The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads!

by Rosie Tue Nov 24, 2009 11:50 pm

This post taken from the Blogpaper is excellent and well worth reading!

http://www.theblogpaper.co.uk/article/worldnews/18nov09/madeleine-foundation-bows-mccanns-and-carter-ruck

Madame Arcati posted this article on Thu, 11/19/2009 - 00:26
The Madeleine Foundation bows to the McCanns and Carter-Ruck

Private Eye's least favourite firm of solicitors, Carter-Ruck, has imposed a set of restrictions on The Madeleine Foundation - the organisation of loafers, bigots and trouble-makers who have persisted in falsely holding Kate and Gerry McCann personally responsible for the disappearance or death of their young daughter.
This at least is the claim of the Foundation in a newsletter dated November 15 (2009). The MF was recently threatened with a libel suit by Carter-Ruck on behalf of Madeleine's parents over a number of outrageous baseless claims made against them. The newsletter - which has been passed to me by a source - describes these purported restrictions and acknowledges trouble within the organisation led by Tony Bennett.
The MF has agreed to launch a new website with new material. It will now "report the facts of the [Madeleine] case without comment"; will "analyse these facts"; and will "ask questions based on these facts." As opposed to publishing the crazed accusations of sofa Poirots with too much time on their hands. The MF reports: "The Carter-Ruck requirements mean that we can no longer make specific allegations against the Mccanns [sic], e.g. that Madeleine died in their apartment, or that they somehow caused her death and then covered it up."
The MF promises to add to any article "the McCanns’ version on any of the issues. For example, there is nothing to prevent our publishing, as we intend to, the evidence of Martin Grime and his springer spaniel sniffer dogs, so long as we add the McCanns’ comment on this. They claim that the evidence of sniffer dogs is ‘notoriously unreliable’."
This is excellent news, if accurately reported. At a stroke it ends the spurious claim of MF-ers that their right to free speech is being blocked by the McCanns. The couple have, I think, displayed a magnanimity unmatched by Bennett and his army of lapsed Daily Express readers and other frothing lounge louts.
There is distressing news, however. The newsletter discloses that the MF current bank account of £2,766 has been frozen. By the McCanns and their wicked lawyers? No. By its former chairman Debbie Butler following her expulsion and her denied fraud claims against the MF. If she's reading this, do get in touch.
Bennett has agreed to give an undertaking to the High Court “Not to repeat allegations that the McCanns are guilty of, or are to be suspected of, causing the death of their daughter Madeleine McCann, and/or of disposing of her body, and/or lying about what happened and/or seeking to cover up what they had done”. The MF adds: "We would advise all our members that they may run the risk of receiving a letter from Carter-Ruck if they can be identified as having made similar comments about the McCanns." So they should use "cautious language".

That could be difficult judging by the filth I have received.

by Tinkerbell43 Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:55 am

What a good article. I particularly liked the way she described them as "frothing lounge louts" how very apt, lol.

As for the MF publishing "The McCanns" version of events, what will that be, snippets of conversations taken out of context or from a "source" close to Kate and Gerry McCann!.

Whatever he choses to publish will be to suit his own agenda, he demonstrates that by the example he has given. Instead of quoting Gerry and Kate why doesn't he quote what Martin Grimes, The Dog Handler actually advised ?.

Bennett can dress the MF up all he likes, it doesn't alter the monster that lurkes beneath!

by May Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:27 am

Spot on Tinkerbell The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads! 985497

by vee8 Wed Nov 25, 2009 4:53 am

EXCELENT! Brilliant article! i thouroughly enjoyed every sylable of that! I wonder how it's going down over at the cesspits?!

by Rosie Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:26 am

I have no idea who Arcati is, but I would like to congratulate her on an extremely well written and well summarised article.

Tinks you are spot on, and as for Grime, I notice that Bennett fails to mention the controversy that is raging about how Grime trains his dogs and why he allowed such obvious "evidence tampering", no wonder Grime said the evidence would need corroborating, if he went to court with that, he would be thrown out on his ear.

By the way, word has it that questions are being asked about his involvement and what actually happened, during his involvement. Why cars were mysteriously moved around, why the camera was cut off between Grime desperately trying to drag Eddie back to the car and why he allowed the dog to be around that car for so long in comparison to the other cars and why Grime pretended not to know which car was the McCanns, when not only was it the only silver Renault Scenic there, it had bright yellow find Madeleine stickers all over it.

by Peaceful1 Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:02 pm

Questions need to be asked yes, re Grimes and his dogs.
First viewing of the video and it was plainly obvious, to me anyway, that Grimes was almost forcing his dog back to the McCanns vehicle.
The dog appeared to be more interested in the wall away from the car, Grimes was almost begging his dog to return to the McCann vehicle when it was clear to me the dog was really not interested! The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads! 442460

The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads! 442460

by Rosie Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:55 pm

Absolutely!

When Chris spotted that the stickers had been removed from the car apparently half way through this experiment, *AFTER* Grime had "SUPPOSEDLY" taken Eddie to the car for the first time, the world and his brother then knew that there had been evidence tampering (or supposed evidence).

Grime had started the test, allowed Eddie to stay around all the other cars for just a few seconds and when it came to the McCanns car, he forced Eddie back to it at least SIX times that we can count on the video and goodness knows how many more times AFTER they had stopped the video, to move the car around and remove the Find Madeleine stickers.

Grime knows perfectly well this was meant to be a controlled test, Grime broke just about every single forensic rule possible and this is the so-called "evidence" that Tony Bennett thinks is so damning? The whole thing is a big joke just like Bennett himself.

Of course you are right Peaceful, we all saw that Eddie seemed to be more interested in the wall between the cars, sniffing it and looking at it and as Bennett and some of the other blather heads keep telling us all that dogs don't lie, could they explain why and what Eddie was doing when he was doing this?

Look above where Eddie was interested in the wall, what do you see?
A huge air vent or something, what is this? I ask, because when we see the whole video, the person taking the video was also very interested in this air vent, in fact he was so interested in it, he actually filmed inside it, why?

Why did Eddie the dog with the supposed super snout, totally ignore the McCanns car at least six times, then the break in filming must have happened and then suddenly the dog indicated a positive at the car door and NOT at the boot?

Now if I was being cynical, I would think that the break in filming happened, someone moved the McCanns hire car for some reason, removed the Find Madeleine stickers and at the same time, I believe they planted some kind of scent to make Eddie give a positive.

This whole thing is flawed and not only does Amaral need to be arrested because in my opinion he is likely to be involved in all of this, I would like to know what Martin Grime was doing when that video was paused?

Where was Grime and where was Eddie when this took place?
Does Grime know anything about this?

Grime owns a company that depends on him getting results with his dogs, the Madeleine investigation was huge, it was international and everyone was taking note of everything concerning it.

I suggest that perhaps Grime was also taken in by Goncalo Amaral and he was persuaded that the McCanns were guilty and he thought that sooner or later they would be arrested in connection with the disappearance of their daughter.
Thinking this and knowing this would be huge, I believe Grime took one huge gamble, not wanting to risk himself or his dogs looking as if they got the wrong result in the biggest case concerning a missing child, he took a gamble and probably turned a blind eye to what happened at the car test, the apartment and villa tests and the garden test.

Doesn't fill me with much confidence for Grime's talents as an investigative officer, if I were him, I would stick to training dogs for entertainment purposes, I suggest comedies, because this whole dog this was a massive joke, right Mr Grime?

I cannot imagine what Grime was thinking, did he honestly expect to get away with this? The came that farce in Jersey!

Talk about money for old rope! (Or in Eddie's case old coconuts)

by dianeh Thu Nov 26, 2009 8:43 am

I also have long wondered about Grimes. But it does bear repeating again, that it really shouldnt matter just how bad or how unscientific his search was, he was very very specific that without corroborating forensic evidence what the dogs indicated means nothing. So it shouldnt have matter if he locked the dog in the boot of the car to get it to bark, he knew that without forensics, nothing is proven. The insistence on forensics means that the method of serach becomes less important, as the only true evidence is the forensics gathered from the search, as well as proof it was collected at the scene of the search.

Looking in hindsight, I think that this was more than just a general disclaimer (hence the bit in the summary about possible contamination), it may have been done to specifically counter the unorthodox methods undertaken in the search. And yes, the unorthodox methods may have stemmed from a desire to get some sort of result if he was given assurance that the McCanns were guilty (or course if evidence were planted it would be easy to give such assurances, but it would also indicate that whoever did the planting didnt realise that without forensics the dog alerts were useless, except as a propaganda piece or if a confession were extracted).

by Sponsored content

The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads!

The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads!

Re: The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads!

Re: The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads!

Re: The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads!

Re: The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads!

Re: The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads!

Re: The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads!

Re: The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads!

Re: The Madeleine Foudation and Bennett's Infamy (They've All Got it In For Me) Spreads!