Tony Bennett - new court date

Thank you.So not technically a pensioner then? Sometimes I think unneccessarily emotive wording is used in this case eg saying the fund was given to by children and pensioners as if nobody between those ages donated.IMO

ProfessorPlum wrote:Thank you.So not technically a pensioner then? Sometimes I think unneccessarily emotive wording is used in this case eg saying the fund was given to by children and pensioners as if nobody between those ages donated.IMO

Hi ProfessorPlum. Yes many donated to the fund, and I suppose many unemployed on benefit donated. It's just that these groups, have very little money so if donating four weeks pension as I did, that was, for me, a lot of money, just as a childs weekly pocket money would for them be a huge donation.

Remember Professor Plum it was the McCann's own lawyers that used these words.

"After the abduction Gerry and Kate McCann set in motion their own search with professional
assistance. A Fund was set up to finance the search and many people, often those who could
barely afford it, have given generously to that fund."

And what information have these who could "barely afford it" been given back by the McCanns about where there hard earned money was spent? As little as legally possible - how nice!.

Bobsy wrote:

ProfessorPlum wrote:Thank you.So not technically a pensioner then? Sometimes I think unneccessarily emotive wording is used in this case eg saying the fund was given to by children and pensioners as if nobody between those ages donated.IMO

Hi ProfessorPlum. Yes many donated to the fund, and I suppose many unemployed on benefit donated. It's just that these groups, have very little money so if donating four weeks pension as I did, that was, for me, a lot of money, just as a childs weekly pocket money would for them be a huge donation.

Good point Bobsy and also lets not forget about the many children who raised money for the Fund by selling their toys and baking cakes. I'm sure they did not intend the money would be used to pay legal fees.

Autumn wrote:

Bobsy wrote:

ProfessorPlum wrote:Thank you.So not technically a pensioner then? Sometimes I think unneccessarily emotive wording is used in this case eg saying the fund was given to by children and pensioners as if nobody between those ages donated.IMO

Hi ProfessorPlum. Yes many donated to the fund, and I suppose many unemployed on benefit donated. It's just that these groups, have very little money so if donating four weeks pension as I did, that was, for me, a lot of money, just as a childs weekly pocket money would for them be a huge donation.

Good point Bobsy and also lets not forget about the many children who raised money for the Fund by selling their toys and baking cakes. I'm sure they did not intend the money would be used to pay legal fees.

I have never interpreted any comment about children and pensioners giving money to be an intention to exclude others who donated, just that those two groups, in particular, gave money. I read about a pensioner, who had been saving money to buy a new pair of shoes, and he gave the money to the fund. There was a child who sold her birthday presents on Ebay and donated the money.

AnnaEsse wrote:

Autumn wrote:

Bobsy wrote:

ProfessorPlum wrote:Thank you.So not technically a pensioner then? Sometimes I think unneccessarily emotive wording is used in this case eg saying the fund was given to by children and pensioners as if nobody between those ages donated.IMO

Hi ProfessorPlum. Yes many donated to the fund, and I suppose many unemployed on benefit donated. It's just that these groups, have very little money so if donating four weeks pension as I did, that was, for me, a lot of money, just as a childs weekly pocket money would for them be a huge donation.

Good point Bobsy and also lets not forget about the many children who raised money for the Fund by selling their toys and baking cakes. I'm sure they did not intend the money would be used to pay legal fees.

I have never interpreted any comment about children and pensioners giving money to be an intention to exclude others who donated, just that those two groups, in particular, gave money. I read about a pensioner, who had been saving money to buy a new pair of shoes, and he gave the money to the fund. There was a child who sold her birthday presents on Ebay and donated the money.

And not forgetting the taxi drivers who returned
their fares, one in Amsterdam and the other in
Liverpool. (total bullox) but it makes for good PR.

More here:

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html

Over on Jill's there was a foreign lady, I forget her name, but she is married to an Englishman and was living here. She gave a month's wages to that fund in the same week that her husband lost his job. They've since had to leave England to go stay with her mother. She was absolutey raging that her money was used to pay for lawyers, and I don't blame her. I only lost a tenner so I just feel a little bit annoyed.

Iris wrote:Over on Jill's there was a foreign lady, I forget her name, but she is married to an Englishman and was living here. She gave a month's wages to that fund in the same week that her husband lost his job. They've since had to leave England to go stay with her mother. She was absolutey raging that her money was used to pay for lawyers, and I don't blame her. I only lost a tenner so I just feel a little bit annoyed.

My dad was about to donate when the dogs arrived...

Claudia79 wrote:

Iris wrote:Over on Jill's there was a foreign lady, I forget her name, but she is married to an Englishman and was living here. She gave a month's wages to that fund in the same week that her husband lost his job. They've since had to leave England to go stay with her mother. She was absolutey raging that her money was used to pay for lawyers, and I don't blame her. I only lost a tenner so I just feel a little bit annoyed.

Mi dad was about to donate when the dogs arrived...

Well done your dad for changing his mind.

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

Iris wrote:Over on Jill's there was a foreign lady, I forget her name, but she is married to an Englishman and was living here. She gave a month's wages to that fund in the same week that her husband lost his job. They've since had to leave England to go stay with her mother. She was absolutey raging that her money was used to pay for lawyers, and I don't blame her. I only lost a tenner so I just feel a little bit annoyed.

Mi dad was about to donate when the dogs arrived...

Well done your dad for changing his mind.

He didn't need convincing.

The fund was set up as a limited company, I believe on the advice of the Inland Revenue or an equivalent government department, who had been instructed by GB to assist the parents after their application to set up a charity had been refused. Initially the fund directors rejected authorization of payments towards the McCanns' mortgage and also refused to allow fund money to be used for payment of legal services. I clearly remember the headlines of September 2007 after the McCanns had returned to England as suspects; headlines which reported GM's fury that the directors had refused to allow legal expenses to be paid from the fund.
That is when Richard Branson stepped in with his 'pledge' of 100,000 pounds for a fighting fund to take care of the McCanns' legal expenses (although he probably didn't envisage those to be legal expenses for civil actions against media outlets and people expressing different opinions). Since then, important people in public life such as Esther McVey, who as non-family members were expected to ensure that fund money was used appropriately, have resigned one after the other from the board and the parents together with their closest allies have gradually taken over complete control of the company. As that process of taking control advanced, the fund has been increasingly used to pay massive amounts to ineffective detective agencies and fund lawsuits against media outlets and specific individuals who question the McCanns' version of the events of May 3 2007. There is little or no information concerning just how much of this fund money has actually been used to fund the search for Madeleine. As far as I recall, a couple of years ago, the Daily Express came up with a figure of just 13%. It has to be said that the transparency, much vaunted in the early days, does not exist and has not existed for at least 4 years, the company only filing accounts which satisfy the bare minimum requirements for a limited company under the law. As such the accounts do not contain the kind of detailed information on the allocation of expenditure one would expect the directors of a company of this nature to insist on providing, out of a sense of responsibility to those who had helped to finance it in the first place. The fact that the directors feel no such sense of responsibility tells us a lot about them and their moral values. Indeed it raises the question of whether a bona fide search for Madeleine financed with fund money as was originally envisaged, has ever taken place at all.

my gran gave and darnt tell us how much , oh and she thought madeline had been kidnapped and they wanted it to get her back

The dates for the trial have been announced as 9th and 10th May at the Royal Courts of Justice in The Strand.

This is taken from HardlineMarxist a couple of days ago.


"I can report that negotiations are currently in progress between Tony and Carter-Ruck to see if there is any way that the contempt of court matter can be settled without the need for a 2-day trial. In the meantime, and pending any agreement if there is to be one, Tony, on 22 February, made a cross-application within the contempt proceedings to be released from one of his undertakings. No date has yet been fixed for the trial. I will provide more information when available"

Not Born Yesterday wrote:The dates for the trial have been announced as 9th and 10th May at the Royal Courts of Justice in The Strand.

With acknowledgement to the CMOMM site, here's a link to Tony's announcement of the dates of the trial.

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t4468-trial-date-mccanns-v-bennett-9-10-may-2012

DEBBIE BUTLER HAS THREATENED TO CHAIN HERSELF TO THE RAILINGS.

Badboy wrote:DEBBIE BUTLER HAS THREATENED TO CHAIN HERSELF TO THE RAILINGS.

Good, hopefully somebody will get the key off her and throw it away.

What an image that conjures up! I'm not sure if she will be campaigning to keep Tony in or out of prison though.

The very best of luck Tony. Though you have nothing to worry about in the sense you are fighting for truth...and for the core values of the UK...If this country has any left then you will win

PERHAPS I SHOULD DO A PROTEST AS WELL ABOUT THE WORKFARE SCHEME AT THE SAME TIME.