UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: DevilsAdvocate on May 04, 2013, 01:56:21 PM
-
Just who is Tony Bennett and what are his motives in becoming embroiled in high profile cases ? Fame / infamy, monetary gain, academic acclaim ?
What are your thoughts on the man and his motives ?
-
Just who is Tony Bennett and what are his motives in becoming embroiled in high profile cases ? Fame / infamy, monetary gain, academic acclaim ?
What are your thoughts on the man and his motives ?
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
Never heard of him.
You've never heard of him Martha ?
This from an earlier post of your's-
Not really. They have attempted to counteract myths and lies spread by the most high-profile individuals such as Tony Bennett and Goncalo Amaral, and by certain newspapers - however the vast majority of those anonymous internet beings who daily trash Kate & Gerry's reputations and spend all their free time trying to convince the world that Madeleine is dead do so without any restrictions placed on them by the McCanns whatsoever.
Why lie ?
-
He is a serial meddler in matters that do not in truth concern him!
-
He is a serial meddler in matters that do not in truth concern him!
I agree to an extent debunker but surely he has every right to meddle once a case comes into the public domain as long as he remains within the boundaries of legal argument ?
His version of the boundaries of legal argument is obviously skewed given his recent court appearances !
Misguided fool ?
-
He is a serial meddler in matters that do not in truth concern him!
Insignificant little weed. Not worth wasting time on. I can't wait for him to mess up his court ruling, to be honest.
And he will, cos he can't keep his neb out.
Then he'll be 8)><( all over again.
-
He is a serial meddler in matters that do not in truth concern him!
I agree to an extent debunker but surely he has every right to meddle once a case comes into the public domain as long as he remains within the boundaries of legal argument ?
His version of the boundaries of legal argument is obviously skewed given his recent court appearances !
Misguided fool ?
He has sailed very close to the wind of defamation and harassment laws in other cases. He is also a convicted criminal for removing road signs as a protest.
Serial Meddler!
-
Never heard of him.
You've never heard of him Martha ?
This from an earlier post of your's-
Not really. They have attempted to counteract myths and lies spread by the most high-profile individuals such as Tony Bennett and Goncalo Amaral, and by certain newspapers - however the vast majority of those anonymous internet beings who daily trash Kate & Gerry's reputations and spend all their free time trying to convince the world that Madeleine is dead do so without any restrictions placed on them by the McCanns whatsoever.
Why lie ?
Oh THAT Tony Bennett. 8)--))
Ba-Boom.
Left your Heart in San Francisco?
-
His acolytes are up in arms about what has happened.
Now what is that useful German word?
Oh, yes, Schadenfreude!
-
He is a serial meddler in matters that do not in truth concern him!
I agree to an extent debunker but surely he has every right to meddle once a case comes into the public domain as long as he remains within the boundaries of legal argument ?
His version of the boundaries of legal argument is obviously skewed given his recent court appearances !
Misguided fool ?
He has sailed very close to the wind of defamation and harassment laws in other cases. He is also a convicted criminal for removing road signs as a protest.
Serial Meddler!
Debunker, with respect, there have been many "convicted criminals" over the years who have obtained that status because of their personal beliefs (Greenham Common activists, Aung San Suu Kyi, Wang Yonghang to name but a few) the governing bodies of their respective countries would surely have labelled them 'meddlers' ! That doesn't necessarily carry through that they were !
-
Never heard of him.
You've never heard of him Martha ?
This from an earlier post of your's-
Not really. They have attempted to counteract myths and lies spread by the most high-profile individuals such as Tony Bennett and Goncalo Amaral, and by certain newspapers - however the vast majority of those anonymous internet beings who daily trash Kate & Gerry's reputations and spend all their free time trying to convince the world that Madeleine is dead do so without any restrictions placed on them by the McCanns whatsoever.
Why lie ?
Oh THAT Tony Bennett. 8)--))
Maybe best leave the comedy to the professionals Martha, at least they are funny !
-
Never heard of him.
You've never heard of him Martha ?
This from an earlier post of your's-
Not really. They have attempted to counteract myths and lies spread by the most high-profile individuals such as Tony Bennett and Goncalo Amaral, and by certain newspapers - however the vast majority of those anonymous internet beings who daily trash Kate & Gerry's reputations and spend all their free time trying to convince the world that Madeleine is dead do so without any restrictions placed on them by the McCanns whatsoever.
Why lie ?
Oh THAT Tony Bennett. 8)--))
Maybe best leave the comedy to the professionals Martha, at least they are funny !
8)><( Devil's Avocado doesn't like my jokes. 8)><(
Nor your childish dissection of members names, if that is the level of your debating skils best you turn away from your keyboard now and leave mature reasoned debate to mature reasoned debaters !
-
He is a serial meddler in matters that do not in truth concern him!
I agree to an extent debunker but surely he has every right to meddle once a case comes into the public domain as long as he remains within the boundaries of legal argument ?
His version of the boundaries of legal argument is obviously skewed given his recent court appearances !
Misguided fool ?
He has sailed very close to the wind of defamation and harassment laws in other cases. He is also a convicted criminal for removing road signs as a protest.
Serial Meddler!
Debunker, with respect, there have been many "convicted criminals" over the years who have obtained that status because of their personal beliefs (Greenham Common activists, Aung San Suu Kyi, Wang Yonghang to name but a few) the governing bodies of their respective countries would surely have labelled them 'meddlers' ! That doesn't necessarily carry through that they were !
The crux of the matter is that those you mention were campaigning against certain aspects of the government or regime, and were thus campaigning against an institution. And had Bennett confined his activities to campaigns aagainst metrication, or even fringe politics then no problem.
However, in this case (and one or two others) he has been conducting a campaign targetting specific individuals, first of all trying to bring a private prosecution. When that failed, he has been conducting a rather unpleasant campaign of defamation, accusing them in public of comitting criminal acts, and taking his campaign to their very doorstep.
The fact that his victims were parents grieving over the loss of the daughter is particularly repellent.
If he had real evidence of criminal behaviour by any individual, the appropriate action would be to draw the matter to the attention of the proper authorities, and let them deal with it through the proper channels.
-
He is a serial meddler in matters that do not in truth concern him!
I agree to an extent debunker but surely he has every right to meddle once a case comes into the public domain as long as he remains within the boundaries of legal argument ?
His version of the boundaries of legal argument is obviously skewed given his recent court appearances !
Misguided fool ?
He has sailed very close to the wind of defamation and harassment laws in other cases. He is also a convicted criminal for removing road signs as a protest.
Serial Meddler!
Debunker, with respect, there have been many "convicted criminals" over the years who have obtained that status because of their personal beliefs (Greenham Common activists, Aung San Suu Kyi, Wang Yonghang to name but a few) the governing bodies of their respective countries would surely have labelled them 'meddlers' ! That doesn't necessarily carry through that they were !
He is a meddler.
NO nobility, just an interfering busy body.
-
The crux of the matter is that those you mention were campaigning against certain aspects of the government or regime, and were thus campaigning against an institution. And had Bennett confined his activities to campaigns aagainst metrication, or even fringe politics then no problem.
However, in this case (and one or two others) he has been conducting a campaign targetting specific individuals, first of all trying to bring a private prosecution. When that failed, he has been conducting a rather unpleasant campaign of defamation, accusing them in public of comitting criminal acts, and taking his campaign to their very doorstep.
The fact that his victims were parents grieving over the loss of the daughter is particularly repellent.
If he had real evidence of criminal behaviour by any individual, the appropriate action would be to draw the matter to the attention of the proper authorities, and let them deal with it through the proper channels.
Hello Jean-Pierre and thank you for your contribution. The examples I referenced were indicative of people's beliefs in a 'system flawed' and as such I mentioned Tony Bennett in the same context only in that he had a belief that metrification was not the way forward for Britain. I would be at odds with many of his beliefs and political leanings but I do acknowledge his right to object / meddle ! That he received a criminal conviction, according to debunker, is unfortunate in my reasoning but such is the law of the land.
In regards to this and other cases my question remains is he a misguided fool or fervent campaigner and what are his motives in your (and other members) view ?
-
Well, Devils Advocate, in the context of his recent activities, I would describe him as neither misguided fool or fervent campaigner.
In targetting individuals in the particularly personal and unpleasant way he has, I would say that attention seeking, self aggrandising wannabe Poirot / Ironside would be nearer the mark.
I really cannot believe he has actually qualified as a solicitor. I think his woeful performance in court before Mr Justice Tugendhut is ample proof.
As for his stance of "pluckly little Bennett, forced to represent himself against the evil empire of The McCanns, Carter Ruck and their legal team" - absolute tommyrot.
-
Well, Devils Advocate, in the context of his recent activities, I would describe him as neither misguided fool or fervent campaigner.
In targetting individuals in the particularly personal and unpleasant way he has, I would say that attention seeking, self aggrandising wannabe Poirot / Ironside would be nearer the mark.
I really cannot believe he has actually qualified as a solicitor. I think his woeful performance in court before Mr Justice Tugendhut is ample proof.
As for his stance of "pluckly little Bennett, forced to represent himself against the evil empire of The McCanns, Carter Ruck and their legal team" - absolute tommyrot.
But to what gain ? The adulation of non descript keyboard warriors ! At his stage of his life, surely not ! There is something deeper in his psyche that is not being conveyed to those reading his words / posts, what it is is purely speculative as I have not spent any time in his company !
-
Well, Devils Advocate, in the context of his recent activities, I would describe him as neither misguided fool or fervent campaigner.
In targetting individuals in the particularly personal and unpleasant way he has, I would say that attention seeking, self aggrandising wannabe Poirot / Ironside would be nearer the mark.
I really cannot believe he has actually qualified as a solicitor. I think his woeful performance in court before Mr Justice Tugendhut is ample proof.
As for his stance of "pluckly little Bennett, forced to represent himself against the evil empire of The McCanns, Carter Ruck and their legal team" - absolute tommyrot.
Good posts Jean-Pierre. 8@??)(
I would go further though. Bennett crossed the line from virtual abuse to actual abuse and that is where he went wrong. Had he restricted his campaign of hate to the internet he would not have been prosecuted or now had a jail sentence hanging over him.
I would say simply a FOOL!!!
-
Well, Devils Advocate, in the context of his recent activities, I would describe him as neither misguided fool or fervent campaigner.
In targetting individuals in the particularly personal and unpleasant way he has, I would say that attention seeking, self aggrandising wannabe Poirot / Ironside would be nearer the mark.
I really cannot believe he has actually qualified as a solicitor. I think his woeful performance in court before Mr Justice Tugendhut is ample proof.
As for his stance of "pluckly little Bennett, forced to represent himself against the evil empire of The McCanns, Carter Ruck and their legal team" - absolute tommyrot.
But to what gain ? The adulation of non descript keyboard warriors ! At his stage of his life, surely not ! There is something deeper in his psyche that is not being conveyed to those reading his words / posts, what it is is purely speculative as I have not spent any time in his company !
To what gain? God knows. Maybe the adulation of his fans? To be seen as a "somebody", and taking on "the establishment" in the relatively safe form of Drs McCann?
At this stage of his life - well, it must be a bit galling to have expended so much energy over the years and achieved so little of any substance, perhaps he saw an opportunity in this case.
-
Have you seen his misguided response?
-
Well, Devils Advocate, in the context of his recent activities, I would describe him as neither misguided fool or fervent campaigner.
In targetting individuals in the particularly personal and unpleasant way he has, I would say that attention seeking, self aggrandising wannabe Poirot / Ironside would be nearer the mark.
I really cannot believe he has actually qualified as a solicitor. I think his woeful performance in court before Mr Justice Tugendhut is ample proof.
As for his stance of "pluckly little Bennett, forced to represent himself against the evil empire of The McCanns, Carter Ruck and their legal team" - absolute tommyrot.
Good posts Jean-Pierre. 8@??)(
I would go further though. Bennett crossed the line from virtual abuse to actual abuse and that is where he went wrong. Had he restricted his campaign of hate to the internet he would not have been prosecuted or now had a jail sentence hanging over him.
I would say simply a FOOL!!!
Thank you Angelo. I think you are right in your comment about "crossing the line". There is a difference between conducting a campaign against an institution or a government - which is perfectly capable of lokking after itself, and conducting a campaign against an individual.
-
In regards to this and other cases my question remains is he a misguided fool or fervent campaigner and what are his motives in your (and other members) view ?
misguided fool, NAH! he knows exactly what he's doing
He was only forced to represent himself, as he's a tight fisted git. He was told by Kirwins, he didn't stand a chance of winning, the case.
He causes nothing but havoc, with everything he touches. Couldn't care less what harm he causes to people, (and not just the McCann's).
Hides behind women, as long as they have a bob or two.
IMO, he's a sneeky little creep. He's still posting his rubbish, but has had new socks @)(++(*
-
Tony Bennett's campaign against Kate and Gerry McCann is now over, thankfully.
He's yesterday's news now - and neither a misguided fool nor fervent campaigner. Just a particularly malicious nobody who, amongst other things, tried to get Kate and Gerry McCann struck off the medical register.
-
Well, Devils Advocate, in the context of his recent activities, I would describe him as neither misguided fool or fervent campaigner.
In targetting individuals in the particularly personal and unpleasant way he has, I would say that attention seeking, self aggrandising wannabe Poirot / Ironside would be nearer the mark.
I really cannot believe he has actually qualified as a solicitor. I think his woeful performance in court before Mr Justice Tugendhut is ample proof.
As for his stance of "pluckly little Bennett, forced to represent himself against the evil empire of The McCanns, Carter Ruck and their legal team" - absolute tommyrot.
Good posts Jean-Pierre. 8@??)(
I would go further though. Bennett crossed the line from virtual abuse to actual abuse and that is where he went wrong. Had he restricted his campaign of hate to the internet he would not have been prosecuted or now had a jail sentence hanging over him.
I would say simply a FOOL!!!
Agreed with regard to excellent posts Jean-Pierre and I am leaning to your assertion Angelo.
-
Have you seen his misguided response?
Hello debunker, no I have not seen his response, please elaborate, thank you.
-
Have you seen his misguided response?
Hello debunker, no I have not seen his response, please elaborate, thank you.
Posted on the Magnanimous McCanns thread.
-
Is that your contention debunker that your levels of brevity are sad and that your aspirations of actual evidence are silly ?
Can't say that I'd disagree to be honest !
-
I know of Tony Bennett only what I have read.
so you know exactly the same as probably everyone else on here
-
bennett has made payments to the Mccanns, Smethurt and also Kennedy for his actions.
-
It seems that this thread has somehow strayed from the original topic.
It seems to have been derailed by a poster coming over all girly about alteration to his or her user name (a common tactic, used when the argument isn't going the way one wants).
So, could the poster who called Devils Advocate "Devils Avocado" please apologise (with the same level of sincerity used by Mr Bennett during the court case, please) and lets get this thread back on track.
Thank you.
-
It seems that this thread has somehow strayed from the original topic.
It seems to have been derailed by a poster coming over all girly about alteration to his or her user name (a common tactic, used when the argument isn't going the way one wants).
So, could the poster who called Devils Advocate "Devils Avocado" please apologise (with the same level of sincerity used by Mr Bennett during the court case, please) and lets get this thread back on track.
Thank you.
Yes, it seems like there is an attempt at disruption going on on this forum.
Let's get back on topic!
-
Could having to make contributions to the McCanns fund be described as:
A "cruel and unusual punishment?".
Or a demonstration of Karma?
Discuss.
-
He is a serial meddler in matters that do not in truth concern him!
I agree with this
Bennett does have 'previous' and appears to involve himself directly and actively in matters that are of no personal concern to him
His 'leafleting campaign' was entirely inapproprite and arrogant
I am always bemused when this character is compared with Amaral, who is a different proposition altogether
Unlike Bennett, Amaral did not choose to involve himself with the McCanns ... he was involved by them, when he picked up the phone that night ( unaware at that point of Madeleine's or the McCanns existence )
There is no comparison between the two, in my opinion
-
It seems that this thread has somehow strayed from the original topic.
It seems to have been derailed by a poster coming over all girly about alteration to his or her user name (a common tactic, used when the argument isn't going the way one wants).
So, could the poster who called Devils Advocate "Devils Avocado" please apologise (with the same level of sincerity used by Mr Bennett during the court case, please) and lets get this thread back on track.
Thank you.
Is the above highlighted quote aimed in my direction Jean-Pierre ?
-
should have gone to Specsavers
-
On topic, I think Tony Bennett is a very sad individual who has failed in everything he has turned his hand to.
He has most recently been soundly taken to task (and given a criminal record) for his attacking (with lies and deceit) of the parents of a missing little girl. His unwarranted interference in this case has brought shame upon him and his family. Will his grandchildren be proud that their grandfather is a criminal? Is his brother who wrote a letter in mitigation for him really proud of his continued abuse of the parents of Madeleine?
His failure as a solicitor is demonstrated by his dressing down whilst in that profession for what looked very much like fraud, his early withdrawal from that profession and his most recent court case where he showed undiluted ignorance of the most basic rules of law.
His failure as a politician is legend. Its interesting that he has gone back to his roots in the far right to find a solicitor who he could work with.
But beyond the sad picture that Bennett portrays, I think there are other signs of something more sinister. His obsession with homosexuality, with paedophilia and with other deviancy is most peculiar. Again, I refer to his grandchildren and wonder if they should be proud of the postings that he has made over the years on these subjects.
To my mind, he is a criminal who does not have any understanding of the responsibilities which go with the kinds of activities which he obsessively meddles in. The Judge made that very point about him, mentioning that he had no understanding of the fact that his rights do not come without responsibility. He has ignored his responsibility to his own family, to the concept of truth and to society in general in his blinkered, obsessive desire to achieve what he believes are his rights.
He is neither fervent nor misguided. He is, in my view, an obsessive who does not recognise the views/rights of others and who, because of that, drives headlong to failure in everything he ever tries to do.
-
It seems that this thread has somehow strayed from the original topic.
It seems to have been derailed by a poster coming over all girly about alteration to his or her user name (a common tactic, used when the argument isn't going the way one wants).
So, could the poster who called Devils Advocate "Devils Avocado" please apologise (with the same level of sincerity used by Mr Bennett during the court case, please) and lets get this thread back on track.
Thank you.
Is the above highlighted quote aimed in my direction Jean-Pierre ?
If the cap fits, Devil's Advocate.
I really cannot believe that anyone could be THAT sensitive about such a trivial matter. To my mind there are three possibilities
(A) You really are that sensitive.
(B) You find the thread is moving in an undesirable direction, and are seeking to derail it
(c) You are allergic to Avocados.
-
On topic, I think Tony Bennett is a very sad individual who has failed in everything he has turned his hand to.
He has most recently been soundly taken to task (and given a criminal record) for his attacking (with lies and deceit) of the parents of a missing little girl. His unwarranted interference in this case has brought shame upon him and his family. Will his grandchildren be proud that their grandfather is a criminal? Is his brother who wrote a letter in mitigation for him really proud of his continued abuse of the parents of Madeleine?
His failure as a solicitor is demonstrated by his dressing down whilst in that profession for what looked very much like fraud, his early withdrawal from that profession and his most recent court case where he showed undiluted ignorance of the most basic rules of law.
His failure as a politician is legend. Its interesting that he has gone back to his roots in the far right to find a solicitor who he could work with.
But beyond the sad picture that Bennett portrays, I think there are other signs of something more sinister. His obsession with homosexuality, with paedophilia and with other deviancy is most peculiar. Again, I refer to his grandchildren and wonder if they should be proud of the postings that he has made over the years on these subjects.
To my mind, he is a criminal who does not have any understanding of the responsibilities which go with the kinds of activities which he obsessively meddles in. The Judge made that very point about him, mentioning that he had no understanding of the fact that his rights do not come without responsibility. He has ignored his responsibility to his own family, to the concept of truth and to society in general in his blinkered, obsessive desire to achieve what he believes are his rights.
He is neither fervent nor misguided. He is, in my view, an obsessive who does not recognise the views/rights of others and who, because of that, drives headlong to failure in everything he ever tries to do.
8@??)( 8@??)( 8@??)(
-
acceptance is a good healer
-
On topic, I think Tony Bennett is a very sad individual who has failed in everything he has turned his hand to.
He has most recently been soundly taken to task (and given a criminal record) for his attacking (with lies and deceit) of the parents of a missing little girl. His unwarranted interference in this case has brought shame upon him and his family. Will his grandchildren be proud that their grandfather is a criminal? Is his brother who wrote a letter in mitigation for him really proud of his continued abuse of the parents of Madeleine?
His failure as a solicitor is demonstrated by his dressing down whilst in that profession for what looked very much like fraud, his early withdrawal from that profession and his most recent court case where he showed undiluted ignorance of the most basic rules of law.
His failure as a politician is legend. Its interesting that he has gone back to his roots in the far right to find a solicitor who he could work with.
But beyond the sad picture that Bennett portrays, I think there are other signs of something more sinister. His obsession with homosexuality, with paedophilia and with other deviancy is most peculiar. Again, I refer to his grandchildren and wonder if they should be proud of the postings that he has made over the years on these subjects.
To my mind, he is a criminal who does not have any understanding of the responsibilities which go with the kinds of activities which he obsessively meddles in. The Judge made that very point about him, mentioning that he had no understanding of the fact that his rights do not come without responsibility. He has ignored his responsibility to his own family, to the concept of truth and to society in general in his blinkered, obsessive desire to achieve what he believes are his rights.
He is neither fervent nor misguided. He is, in my view, an obsessive who does not recognise the views/rights of others and who, because of that, drives headlong to failure in everything he ever tries to do.
Super post gilet, summed up in a nutshell. Bennett took it upon himself to insert himself into the case of a missing child, a case where there was no evidence at all found against the parents. Despite this, he carried on with his campaign which I have no doubt will have caused great distress to an already suffering family. He also spread his poisonous tentacles to Mr Smethurst, Brian Kennedy and others.
I am glad that he has been taught an expensive lesson, and hope that it will deter him against latching onto other vulnerable families.
-
It seems that this thread has somehow strayed from the original topic.
It seems to have been derailed by a poster coming over all girly about alteration to his or her user name (a common tactic, used when the argument isn't going the way one wants).
So, could the poster who called Devils Advocate "Devils Avocado" please apologise (with the same level of sincerity used by Mr Bennett during the court case, please) and lets get this thread back on track.
Thank you.
Is the above highlighted quote aimed in my direction Jean-Pierre ?
If the cap fits, Devil's Advocate.
I really cannot believe that anyone could be THAT sensitive about such a trivial matter. To my mind there are three possibilities
(A) You really are that sensitive.
(B) You find the thread is moving in an undesirable direction, and are seeking to derail it
(c) You are allergic to Avocados.
Such a sad response Jean-Pierre !
-
Tony Bennett ! Misguided fool or fervent campaigner ?
do you have enough to make a decision yet?
-
He is a serial meddler in matters that do not in truth concern him!
I agree with this
Bennett does have 'previous' and appears to involve himself directly and actively in matters that are of no personal concern to him
His 'leafleting campaign' was entirely inapproprite and arrogant
I am always bemused when this character is compared with Amaral, who is a different proposition altogether
Unlike Bennett, Amaral did not choose to involve himself with the McCanns ... he was involved by them, when he picked up the phone that night ( unaware at that point of Madeleine's or the McCanns existence )
There is no comparison between the two, in my opinion
Whaddayaknow I finally get to agree with one of your missives
Amaral/Bennett are entirely different
The former: a cop with decades of experience who was asked to do a job which he botched due to him having a closed mind - but nevertheless a cop at the heart of the early stages of the investigation.
The latter: an entire failure in everything he tried, whilst aiming to make the lives of other people as grim -as the life inside his own mind.
Amaral might be a blundering, macho idiot - but I don't have him down as a sadist
Bennett - loves tormenting people - without ever getting his hands dirty - well they've been dirtied now
The only similarty - both got caught out as being of hindrance, not use to civilised society - and have thus been branded criminals
-
Bennett and Amaral have spent years smearing, slagging off and lying about Kate and Gerry McCann.
But it their lives were in danger and the McCanns were the only doctors around, I bet they wouldn't refuse life-saving medical treatment from them.
-
On topic, I think Tony Bennett is a very sad individual who has failed in everything he has turned his hand to.
He has most recently been soundly taken to task (and given a criminal record) for his attacking (with lies and deceit) of the parents of a missing little girl. His unwarranted interference in this case has brought shame upon him and his family. Will his grandchildren be proud that their grandfather is a criminal? Is his brother who wrote a letter in mitigation for him really proud of his continued abuse of the parents of Madeleine?
His failure as a solicitor is demonstrated by his dressing down whilst in that profession for what looked very much like fraud, his early withdrawal from that profession and his most recent court case where he showed undiluted ignorance of the most basic rules of law.
His failure as a politician is legend. Its interesting that he has gone back to his roots in the far right to find a solicitor who he could work with.
But beyond the sad picture that Bennett portrays, I think there are other signs of something more sinister. His obsession with homosexuality, with paedophilia and with other deviancy is most peculiar. Again, I refer to his grandchildren and wonder if they should be proud of the postings that he has made over the years on these subjects.
To my mind, he is a criminal who does not have any understanding of the responsibilities which go with the kinds of activities which he obsessively meddles in. The Judge made that very point about him, mentioning that he had no understanding of the fact that his rights do not come without responsibility. He has ignored his responsibility to his own family, to the concept of truth and to society in general in his blinkered, obsessive desire to achieve what he believes are his rights.
He is neither fervent nor misguided. He is, in my view, an obsessive who does not recognise the views/rights of others and who, because of that, drives headlong to failure in everything he ever tries to do.
Fair points, eloquently stated.
-
do you have enough to make a decision yet?
-
do you have enough to make a decision yet?
I am still awaiting your citation regarding Amaral's office boy claim, which you stated as fact !
-
do you have enough to make a decision yet?
I am still awaiting your citation regarding Amaral's office boy claim, which you stated as fact !
what on earth has that got to do with this thread
Tony Bennett ! Misguided fool or fervent campaigner ?
If you can't answer - just say so.
-
You certainly seem to like asking questions - but a reluctance to answer them
This is your thread and you have had plenty of replies.
Would you like to make a decision now?
-
Irrelevant, disruptive and argumentative posts have been expunged from this thread in case anyone was wondering due to the high number of complaints.
-
do you have enough to make a decision yet?
On topic, not argumentative or disruptive.
-
Irrelevant, disruptive and argumentative posts have been expunged from this thread in case anyone was wondering due to the high number of complaints.
irrelevant and disruptive I get
but argumentative I don't
arguments - are what most of us are here for - otherwise we'd join mutual appreciation societies like
Haverns and J A T etc. (and what a drag that would be)
-
you reported a poster for nothing - repeat - nothing
-
you reported a poster for nothing - repeat - nothing
8@??)(
-
Irrelevant, disruptive and argumentative posts have been expunged from this thread in case anyone was wondering due to the high number of complaints.
irrelevant and disruptive I get
but argumentative I don't
arguments - are what most of us are here for - otherwise we'd join mutual appreciation societies like
Haverns and J A T etc. (and what a drag that would be)
I tend to agree Registrar ! A lot of debate has been lost through the actions of moderators expunging and deleting threads !
A number of posters here have wriggled off the hook in relation to specific questions being asked of them, such a pity !
I congratulate UK Justice Forum - for letting the waifs and strays of other - since dismantled forums - have their say on here
And I bet it must be a headache for the admin/mods to deal with 6- years of history on many forums percolating on here
They are doing a great job
IMO - if the post is not libellous, racist, ageist, sexist or contrary to common decency - let it go out
Freedom of speech on the internet is a privilege to be enjoyed by responsible peeps
I, personally feel this freedom won't be enjoyed for much longer
So, enjoy it while it lasts
(trolls, socks and wums should be shot on sight however) 8((()*/
-
ditto astroturfers
I always enjoyed doing that
-
Tony Bennett ! Misguided fool or fervent campaigner ?
decision?
-
Tony Bennett ! Misguided fool or fervent campaigner ?
decision?
bump
-
of course the person who started this thread could always email bennet himself and ask the question
-
My own view of Bennett is that he is a really sad deluded individual. The McCann's were right to pursue him in the way they did. It's just a pity the soft judges saw fit to spare him prison. I sincerely hope he has been struck off as a lawyer.
-
now i know that the person who started this thread is not experienced on posting on Mccann related forms. But don't you think he would have the decency to review the posts on here and give an opinion?
Wht start a thread otherwise?
>@@(*&)
-
Tony Bennett, where shall I start..??
Well, first he lied and lied, and altered witness statements in the Michael Barrymore/ Stuart Lubbock case.. He left bits out to suit his idea if what happened.
Second Lee Balkwell case ...... As it is now been reopened, I shall be careful what I say, except, Bennett was contacted by Balkwell's widow, who pleaded and begged Bennett to remove pictures of her husband , crushed in a cement mixer. Bennett, just mocked her and refused this to happen, citing he could do what he wanted to, as it was in the public domain, and it proved Balkwell was murdered.
Thirdly..... The curious case of road traffic signs, where BentTit gave a false name and address whilst nicked for stealing road signs.
Fourth.... The McCann case. There are reports of him contacting the McCanns first off, wanting to act for them, citing his experience as a child Solicitor (more on this later). He was refused this and since then conducted a war against the McCanns, their friends and supporters and those that believe the McCanns are innocent.
Fifth...... He has never ever denied he was caught "cottaging" in public toilets in Leverton , Lincolnshire.
Sixth... He was disciplined and told he could never be called a Solicitor again after charging a couple twice for legal work he did for them, whilst they were using the services of the Solicitors, Bennett was a Junior for. Bennett, decided to charge them, using his name, and set up as himself, claiming he did the work and sent invoices off.
Seventh.... he is a weasel, a liar, a complete c**k head, and IMHO never be allowed anywhere near a computer keyboard.
Oh and he said Karen Matthews was innocent and to Mick Philpott
-
you reported a poster for nothing - repeat - nothing
A common tactic with someone we are discussing... On ever forum he is just a member >@@(*&) >@@(*&) >@@(*&)
-
Make your own mind up about Bennett from this one post he made
http://justice4mccannfam.5forum.biz/t1063-tony-bennett-pretending-to-be-the-voice-of-madeleine-sick
-
He is undoubtedly reading this as he implodes. @)(++(*
-
He is undoubtedly reading this as he implodes. @)(++(*
Hello John. I have been seriously considering the posited questions and have dismissed the second one, which really only applies to his metric fun and games. However, I do not think he is a fool as such. I think he is what used to be called an agitator, a rabble-rouser and as such dangerous. He is an OAP, surely a time to sit back and relax. But instead he harasses people, disseminates material altered to suit his purpose and fills his followers with skewed information. In a way I feel sorry for him, in another way I am glad he got his comeuppance in court. I do not think he will keep to the promises made in court, in fact he had already broken them after talking to the BBC and then immediately started trashing again on the web so I certainly think he will continue as before. Time will tell, but I don't see a good prognosis.
-
now i know that the person who started this thread is not experienced on posting on Mccann related forms. But don't you think he would have the decency to review the posts on here and give an opinion?
Wht start a thread otherwise?
>@@(*&)
Your assumption that I am male is wholly false, and I started this thread asking a question, that question has been answered by many contributors for which I am grateful.
-
I know you are very sensitive about your name, but did you know that very appropriately it is an anagram of Deviated Vocals!
-
He is undoubtedly reading this as he implodes. @)(++(*
Hello John. I have been seriously considering the posited questions and have dismissed the second one, which really only applies to his metric fun and games. However, I do not think he is a fool as such. I think he is what used to be called an agitator, a rabble-rouser and as such dangerous. He is an OAP, surely a time to sit back and relax. But instead he harasses people, disseminates material altered to suit his purpose and fills his followers with skewed information. In a way I feel sorry for him, in another way I am glad he got his comeuppance in court. I do not think he will keep to the promises made in court, in fact he had already broken them after talking to the BBC and then immediately started trashing again on the web so I certainly think he will continue as before. Time will tell, but I don't see a good prognosis.
I believe he has only been an OAP for a few months now. Almost all his five and a half years of hounding the McCanns have been done whilst he would normally have been earning a living. Its an interesting question as to how he managed to take five years or so out of his working life to devote to this cause and many years before that on other obsessions of his. All these years without any apparent income. That's why I referred earlier to his legacy to his family. When most are earning an income to provide for their families this man has apparently been spending all his waking/working hours on his obsessions.
I don't feel any sorrow for the man, though I do for his beleaguered family. But I do agree with your belief that he will and probably already has broken his undertakings.
-
I know you are very sensitive about your name, but did you know that very appropriately it is an anagram of Deviated Vocals!
And your point is what exactly in relation to the OP ?
I will just this once more stoop to the level you post at and answer that I am not one bit sensitive about the name I chose, I am very sensitive to the fact that by childish dissection of a name to form a name by which to ridicule a person is an immature play ground form of bullying.
If that is the standard of certain members powers of debate I'd rather they did not engage me in same as I will not respond.
The last 24 hours have truly been eye opening for me on this forum, the true measure of a lot of members came to light.
-
I suggest you grow a thicker skin and purchase a sense of humor!
The more you protest, the bigger the target!
-
DA...nothing about what I said?
I can also add that Bennett claimed is father was a war hero, who SINGLE HANDEDLY took the German Surrender in Italy in WW2. 8-)(--) 8-)(--)
The old duffer claims he has the original declaration of surrender and was going to show it all to the world to prove his old man was there, still waiting for it though.
Also whilst at boarding school , Bennett (and he confirmed this), took part in some non curriculum activities late at night
-
In this one sentence you have just answered who you are...
If that is the standard of certain members powers of debate I'd rather they did not engage me in same as I will not respond.
Care to explain why you have gone back on your agreement and undertaking, and what you said on BBC News at the time?
-
DA...nothing about what I said?
I can also add that Bennett claimed is father was a war hero, who SINGLE HANDEDLY took the German Surrender in Italy in WW2. 8-)(--) 8-)(--)
The old duffer claims he has the original declaration of surrender and was going to show it all to the world to prove his old man was there, still waiting for it though.
Also whilst at boarding school , Bennett (and he confirmed this), took part in some non curriculum activities late at night
Hello Muratfan, thank you for the references you provided, there is a lot of reading up to be done from the stories you provided, once again thank you.
-
In this one sentence you have just answered who you are...
If that is the standard of certain members powers of debate I'd rather they did not engage me in same as I will not respond.
Care to explain why you have gone back on your agreement and undertaking, and what you said on BBC News at the time?
By what powers of deduction do you reckon I am Tony Bennett ?
The moderators of this board can most certainly verify that I am not Tony Bennett from my location.
I shall await your apology Muratfan !
-
Well, I feel sorry for him. I would have died a thousand deaths if I had been humiliated in such a fashion.
As for what I think of him, or his motives, I am still trying to figure that out. But it all sounds frightfully sad to me. What a waste of what could have been a force for goodness and kindness.
-
In this one sentence you have just answered who you are...
If that is the standard of certain members powers of debate I'd rather they did not engage me in same as I will not respond.
Care to explain why you have gone back on your agreement and undertaking, and what you said on BBC News at the time?
By what powers of deduction do you reckon I am Tony Bennett ?
The moderators of this board can most certainly verify that I am not Tony Bennett from my location.
I shall await your apology Muratfan !
Who mentioned Tony Bennett?
Be interesting ... are you going to say you will allow them to post your IP, I will then match it on my Blog as I am well aware of your IP, as your proxy one is not hiding you very well
-
In this one sentence you have just answered who you are...
If that is the standard of certain members powers of debate I'd rather they did not engage me in same as I will not respond.
Care to explain why you have gone back on your agreement and undertaking, and what you said on BBC News at the time?
By what powers of deduction do you reckon I am Tony Bennett ?
The moderators of this board can most certainly verify that I am not Tony Bennett from my location.
I shall await your apology Muratfan !
Please don't take this as a compliment but I can't see any resemblance between your posts and those of Tony Bennett. You are not as verbally effusive as he is. And while you have a tendency to take umbrage at minor irritations, you don't deal with them in the same patronising and dismissive way he does.
No, you are definitely not Bennett. Not even in his league.
-
Well, I feel sorry for him. I would have died a thousand deaths if I had been humiliated in such a fashion.
As for what I think of him, or his motives, I am still trying to figure that out. But it all sounds frightfully sad to me. What a waste of what could have been a force for goodness and kindness.
If only he had used what seem to be good talents in other ways then indeed he could have been a force for good. There are many causes he could have embraced. But we all have a bad side and this is an example of what happens when you let that come to the fore. Instead of being lauded for his ideals he is hated by quite a few people, and not just on the internet.
-
In this one sentence you have just answered who you are...
If that is the standard of certain members powers of debate I'd rather they did not engage me in same as I will not respond.
Care to explain why you have gone back on your agreement and undertaking, and what you said on BBC News at the time?
By what powers of deduction do you reckon I am Tony Bennett ?
The moderators of this board can most certainly verify that I am not Tony Bennett from my location.
I shall await your apology Muratfan !
Who mentioned Tony Bennett?
Be interesting ... are you going to say you will allow them to post your IP, I will then match it on my Blog as I am well aware of your IP, as your proxy one is not hiding you very well
As I said, I shall await your apology !
-
Well, I feel sorry for him. I would have died a thousand deaths if I had been humiliated in such a fashion.
As for what I think of him, or his motives, I am still trying to figure that out. But it all sounds frightfully sad to me. What a waste of what could have been a force for goodness and kindness.
Yes, Bennett is a very sad individual who has wasted years of his life (and his family's life) in obsessive campaigns all of which have ultimately failed and in this case very conspicuously failed. Not only has he embarrassed himself but also his family with his actions.
He hasn't demonstrated anything akin to goodness or kindness nor even the most basic empathy with any of the victims of his campaigns.
-
In this one sentence you have just answered who you are...
If that is the standard of certain members powers of debate I'd rather they did not engage me in same as I will not respond.
Care to explain why you have gone back on your agreement and undertaking, and what you said on BBC News at the time?
By what powers of deduction do you reckon I am Tony Bennett ?
The moderators of this board can most certainly verify that I am not Tony Bennett from my location.
I shall await your apology Muratfan !
Please don't take this as a compliment but I can't see any resemblance between your posts and those of Tony Bennett. You are not as verbally effusive as he is. And while you have a tendency to take umbrage at minor irritations, you don't deal with them in the same patronising and dismissive way he does.
No, you are definitely not Bennett. Not even in his league.
I am not here looking for compliments, I am here to read reasoned debate, unfortunately there are only a very small number of contributors capable of same.
-
In this one sentence you have just answered who you are...
If that is the standard of certain members powers of debate I'd rather they did not engage me in same as I will not respond.
Care to explain why you have gone back on your agreement and undertaking, and what you said on BBC News at the time?
By what powers of deduction do you reckon I am Tony Bennett ?
The moderators of this board can most certainly verify that I am not Tony Bennett from my location.
I shall await your apology Muratfan !
Please don't take this as a compliment but I can't see any resemblance between your posts and those of Tony Bennett. You are not as verbally effusive as he is. And while you have a tendency to take umbrage at minor irritations, you don't deal with them in the same patronising and dismissive way he does.
No, you are definitely not Bennett. Not even in his league.
I am not here looking for compliments, I am here to read reasoned debate, unfortunately there are only a very small number of contributors capable of same.
And on the evidence of your posts so far, your presence is not going to increase their number.
-
Wonder why someone is asking members of a fora, on what to post, then posts exactly the same on here
-
Strange that Mr Advacado is online , and has been for several hours, but is missing his own threads..
On-line, the same time as someone else on another fora (albeit hidden log in), for the same amount of time
-
Strange that Mr Advacado is online , and has been for several hours, but is missing his own threads..
On-line, the same time as someone else on another fora (albeit hidden log in), for the same amount of time
Somebody being impersonating me??? 8()(((@#
-
DA...stick to being Sherlock...Although a very bad one
-
For information, there are two members registered with names devils advocate and DevilsAdvocate.
The former is one of our founder members, the latter a new member.
-
For information, there are two members registered with names devils advocate and DevilsAdvocate.
The former is one of our founder members, the latter a new member.
The cheek!!! 8()(((@#
-
For information, there are two members registered with names devils advocate and DevilsAdvocate.
The former is one of our founder members, the latter a new member.
The cheek!!! 8()(((@#
Welcome to the cloning/trolling center of the internet !!!! @)(++(* 8((()*/
-
Oh dear, this could get confusing. 8-)(--)
More than things are already? Anyone wanna buy a flak jacket and tin hat? @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
Has the Devil Advocate clone been disciplined about cloning a members name
-
Just who is Tony Bennett and what are his motives in becoming embroiled in high profile cases ? Fame / infamy, monetary gain, academic acclaim ?
What are your thoughts on the man and his motives ?
Does Tony Bennett run the Jill Havern forum?
-
Does Tony Bennett run the Jill Havern forum?
No.
-
No.
lol.
-
No.
Who does?
-
Who does?
This is the real Mystery of CMOMM. Please let us know if you find out.
-
This is the real Mystery of CMOMM. Please let us know if you find out.
I've no idea what CMOMM is?
-
I've no idea what CMOMM is?
Tony Bennett's Site. Known as------
Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann.
-
Tony Bennett's Site. Known as------
Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann.
Thought you said it wasn't Tony Bennett's site?
I've googled CMOMM and found this
"Hello, everyone! My name is Thomas Henry Horan, from Saint Louis MO USA. I am a professor, author, part-time private investigator/consultant, and executive producer and host of The Stones Unturned Podcast.
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t15185-professor-horan-ideas-for-a-podcast-about-the-mccann-case
But you probably already know...?
Is Jill Havern a real person; ex us military police from RAf Alconbury?
-
Thought you said it wasn't Tony Bennett's site?
I've googled CMOMM and found this
"Hello, everyone! My name is Thomas Henry Horan, from Saint Louis MO USA. I am a professor, author, part-time private investigator/consultant, and executive producer and host of The Stones Unturned Podcast.
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t15185-professor-horan-ideas-for-a-podcast-about-the-mccann-case
But you probably already know...?
Is Jill Havern a real person; ex us military police from RAf Alconbury?
i think shes a driving instructor if she still has a job
-
Thought you said it wasn't Tony Bennett's site?
I've googled CMOMM and found this
"Hello, everyone! My name is Thomas Henry Horan, from Saint Louis MO USA. I am a professor, author, part-time private investigator/consultant, and executive producer and host of The Stones Unturned Podcast.
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t15185-professor-horan-ideas-for-a-podcast-about-the-mccann-case
But you probably already know...?
Is Jill Havern a real person; ex us military police from RAf Alconbury?
I didn't say it isn't Tony Bennett's Site. Tony Bennett says it isn't. But it is known as for reasons of clarity.
However, Tony Bennett is a member of this Forum and we do try to afford our members some courtesy.
-
i think shes a driving instructor if she still has a job
So your claiming she's a real person called Jill Havern?
-
So your claiming she's a real person called Jill Havern?
She is a real person, yes. If you have a complaint against her or Tony why don’t you join that forum and send them a message? Or you can send one to Tony on here, if I can remember his user name.
-
She is a real person, yes. If you have a complaint against her or Tony why don’t you join that forum and send them a message? Or you can send one to Tony on here, if I can remember his user name.
Sorry. I can't help you with that.
-
Keep on topic and no goading.
-
She is a real person, yes. If you have a complaint against her or Tony why don’t you join that forum and send them a message? Or you can send one to Tony on here, if I can remember his user name.
Should it be encouraged to show who is who on here?
-
Should it be encouraged to show who is who on here?
I believe Tony has already acknowledged he is on here under a pseudonym, the name of which escapes me.
-
What happened to all those old members earlier on this thread who used to post here? Shame they’re not still around.
-
What happened to all those old members earlier on this thread who used to post here? Shame they’re not still around.
I do so agree.
-
Having read this entire thread, I've been enlightened as to the motives of Mr. Bennett. I knew nothing of the back story.