Tony Bennett - new court date

Oldartform wrote:Couldn`t Mike Gunnill`s actions be considered as `entrapment`. The Wiki references mainly refer to Police entrapment, but there is a piece under Wiki`s `Agent Provocateur` Common Usage :-

"Agent provocateur activities raise ethical and legal issues. In common law jurisdictions, the legal concept of entrapment may apply if the main impetus for the crime was the provocateur."

But hopefully TB has sussed this one.

That's exactly what l think. It's a shame Tony doesn't have the funds to pursue whether there's a link to CR and Gunnill before that phone call.

At least Tony is honest, he could have denied it and it would have been his word against Gunnills.

Wonder if Gunnill received any blood money for his dirty deed.

Should it matter what name was used though? Isnt the point that TB had undertaken NOT to distribute, by any means, the booklet thereby breeching a court undertaking?

ProfessorPlum wrote:Should it matter what name was used though? Isnt the point that TB had undertaken NOT to distribute, by any means, the booklet thereby breeching a court undertaking?

Accepted, but I think it weakens the prosecution case.

pennylane wrote:

Lillyofthevalley wrote:Tony is small fry and can't really fight back (as Tony said "I have made an offer to the McCanns which I am not at liberty to disclose" obviously it wasn't enough for the McCanns) but Richard Desmond surely has his own axe to grind regarding the McCanns, he has the money and the power.

Good morning Lilly,

I wouldn't blame Mr Bennett for making an offer to the McScams at this juncture. Whilst I am hugely in awe of his efforts, I think the risks are enormous... especially having seen the sickeningly biased rubbish being spouted at the Leveson inquiry where the McCanns are concerned!


Dear Mr/s McC, I apologise as I now believe all your lies are true.

Hi Pennylane sorry for the late reply, yes I agree the risks certainly are enormous as you say, but can the McCanns be seen to be putting a pentioner in prison for repeating what is in the police files, will the papers pick up and start to turn on the McCanns?? I think if they win this case against TB imo its going to come back and bite them on their ar** will the media start to delve into the police files to find out what Bennets gripe is.........I hope so.

ProfessorPlum wrote:Should it matter what name was used though? Isnt the point that TB had undertaken NOT to distribute, by any means, the booklet thereby breeching a court undertaking?

Perhaps not, but is TB alledged to have sold this book to MG or was it another named person, be it Mike G. or not using a different name? I can't see how anyone can claim to have recieved a book using one name and then claim to be someone else - ie someone with a different name.

Oldartform wrote:Couldn`t Mike Gunnill`s actions be considered as `entrapment`. The Wiki references mainly refer to Police entrapment, but there is a piece under Wiki`s `Agent Provocateur` Common Usage :-

"Agent provocateur activities raise ethical and legal issues. In common law jurisdictions, the legal concept of entrapment may apply if the main impetus for the crime was the provocateur."

But hopefully TB has sussed this one.

If the alleged offender had the intention to commit a crime and was presented with an opportunity, then entrapment is not an acceptable defence. However, if the alleged offender had no intention of committing a crime, but was persuaded by another person, then entrapment is an acceptable defence.

I think Mike Gunnill asked for the book in a false name and then when it was refused he tried again and said it was for research purposes as he was investigating the case. That' swhat I remember, but may be wrong. If tm really are telling the truth why don't they refute/dispute what TB & GB state and ask for 1p instead of millions. Money is the only thing they want imo. It saddens me greatly that this is the case, but that's how it appears. If it was me I'd be shouting from the rooftops what happened, not sue-ing people who are trying to find out the truth of what happened for millions.

I just cannot understand their actions. If you've lost a child money is totally irrelevant.

I'm no TB fan. But what the whatever his name lying piece of scum did was disgusting. And very telling of the other side's ways.

Claudia79 wrote:I'm no TB fan. But what the whatever his name lying piece of scum did was disgusting. And very telling of the other side's ways.

I agree. That the lying piece of scum didn't use his real name is very telling.

Ironically he is registered on the J H forum in his own name (Mgunnill) and occasionally logs in - most recently on Tuesday - but he hasn't contributed regularly for over a year. Thank heavens for small mercies.

Ive come to the conclusion that whatever happens with Tony he will except it, and the Mccanns will regrest persuing a pensioner, and sending him to prison, Tony WILL come out on top with this.
Once they send Tony to prison for a short period, what do they do next to shut him up, imo they can't shut him up.

Panda wrote:I think I have previously indicated that the McCanns claim I have
breached the undertaking I gave the High Court in November 2009 in 149
instances, once by selling a book to Mike Gunnill, and on 148 other
occasions by words I have used in postings, articles and leaflets
published between January 2010 and August 2011."

Hi Panda, Why did Tony accept the terms/undertaking as per
the High Court judgement on Nov 09? could he not of challenged
it? If it was such a draconian order then I would think that he
had plenty of room to appeal to European Court.

149 words in postings ......

1. Cadaver

2. Death


3. Dogs


4. 40 plus questions...



That's 4 words or more I've used

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:I'm no TB fan. But what the whatever his name lying piece of scum did was disgusting. And very telling of the other side's ways.

I agree. That the lying piece of scum didn't use his real name is very telling.

Exactly!

Acknowledgements to the CMOMM site.

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t4279-mystery-mike-gunnill-a-book-a-courier-and-a-third-party#93795

Court date has been updated. 8th Feb.



http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t4280-contempt-hearing-8-feb-will-be-in-open-court-anyone-can-attend

It was here, on this forum once, ferretting about and trying to find out people's real names. It tried to find out mine and Ufercoffy rumbled it. Then Antoinette kicked it out. And good riddance.

This, people, is the sort of scum we have had to put up with for the past five years.

I would like to know why Debbie butler has turned on him and gone talking to sabot and other pro mccanns And if she has spoken to Mitchell.


I know about the leaflet drop, I would be peeved about it but know body forced her to do it but she has turned for a reason.

kitti wrote:I would like to know why Debbie butler has turned on him and gone talking to sabot and other pro mccanns And if she has spoken to Mitchell.


I know about the leaflet drop, I would be peeved about it but know body forced her to do it but she has turned for a reason.

Yes, Debbie Butler spoke to Mitchell. I remember he saying so herself, at the time. There was no love lost between DB and TB, but to then go talking to Sabot is pretty extreme. There are an awful lot of people out there who are letting their egos, and hatred/jealousy of other people, interfere with their sense of justice for a little missing girl.

The book was supposedly bought by a 'Michael Sangerte ', a person who obviously does not exist. I'm sure there must be a legal technicality here somewhere

Iris wrote:It was here, on this forum once, ferretting about and trying to find out people's real names. It tried to find out mine and Ufercoffy rumbled it. Then Antoinette kicked it out. And good riddance.

This, people, is the sort of scum we have had to put up with for the past five years.

Mike Gunnill was here once was he? As I've said already he is still currently registered with the Havern site. I've heard that Murat fan found out names and addresses for people on there but not that anyone else did it here. I do know of a sceptic whose Facebook account was hacked into by someone in the Maidstone area and he does suspect Mike G for that.

Not Born Yesterday wrote:

Iris wrote:It was here, on this forum once, ferretting about and trying to find out people's real names. It tried to find out mine and Ufercoffy rumbled it. Then Antoinette kicked it out. And good riddance.

This, people, is the sort of scum we have had to put up with for the past five years.

Mike Gunnill was here once was he? As I've said already he is still currently registered with the Havern site. I've heard that Murat fan found out names and addresses for people on there but not that anyone else did it here. I do know of a sceptic whose Facebook account was hacked into by someone in the Maidstone area and he does suspect Mike G for that.

Yes, and quite a few of us were fooled by him - at first. He was soon found out for the devious little reptile that he is, though.

In fact, that's being a bit unfair to reptiles. Some of the reptiles I know are actually quite nice.

Personally, I don't have a problem with y personal details being available to anyone with a right to know but, believe me, there are some real nutters out there - many of them who think it acceptable to leave young defenceless children at unnecessary risk of all sorts of bad things. And I'm not talking wardrobe monsters.

Is TB a pensioner? I didnt think he was 65 yet but with the government changing retirement ages etc who knows lol

Tony will be 65 in September.