Carter-Ruck demands

Received from a friend, tut tut Bennetts away with the fairy's again.

Carter-Ruck demands immediate removal of 'abduction scenario' article from Madeleine Foundation

by jkh Today at 10:03 am
whose Search Fund is allegedly running dry, although the McCanns can afford to retain Carter-ruck at ca £500 per hour)

By Tony Bennett, Madeleine Foundation:

In a letter dated 5 February 2010, Carter-Ruck have asked us to 'immediately' remove the article on our website, by Barbara Nottage, titled "How did the alleged abductor snatch Madeleine in a time slot of no more than 3-4 Minutes?"

Their letter claims that this article "implies that our clients have lied and that their daughter was not abducted" and is therefore "highly defamatory, casting (as it does), very serious doubt on the sugsestion that Madeleine could indeed have been abducted".

We are considering our formal response urgently.

The letter is addressed to me personally and I have provisionally made these points in my reply to Carter-Ruck dated today [8 February]:

Firstly, the facts in it have been meticulously checked and we note that in your letter you do not raise any issue as to the factual basis for it.

Secondly, the article is based entirely on statements made either by your clients themselves or by their friends who were on holiday with them, such as Jane Tanner and Dr Matthew Oldfield. It is your client Dr. Gerald McCann who states that he was in Apartment 5A until around 9.10pm on 3 May 2009 and Jane Tanner who says that it was at 9..15pm that she saw a swarthy-looking man in a dark jacket and light trousers walking ‘purposefully away’ from the direction of Apartment 5A, an observation moreover confirmed by Dr Russell O’Brien’s handwritten notes about the timeline of that evening which he wrote down on the cover of Madeleine’s Activity Sticker Book - which had been torn off for the express purpose of writing down this timeline (and an amended one written later the same evening).

Thirdly, the final paragraph of Barbara Nottage’s article explicitly states the following: “I conclude by saying that I am not saying the abduction of Madeleine never happened. But I confess I do find it very difficult to understand, given all that has been said about it, how it could have happened”.

In the meantime, here is the article, which you are free to use, subject to the warning that Dr Gerald and Dr Kate McCann consider it 'highly defamatory'. Barbara Nottage would appreciate the credit if it is to be reproduced anywhere.

Tony Bennett
Secretary
The Madeleine Foundation
-------


Chris, Tinks and myself have had a conflab and we think the "Barbara Nottage" fairy story is best removed from the post, we think it is illegal and libellous. Feb 08 2010 (21.38H).

you know, these people make me feel sick. what sort of person would want an explanation as to why gerry mccann should spend more than five minutes in the toilet. 'He also says he spent an unusually long time in the toilet - maybe up to 5 minutes, though we have never been told why.' surely it doesn't take a degree in personal hygiene to figure it out!

as far as all the time lines are concerned, if i had just discovered my child had been taken i wouldn't be able to focus on precise times of who did what, where and when. this woman must be super human if she could be so precise as to the exact minute everything happened before, during and after the event. she is only stating what has been stated many times before by the non-believers.

i presume she is of the opinion that madeleine died in the apartment, her parents covered up her death, hid her in the fridge for 20+ days, then transported her body to a burial place in the hired car, without the millions of cameras and reporters noticing anything. NOW THAT WOULD BE A NEW SLANT ON THE STORY, WOULDN'T IT!!!!!!!!!!

What happened to Maddie McCann?Members Lounge

A brief period on 'MCF' as 'freudian slip'


by Tony Bennett Yesterday at 4:22 pm

figaro wrote:However, how many times has Tony asked people to post up their real names...numerous times. Let he who is without sin and all that...No one should have to reveal their real names and no one should have to use the same username whichever forum they post on IMO. Yet, Tony seems to think it suspicious that others use different names when he does exactly the same. He needs to practice what he preaches.

.......................................................................
In fact, I have only ever asked people to give me their true names when they have asked for information tending to be of a personal nature. I don't believe in exchanging that kind of information with someone who hides behind a 'username', especially if they use that cloak of anonymity to seek personal information. I'll exchange that kind of information with someone whose identity I know.

Whilst I respect that people on forums may want to post strong opinions, and everyone on forums has to live with that, I most certainly draw the line at those like murat_fan who serially post deliberate lies about other forum members and people like him deserve to be 'outed'. (As I think almost everyone on here agrees).

There are others, including some on this thread, who only post here in order to attack me personally. That is basically a matter for the forum owner.

I posted away happily, but not very often, on 'Maddie Case Files', as 'freudian slip', where I made specific analytical contributions on Robert Murat, on the events of 3 May, on the telephone records, on the smearing of Goncalo Amaral over the alleged 'F___ the McCanns' incident, and a few other matters.

Immediately after the smearing of Goncalo Amaral incident, I was, without explanation, barred from access to 'Maddie Case Files' and all my contributions were erased.

That is the right of the Forum Owner.

The accusations made by Debbie Butler and my responses were not, I agree, a suitable item for discussion on a serious research forum about what happened to Madleiene McCann.

The 'fall-out' happened, we are over it, we have a new and stronger Committee, we have a 108-page book coming out later this month, we have a new website with new material on it, we have a conference coming up, and we remain the only formal membership organisation that I am aware of committed to questioning the 'official' account of the alleged abduction of Madeleine McCann.

I shall continue to recommend 'Maddie Case Files', as I have been doing, as the best current place for research, analysis and discussion of what really happened to Madeleine McCann.

In fact, I have only ever asked people to give me their true names when they have asked for information tending to be of a personal nature. I don't believe in exchanging that kind of information with someone who hides behind a 'username', especially if they use that cloak of anonymity to seek personal information. I'll exchange that kind of information with someone whose identity I know.


You blatant liar, Rosiepops wasn't asking you for personal information when you asked for her real name. That is just an excuse you hide behind when you are challenged. Jeez you try to be such the big I am when in reality you are one lily livered individual!

Lets face it.

Bennett is just a big fat liar. He is also very very stupid.

Common sense dictates that if you have had action taken against you for libel, that you stop doing it, not try to find some way to 'do it' without being caught. And he has been caught, and it is now only a matter of time before he fronts the court. He can write bs like that above, blaming someone else for the article and picking on certain sentences as a disclaimer. But it wont help, there is no disclaimer for libel.

Bennett's 'fame' and 'adoration' from his small band of lunatic suporters is not going to compensate in the least when he loses his house and his life savings, and his poor wife has to suffer for his actions.

He needs to stop making excuses and trying to justify his actions. He only does it for himself, and it is himself that will have to pay the piper.

All the nasty comments from TB, all the antis, are not welcome nor needed.

It doesnt matter whether Bennett wrote it or not. He has been a party to publishing it. Republishing libellous material written by someone else, doesnt mitigate the liability of the publisher. If it did, then the Express group would have claimed they were only repeating the crap coming out of Portugal.

That is something that Jill should also consider.

And Rosie, you are probably right about Bennett. The article shows such a lack of logical thinking and reasoning that it most likely had to be written by Bennett. As well, it is so bloody boring that it almost put me to sleep reading it. Both are a fair indication of who the author is.

Every time someone has challenged Bennett and driven him into a corner (not hard to do), he has colluded with the forum admin and had them barred, *WITHOUT* exception. He simply cannot argue the case because he has not got one and if he capitulates this easy on an internet forum, just what will happen to him when he appears in court and is taken to task by solicitor of Carter Ruck's calibre? He will be reduced to a snivelling wreck in 10 seconds flat!

Bennett asked me for my real name a few times, he must think I am as stupid as he is. How dare he ask for people's personal details? Why does he want them? So he can SELL them to his mates?

I have never, not once asked him for his personal details, why would I? He has them plastered all over the internet! The reason why he did this was to try and divert attention away from the fact that i had him cornered, he could not answer my questions and I tore him and his stupid leaflets and booklets to shreds.

Bennett is a pathetic pathological lying wind bag, the original long streak of nothing!

Rosiepops wrote:

PLEASE NOTE


That the article said to have been written by "Barbara Nottage" is almost certainly been written by Tony Bennett, it is his style, the syntax is almost identical. As are the incoherent ramblings and the inaccuracies contained within it.

Who knows if this "Barbara Nottage" exists or not, probably does, another person Bennett has now sucked in and is using and is about to land her in a whole heap of trouble.


Bennett thinks he can write these things and either make up a sock or get someone else to say they have written it and the stupid pathetic little runt thinks he can get away with it, he actually thinks Carter-Ruck are stupid to fall for it, let me assure him they are definitely not. I suspect they will have an expert examine this and compare it with Bennett's meanderings, they will see they are virtually identical and Bennett is going to find himself in court and like Amaral, he is going to lose and he is going to lose everything.

GOOD.

I wonder if Baroness Scotland still thinks she has done the right thing?

It has been more or less confirmed over on PFA that bennett is indeed nottage.

dianeh wrote:It doesnt matter whether Bennett wrote it or not. He has been a party to publishing it. Republishing libellous material written by someone else, doesnt mitigate the liability of the publisher. If it did, then the Express group would have claimed they were only repeating the crap coming out of Portugal.

That is something that Jill should also consider.

And Rosie, you are probably right about Bennett. The article shows such a lack of logical thinking and reasoning that it most likely had to be written by Bennett. As well, it is so bloody boring that it almost put me to sleep reading it. Both are a fair indication of who the author is.

Absolutely correct Diane, you are right, the fact that he published it on his forum is enough to get him into serious trouble, it hasn't resonated with him as yet, that this is why Carter Ruck sent him the correspondence. This is why we removed it from here, it is libellous, that and we are not advertising his crap for him!

Can you actually believe that this guy was a solicitor? He is one thick twit.

However, i just wanted everyone to know that Bennett wrote it and I wanted Bennett to know that it has been examined by an expert! So not only is he definitely going to get into trouble for publishing it he is going to get into trouble for being duplicitous too and if this "Barbara" exists, she is most likely going to find herself in court too!

Everyone that Bennett comes into contact with lands up in trouble, without exception!

The term you want, Rosie, is

"Long Streak of Pelican Shite".

Sabot wrote:The term you want, Rosie, is

"Long Streak of Pelican Shite".

I was just trying to be ladylike!

Rosiepops wrote:

Sabot wrote:The term you want, Rosie, is

"Long Streak of Pelican Shite".

I was just trying to be ladylike!

Wot? With Bennett? Save your efforts.

How does Bennett know it has been meticulously checked ?

Perhaps compared to the 60 reasons it is?
And Diana is right. Repeating libel is committing libel as well.
TB really should have read the 'Libel Laws for Dummies' and the explanations AGW has posted.

Tinkerbell43 wrote:How does Bennett know it has been meticulously checked ?

Excellent point Tinks! How does he know if it was written by someone else? (the man is a penis (and a little one at that!)

Rosiepops wrote:Well I reckon bennett is a ladyboy!

There is something decidely distasteful about him, but I think he is just a nasty creep.

Rosiepops wrote:Oh and Tinks if Bennett's "meticulous" checking is anything like the research he done for his booklet, he is in serious trouble! Oh happy days!

Thats what made me laugh, since when has Bennett ever been meticulous, lol.

He must of been expecting mail!

He must surely also be expecting a court appearance soon as well?
Such a shame that the McCanns have people like bennet, butler, amaral, bren, etc to be wasting valuable time and money on, when their priority is Madeleine.
Sad pathetic creatures who cant be human to be doing this.

Rosiepops wrote:It makes me sick to be honest, the parents have a fund which they are desperately trying to keep flowing in order to keep the search up and then they have these complete morons who are hell bent on destroying the search for Madeleine and forcing her parents to waste time and money on the idiots. Then the same imbeciles turn around and attack them over wasting the fund!

I admit, I do not know how the Bennett type people live with themselves or what makes them tick, I think they are hateful, vile despicable creatures and one day soon they will get theirs for sure.


How do they explain to their own children and family how they have evolved into the most vile creatures that are so vile, there is no suitable name for them?

It's in the genes. And it is being passed on. This is probably why Britain has got such a problem with feral youth.

One of these days TB your luck will run out and you will go down!!!!!! I, for one, cannot wait for that day.