Just for the hounders....

You may think that test purchasing of alcohol has nothing to do with the McCann case, and in a sane world, it wouldn't.

Sadly, many of the McCann-haters don't qualify as sane, and appear to have no grasp whatsoever of the law, civil or criminal.

They are currently enraptured by some tosh about Bennett's wrongful sale of Reasons, and have talked themselves into believing Bennett is somehow the victim.

So, on their reasoning, shops which illegally sell alcohol to under-age drinkers are victims of the police and the local Licensing Boards?

I don't think so...

http://www.cleveland.police.uk/news/releases/release13853.aspx


Over 500 Test Purchases On Licensees in Stockton to Curb Underage Sales

Officers from Stockton Licensing Unit have co-ordinated 546 test purchases across the District over the last seven years in a bid to identify people responsible for selling alcohol to underage youngsters.
As part of these pre-planned operations, two underage teenagers go into licensed premises as ‘test purchasers’ to buy alcohol, with officers waiting in the wings to find out the response. Since 2007, test purchasers were sold alcohol on 108 occasions. These sales have resulted in 99 fixed penalty notices, eight cautions and one report to court for summons.
Police say the strongest message is sent to retailers when licenses are reviewed, meaning that it can have stringent conditions attached or it can be revoked completely. Four reviews took place in 2008, five in 2011 and one in 2012 and figures show a dip in sales to test purchasers in the years after these reviews.

Sgt Keith Daley from the Licensing Unit said: “We have worked hard to send the message to licensees that it is completely unacceptable to be selling to people who are underage; the law is there for a reason.

“There are no excuses, if they are unsure they should be asking for appropriate identification and refusing if there is none. Underage drinking can cause serious health implications, alcohol-fuelled antisocial behaviour and can ruin lives. Carrying out these test purchases supports our other work to tackle this behaviour by getting to the source of the issue.

“Some licensees do get caught out, but some do sell to teenagers in the full knowledge that they are not old enough to buy alcohol. I’m pleased to say of the 24 tests carried out so far this year, we have had no sales of alcohol to underage people and that is a significant step forward in tackling this. The message seems to be getting through to the minority of licensees who flout the law that it is just not worth the consequences.”

Curiously, no-one seems to have tried to pretend they were the 'victim' of unscrupulous under-agers in court, as Bennett and his fan club are trying to.

I expect that's because the shopkeepers who were caught were totally in the wrong. As Bennett is, despite all pretendy's nonsense.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/asda-hit-with-alcohol-sales-ban-after-sting.17334568

SUPERMARKET giant Asda has been hit with an alcohol sales ban at one of its main Scottish stores after selling drink to a 16-year-old.

The company's store in the affluent Glasgow suburb of Newton Mearns had its alcohol licence suspended for 24 hours from yesterday following the test purchase sting earlier this year.

Asda was the only business of around 20 tested in East Renfrewshire that failed the test purchase.

Strange, Asda don't seem to have tried to claim they were the victims...possibly because they weren't. They were no more allowed to sell alcohol to 16 year olds than Bennett was allowed to sell Reasons to ANYONE.

Would the hounders and pretendypete like to think about how the police get drug dealers convicted? On their logic, the poor ickle wickle dealer who, in all innocence, sells to an undercover police officer is the victim of a cruel fraud.

bb1 wrote:Would the hounders and pretendypete like to think about how the police get drug dealers convicted? On their logic, the poor ickle wickle dealer who, in all innocence, sells to an undercover police officer is the victim of a cruel fraud.

Well, he would be the victim. It could only be the result of an illegal sting.

Never mind, he can have Bennett as his legal representative. Problem solved.

Seriously, doesn't it sound ridiculous when you put it in the terms you have?

Astounding. Assorted hounders are STILL trying to claim that the mistaken sighting in Leh was a 'hoax' conjured up by Evil Clarrie.

No, it wasn't - as Scotland Yard are well aware, having been involved in ruling the child mistakenly thought to be Madeleine out.

Always good to see them making complete tw@ts of themselves, though. We must bear in mind that these are the people who, inspired by the Icke Lizards, pronounced the Boston atrocity a 'hoax'.

And sadistically insulted the victims by claiming that those poor people who had lost limbs were 'amputee actors'.

So what they think of anything doesn't really count for much, does it?

Ordinisrubricrucis ‏@ordinisrubri 1m
@JillyCL no Jill you will find that your colleagues are the bigots, racists and xenophobes, read it and weep http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2005/feb/03/uk.otherparties1 … #mccann

How very interesting!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2005/feb/03/uk.otherparties1

Kilroy-Silk colleague linked to ex-National Front leader

Oliver Burkeman
The Guardian, Thursday 3 February 2005 02.39 GMT
A key member of Robert Kilroy-Silk's new political party co-founded an organisation with a former chairman of the National Front, the Guardian has learned.
Anthony Bennett, whose name appears in the Electoral Commission's database as the official leader of Mr Kilroy-Silk's party Veritas, was also fired from the UK Independence party last year after publishing a pamphlet describing the prophet Muhammad as a paedophile.

The revelations, coming the day after the official launch of Veritas, will call into question Mr Kilroy-Silk's insistence that his party's anti-immigration stance has nothing to do with racism or Islamophobia.

Yesterday Mr Bennett said he had not known that Ian Anderson was a former chairman of the National Front at the time that the two men helped to form the People's Campaign to Keep the Pound. "Had I known that, I probably wouldn't have joined it," he said.

But Mr Bennett called Mr Anderson "an English patriot" and said they were both still members of a local land-preservation organisation in Epping in Essex that organises an annual May fair.

"He's a well-respected committee member of that organisation ... I don't know that one could dignify that with the word 'link'," he said.

Mr Bennet himself had "always stood for social justice," he said. The Electoral Commission's records, he added, were being updated to show Mr Kilroy-Silk as the official leader of Veritas.

"Robert Kilroy-Silk's not going to be pleased about this," Mr Anderson said. He confirmed that he had been a chairman of the National Front but said he had now left politics.

Mr Bennett has been working as a researcher for Mr Kilroy-Silk after being banned, last year, from holding any Ukip office for two years because of his writings on Islam. Mr Kilroy-Silk said at the time that Mr Bennett's remarks about Muhammad had been part of a "reasoned, academic exposition" aimed at explaining the reasons behind the September 11 terrorist attacks.

Mr Kilroy-Silk, 62, elected as a member of the European parliament under the Ukip banner, was sacked from his BBC talk show after writing a newspaper column disparaging Arabs as "limb-amputators".

After failing in his bid to lead Ukip, he left the party last month, accusing its members of being "rightwing fascist nutters". He could not be reached for comment last night.

Nigel Farage, Ukip's leader in the European parliament, said: "Tony Bennett is an energetic campaigner, with some extremely eccentric and individualistic views.

=========

Is that a polite way of saying, Bennett thinks there were dinosaurs on the Ark?

Any police officer, ex or otherwise who thinks that Bennett was entrapped must have a serious misunderstanding of the law. Using a false name isn't illegal, otherwise we are all up for the cop.
Although I bet Pretendy Pete never tried to entrap anyone. Oh my goodness me, no. Never told anyone that they had evidence they didn't have? This is common police practice.
Can't you just hear him. No Sir, I will not try to trick a criminal, and you norty boys and girls mustn't either.

Any police officer, ex or otherwise who thinks that Bennett was entrapped must have a serious misunderstanding of the law

It wouldn't be the first time people have wondered about pretendy being the Troll Supreme, Sabot.

He seems to know next to nothing about the law, but posts as if he is an expert, knowing full well that those thickos will believe every word. Remember when he demonstrated that he knew absolutely nothing about custody law in England and Wales?

And he is the one who proved, beyond any doubt, that those shutters can be opened from the outside with ease....

It does make people wonder.

It does make people wonder.

It is a complete mystery that.

Hasn't Pretendy Pete sussed it out yet? Has he not sussed that evidence is required? This man is supposedly the epitome of The Law, but he accuses without a scrap of evidence.
No wonder that Britain has a problem, and for why too many people don't get a fair trial.
This man was in the upper echelons of British Justice, and this is what we are supposed to rely on?

Oh dear, the hounders are rather making fools of themselves over this:

As predicted - Latest sighting. 25/4/13....'I saw girl who looked like Maddie on tram in Brussels': New sighting as McCanns' detectives focus on Belgium
candyfloss Today

'I saw girl who looked like Maddie on tram in Brussels': New sighting as
McCanns' detectives focus on Belgium

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1042818/I-saw-girl-looked-like-Maddie-tram-Brussels-New-sighting-McCanns-detectives-focus-Belgium.html#ixzz2RW9wmboU

The article is strange, it talks about her seeing Maddie 12 days after she disappeared??? So SY focusing on this now??

===========

I doubt it very much.

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post45909.html#p45909

'I saw girl who looked like Maddie on tram in Brussels': New sighting as McCanns' detectives focus on Belgium

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 9:56 AM on 08th August 2008

For some reason best known to themselves, the Wail has stuck today's date on a 5 year old story......

Didn't they read it and think, Wait a minute, that sounds familiar....and check?

Clearly not.

Having been caught out, Stephen has now posted the original article. LL

The bl**dy fools actually think the McCanns are responsible.

Not a blundering Wail sub then? Because of course, newspapers NEVER get anything wrong.

Conspiraloon muppets.

Addled forker:

NO sightings are worth anything, are they? Someone says a person looks like someone else. So what? It means nothing. It's an opinion and no more. Why do the newspapers run with this idiocy? Answer: to increase circulation by featuring the name of Madeleine, a picture of her, or pictures of her parents. BONKERS! Is it all tongue in cheek on the press's behalf? Surely readers don't believe it either. There are not enough silly fools in tabloid readership. There can't be

And they imagine all this because some sub put the wrong date on an ancient article? Didn't it occur to ANY of them to wonder why this years-old piece couldn't be found on the contemporary site?

No? They just charged right in, inventing plots, as is their usual style.

Does it never, ever occur to them to think c*ck-up, instead of conspiracy? The whole lot of them would fit in perfectly with Icke and the Lizard People.

Proof positive that they are all candidates for a Darwin Award:

Washing the curtains
whmon Yesterday at 9:45 pm

Before I found this site, I read somewhere on the internet that the curtains in 5A had been washed by the Mccanns. I don't recall where I read it but the post or article said that there were small amounts of blood on the wall and the curtains above had been washed. Can anybody shed any light/refute this?

Why on earth would anybody rent a holiday apartment for a few days and spend part of those precious few days washing the curtains? Well they wouldn't.

I expect that's why - THEY DIDN'T.

Why on earth, six years down the line, are the McCann-haters still repeating this utter garbage? There was no mythical 'blood on the wall', there was no curtain-washing, no bleaching, NOTHING.

If any of them ever bothered to actually read the police files, they would know all this. Guess actually reading police reports is too hard for them, though. So much easier to repeat and embellish lies that were garbage the first time, are garbage now, and are always going to be garbage.

See they're hard at work, bumping zombie threads again.

Good to see the hounders demonstrating why they are called HATERS as they spew bile at the very idea of the McCanns being on TV tomorrow.

Oh, and it was fascinating to see them eagerly abusing Mike Gunnill yesterday, without a single one of them mentioning why Mike Gunnill got dragged into their mess in the first place.

They had clearly 'forgotten' it was over this:



Mr Gunnill couldn't manage to make Butler look like a normal human being - no cameraman ever has - so the hounders retailated by trying to wreck his livelihood.

I didn't see that being mentioned when they were playing their baby games....

: mccannfest on daybreak tomorrow.
tiny Today

Oh gawd,more sh** for the shovel

Spiteful and vulgar, or what?

Don't forget jealousy, Bonny. You know how it oozes out of them.

They are certainly sounding very embittered right now, after the downfall of the Dear Leader.

Despite the fact that they are the ones who egged him on to ever-greater acts of legal madness, and screeched TROLL!!!!!! at anyone who pointed out that he was on the road to ruin.

I see pretendypete is still demonstrating his ignorance of the law by falsely claiming an offence was committed by Mike Gunnill:

He committed a Criminal Offence under the Fraud Act 2006
Section 2 Fraud by false representation

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b) intends, by making the representation—
(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or
(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2) A representation is false if—
(a) it is untrue or misleading, and
(b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

(3) “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—
(a) the person making the representation, or
(b) any other person.

(4) A representation may be express or implied.


This was evidence obtained by the commission of a Crime.
The man who obtained the book by lying is a common criminal and admitted what he had done before a Senior judge in the High Court.
The firm of lawyers appointed by the McCanns chose to use evidence obtained by Fraud to have an old man sent to prison.
If, (and only if), that firm of lawyers received the book, then they are themselves Guilty of the offence of Handling Stolen goods.
Good job ! Champagne all round.

Total, utter, bolleaux which serves yet again to demonstrate his ignorance. No doubt the hounders will lap it up, though.

PS - the clue is in the word 'stolen'.

Mr. Bennett knows that this is all bollox. Does anyone believe that Mr. Bennett would have allowed such an opportunity to pass?

The booklet was applied for as a historical reference, which it is. There is no Law that says a correct name must be given.

Really, for intent to deceive and cause harm, the hounders trying to wreck Mr Gunnill's business and cloning his work site is a much better example.

Odd how they 'forget' to mention that, isn't it?

How Bennett should have dealt with the request but didn't because of greed.

Customer, "Mr Bennett can I buy one of your Books?"
Bennett, "No, I am very sorry but I cannot sell the books because of a court order".
Customer, "But I need it for research, and I'll give you cash".
Bennett. "I have already said no, please don't contact me again".

Exactly, Tony. It's the same as:

Young customer in off-licence:

Litre of voddie, please, pal.

Shopkeeper:

There you go, have a nice day!

Police/Trading Standards Officer:

You are nicked, he's seventeen and that was a test purchase.

Odd, the way a supposed ex-policeman doesn't know any of that. Or about custody law. Or about UK law on discussing ongoing criminal trials.