LATEST ON BENNETT'S LIBEL HAT TRICK

So the case is going ahead then.

http://www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/courts-and-tribunals/courts/procedure-rules/civil/contents/practice_directions/pd_part51g.htm

Oh, good find!


4.1
The court will seek to manage the costs of the litigation, as well as the case itself.

This is interesting:


4.5
Any party may thereafter apply to the court if that party considers another party is behaving oppressively in seeking to cause that party to spend money disproportionately on costs.

I wonder if that can be applied to Bennett being as awkward as possible, in the mistaken belief that he is draining the fund to find Madeleine?

MERCANTILE COURTS AND TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTION COURTS – PILOT SCHEME

I don't understand how the above fits into this case?

Found it.


http://www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/courts-and-tribunals/courts/procedure-rules/civil/contents/practice_directions/pd_part51d.htm

Another one:

http://www.hilldickinson.com/client_services/insurance/costs_management.aspx

Oh, that's a good one, Lily..

http://www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/courts-and-tribunals/courts/procedure-rules/civil/contents/practice_directions/pd_part51d.htm

1.2
The Defamation Proceedings Costs Management Scheme will apply to proceedings which include allegations of –

(1)libel;

(2)slander; and/or

(3)malicious falsehood.

1.3
The Defamation Proceedings Costs Management Scheme provides for costs management based on the submission of detailed estimates of future base costs. The objective is to manage the litigation so that the costs of each party are proportionate to the value of the claim and the reputational issues at stake and so that the parties are on an equal footing. Solicitors are already required by paragraph 2.03 of the Solicitors Code of Conduct 2007 to provide costs budgets to their clients. Accordingly, it should not be necessary for solicitors to incur substantial additional costs in providing costs budgets to the court.

the reputational issues at stake

Bennett was well warned, every single time one of the hater trolls repeated his filth, it was going to cost him money.

It was going on last night, as well, on several sites - he needn't kid himself it wasn't all being screenshot for future use.

3.2
A litigant in person shall not be required to prepare a costs budget unless the court otherwise orders.

If Bennett is representing himself.

It is good, isn't it, Bonny?

(3)malicious falsehood.

I like that phrase - describes what Bennett has been doing perfectly.

It is what he has been doing - and still continues, Bonny.

You can imagine that the judge will not be pleased with Bennett's malicious and outrageous lies aimed at Mr. Smethurst.

Oh, look at this, a blast from the past:

http://www.harlowstar.co.uk/Home/Solicitor-claims-Madeleine-McCann-book-will-stand-up-in-court.htm

Published: 18/12/2008 00:00 - Updated: 30/12/2008 10:29

Solicitor claims Madeleine McCann book 'will stand up in court' By Chris Moss

A FORMER solicitor who has written a controversial new book about the disappearance of three-year-old Madeleine McCann claims "every sentence" would stand up to scrutiny in a court of law.

Tony Bennett (61), of Chippingfield, Old Harlow, has risked the wrath of Kate and Gerry McCann's lawyers after publishing What Really Happened To Madeleine McCann? in which he claims the little girl was not kidnapped.

In the 64-page book Mr Bennett questions the McCanns' version of events on the night their daughter was reported missing from the Port-uguese holiday apartment where the family were staying in May 2007.

The McCanns have already won huge libel payouts from Express Newspapers for publishing stories alleging the couple were responsible for their daughter's death.

But speaking to the Star, Mr Bennett appeared unconcerned about the possibility of expensive legal action.

"I've spent a long time researching this book," he said. "I've looked at all the evidence found by Portuguese police in great detail and I'm confident every sentence would stand up in court should it come to that."

The £3 paperback, which has been released as the McCanns prepare to launch a second high-profile Christmas appeal for help finding their daughter, has already been purchased by hundreds of people from Mr Bennett's website. He has also sent copies to the national press.

Mr Bennett is no stranger to controversy over the case. In November last year he attempted to prosecute the couple under the Children and Young Person's Act after claiming they were guilty of child neglect.

He also complained to the Office of Commu-nications after being subjected to a barrage of abuse from radio talk show host James Whale who called him "despicable and disgusting" for his attempts to bring a private prosecution against the McCanns.

A spokesman for the McCanns was unavailable for comment.

Things do have a habit of coming back to haunt you, don't they? LL

Brilliant, LL. It even details his typical complaints.

To be honest, every time I hear about him complaining, he does sound effeminate.

Solicitor claims Madeleine McCann book 'will stand up in court'

Oh, how embarrassing! And it reminds me - there was a woman from the local paper showing an interest in Bennett's latest woes on twitter last night, wasn't there?

bb1 wrote:Oh, how embarrassing! And it reminds me - there was a woman from the local paper showing an interest in Bennett's latest woes on twitter last night, wasn't there?

How long before a kind bot spreads it around? LL

I don't think it has had much of an airing, LL - I certainly don't recall reading it. I would remember this:

I'm confident every sentence would stand up in court should it come to that.

bb1 wrote:Oh, how embarrassing! And it reminds me - there was a woman from the local paper showing an interest in Bennett's latest woes on twitter last night, wasn't there?

Yes there was, Bonny.

bb1 wrote:Oh, how embarrassing! And it reminds me - there was a woman from the local paper showing an interest in Bennett's latest woes on twitter last night, wasn't there?

Oh yes

http://twitter.com/#!/HarlowStarVicky

And she is a real one, not a fake like whichever drama queen the 'privatejourno' WUM was

Another little gem, culled from a now sleeping forum. LL

It seems that the Professional Standards copper was rather overwhelmed when he turned up for work this morning and found wads of new complaints in his inbox. It seems that quite a few others who have been harrassed by Debbie Butler have also filed complaints and that the Essex Police files on this matter are expanding exponentially. I am told that many people did not take kindly to explicit threats from Debbie that if they attended The Madeleine Foundation meeting on 14 November, they would be arrested by police (I'm not sure what for, mind you, maybe Debbie will provide an explanation?).

Anyway, here's the copper's e-mail, unedited except for removing some names and contact details:

Dear Mr Bennett,

Please note the fact I am appointed to investigate your complaint(s), which I will do so at the earliest opportunity.

This morning I have found twelve (12) emails from yourself and from other parties, which have been instigated by you.

This volume of emails is inappropriate, unecessary and is not helpful in dealing with your matters effectively and efficiently.

I would be grateful if you could contact [details withheld] on 0300 333 4444 ext [withheld] and make an appointment at the earliest opportunity to come and see me please or if preffered [sic] for me to come and see yourself, where I will dicuss [sic] all issues and seek to take things forward.

In the meantime I would ask email traffic is restricted into Essex Police and the preferred [got it right this time!] methods of communication are used (telephone or meetings in person).

My contact details are shown below.

Many Thanks
Regards

[withheld]
Detective Chief Inspector
Western Division
Direct Dial 0300 333 4444
Ext [withheld]
[withheld] @essex.pnn.police.uk

http://the3arguidos.forumotion.net/

Blimey another site of mine i forgot about lol

Oh, was that one yours, mf? I like this bit:

This volume of emails is inappropriate, unecessary and is not helpful in dealing with your matters effectively and efficiently.

Bennett still doesn't seem to be getting the message..

Only Twelve [12] Emails. He was lucky. Someone must have been slipping.

On Bennett's forum, they are occupying themselves discussing whether buildings really exist, if photos have been shopped, if stand-in children have been used - usual ghoulish stuff.

Then this appears:

That is never baby A**** with red hair? Bound to be someone else's baby. She was born blond and stayed blond? Not likely that a red haired baby turns blond within months? What does it say in Mein Kampf?



Personally, I wouldn't know what Hitler had to say on the subject of children's hair colour, but then, I have never used Mein Kampf as a reference book

That follows the disgusting anti-Semitic remarks that were being posted on that site not long ago, by kiki and others.

Removed.

That's a new one on me, LL.

Bennett has posted this:
______________

FURTHER UPDATE

Another month has gone by.

SMETHURST

A preliminary proceedings hearing will take place on 7 December 2011. More information about James Halley, to whom Edward Smethurst is still linked on Facebook, has emerged, namely:

James Halley’s Facebook profile informs us that he is employed by ‘Television x’ and studies at ‘The University of Life’ and went to school at ‘The School of Hard Knocks’.

He also lives in Norden, Rochdale, within a mile of Edward Smethurst’s Norden home.

His Facebook Friends include Greg Bailey and Ben Murphy. He is also, like Edward Smethurst, a ‘Facebook Friend’ listed on the ‘Elephant and Castle’ Facebook Group.

On the internet dating site ‘Plenty Of Fish’, he describes himself ‘James Halley: Looking for a partner in crime!’, adding: “I am a 29 year old single lad from Norden in Rochdale, looking for a strong minded and sexy woman to share good times and new things with, i love my nights out and know how to make the most of them”. He is now aged 30.

MCCANNS

There have been no further developments. It is now over three months since the McCanns said they were actively considering contempt of court proceedings for an alleged breach of a High Court undertaking given in November 2009. The postings and articles that the McCanns asked to be withdrawn from this forum and the Madeleine Foundation website remain withdrawn.

BRIAN KENNEDY


There has been further correspondence - and a resolution now seems likley based on (a) the articles to which Mr Kennedy objects having been removed from the internet, so long as they are not republished, and (b) my apology to Brian Kennedy which has been published on this forum, on twitter, and elsewhere. The postings and articles that Mr Kennedy asked to be withdrawn from this forum and the Madeleine Foundation website remain withdrawn.
________________

So - to sum up:

Smethurst. Considering action, and continuing to provoke with this sort of post him will not play well. Prediction - Bennett will cave in at last minute.

McCanns. Why would they pursue action for contempt of court when Bennett has removed offending posts and is merely a low level nuisance.

Kennedy. Ditto.