Tony Bennett's Interview Talk Radio Europe

ht

Again Bennett insists that these dogs have a 100% record they do NOT.

The same dogs were used in Jersey and they indicated a positive when the samples cam back they were negative, the dog 'Eddie' had indicated once at a lump of cardboard and the other time at a coconut shell.

Bennett is so eager to spread disinformation - WHY?

Because he gives the impresssion of being a fantasist and someone that has trouble with the truth!

I think he is goading them. He is pushing them into suing for libel, so he can have his day in court. You can't go on public radio, making the kind of bullshit claims he is making and not expect repercussions. He is obviously disapointed at the lack of response from them so far, and he's not yet getting the attention he craves, so he is ratcheting up the pressure another notch.


Big mistake, bennett.

If they take him to court for libel, they will win and the case will be concerning libellous comments and nothing else, this dolt is on a hiding it nothing. I hope his wife is not comfortable in their house, because if this man carries on the way he is going it is all going to end in tears for him.

I honestly think he is so far gone that he has lost all grip on reality, he thinks he is some kind of vigilante, when all he is and all he is seen to be is an attention seeking stalker harassing an innocent couple and trying to make their lives worse than they already are!

Rosiepops wrote:If they take him to court for libel, they will win and the case will be concerning libellous comments and nothing else, this dolt is on a hiding it nothing. I hope his wife is not comfortable in their house, because if this man carries on the way he is going it is all going to end in tears for him.

I honestly think he is so far gone that he has lost all grip on reality, he thinks he is some kind of vigilante, when all he is and all he is seen to be is an attention seeking stalker harassing an innocent couple and trying to make their lives worse than they already are!

I think his only motivation is self-publicity.

He seems to make a habit of being controversial.

I hope the McCanns never bow to suing him.

That's exactly what he wants.

So far they have resisted even when he was hovering behind Gerry at the parliamentary sub-committee.

He is not having any real affect on anything.

Most people are suspicious of his motives.

Tommy

I agree, it is not the right time to sue him, it will only give him publicity. But his time will come. And all of us here (and in a few other places which may or may not include the House of Commons) will all be applauding.

What I want to know is.........How can they keep getting away with that shorter version of the video?

When you see the full video, it is so plain that the dog (sorry cant remember which one) is not interested in the Mccanns car. He has to be brought back to it over and over again and the handler is very insistent that he looks at the Mccann car. I think that I saw the full video on Katie Smiths site.

Why is this persistent limited information being pushed forward? The way things are being deliberately presented, truncated and always from an 'anti' slant, make the information into disinformation. OK the dog did appear to mark in several places, but it was almost told where to look at times.

Yes the dog did mark eventually, but forensics have shown that the marks could have been from a fair proportion of the population. That in no way were they incriminating.

Who is pushing this anti agenda? And why?
I can make several good guesses. How about you?

Anyone devious enough can make fair information into incriminating information.


Diane, I agree with you about the fact that certain sectors of the House of Commons (and maybe the Lords) may, or may not, be amongst us applauding.


Try googling the words : paedophiles, D notices, operation ore, Government ministers..........you'll have a shock! There are a lot of reports about it there.

Or just go to: http://www.tpuc.org/node/34

Obviously the McCanns are not in the right frame of mind to sue, but then again their legal team may be maybe collecting as much evidence as possible, apparently libel cases take a great deal of evidence to prove.

Rosiepops wrote:Obviously the McCanns are not in the right frame of mind to sue, but then again their legal team may be maybe collecting as much evidence as possible, apparently libel cases take a great deal of evidence to prove.

I think they probably hoped that if they didn't increase his publicity he would fade away..........In the scheme of things he is about as important to them as a squashed fly.............Getting Madeleine back is the main focus....creeps like him...will keep...........

Rosiepops wrote:Obviously the McCanns are not in the right frame of mind to sue, but then again their legal team may be maybe collecting as much evidence as possible, apparently libel cases take a great deal of evidence to prove.

If I come across anything I think is libellous I C+P it and forward it to Carter Ruck.
The problem with bennett is he doesnt say outright he just oozes his sick theories leaving others to read between his lies and they fire the bullets for him

Mulleena wrote:

Rosiepops wrote:Obviously the McCanns are not in the right frame of mind to sue, but then again their legal team may be maybe collecting as much evidence as possible, apparently libel cases take a great deal of evidence to prove.

If I come across anything I think is libellous I C+P it and forward it to Carter Ruck.
The problem with bennett is he doesnt say outright he just oozes his sick theories leaving others to read between his lies and they fire the bullets for him

He has done so.

I can't find the link but he believes Madeleine died in the apartment and the McCanns are covering up her death.

He has also implied something more depraved.

So, no surprises there.

Mulleena wrote:

Rosiepops wrote:Obviously the McCanns are not in the right frame of mind to sue, but then again their legal team may be maybe collecting as much evidence as possible, apparently libel cases take a great deal of evidence to prove.

If I come across anything I think is libellous I C+P it and forward it to Carter Ruck.
The problem with bennett is he doesnt say outright he just oozes his sick theories leaving others to read between his lies and they fire the bullets for him

You are so right Mulleena, he manipulates the 3A's to suit his own personal agenda. Where else can he recruit support for his online petitions and people to be his goffers. They are all just pawns in his sick pursuit of Kate and Gerry McCann and when they have served their purpose they will be discarded.

Mulleena wrote:

Rosiepops wrote:Obviously the McCanns are not in the right frame of mind to sue, but then again their legal team may be maybe collecting as much evidence as possible, apparently libel cases take a great deal of evidence to prove.

If I come across anything I think is libellous I C+P it and forward it to Carter Ruck.
The problem with bennett is he doesnt say outright he just oozes his sick theories leaving others to read between his lies and they fire the bullets for him

Please can we have a thread of Organisations, their postal and email addresses and the best person to address if we have complaints or things we want to bring to their attention. Their telephone numbers mught be good too.

Thanks

Hmmm jut watched that video there and again im baffled as i have been in the past with these dogs. They may very well have picked up on Madeleine scent leaving the apartment and going to the supermarket but in all honesty thats not such a bizarre thing imo. She was on holiday!!!! of course the child was at the supermarket and the beach and the road near the blah blah blah...she was also in this shop and that shop. What exactly do they think it proves by getting a positive result from a sniffer dog that shows she at the supermarket???

The whole sniffer dog thing is brought tumbling down on our sniffer dog thread.
As soon as we learned that there was as extended version of that video that showed Grime and this video up as being just plainly flawed it lost all credibility and I am afraid Martin Grime did not fair that much better either.

Equally if the Portuguese sniffer dogs caught Madeleine's scent in these places, you are quite right, Madeleine had been to all these places but sadly there is another explanation, her abductor could have taken her that way, apparently the scent was lost at the supermarket, so this is where she could have been put in a car, or taken into a nearby building. Apparently there are OC apartments all around here that still to this very day have NOT bean searched or forensically examined!

Remember when Shannon Matthews went missing, we saw the British police literally crawling on their hands and knees in a line doing a properly coordinated fingertip search - this was NEVER done by the PJ.
We saw the British police search ever single barn, outhouse, shed and garden within a set ring around where Shannon disappeared- this was NEVER done, we also saw policeman emptying every bin out on the floor and examining the contents, again this was NEVER done for Madeleine.

Not only that we saw the police breaking the ice on ponds etc and dragging them - again NOT done, the only time that damn was searched was by Marcos the lawyer and paid for by him also! we saw the police and members of the public being briefed and carrying out a properly coordinated search of waste land and fields near where Shannon disappeared from, did we see this in and around PDL? No of course we didn't, we saw unorganised searches which could have destroyed vital DNA. The searchers were never instructed on what to look for or, how to look for it, they were all just wandering around in different directions, this means of course that some places got searched several times by several different people and other places did NOT get searched at all.

Appalling! Thanks to Amaral who stopped looking for Madeleine on day 3 after she went missing!

Why doesn't bennett concentrate on these blunders, instead of spreading disinformation?

I remember a couple of days after Madeleine went missing Richard Bilton from the BBC was following one of the Portuguese police through some scrubland. They came across a barn which had a padlock on the door. All the policeman did was peer through the crack in the door and then walked off. Richard asked why he hadn't made steps to search the inside of the barn, and the reply was that it was a private barn and they weren't allowed to search it. Richard Bilton was absolutely gobsmacked!! The majority of the searches over the scrubland were by British ex-pats. It was disgusting

Doesn't that just speak volumes!

Even picking up scent in 5A and the vehicle would be expected. 15 out of 37 markers included at least 3 people who are very much alive. So what makes Madeleine's markers from a dead person? This is a question I cant phathom out since finding out there is a mix of several people in the DNA with which Amaral was convinced Madeleine is dead. How come the other people in the scent are very much alive?

I'm not supposed to be posting this week!! I'll be back next week.