MORE LIBEL AND SHIT FROM BENNETT

Re: McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January

  Tony Bennett Today at 9:01 pm

ShabbyTiger wrote:Why didn't you just walk away from all this back in 2009 Tony? 

I am no fan of the McCanns and their "childcare" arrangements, and IMO the abduction story is crap. 

You can say that. I can't. 

But don't you think that it's time that you stopped this obsession? 

I've been working on the Lee Balkwell case for a fraction over 6 years now, probably spent more time on that than on the McCanss. We keep on because, though nearer the truth, we haven't got near enough yet

The letters to Social Services, 

One letter, 4 years ago

the leaflet campaign, 

No new leaflets for a while

the attempts to get the McCanns struck off the medical register... 

They claimed in the libel writ against Goncalo Amaral that they were so ill, tormented and emotionally disturbed that the General Medical Council was bound to look at what they claimed. However, it seems as though the GMC thought that their alleged medical problems in their libel claim were a gross exaggeration, maybe to inflate their claim 

trying to dig up "dirt" on Smethurst... Why?

Trying to 'dig up dirt'? Why, the attempts he made to flout planning laws in Rochdale was plain for all to see. The attempt by Smethurst and his partner from Palladium to stitch up Clive Garrad and get him banged up fell into my lap when Clive Garrad contacted me and told me the full story. No digging by me involved Why?

Let’s put it this way.

You switch on the telly.

You hear about an English couple whose 3-year-old child has been abducted from a bedroom where she had been sleeping with younger children whilst her parents were out wining and dining with their friends.

You sit up in your chair.

You learn that the wicked abductor jemmied open the shutters and smashed the window etc. to get in to the apartment.

As reporters start beaming their reports in from Praia da Luz, you hear various stories…the parents were checking every hour, no, every 15 minutes, no, every half-hour etc.

A day or so later you learn that the shutters hadn’t been jemmied open after all, and that the parents now think the abductor calmly walked in through an unlocked patio door.

You see pictures of local people and police officers searching the countryside and outbuildings.

Then you see a press conference about a fund that’s been set up to ‘Find Madeleine’. 

The parents ask everyone in Britain to make a donation.

So you make a donation.

Then you see Brian Kennedy (uncle) come on the telly in Rothley and say: ‘The money will be mostly used for lawyers’.

Then on your telly you see pictures of one pre-arranged photoshoot of the couple after another.

You see them jogging. You learn from a bland blog written by the male parent that such-and-such a job was achieved in 19 minutes and 11 seconds.

You see the parents visiting the Pope, the U.S., Germany, Morocco.

Then you hear about British sniffer dogs alerting to the scent of a human corpse in the parents’ apartment.

They react with excuses: signing lots of death certificates, taking Cuddle Cat on visit to patients in your handbag, rotting meat, dirty nappies.

Next you learn about a DNA match to Madeleine of blood and body fluids.

Then you see the parents pulled on for questioning. One, the female one, looks defiant. The other, the male one, looks petrified. 

You begin to ask yourself if the parent’s story is true.

You look on the internet and discover that thousands of people share your doubts about the case. You join in and contribute your two penn’orth.

The detective who made the parents suspects is removed from the investigation.

There’s a constant supply of alleged ‘sightings’, some from dubious sources.

The investigation gets closed down, but in the process, thousands of documents on the case are released on the net.

You learn a lot more about contradictions and changes of story.

You lose track of the vast number of suspects, ‘persons of interest’ and ‘people we want to eliminate from our enquiries’.

The head of the initial police investigation writes a book giving chapter and verse of why he and his team believed that Madeleine died in her parents’ apartment and covered it up.

You discover a host of things about the private investigators the couple have been hiring. None of them have any track record of finding missing children. They seem more expert in fields such as fraud and money laundering. First, one is carted off to prison in Spain on serious charges.

Then another is exposed as a liar, fraud and cheat who was paid half a million quid and found out nothing, at the same time living the life of Riley with his girlfriend in London and New York.

You find out that two detectives employed by the McCanns are not employed by a detective agency called ALPHAIG after all.

You learn that the parents have taken out an expensive libel suit against the detective who wrote the book, and succeed in banning his book. You learn that just as the parents release a heavily-marketed book, the Prime Minister of your country, pushed into it by the News International CEO, orders the head of the Met to begin a review of the case which ‘could cost millions and last years’.

You realise that instead of the parents resorting to reasoned argument against the sceptics, they run to libel lawyers, clearly able to afford the best there is.

Then you learn that although the detective’s book was banned, the top two Portuguese courts have unbanned it.

You learn that it’s been translated into 9 European languages and has sold over ½ million copies.

Basically, with all this and more, most people would smell a rat.


And some of them would vow to keep on digging…

 Re: McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January

  ShabbyTiger Today at 9:11 pm

You really need to stop this, Tony. Even if it's only for the sake of your Mother and your family. The Madeleine Foundation could have been a good thing, a benevolent thing, to campaign against child neglect. Instead you made it personal, against two people that you had never met. OK, their "childcare" was appalling and IMO the abduction story is full of holes. You could have agreed to the terms of the court order in 2009 and walked away and have just forgotten about all this.

Why have you made this into a vendetta against them? They were strangers who had never done you any harm. Again, I am no fan but I would never have dreamed of targeting them personally by trying to get them struck off, leafletting their village or contacting Social Services.



Why... just why??? What is driving this?



PS) What about all the Facebook "dirt" that you tried to dig up against Smethurst and his family? WHY??

Last edited by ShabbyTiger on Thu Jan 03, 2013 9:21 pm; edited 1 time in total

 Re: McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January

  Tony Bennett Today at 9:19 pm

ShabbyTiger wrote:Why have you made this into a vendetta against them?

Has it occurred to you that the McCanns' pursuit of Dr Goncalo Amaral is a 'vendetta'?

Or hasn't that thought crossed your mind yet?

I note that in your two posts you say that the McCanns' abduction story is 'crap' and 'full of holes' or, to put it in plain English, false.

Should we all just lie back and accept a false story?

Re: McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January

  ShabbyTiger Today at 9:27 pm

Tony Bennett wrote:

ShabbyTiger wrote:Why have you made this into a vendetta against them?

Has it occurred to you that the McCanns' pursuit of Dr Goncalo Amaral is a 'vendetta'?

Or hasn't that thought crossed your mind yet?

I note that in your two posts you say that the McCanns' abduction story is 'crap' and 'full of holes' or, to put it in plain English, false.

Should we all just lie back and accept a false story?

I never mentioned Goncalo Amaral. As far as I know, Dr Amara just did the job that he was paid for and reported the conclusions. 

You are doing "Justice for Madeleine" more harm than good with your personal vendetta.

Goncalo Amaral did not do the following:



Try and bring a private prosecution for child neglect.

Deliver leaflets around Rothley and environs.

Send letters to Leicestershire Social Services.

Try and get the McCanns struck off the medical register.

Why have you done all this against two strangers, Tony?

Goncalo was just doing his job. This case had nothing to do with you... so why have you done all this? Why didn't you just walk away?

Last edited by ShabbyTiger on Thu Jan 03, 2013 9:54 pm; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : spelling)

Re: McCann v Bennett 'commit-to-jail' case may (OR MAY NOT) be heard on Tues 29 and Weds 30 January

  ShabbyTiger Today at 10:29 pm

Tony Bennett wrote:

ShabbyTiger wrote:Why have you made this into a vendetta against them?

Has it occurred to you that the McCanns' pursuit of Dr Goncalo Amaral is a 'vendetta'?

Or hasn't that thought crossed your mind yet?

I note that in your two posts you say that the McCanns' abduction story is 'crap' and 'full of holes' or, to put it in plain English, false.

Should we all just lie back and accept a false story?

You really need to stop this obsession, Tony. Think of your family.