Can we judge a person's character by their stance on the case?

[Vertigo Swirl]

They may well still have been motivated to hand out leaflets stating the true events of the case and if they had restricted themselves to that, all that might have happened  would have been an injunction halting their activities.

Bennett had legal training and should have been wise to the pitfalls that ultimately befell him.

The papers already stated the true events of the case.  What do you think Bennett knew about the case that was true and hadn’t been reported?

[G-Unit]

In hindsight you’re probably right but the McCanns firmly believed that Amaral’s book and subsequent publicity campaignwas instrumental in convincing the Portuguese public that Madeleine was dead and that that was harmful to her prospects of recovery if she were still alive and findable.

That particular claim was dismissed by the judge of the first instance because they were unable to prove it.

[jassi]

The papers already stated the true events of the case.  What do you think Bennett knew about the case that was true and hadn’t been reported?

He clearly felt there should be greater publicity, particularly in the village of Rothley.

[Holly Goodhead]

the mail is a good example...the mail knew it was committing libel...I remember the case at the time. The mail wanted to be sued...they wanted to force the alleged killers into court ...they knew they would not be sued


uk libel law is very simple ....you dont need to be  apawyer to understand it. no one on theis forum can accuse the mccanns of being involved...that would be libel...check with John

There's a mountain of commentary online claiming the McCanns were involved.  Ignore is the best policy imo.  Pre-internet they would only have had to contend with traditional media but those days are over and good luck to anyone who wants to try and put the genie back in the bottle!

By the McCanns doing what they do they simply raise the profile of their critics and add to their ranks. 

[Eleanor]

There's a mountain of commentary online claiming the McCanns were involved.  Ignore is the best policy imo.  Pre-internet they would only have had to contend with traditional media but those days are over and good luck to anyone who wants to try and put the genie back in the bottle!

By the McCanns doing what they do they simply raise the profile of their critics and add to their ranks.

John takes it seriously.  That's for sure.

[Vertigo Swirl]

That particular claim was dismissed by the judge of the first instance because they were unable to prove it.

I'm aware of that.  And?

[Vertigo Swirl]

He clearly felt there should be greater publicity, particularly in the village of Rothley.

No, he clearly felt that the McCanns home town, friends and neighbours should be convinced of their guilt by means of propaganda tactics.  What an evil get.

[Vertigo Swirl]

There's a mountain of commentary online claiming the McCanns were involved.  Ignore is the best policy imo.  Pre-internet they would only have had to contend with traditional media but those days are over and good luck to anyone who wants to try and put the genie back in the bottle!

By the McCanns doing what they do they simply raise the profile of their critics and add to their ranks.

Victim blaming, that's what you're doing. 

[jassi]

Fanatics often are.  (Response to 426)

[Eleanor]

No, he clearly felt that the McCanns home town, friends and neighbours should be convinced of their guilt by means of propaganda tactics.  What an evil get.

Even hiding in bushes, would you believe.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Even hiding in bushes, would you believe.

I do believe.  A most unpleasant individual, am I allowed to judge his character by his stance on the case?

[Holly Goodhead]

You think?  Bennett and crew were handing out leaflets and booklets in the street, and even delivered to neighbours in The McCann's village and their immediate neighbours.

How would you like someone doing this to you in your own road?

I have no real idea who this character is etc but from KM's book there was only limited action they could take and he apparently is still vocal online. 

People can form their own opinions.  Most people I think would be highly suspicious of such an individual and see him/her as being somewhat disturbed to go to such lengths especially when law enforcement have been unable to find any evidence against the McCanns.   

I think KM is probably the driving force behind the litigation as she strikes me as someone who likes a lot of control. 

[Mr Gray]

There's a mountain of commentary online claiming the McCanns were involved.  Ignore is the best policy imo.  Pre-internet they would only have had to contend with traditional media but those days are over and good luck to anyone who wants to try and put the genie back in the bottle!

By the McCanns doing what they do they simply raise the profile of their critics and add to their ranks.

they have ignored most of the online stuff..but they couldnt ignore mainstream media imo.

[jassi]

I do believe.  A most unpleasant individual, am I allowed to judge his character by his stance on the case?

Don't suppose anyone really cares, one way or the other - but if it makes you feel better then fine.

[G-Unit]

why do you think thta is...but Im glad you agree amaral has

He seems to have spoken to the latest commentators; Netflix and Saunokonoko. Wasn't May 2017 the last McCann interview? Apart from Gerry's mental health radio interview that is, which  was about his feelings, not the actual case.