WHERE DO WE START,
BENNETT REQUESTED AN ADJOURNMENT TO THE PROCEEDINGS CLAIMING HE WAS NOT READY, AN INEQUALITY OF ARMS, AND TOO MUCH FOR HIM TO DO AS A LIP.
THIS WAS REFUSED BY THE JUDGE
BENNETT MOANED HE WAS AT A DISADVANTAGE FINANCIALLY, JUDGE POINTED OUT THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WITH A LIG
JUDGE REFUSED BENNETT A WITNESS, AS IT WAS IRRELEVANT ,
JUDGE REPEATED TO BENNETT THAT HE WAS BOUND BY TERMS OF UNDERTAKING AND SHOULD ABIDE BY THEM...BENNETT CLAIMED HE ONLY SIGNED UNDER DURESS AS IT MEANT HE WOULD HAVE BEEN SUED FOR DEFAMATION, WHICH BENNETT SID HE COULD NOT AFFORD. JUDGE AGREED BUT SAID BENNETT SHOULD HAVE ABIDED BY THE TERMS OF THE UNDERTAKING
THE GOOD JUDGE POINTED OUT THAT THE HEARING TODAY WAS ABOUT THE BREACH OF UNDERTAKING AND WOULD NOT ALLOW IT TO BECOME A LIBEL TRIAL
ADRIENNE PAGE (AP) MADE A VERY GOOD OPENING ADDRESS, SHE WENT THROUGH 16 OF THE 26 BREACHES, FROM BOOKS TO FORUM POSTINGS, AND TO THE LETTERS SENT TO MP'S. AP DID SAY SHE HAD NO OBJECTION TO HIM WRITING THE LETTERS, BUT BY PUBLISHING THEM, HE BROKE THE UNDERTAKING
IN THE AFTERNOON SESSION BENNETT HAD THE CHANCE TO EXAMINE MIKE GUNHILL . BENNETT ACCUSED MG OF USING AN ALIAS AND REASONS FOR THE BOOKLET, MG AGREED WITH THIS. BENNETT PRODUCED SOME BUNDLES OF E-MAILS BETWEEN HIMSELF AND MG, WHICH WAS PASSED TO AP.
BENNETT THEN CALLED ISABEL MARTORELL l, HIS BIGGEST MISTAKE. BENNETT WAS TOLD SEVERAL TIMES THAT HE COULD ONLY EXAMINE THE WITNESS ON THE FACTS, NOT ON THE CASE.
BENNETT WAS REBUKED BY THE JUDGE WHEN HE ASKED ABOUT INCONSISTENCIES IN THE McCANN STATEMENTS AND IF ID HAD CHALLENGED THAT, SAYING INFORMATION BETWEEN CLIENT AND SOLICITOR IS CONFIDENTIAL .
BENNETT ASKED ABOUT AMARAL'S TRIAL AND WHAT SETTLEMENT WAS REACHED, JUDGE TOLD HIM THAT THERE WAS NO RELEVANCE AT ALL.
BENNETT THEN SPOKE ABOUT HOW VARIOUS THINGS WERE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN , BUT HE WAS BARRED FROM TALKING ABOUT IT. JUDGE REMARKED BENNETT WAS THE ONE WHO SIGNED THE UNDERTAKING, NOT ANYONE ELSE.
BENNETT THEN PRODUCED A LIST OF PEOPLE WHO WERE REPEATING ALLEGATIONS (17 PAGES OF IT ACTUALLY), AND MOANED IT WAS NOT FAIR THAT HE WAS ONLY SUBJECT TO COURT PROCEEDINGS
END OF DAY...CASE CONTINUES
7 comments:
Duarte??? She is in Portugal surely?
....should be Isabel Martorell
I couldn't remember her last name now
Did anything go right for him today?
I have just seen your weblog.
Your posts are extremely inaccurate.
I was reporting in court 14 today on an official basis and you do your case no justice by making public untruths.
What paper do you work for, obviously one of our recent rivals, bet you're a red top!
reporting in court on an official basis- that means you work for the court and at best are being unprofessional in commenting here. i suspect you mean you are spiining for tb.
@anonymous at 23:11 oh dear, next time try hiding your IP address and it won't show who you are. Also "recent rivals", there are old rivalries, not new ones.
You're lack of simple basic knowledge of reporting has let you so quick in just one sentence.
Also it is best not to brag about what you have done on a forum
Post a Comment