BENNETT NOW MAKING GROVELLING APOLOGIES TO KENNEDY!!!!!

Did you cross his name out Bonny, or is that from hellhole?

crazytony wrote:

lily wrote:Someone must have alerted them?

How much would you care to bet that a C & R clerk was standing outside Scotland Yard at the same time as Bennett?

Tony, something like that happened, for sure.

I crossed it out, Lily.

I wonder when he is going to publically grovel to the McCanns and Smethurst?

How much would you care to bet that a C & R clerk was standing outside Scotland Yard at the same time as Bennett?

Or the 'important phone call' was CR saying, OK, we've got it all now, you can kick him out of the police station?

I have it on good authority that Bennett has absolutely no intention of issuing any form of apology to the McCanns, or Smethurst, or anyone else for anthing he has said or done.














Until tomorrow.

sans_souci wrote:I have it on good authority that Bennett has absolutely no intention of issuing any form of apology to the McCanns, or Smethurst, or anyone else for anthing he has said or done.














Until tomorrow.

Oh yes........ that phone call might have come from Bennett's favorite firm of lawyers.



I'm with you on that sans.

sans_souci wrote:I have it on good authority that Bennett has absolutely no intention of issuing any form of apology to the McCanns, or Smethurst, or anyone else for anthing he has said or done.








Until tomorrow.

bb1 wrote:

sans_souci wrote:I have it on good authority that Bennett has absolutely no intention of issuing any form of apology to the McCanns, or Smethurst, or anyone else for anthing he has said or done.








Until tomorrow.

Why haven't we seen the C & R letter yet?
We have seen all the rest.

I wonder if he's signed another undertaking?

lily wrote:I wonder if he's signed another undertaking?

If you look at what Bennett posted in the screenshot, he gives two dates. September 2 and October 3 both 2011. What did he fail to remove over a month ago from his forum that warranted the second letter?

Tony. Bennett is making the most insincere of apologies. How long before he's back to putting the boot in but in as devious a way as he can do it?

lily wrote: Tony. Bennett is making the most insincere of apologies. How long before he's back to putting the boot in but in as devious a way as he can do it?

Bet the October 3 letter came by pony express.

The pressure is on.........As stated earlier, Mr Kennedy isn't Bennett's sole serious legal problem.

Mr. Bennett didn't mean to imply? So what was he doing then?

And as apologies go, that one sucks.

But you have to laugh at AnnaEsse. She gets stuck into the fight and then locks the thread because they were fighting. She does that a lot, and so often at the wrong time.

Poor AnnaEsse - Not the sharpest knife in the draw in human terms. But a veritable razor within MM.

he thought he was getting away with it with Kennedy didn't he?

I hope the Madeleine fund is a little better off now he's apologised

It will be.

And this is a man who said he wants to get the McCanns into court. And that he can justify everything that he has written. He likes to bully those who he thinks will not fight back. He should be relishing the opportunity to face them and "bring Team McCann down".

Instead, when CR very politely say "boo", what does he do....

I think it can be summed up in four words CAP IT UL ATION.

sans_souci wrote:Poor AnnaEsse - Not the sharpest knife in the draw in human terms. But a veritable razor within MM.

I'm just waiting for her to ban Lifeisforliving. It was all her fault. How dare she question Bennett half an hour before he grovelled.

So, what's this all about?



NOTICE TO ABUSE OF POWER, MCCANNFILES, MCCANNEXPOSURE, STEEL MAGNOLIA, MARIACPOIS & MADELEINEFOUNDATION.BLOGSPOT to remove allegedly libellous articles about Brian Kennedy
Tony Bennett Today at 8:31 am

This post acts as a PUBLIC NOTICE to the owners of the following websites or blogs, asking them to remove the articles on the links below, because Carter-Ruck, on behalf of Brian Kennedy, say they are libellous of their client.

A letter from Carter-Ruck re Brian Kennedy dated 3 October declares, on pages 3 and 4 of the letter:

"We note that you have removed the articles complained of from your own website but...a number of the publications complained of continue to be published both on the 'Jill Havern' website, and on other websites.

These publications...continue to be published:


]http://gerrymccann-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.com/2010/11/leicester-police-wont-investigate-brian.html

]http://gerrymccann-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.com/2010/03/monsterman-how-kate-and-gerry-mccann.html

]http://mcccannfiles.com/id336.html

]http://mcccannfiles.com/id383.html

]http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2010/11/03/kevion-halligven-the-mccanns-clarence-mitchell-brian-kennedy-time-the-public-had-answers-to-some-questions

]http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.com/2011/07/mccanns-indepth-look-at-agenda-of-brian.html

http://mariacpois.blogspot.com/2010/10/ray-wire.html

http://madeleinefoundation.blogspot.com/2011/-1/bennett-on-ray-wyre-and-mccanns-link.html


It is clear that you have not made any real efforts to remove all the postings complained of from the 'Jill Havern' website...We must repeat our client's requirement that you do now use your best endeavours to remove this material from not only the 'Jill Havern' site but from the others to which we refer above".

I shall be writing today individually to the owners of all the above websites and blogs asking them to remove those articles on the grounds that Brian Kennedy considers that they libel him.


Which is followed by:

Get 'em Gonçalo Today at 8:42 am

I've just clicked on the links that refer to my blog and the posts aren't there. I didn't remove them so does that mean Carter Ruck have contacted the host?

The links to mccannfiles and mccann exposure aren't there either.

So why are Carter Ruck going to bother to write to us when the job is already done?

Surely they're not going to charge Brian Kennedy twice?


No doubt the script for all this public outrage has been worked out behind the scenes, as usual.

Wonder when we are going to get the WHOLE Carter Ruck letter, and the WHOLE Scotland Yard letter?

Unsurprisingly, doubts are being expressed about the sincerity of Bennett's grovelling.

http://regretsandramblings.com/2011/10/07/bennett-and-his-apology/

It's Bennett = he doesn't mean it and thinks it doesn't count if he crosses his fingers behind his back.

That said, he has had to publically admit that the 'dossier' on Kennedy and others that he inflicted on Scotland Yard so proudly is, well, a load of cr*p.

It has also now been made clear that he has to get all the other cr*p he has written about his victims off the internet. Which is going to keep him busy for a while.

Something Bennett should bear in mind - well known firms of lawyers know perfectly well how far the filth was spread by Bennett's eager little helpers.

He'd better do a very, very deep clean.

I see it but I can hardly believe it. Right after his grovel to Kennedy, Bennett is making nasty insinuations about Mr Edmonds.

I'm not copying it, the less that muck is spread the better.

Bennett needs locked up for the good of society.

bb1 wrote:I see it but I can hardly believe it. Right after his grovel to Kennedy, Bennett is making nasty insinuations about Mr Edmonds.

I'm not copying it, the less that muck is spread the better.

Bennett needs locked up for the good of society.

Let the fool carry on. The Dosser is tired with living in his house; he wants his poor old mom to accomadate him.
ETA Hit the send button before I meant to.

He already uses her bank account to hide monies he might as well use her home to elevate himself to higher prestige too.
I totally believe that is why he isn't afraid of being sued. He has power of attorney over his mother's estate and can do as he so wills.

A dreadful display by Bennett, really - he isn't sorry at all, he's just sorry he's been told to stop. He's already trying to weasel round his own apology; the man has no honour at all, does he?