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.
