A retired solicitor who published claims that Madeleine McCann’s parents caused her death has been given a suspended jail sentence.
Mr Justice Tugendhat said 65-year-old Tony Bennett deliberately flouted legal undertakings, given in November 2009, not to repeat allegations about the couple. He said his conduct was so serious that nothing less than a custodial sentence of three months suspended for one year would reflect the harm he had done.
Finding Bennett guilty of contempt of court, Tugendhat said: “I am sure that he intended to allege that the claimants are to be suspected of causing the death of their daughter, and did in fact dispose of her body, lie about what happened and covered up what they had done.”
The London high court judge said he was satisfied that Bennett, of Harlow, Essex, was in breach of the undertakings in each of the 13 representative instances before the court – out of 153 publications complained of. He was not asked to make findings in relation to the other alleged breaches.
He said: “It is essential for the rule of law that injunctions and court orders be obeyed. It can’t be an answer that the person who is giving an undertaking or subject to an injunction can ignore it with impunity while it is in force.”
Bennett, who was ordered to pay the costs of the litigation, apologised to the court. He said: “I recognise the distress I have caused on a number of occasions to the claimants. I would like to apologise to them for that distress.”
The judge said Gerry and Kate McCann, who did not attend court, had suffered injury to their reputations and feelings, and had resorted to legal action not to punish Bennett but to put a stop to his repeated conduct.
He agreed with lawyers for the McCanns that Bennett had played “cat and mouse” with them by complying with the undertakings some of the time. “He was testing them with false or disingenuous assurances and demands for explanations to which, as a member of the public with no responsibility for law enforcement, he was not entitled.”
Which just goes to prove that you can libel some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time….especially not when you have signed an undertaking not to do so at any time…
Those who believe that the Internet is some sort of wild west would be well advised to take notice. Last time I heard a figure for the costs in this matter, it was somewhere in the region of £288,000.
As is well known, I have a long history with this man, his propensity for libel has had to be curtailed by me on several occasions. Hopefully he will shut up now.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2013/332.html
Ms Raccoon lives in the Monbazillac area of South West France, renowned for its fine wines and gourmet food, so she frequently finds better things to do than sit in front of a computer all morning. She is liable to take off traveling at a moment's notice. Consequently this blog only gets updated these days when it is raining - and it doesn't rain very often round here...
{ 68 comments }
What a dick. It’s been quite a decent week for us dicks, what with Oscar ‘whoops, the girlfriend’s dead’ Pistorias, Vicky Pryce’s jury with ‘is it alright if we base our judgement on stuff that has bugger all to do with anything?’ and now this penis landing a whopping great kick you out of your house type bill for, err, sadistic kicks I guess. I thought lawyers were menat to consider cui bono – what exactly has he got out of it? ho hum…never mind.
That comment has made me laugh more than any other this week!I bet the canvassers in Eastleigh are just delighted that the Huhne affair is still live….. must make for some interesting doorstops.
Vicky Pryce’s jury with ‘is it alright if we base our judgement on stuff that has bugger all to do with anything?
Interesting point. My impression on reading those questions that the jury sent to the judge was that the more intelligent members of the jury sent those questions in the hope that the judges responses would provide an authoritative answer to other recalcitrant jurors whose performance as jurors was making the whole thing a farce.
The question what is reasonable doubt? is certainly one that perplexes juries on both sides of the Atlantic. Replying that it is a doubt that is reasonable does little to lift the fog. To me the problem is interpretation of the word reasonable. What kind of reasoning is acceptable as the underpinning for doubt? Anyone who has ever had a discussion about interpretation of the Bible with a fundamentalist Christian (who is not himself a fundamentalist Christian) will soon discover that what one person considers reasonable may be what another considers quite unreasonable, if not insane.
OK, some of the questions were a bit dumb, but I’m not surprised the jury were having a serious case of WTF?
One bloke stood up and said “she took speeding points”.
Vicky Pryce stood up and said “yeah but he made me”.
First bloke said “nah, he didn’t, ‘cos she’s got a good job, innit?”.
I guess they were waiting for witnesses to be called, evidence to be presented, you know, all that “courtroom” stuff that usually happens at a trial.
*First bloke said “nah, SHE didn’t, ‘cos she’s got a good job, innit?”. (cold fingers – I’m up North! )
@ Jonathan Mason
I am aware that on twitter there is, or was, a long discussion going on between lawyers and legal experts, as to whether the judge properly directed them about reasonable doubt.
That said, when I heard about the ‘can we use other reasons rather than the evidence’ question, I could only think that they must have ended up with a gaggle of anti-McCann pitchforkers within the jury.
It is reported elsewhere that the “12 good men and true”, supposedly representative of the local community and who made up the Vicky Pryce jury, consisted of 10 members from Afro-Caribbean and Asian origin. Eight of the 12 were women.
Whether any of this had any bearing on their conduct may be a topic of some debate, but those proportions do not seem to reflect the community in which the alleged offence was committed. Judged by one’s peers ?
Maybe, but the English-speaking Caribbean has the same jury system.
It seem to me that the whole trial was a farce and the jury might just as well have discharged her.
What she did was obviously wrong, but she is not a danger to society.
Vickey Price? Is that her name? And jut how many female members of this Forum would have welched on their husbands, MP of somewhere or another, if he had sicked this on them. Not too many, I do suspect.
He should never have left her for a lesbian. But that is neither here nor there. ORLY?
But you it seems are all over the place
Although juries are selected from the local community, it is by random, and not according to any rules that there must be an exact demographic match. Both “sides,” of course, get to challenge the inclusion of individual jury members.
Although that’s the principle, it only ever delivers those people willing to participate and/or not smart enough to concoct an acceptable excuse. Then add in the facility for both sides to challenge jurors until an agreeable dozen emerges, and it’s almost certain that a jury will nowhere near represent ‘peers’, thus failing in its primary objective.
For some time, juries in complex financial trials have proved demonstrably inadequate for the task. This problem now seems to be extending into the area of the more basic criminal trials, which may signal a need to review the whole principle of jury trials, it no longer being feasible to expect the average available UK citizen to be capable of absorbing, analysing and concluding on even a relatively simple trial such as this one.
Jury selection is not quite as “blind” as it looks. The interweb contains information on avoidance of it. There are a lot of ways for someone to shirk it. I should think a typical jury is likely to be atypical, in that many of those savvy enough to stay off the jury manage to do just that. While the questions put to the judge seemed a bit daft, view that in the context of say, the less bright kids in the class who didn’t realise how not to volunteer for some onerous task, and maybe its no more or less than you would expect.
Quote
He agreed with lawyers for the McCanns that Bennett had played “cat and mouse” with them by complying with the undertakings some of the time. “He was testing them with false or disingenuous assurances and demands for explanations to which, as a member of the public with no responsibility for law enforcement, he was not entitled.”
What kind of judge was this?
Principle 7 of the 9 principles of law enforcement is clear :
To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen, in the interests of community welfare and existence.
I know nothing about this chap but at least let us get law in the correct order, that from a judge is the reason we are in the mess we are.
He qualified the statement that Bennett was just a member of the public by adding “with no responsibility for law enforcement”. So Bennett has no right that anyone answers questions to him, in fact he could actually endanger any future trials by this behavior.
There isn’t going to be any future Trial, although I agree that Mr. Bennett would have endangered one such, if there ever was one. But he knows that. So in effect, he has destroyed his own objective.
It was always his intention to destroy The McCanns in the Court of Public Opinion. I don’t know why this is so.
I might have said that Juries aren’t daft, but I don’t think that one will wash anymore.
We now head closer to Trial by Judge. Would this be such a bad idea?
I’m not entirely sure why he felt the Court of Public Opinion needed the help, frankly…
So presumably you think that The Court of Public Opinion has some Jurisdiction in Law? Sorry. It doesn’t. This happens to be a fact.
And yer, yer, yer, I left my children alone on occasions, for which I owe you no apology. Or them for that matter. Although I must say that they all hate me now and again because I wasn’t perfect. But, ha ha, neither are they. I just choose not to tell them so. Any more than I ever told my Father that I thought he was a waste of space. Sometimes people don’t always do exactly as they should. But this does not necessarily amount to Child Neglect.
“So presumably you think that The Court of Public Opinion has some Jurisdiction in Law?”
Well, I’m not sure how you could reach that conclusion from what I said. Unless you were a Pryce Jury member?
well severla media outlets had admitted they had printed false stories about the case, so perhaps he jut wanted to keep the lies going. he has certainly written lie after lie about them, even during the trial he was telling journalists that they had spent four millon on various court proceedings which was a lie. If one looks at the forum where he wrote this he has made up the number of hours and the costs per hours, miscalucalated some of these by a factor of ten, included the cocts of court cases that the mccanns were not involved in (when he made false accusations who supported them for instance), and ignored the fact that CR had told him that they wer enot paid by the find madeleine fund.
We now see people expressing their disbelief at his claims thinking them to be true.
I am overawed by the written Judgement of Judge Tugendhat. He didn’t miss one single devious trick that Mr. Bennett endeavoured to pull. And he did it in such an incredibly short space of time. The Judgement was pure joy to read. Not because I care about what happens to Mr. Bennett, but just to see a great mind at work.
I also hope that Mr. Bennett will shut up, and I make not predictions of whether he will or not. But is was always the only thing that The McCanns wanted.
Oh, and me.
Costs at approximately £288,000, could be reduced somewhat, but not a lot I think, since The Judge stated that this was the fault of Mr. Bennett by refusing to either seek, or had possibly rejected Legal Advice, while still proceeding to pull every trick in his book.
“Free Speach and Yuman Rites, but only for me Bennett.” Take that one to The Court of Human Rights.
Elena,
First rule of legal advice from Abraham Lincoln, ” He who represents himself has a fool for a client.”
Yes, I know, Brian. But this is not necessarily true. Sometimes you have to be a complete dick head to miss the point. And sometimes some persons are able. This wasn’t so on this occasion.
Mr. Bennett allowed his judgement to be clouded by his all consuming desire to find some other person wanting. I truly do not understand for why he had to do this.
To represent yourself? Who knows? I frequently went into Court to represent my Employer without one wit of legal training, and always everyone was kind to me, not least The Judge. And I never lost one single Case. But then I was never a smart arse.
I am really sad about what has happened today, but only because Mr. Bennett is a fool. And a nasty one at that.
I agree it sure looks like Judge T. got the measure or him.
I loved reading the subtle -and not that subtle- remarks, like “His attitude that fundamental or human rights are only for himself”.
Will this make an end to his stalking, harassing and accusing Madeleine’s parents?
Call me cynical but I doubt that.
you guys appear to know a lot about the MaCanne’s, how so if you don’t mind me asking?
in what way do you mean
it is possible to know that bennett has lied and misrepresented him simply by comparing the files with his writings.
do you have any specific questions, i do not mind trying to have a go at answering them.
Followed the case from day 1, belinus … actually my home was badly flooded so was a bit late on forums
Nearly six long and very tedious years of watching the really horrible things that Mr. Bennett has tried to do to The Mccanns, without a scrap of proof. His intention always being to destroy them in The Court of Public Opinion.
Okay, so I am a lonely old fart who spends too much time on The Internet. But I ain’t daft, and I do know a bit more about The Law than most.
And No, I doubt that this is over. Bennett is now offering to withdraw his “Right” to a Libel Trial if The McCanns pay some of The Costs which have been awarded against him by Judge Tugendhat. One might wonder about his mental health.
No, it’s not over.
It might be for Bennett, but he never did have any strategic plan or any rationality.
Yes I too wonder, considering that they (the McAnns) come across as a thoroughly nasty pair of oiks whenever I have seen or heard anything of them.
Doesn’t mean they are guilty of child murder and then covering it up though…
i have never thought that, they just seem an ordinary couple suddenly thrust into extraordinary circumstances.
An ordinary couple. With rather extra-ordinary resources…
To be honest I stopped following the case when it turned into a circus. In that sense anything offered is info I would be interested in.
I do remember however holding a deep sense that something is missing in the affair, but we cannot expect any parent to act in a particular manner when such is overshadowing them.
Could not warm to the father at all.
I am aware of the cost to move up the ladder of the kingdom of earth for some, it did cross my mind…
CR and other legal companies do CF work for lots of people, not just those in the public eye.
“…an ordinary couple suddenly thrust into extraordinary circumstances.”
Should I bite? You seem hardly worth it…I think I’ll pass…
Seriously you took the time to write a reply telling me I was not worthy of a reply?
Are you seriously telling me you do not think being a couple of doctors married with children is ordinary, or do you not think having your child abducted is extraordinary?
Nah, he’ll be back
Wants to make a martyr of himself
To be remembered forever
Do any of you really believe Mr Bennett’s got 300 grand lying around in any sort of equity?
I read elsewhere that he nipped out yesterday and put down 900 quid on a burial plot, which somewhat surprised me as he always seemed perfectly capable of digging his own grave.
So, who’s going to be stumping up from which, er, Fund, do you reckon? Adam Tudor, Isabel Martorell, the two QCs and two legal assistants sitting opposite Bennett this morning were, I suspect, not doing it for love of the sainted couple.
conditional fee i believe. cr have stated they have never been paid by the fund. so they will have conditional fee insurance. but if tb owns a house in harlow it is likely it would sell for a good sized chunk since house prizes within commutable distance from london are through the roof.
Evidently, Bennett secured a plot in his Local Authority graveyard whilst they were going cheap. Bennett will likely live to be 95 like his parents, but think of the cost of a burial plot in 30 years time. And the graveyards will be full up in 30 years time. Everybody will have to be cremated due to shortage of land. He is very forward thinking is our Mr. Bennett.
Also killing two birds at a time….when he becomes homeless due to selling his house to pay for £288,000 legal bill, he can pitch his tent up over his paid-for plot of land in the graveyard. Nobody can move him on if he owns the freehold on that grass
that would be a shallow grave then
s’ppose those are somewhat cheaper
and Tone does watch the pennies
house prices rather
It appears Bennett has pulled his last cunning stunt – good
Now will someone please relieve him of all his earthly goods?
Starting with that God-awful shopping trolley full of Goebellian pamphlets
The Harlow hounder deserves no less
This Bennett bloke is a genuine fool! To what end would he bedevil the McCanns, in the face of distinct legal undertakings to do the contrary?? One has to wonder… Regardless of what his opinion on the subject is, once he has undertaken not to repeat these incendiary allegations he should not do so!
I really do wonder at some people.
Well, it’s obvious, init? He did it to big himself up in front of his many female followers who simply adore him. I don’t know what they see
in him myself, although he does have fairly kissable lips.
You may well have a point there about the female followers
don’t know about the fleshy lips though
Tone always reminded me of Jarvis Cocker’s
great grandad
Oh, thank God someone else saw that. I thought I was alone. I could actually fancy him. If I was desperate. Which I often am. But there you go. No accounting for taste.
Tone Bennett is in a bit of a bind now
The law of the land has told him to keep his trap firmly shut
His wee squadron of adoring biddies want him to keep ‘raging against the machine’ – or whatever Max Bygraves might have termed it
Tricky that
Do they still sell gob-stoppers in Essex?
Isar. I Smell a Rat. I love you to bits, inso far as I am able. But could you possibly decide wherein your Legal loyalties lie because I am getting a bit pissed off with your constant change of heart.
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Love ya right back El,
my opinion of Tone has never wavered/faltered/changed one iota
and Tone is the subject of this thread – non?
Is this a MI6 blog – build to ensure that the real coverup is being maintained by England and Portugal, and MADELEINE MC CANN is left buried under the Murat driveway !!!
We will truly know if this comment is posted………….Stephen D. Birch
Your comment is published Mr Birch – possibly because this blog is hosted in the US where commentators are personally, legally and financially responsible for the despicable tosh that some of them choose to utter.
Welcome to the real world, you’re not in a back street blog now!
You are the gentleman who climbed over the wall of an elderly ladies home in the early hours of the morning in order to take photographs that you intended to sell to the media to further your daft theory, aren’t you?
Just one of the dwindling number of people who think that the disappearance of a small girl is some sort of point scoring internet game rather than a real life tragedy.
Hurrah for Anna and well said.
Birch and Bennett are cut from the same cloth – attention seeking fools who think their certainties over-ride the rights of others.
Anna the fact that you and the Mc Canns refuse to excavate the Murat driveway, despite 4 US and 1 UK and 1 South African expert in ground penetrating equipment, confirming something is buried below the Murat driveway, 99% Maddie tells me there major coverup occurring to protect corrupt Portuguese police who planted DNA in the Mc Cann hire car, hired 25 days AFTER Maddie went missing. Just dig, I don,t want glory or fame, just dig or
‘…Anna the fact that you and the Mc Canns refuse to excavate the Murat driveway’.
Surely, Mr. Birch you are not requiring our esteemed host to travel to Portugal and to labour mightily in the hot Portugese digging up the driveway of a private citizen, and without his permission, just to prove (or disprove) your theories?
Tell you what… Why don’t you take your pick (and shovel) and get digging yourself! I am sure the Portugese authorities would be delighted to see you. You may even get the cell they no doubt intended for Graham Mitchell!!
´Neither the mccanns nor the host of this forum have the right to excavate anyone’s propery. And maybe the reson the police do not want to excavate it is because a) they already have, b) they actually got real experts to look at the findings, and c) i do believe the bit you looked at was above piping.
If you were prepared to break into the property etc why did you not just dig there and then if you were so sure?
And you do realise that no DNA of Madeleine’s was actually found in the car. The material that was found could have been from any of the mccanns, so it was a pretty poor job of planting evidence.
An old Italian man lived alone in the country. It was Spring and he wanted to dig his tomato garden, as he had done every year, but it was very hard work for the aging man as the ground was hard. His only son, Vincent, who used to help him, was currently in prison. The old man wrote a letter to his son and described his predicament:
Dear Vincent,
I am feeling pretty bad because it looks like I won’t be able to plant my tomato garden this year. I’m just getting too old to be digging up a garden plot. If only you were here my troubles would be over. I know you would dig the plot for me.
Love Dad
A few days later he received a letter from his son:
Dear Dad,
Not for nothing, but don’t dig up that garden. That’s where I buried the BODIES.
Love Vinnie
At 4 a.m. the next morning, FBI agents and local police arrived at the old man’s house and dug up the entire area. However, they didn’t find any bodies, so they apologized to the old man and left.
That same day the old man received another letter from his son.
Dear Dad,
Go ahead and plant the tomatoes now. That’s the best I could do under the circumstances.
Love Vinnie
————————————
I get my coat
Oh bugger. Our cover blown. Will have to find another site that needs disinforming now !
This has to be a classic case of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut (and I’m not implying TB is a nut) However, I suspect that this is going to backfire.
Having looked back at Bennett’s ‘involvement’ in the Madeleine case
there is, to my mind only one term that sums up the prat:
‘King of Schadenfreude’
If there is a hell, I hope he rots in it
This site is definitely government controlled, and uses disinformation tactics to hide the truth. Fortunately I am now versed in them all. Here,s an example . In my previous comment I state 4 US experts say something is buried beneath the Murat driveway, to which a government agent diverts the forum readers off the main topic , which is why are they not digging, to rather discuss me going to jail. This This time I am going to crush you and your stupid disinformation tactic , and ask you right back , why are you not asking the Portuguese police to dig up a driveway we know has something buried under it, and has never been checked. Before and after photos prove that. Sorry I am away from my office and don,t have my disinformation list with me , or I could quote the actual name of the tactic used. There are 25 used worldwide by governments and press to suppress the truth. Maddie is under the Murat driveway, and that is the issue. MI6 share offices with the CIA in the US and the UK. Hope u enjoyed me countering your disinformation strategy to coverup the truth that MADELEINE MC CANN is under the Murat driveway.
Dear God you are full of utter tosh! This site is government controlled? Other commentators are government agents?
How can anybody take anything you say seriously? You would be hilarious if it wasn’t for the fact that you chose to use the disappearance of an innocent child as the foundation for your paranoia. How dare you! How dare you decide that because the Portuguese Police have not taken up YOUR suggestion as to what has happened to Madeleine, that you are free to deduce that this means you are correct and therefore there is no point in Police forces worldwide collaborating to see if they can discover the truth of what happened to her.
Whether or not there is ‘anything’ buried beneath the Murat drive does not lead to your offensive suggestion that you ‘know’ it is Madeleine’ and therefore she is dead – that is your own paranoid conclusion.
So… Now the Raccoon Arms is Government controlled? Ho ho!!
Anna, I know your ‘open door’ policy attracts any and all who seek a bit of discourse and elightenment but… who is this utter berk? That there are such people out and about, who are not confined to a secure unit is very worrying and comments such as that offered are stretching the right to freedom of expression under Article 10 to their extreme limits!
“This site is definitely government controlled, and uses disinformation tactics to hide the truth.”
Oh dear, you are definitely off your medication today.
You should seek solace over at Alex Jones and the rest of the conspiracy loons at http://www.infowars.com, where you will feel right at home…
Sorry if this is spam
but some swear by Bach rescue medicines
in case, the paranoia might destroy ya
Oh, he’s the pillock who turned up in Portugal with a thing like a lawnmower and then broke into the garden of the elderly Mrs Murat in the early hours, ran his lawnmower over the drive and announced to the world that he’d found Madeleine….came all the way from South Africa apparently.
At one time I did wonder why the McCann’s needed a press spokesman, but when you get to meet some of the characters that hang round that story hoping for five minutes of fame, and realise the worrying character of the people they would have to deal with personally if it wasn’t for Clarence Mitchell, then you understand….
I’ve never made up my mind personally as to what actually happened, we can only guess from snippets of press reports and leaks from the police so I prefer not to have a hard and fast opinion – however, after five years of close encounters with the calibre of person who sets themselves up as armchair detective and persecutes them, convinced they are guilty of something, they have earned my sympathy on that count alone. Whatever happened, no one should have to deal with utter nutters seeking to make money out of what is a tragedy on any account.
These people seem to think that real life tragedy is an edition of some sort of X-box game…
Anyway, he’s had his five minutes of fame in the government controlled snug, and I’ve put him out with the other two berks. That’s three banned now for the record.
Sadly I think families that get thrust into the spotlight over a tragedy have to deal with this sort of idiot all the time. I think there is some sort of club that constantly try to interfere in the hunt for Keith Bennett despite being told to back off by his family.
People should always think of the worst thing that has happened in their own life and then think how they woudl feel if strangers became obsessed with it, and blamed them and wrote lies about them and set up hate groups etc.
Well said
he’s an ambulance chaser
Bennett feeds on other people’s misery –
and that is low
Comments on this entry are closed.