From Myths, with thanks, again another excellent summation from tigerloaf.
PostPosted by tigerloaf » Wed Apr 09, 2014 1:45 am
Tony Bennett is a fool. An unmitigated blithering fool.
That would be fine if he kept himself to himself and burbled and dribbled his sick, perverted rants within his own property, or even within his own neighbourhood where the locals would recognise him for the blithering fool that he is.
But he does not restrict himself. Indeed his goal is to do the very opposite. He publicises himself with every ounce of energy he can muster. One blessing is that his innate inability to handle the modern world and the social structures and the technology of that world means that many means of self-aggrandisement/publicity are not available to him.
But he has found ways of entering forum land (some would say he even has access to forum admin panels) and there his blithering becomes something far more serious. It becomes illegal libel. It becomes clear harassment. It becomes a truly disgusting spectacle.
It was expected by the legal teams and others who faced him previously, and who demonstrated what an appalling grasp of law he has, that he would be unable to contain himself when he saw what he felt was the restriction of the suspended jail sentence hanging over him slide into history.
But he was mistaken. That suspended sentence will never completely pass into history. More of that in a moment.
Those people were right and Bennett has already shown that he has no intention of changing. He is already posting the most idiotic and at the same time libelous material about people connected to the McCann case. He is once again pursuing his vendetta against Madeleine McCann, against the parents of Madeleine McCann, against the siblings of Madeleine McCann, against anyone who dares support Madeleine McCann and her parents and family.
The most junior recruit to the Bar could argue (and almost certainly win) a case that Bennett has already in the last few days undertaken actions which should bring punishment down upon him (nice old church phrase for the chap who pretends to a Christianity but acts with hate not love as his motive) in both civil and criminal courts. Senior lawyers and Judges will enjoy wiping the floor with this disreputable person.
Perhaps Bennett does not realise what he is doing and acts just because he cannot help it? Then again perhaps he does believe he knows what he is doing and his motive is once again to try to drag the McCanns into a court room where he will expose what those who have lesser legal minds than him (police, lawyers and judges included) have so far missed? In either case his actions are delusional. He will never achieve that goal. He simply does not have the requisite knowledge of the law of this land. He will never achieve that goal, because no matter how much his followers on the forum which is not his, fawn at his every word, he does not understand the evidence in the case. He will never achieve this goal because he has not bothered to read and understand [color=#FF0000]b]all[/b]/color] the files. And how do I know these are his failings? Because I read carefully the judgement laid out against him when he was sentenced to jail time (suspended) for his disgusting behaviour. He tried to conduct his case by cherry-picking the sweet bits of the files which supported his case. A bigger legal faux pas one could hardly envisage.
Harassment and libel. Either option available or both, depending on who is about to challenge the man. And both are clear in his actions.
He is without a shadow of a doubt harassing people by his actions.
He may be trying to be clever and trying to avoid libel but his lengthy post yesterday morning was as clear an example of inferential libel as Mr Justice Tugendhat is ever likely to see in his long career dealing with such matters.
The problem for society is that Bennett no longer seems to give a damm. Why should he? His reputation is in tatters. Millions watched him shuffle from the High Court having been proven to have hounded the parents of a missing child. They saw him shuffle out, having been told his grasp as law was atrocious. They saw him stumble to answer questions and then lie on television about his future actions. He is a contemptuous liar who can never regain any kind of status in law or indeed in society. That is no-one's fault but his own. He has made a career out of these misbegotten vendettas which have never been designed to serve anyone but himself.
So what is to be done. Well, his actions will not be allowed to continue for any length of time as before. Lessons have been learned.
Bennett will be hit with at least two cases, one criminal and one civil. He will get legal aid in at least one case but to no avail because his actions are so obvious that nobody can defend the totally indefensible and expect to win. He will whine that he is up against big guns as he did before and look where that got him.
But this is the crucial point. The work of the prosecutors is now so much easier. Harassment is defined (in simple terms) as two or more actions which distress or alarm a person. Well, we now have a case where persons have been proven to have been distressed by his actions. Any repeat of those actions will be the most obvious harassment.
Also for the benefit of Mr Bennett (and others who are as stupid as him and didn't understand the law) Mr Justice Tugendhat went to great pains to highlight the importance of inferential libel and explain that even when Bennett's facts were correct (and that was by no means all the time) they held the potential to infer libel in the way they were mustered and presented.
Bennett is merrily playing his stupid games again by trying to discredit (and that causes distress to people) those people he is writing about so salaciously. He is also playing stupid games because he is ignoring the criminal aspects of his actions.
And finally for those who want to see him stopped, just remember that no court (least of all Mr Justice Tugendhat's court (and he may just take great pleasure in reserving this case to himself)) would ever forget that this is a second series of transgressions.
It may be that he will be challenged on his undertakings which still bind him as much as the day he chose to sign them. In that case the procedures would be much simpler this time round. It may be that a challenge to his actions will be pursued by others in a civil court for very similar offences. Or it may be that he is challenged over the entirely separate and potentially more serious action of criminally harassing a number of people.
No matter which route is about to be pursued two things will follow.
Bennett is about to be the subject of further legal action.
And we must remember this is not a shoplifting offence or a speeding ticket or possession of drugs for personal use, this is the serious and ongoing abuse of a missing child, her parents, her family, their friends and so on. It is a hate crime in reality (though not defined as such). It will not be a matter of another slap on the wrist and fine of a few thousand. Mr Justice Tugendhat will not say in court, "Oh, Mr. Bennett, you should be given another chance because you didn't understand." Allowance has already been made for his ignorance of law and comment made by the Judge that Bennett (as a supposed former solicitor) should not be claiming ignorance of the law he once was expected to uphold, Nor will the potentially mitigating plea that he is basically an honest man, guv, with an upstanding reputation. Not at all. He has a record. A prison sentence was passed for the last offence and the same will be passed in this instance only far stiffer. It will follow that Bennett will be made to abide by the undertakings he made on one hand and on the other by the general low of England.
He will be pursued and convicted and he will not receive such a light sentence as was allowed before as a warning in effect. He has not heeded the warning and will suffer the consequences.
He has no reputation to protect but he has never considered the effect of these actions on the reputation of the rest of his family (or if he has he has selfishly ignored such considerations). He is a most dishonourable man to Madeleine and her parents and siblings for lying to them when signing the undertakings, to the public in his open lying on the television and to his own family in his disregard for their reputations and inheritance. A man who will in the not too distant future see the full weight of English Law served to good effect, on him.
Was that a little birdie chirping, I heard?
