Retired Lawyer Faces Jail for Harrassing McCanns - Telegraph

Correia da Manha 30 January 2012 (Google translation)

http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/noticias/nacional/portugal/arrisca-cadeia-por-assediar-casal-mccann

Lawyer and president of the Madeleine Foundation faces prison for defaming Kate and Gerry

Risks jail for harassing McCanns

Tony Bennett, a retired lawyer who heads a private foundation with the name of Madeleine McCann, Madeleine Foundation, faces a possible prison sentence if found guilty of harassment of Kate and Gerry McCann.

The parents of little Maddie, who disappeared in 2007 in Praia da Luz in the Algarve, sued Tony Bennett the lawyer in attributing the authorship of a smear campaign against them. According to British newspaper said yesterday the 'Sunday Telegraph', the alleged harassment of Kate and Gerry McCann have gone through the release of public leaflets and publications, in which Tony Bennett argues that the couple is allegedly responsible for her death.

The couple sued the lawyer and, at the beginning of February, a British court can decide to order the same prison as well as the payment of compensation, which the lawyer can hardly bear.

I have visited another forum and I came across part of a statement that was made by the Assistant Chief Constable of the Leicestershire Police Force. He said " While both or one of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance."

I wonder if the McCanns sued the A.C.C. of L.P.F. for making that statement? If Tony Bennett or his lawyer, could get hold of a copy of this statement, it could just help Mr Bennett, when his case comes to court. Or am I reading too much into this?

I apologise if someone else has already posted this information, I didn't look at all of the posts in this thread, I made my post quickly, because I have to go out now.

kathybelle wrote:I have visited another forum and I came across part of a statement that was made by the Assistant Chief Constable of the Leicestershire Police Force. He said " While both or one of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance."

I wonder if the McCanns sued the A.C.C. of L.P.F. for making that statement? If Tony Bennett or his lawyer, could get hold of a copy of this statement, it could just help Mr Bennett, when his case comes to court. Or am I reading too much into this?

I apologise if someone else has already posted this information, I didn't look at all of the posts in this thread, I made my post quickly, because I have to go out now.

The statement was made to Justice Hogg at the family court hearing when the McCanns attempted to gain access to the Leicestershire Constabulary files. Btw it's been my signature for quite some time.

kathybelle wrote:I have visited another forum and I came across part of a statement that was made by the Assistant Chief Constable of the Leicestershire Police Force. He said " While both or one of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance."

I wonder if the McCanns sued the A.C.C. of L.P.F. for making that statement? If Tony Bennett or his lawyer, could get hold of a copy of this statement, it could just help Mr Bennett, when his case comes to court. Or am I reading too much into this?

I apologise if someone else has already posted this information, I didn't look at all of the posts in this thread, I made my post quickly, because I have to go out now.

Thanks kathybelle. A quote definitely worth remembering.

That is one of the quotes that I use when discussing the matter with family. Can anyone remember when it was written?

nospinnaker wrote:That is one of the quotes that I use when discussing the matter with family. Can anyone remember when it was written?

T4two has mentioned the source a couple of posts up!

And it is written in Kate's book.

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.com/2011/05/footnote-provided-by-kate-mccann.html

http://littlemorsals.blogspot.com/2011/05/piers-morgan-interview-with-mccanns-may.html

page 316 of Kate’s book...

When Gerry and Kate McCann were refused access to most of the police files, the assistant chief constable for Leicestershire police gave this written statement to explain why they had been refused: (in Kate’s words...page 316 of her book):

“While one or both of them may be innocent there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.”

It’s a mystery why Kate would print something that appears as incriminating as this, but she must have her reasons even though I may not personally understand them at the moment. The files they were given (again in Kate’s words – on the same page): “Having to withdraw was quite galling, especially as the eighty-one items disclosed to us included trivial details that our family had passed on to the police in the first place.”

It was the date I was interested in.

nospinnaker wrote:It was the date I was interested in.

It's a long article.

Monday 07 July 2008

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/mccanns-drop-court-action-as-police-release-files-861524.html?action=Popup

Police agreed today to hand over evidence about Madeleine McCann's disappearance to her parents.

As a result, Kate and Gerry McCann dropped their High Court bid to force disclosure of the information held by Leicestershire police.

The force has been involved in the search for Madeleine since shortly after she disappeared 14 months ago.

The parents, who wanted to avoid a legal conflict with the police or other agencies while at the same time obtaining as much material as possible to help in their continuing search, were content to withdraw their case.

Their spokesman Clarence Mitchell, speaking on the steps of the High Court in London, welcomed the move.

All this sueing by the mccanns is really sickening

I agree JD16. Perhaps they could try to speak to those who disbelieve them and give explanations for peoples questions. It appears to me that after Sexism, Racism, Homophobia etc we are now getting McCannism. Seemingly it is not politically correct to doubt their stories even if they don't add up one iota.

Yes I think that, in years to come, "doing a McCann" and being "Carter-Rucked" will be officially recognised as terms used when people in authority are trying to cover up their misdeeds.

Annabel wrote:

page 316 of Kate’s book...

When Gerry and Kate McCann were refused access to most of the police files, the assistant chief constable for Leicestershire police gave this written statement to explain why they had been refused: (in Kate’s words...page 316 of her book):

“While one or both of them may be innocent there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.”

It’s a mystery why Kate would print something that appears as incriminating as this, but she must have her reasons even though I may not personally understand them at the moment. The files they were given (again in Kate’s words – on the same page): “Having to withdraw was quite galling, especially as the eighty-one items disclosed to us included trivial details that our family had passed on to the police in the first place.”

Surely if LPP are saying it and kate mccann herself is printing it in her bewk ".....there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.”, then no judge can rule against any member of the public from purporting a theory from the facts, however they do it. leaflets or not. Leaflets is a form of communication just like the internet or reading a paper

AnnaEsse wrote:

nospinnaker wrote:It was the date I was interested in.

It's a long article.

Monday 07 July 2008

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/mccanns-drop-court-action-as-police-release-files-861524.html?action=Popup

Police agreed today to hand over evidence about Madeleine McCann's disappearance to her parents.

As a result, Kate and Gerry McCann dropped their High Court bid to force disclosure of the information held by Leicestershire police.

The force has been involved in the search for Madeleine since shortly after she disappeared 14 months ago.

The parents, who wanted to avoid a legal conflict with the police or other agencies while at the same time obtaining as much material as possible to help in their continuing search, were content to withdraw their case.

Their spokesman Clarence Mitchell, speaking on the steps of the High Court in London, welcomed the move.

Clarrie's comment is the ultimate in spinning. LP released virtually nothing that they didn't already have or could obtain.

Chris wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

nospinnaker wrote:It was the date I was interested in.

It's a long article.

Monday 07 July 2008

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/mccanns-drop-court-action-as-police-release-files-861524.html?action=Popup

Police agreed today to hand over evidence about Madeleine McCann's disappearance to her parents.

As a result, Kate and Gerry McCann dropped their High Court bid to force disclosure of the information held by Leicestershire police.

The force has been involved in the search for Madeleine since shortly after she disappeared 14 months ago.

The parents, who wanted to avoid a legal conflict with the police or other agencies while at the same time obtaining as much material as possible to help in their continuing search, were content to withdraw their case.

Their spokesman Clarence Mitchell, speaking on the steps of the High Court in London, welcomed the move.

Clarrie's comment is the ultimate in spinning. LP released virtually nothing that they didn't already have or could obtain.

So, the McCanns were content? In her book, Kate said it was 'galling.'

Their spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, said outside court the couple would very much welcome the 80 pieces of information which the police had agreed to release.

"These are 80 potential new leads. We have information we can work on," he said.

Again, not what Kate said in her book!

Anorak has a new article (under the "Madeleine McCann" tab) "Madeleine McCann: Is Tony Bennett Going To Jail?". It's interesting that comments are not allowed but there are 5 posts in the "Forum" section re "Madeleine", "Retired lawyer faces jail for 'harassing' Kate and Gerry McCann".

An update re Tony Bennett's Court Case



THE HEARING ON 8 FEBRUARY WILL BEGIN IN OPEN COURT, BUT EITHER PARTY COULD APPLY FOR IT TO BE HEARD IN PRIVATE

I clarified the position this morning regarding whether this hearing will be in open court or in chambers (in private), by speaking to Mr James Tipp, Deputy Court Manager in the Queen's Bench Division Listing Office.

Appaently Case Management Hearings are normally held in chambers (in private), but this particular Case Management Hearing is definitely listed as being in open court.

However, for the sake of completeness, Mr Tipp has pointed out that, at the beginning of the hearing, either party could make an application for the remainder of the hearing to be conducted in private. If they do, the Judge ['Master'] would then consider that application on its merits, after listening to any argument as to why the hearing should be held in private instead of in open court.

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t4280p20-contempt-hearing-8-feb-will-be-in-open-court-anyone-can-attend

Perfectly normal procedure.

No prizes for guessing where this came from.

"I SHOULD THINK BENNETT AND HIS ASSORTED OBSESSIONS HAVE COST THE BRITISH TAXPAYER MORE THAN HAS SO FAR BEEN SPENT ON THE YARD'S EFFORTS TO FIND A MISSING CHILD."

"So I suggest a period of silence on the subject from the hounders and forkers would be appropriate."

And I suggest you **** off!

Sara_Rose_ wrote:No prizes for guessing where this came from.

"I SHOULD THINK BENNETT AND HIS ASSORTED OBSESSIONS HAVE COST THE BRITISH TAXPAYER MORE THAN HAS SO FAR BEEN SPENT ON THE YARD'S EFFORTS TO FIND A MISSING CHILD."

"So I suggest a period of silence on the subject from the hounders and forkers would be appropriate."

And I suggest you **** off!

From the dark side??

Hilarious, they really think Tony Bennett has cost the taxpayer much more than £2 million? Erm, where??

"I SHOULD THINK BENNETT AND HIS ASSORTED OBSESSIONS HAVE COST THE BRITISH TAXPAYER MORE THAN HAS SO FAR BEEN SPENT ON THE YARD'S EFFORTS TO FIND A MISSING CHILD."

Just proves how totally brain dead & uninformed these pro's are and not worth the time of day reading anything they have to say

If they had a brain cell to share, they'd be dangerous!

Let's hope that the writer of these words of wisdom will provide a statement of accounts (as transparent as those of the Madeleine Fund) to show how Tony has run up a vast bill for taxpayers.

to everyone on the dark side, you do brighten up our lives sometimes.

I can give a little clue to the 'author' of those comments?

Begins with BB?