Author Topic: Defamation and defamatory ...  (Read 50450 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #75 on: May 12, 2013, 06:20:01 PM »
Let me get this straight.  Blacksmith was told some stuff by another anonymous person on the internet and then he writes about it on his (often unreliable and always anti McCann propaganda) blog and we're supposed to just accept it's absolutely the truth? LOL.

The emails from the webmaster to the anonymous source are safely squirrelled away for future reference I can assure you. Blacksmith removed the references to the emails, after being threatened with legal action ( an absurd over-reaction by the webmaster if the quotes weren't absolutely genuine ) but the originals still exist.

Ah!

Faith's assurances.

Must be true, then ...

No matter whether you believe me or not, suffice to say that when the time is right those emails will play a part in exposing Kate's duplicity.

When do you think that "when the time is right" will happen? When they are charged? Ain't going to happen.  They are innocent.

Perhaps at the libel trial when iI is revealed the McCanns did indeed ask to settle  8)-)))
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #76 on: May 12, 2013, 06:21:14 PM »
No screenshots?

(sic):

Further to that what went on with BS and whoever emailed him about the matter is not in the public domain

Indeed, no screenshots ...
« Last Edit: May 12, 2013, 06:23:41 PM by ferryman »

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #77 on: May 12, 2013, 06:25:32 PM »
Of course, never forget, it was Blacksmith who brought us Murat v Tanner (cough, cough).

This time, Blacksmith has such stalwarts as Faith and the delightfully fragrant Red Blossom to back him up ...

Rachel Granada

  • Guest
Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #78 on: May 12, 2013, 06:32:13 PM »
Faithlilly said; Perhaps at the libel trial when iI is revealed the McCanns did indeed ask to settle 


No-one knows who asked for the settlement.  Those who purport that the McCanns have asked for a settlement are those bastions of truth - the PT press and no-mark blogger Blacksmith. 

registrar

  • Guest
Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #79 on: May 12, 2013, 06:32:55 PM »
and Coldwater - another notorious stirrer idolised by the sceptics

has a cold sheet of metal

registrar

  • Guest
Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #80 on: May 12, 2013, 06:34:00 PM »
And sentimental agent keeps stirring the broth - for 6 years now

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #81 on: May 12, 2013, 06:34:19 PM »
It wasn't Blacksmith that was threatened with legal action, it was the woman that gave the emails, to Blacksnitch!

***

Yes, you are right there, my error, and his name is BlackSMITH, being peurile doesnt do you any good

Then why has Blacksmith himself said on his blog (I think, more than once, certainly at least once) that his name is Anthony Sharples?

I mentioned the discrepancy between blackSMITH and DCIs blackSNITCH
His  real name is irrelevant there


Rachel Granada

  • Guest
Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #82 on: May 12, 2013, 06:35:30 PM »
Let me get this straight.  Blacksmith was told some stuff by another anonymous person on the internet and then he writes about it on his (often unreliable and always anti McCann propaganda) blog and we're supposed to just accept it's absolutely the truth? LOL.

The emails from the webmaster to the anonymous source are safely squirrelled away for future reference I can assure you. Blacksmith removed the references to the emails, after being threatened with legal action ( an absurd over-reaction by the webmaster if the quotes weren't absolutely genuine ) but the originals still exist.

Ah, so not only has Amaral got an ace up his sleeve but Blacksmith also has a squirrel up his sleeve for safe-keeping.  LOL.

I can't wait to see Amaral's fabled ace! Maybe he's been storing it for safe-keeping in the fabled fridge that Madeleine's remains were stored in.....

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #83 on: May 12, 2013, 06:36:32 PM »
No screenshots?

(sic):

Further to that what went on with BS and whoever emailed him about the matter is not in the public domain

Indeed, no screenshots ...

What a stupid question. How could there be screenshots of private emails? There are screenshots though of the original debacle on FB though not complete

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/FB.htm
« Last Edit: May 12, 2013, 06:44:28 PM by Redblossom »

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #84 on: May 12, 2013, 06:37:37 PM »
Let me get this straight.  Blacksmith was told some stuff by another anonymous person on the internet and then he writes about it on his (often unreliable and always anti McCann propaganda) blog and we're supposed to just accept it's absolutely the truth? LOL.

No,a poster went on the OFM website on FB and asked a question about whether it was true the Mccanns offered Amaral an out of court settlement, to which the website master said, let me ask Kate and get back to you. The WM came back and said it was unfounded rumours. This is fact as I and many others saw it at the time. Further to that what went on with BS and whoever emailed him about the matter is not in the public domain as in copies of the emails well I should think not, but BS blogged about it. As said you prerogative to call him a liar.But I see no reason for him to make any such thing up.

If you read back you will see quite clearly that I haven't called him a liar, that doesn't mean I think what he writes is always (or even ever) accurate.

Swings and roundabouts here

Rachel Granada

  • Guest
Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #85 on: May 12, 2013, 06:38:06 PM »
And sentimental agent keeps stirring the broth - for 6 years now

Oh yes, forgot about Sentimental Agent.  Was he the one who claimed that the PJ had "stand alone" evidence?

Offline faithlilly

Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #86 on: May 12, 2013, 06:38:32 PM »
Faithlilly said; Perhaps at the libel trial when iI is revealed the McCanns did indeed ask to settle 


No-one knows who asked for the settlement.  Those who purport that the McCanns have asked for a settlement are those bastions of truth - the PT press and no-mark blogger Blacksmith.

The webmaster's extreme reaction tells you exactly who asked for a settlement.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

registrar

  • Guest
Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #87 on: May 12, 2013, 06:41:55 PM »
And sentimental agent keeps stirring the broth - for 6 years now

Oh yes, forgot about Sentimental Agent.  Was he the one who claimed that the PJ had "stand alone" evidence?

Yes that's him

he was constantly at PJ barbecues - and excited the gullible with 'knowledge' gleaned there

Offline Eleanor

Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #88 on: May 12, 2013, 06:42:25 PM »
Faithlilly said; Perhaps at the libel trial when iI is revealed the McCanns did indeed ask to settle 


No-one knows who asked for the settlement.  Those who purport that the McCanns have asked for a settlement are those bastions of truth - the PT press and no-mark blogger Blacksmith.

If The McCanns had wanted a Settlement they would have gotten one.  As it is, they were forced to listen to what Amaral wanted to offer.  Obviously not enough.

Rachel Granada

  • Guest
Re: Defamation and defamatory ...
« Reply #89 on: May 12, 2013, 06:43:52 PM »
Martha said; Maybe Amaral's ace and Blacksmith's squirrel are one and the same...? (ie: imaginary...)

Yup.  Had Amaral's ace and the PJs "stand alone evidence" had any credibility, both would have been played long ago.  As for Blacksmith - an attention-seeker with nothing credible to say in general, although to be fair I thoroughly enjoyed his demolition job on Bennett back in December/January - it was spot on.  About the only sensible contribution he has ever made.