to be like if and when Michael Barrymore hits him with a lawsuit?

You do know Bennett has announced he owns the Lubbock Trust site now?
xxxxxxxxhttp://tony-bennett.org.uk/xxxxxxxxx

He's losing what little grasp of the plot he ever had. He is now boasting:

one of the strengths of this forum is the extent to which an increasing number of guests visit and stay to read articles here...just checked the stats and 98 members have also looked in here in the past 24 hours

He hasn't a clue who the 'guests' are, does he?

Or that after the first visit, they go back because they cannot quite believe what they saw the first time.

Visits thereafter are to take screengrabs for legal purposes, for press use, etc.

bb1 wrote:He's losing what little grasp of the plot he ever had. He is now boasting:

one of the strengths of this forum is the extent to which an increasing number of guests visit and stay to read articles here...just checked the stats and 98 members have also looked in here in the past 24 hours

He hasn't a clue who the 'guests' are, does he?

Or that after the first visit, they go back because they cannot quite believe what they saw the first time.

Visits thereafter are to take screengrabs for legal purposes, for press use, etc.

Must tell them thar buddies of mine not to be so obvious

Forker in la-la land:


An excellent reply by Tony which should be produced in court. When his evidence is based on the police investigation findings, I can't see how he could lose in court.

Oh, we are all praying it is produced in court. Perhaps they need reminded of what Judge Tugendhat said in October:

25. In my judgment it is in the interests of justice that this committal application, like all committal applications, be heard as soon as possible. It should not be adjourned pending the hearing of any application made or to be made by the Defendant.

26. It is a rule of law of great importance that undertakings to the court (like injunctions) must be obeyed so long as they are in force. If a party restrained by such an order wishes to contend that the order ought not to have been made, or ought not to remain in force, it is not open to that party to ignore the order and then, if faced with a committal application, to ask for that committal application to be adjourned pending the determination of an application to vary the undertaking or injunction. If that were permitted, the administration of justice would be seriously undermined: injunctions and undertakings would not be the effective remedies that they are required to be.

=========

Now, is there anything in that which suggests the High Court is going to be impressed at Bennett continuing to break his own undertaking - and promise to Carter Ruck?

Anything there that suggests the judge is going to think Bennett is big and clever for libelling the McCanns all over again, on Aussie footie sites or nearer home? Indeed, in missives to Carter Ruck themselves?

Yes, please, let's all pray he produces that letter in court.

This bit is from Bennett's reply to Carter Ruck

“First, an entire team of (Portuguese) detectives decided there were grounds for making the McCanns official suspects in the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine.

Now mistake me if I am wrong, but The McCanns were never suspects in the case...ONLY ARQUIDOS so the Police could ask them questions.

2. I refer to circumstantial evidence, viz. that your clients have not told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about what really happened to Madeleine.

Oh dear with that quote Bennett

I wonder if Bennett has realised yet that all his correspondence, and Carter Ruck replying to his boring letters, is actually costing him even more money because they charge for it..

Don't spoil the fun and tell him.

http://watchingthetrolls.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/limerick-to-bennett.html


LIMERICK TO BENNETT
THERE WAS AN OLD MAN CALLED TONY,

WHO SMELLED LIKE THE BACK END OF A DONKEY.

HE WILL ALWAYS TELL LIES..

NOW HE HAS LOST HIS WIFE.

AND TAKEN TO SLEEPING WITH A PONY

You're supposed to write them in green ink - I swear he's going for an insanity plea.

Wibble

Deluded hounder:


I agree. TB should be ready for an offer to settle at the 'door of court' and know what his bottom line is. The MC's won't want to risk going through that door IMO.



What planet are they on? Head hounder's got them well-drilled, if it hasn't dawned on them yet that BENNETT is the one who 'doesn't want to risk going through that door'.

What do they think his increasingly-desperate attempts to delay the hearings yet again are about? His frantic pleas to Carter Ruck?

What has to happen for them to wake up and smell the coffee?

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/still-believe-telling-carter-and-ruck.html



I also seem to recall him boasting that he was going to 'cut them down to size'. That doesn't seem to be going too well, either.

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

Speaking of fools, isn't the fat defective due in court in a couple of weeks? Do you think we should have a sweepstake on what his excuse is going to be this time?

Will he come up with something new, or will he stick with his favourite 'poorly lawyer'?

They seem to be completely oblivious to what is actually happening. Mr. Bennett cannot win, presuming that this was about Libel in the first place, which it isn't. But he might win the right to a full blown Libel Trial if he carries on in this fashion.

Meanwhile, back at Brain Dead Central they are trying to convince each other and the world in general that they are intelechules, did you ever. They would come closer to understanding Narcissism if they took a good look at Mr. Bennett. When he's not being a Sociopath, that is.

But then there are dangerous narcisists, who cannot achieve their goal other than by destroying the ones left, right, in front and behind, crush them down and thus achieve a superior level. Interesting.

Yes, near perfect description of Bennett, who appears to be the world's only INCOMPETENT malignant narcissist.

bb1 wrote:Speaking of fools, isn't the fat defective due in court in a couple of weeks? Do you think we should have a sweepstake on what his excuse is going to be this time?

Will he come up with something new, or will he stick with his favourite 'poorly lawyer'?

I think Gonc the Bonc is going to have to come up with a new one this time. The Portuguese Courts aren't completely stupid, and he is a vast embarrassment, among other things.
His mental health might be a good one. I would believe that.

bb1 wrote: But then there are dangerous narcisists, who cannot achieve their goal other than by destroying the ones left, right, in front and behind, crush them down and thus achieve a superior level. Interesting.

Yes, near perfect description of Bennett, who appears to be the world's only INCOMPETENT malignant narcissist.

Now that is funny. How to be an Incompetent Narcissist. It does always catch up with them in the end, but Mr. Bennett made an art form of starting out as one.