DAVID BRET, HIDEHO AND OTHERS .... THE WORST HATER TROLLS


    Has bennett learnt absolutely nothing about inferential libel?

    Share
    avatar
    Sykes

    Posts : 6831
    Join date : 2011-07-17

    Has bennett learnt absolutely nothing about inferential libel?

    Post  Sykes on Mon Nov 03, 2014 4:58 pm

    From Myths with thanks to tigerloaf.

    [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

    There is a clear inference in this post highlighted by the question at the end. The whole post is yet more inferential libel about an innocent couple.

    This old crank is winding himself up for yet another embarrassing and expensive fail in the courts. He must have forgotten that lying about people has already cost him thousands of pounds, made him look like one of the most incompetent people ever to undertake even the most basic legal training and shown him up on TV to be a blatant liar. I suppose he feels that there is not much more to lose now by continuing to act in precisely the way Mr Justice Tugendhat advised him was illegal. He has already lost his reputation as a lawyer more than once, he has no reputation for honesty (everyone who watched him on the BBC now knows that), his legacy to his descendants is as an interfering prat who failed in everything he tried and his finances are being hit to pay for his obsessive idiocy.

    I am certain that I am not the only one who knows that he is still bound by the agreement he chose to make with the courts rather than face up to his actions.

    Perhaps if he wasn't such a nasty liar and wasn't known as a disgraced solicitor then his frantic, pathetic and pitiful begging for people to sign up their names to the epetition would not be such a spectacular failure. I notice that with all his begging and urging only four more people have chosen to put their names and details on that petition for the government. If he can continue to cajole that many every single day till the petition ends he has a chance of winning the bet but the fact is that the 10,000 mark and the real target of such petitions of 100,000 are mere pipedreams.

    Bennett has, as far as I can see, never even had the remotest belief that his petition could ever reach 100,000 signatures. He has no belief that it could actually achieve a proper result which is consideration for debate and potential action. Instead he has always had the far less demanding target of 10,000 signatures. I wonder do the characters signing the petition (with their real names because only those count) and giving their details actually know what Bennett's aim of 10,000 signing will actually achieve. Well, I will tell them, Bennett knows and those who understand the Epetition system know that his only aim is to get a reply to the petition telling his patsy (the woman who set the petition up because in theory he can't be seen to be interfering (but see above)) why nothing will happen regarding the petition. This stunt of a petition will achieve nothing but a letter saying that the failure to achieve 100,000 signatures and the fact that there is a current live investigation into the issues means that no further action will be taken. Bennett knows that, those who understand the system know that. Its about time he was truly honest with those he is begging to sign it knew that.


    Last edited by Sykes on Mon Nov 03, 2014 7:00 pm; edited 1 time in total


    _________________
    Truth is the Daughter of Time

    Broho

    Posts : 798
    Join date : 2013-08-15

    Re: Has bennett learnt absolutely nothing about inferential libel?

    Post  Broho on Mon Nov 03, 2014 6:45 pm

    Bennett couldn't last as a professional solicitor could he? Too dodgy not to mention knows nothing about law.

      Current date/time is Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:25 am