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


    HE'S OFF AGAIN - THIS TIME IT'S ABOUT A TIMES ARTICLE

    Share
    avatar
    Sykes

    Posts : 6829
    Join date : 2011-07-17

    HE'S OFF AGAIN - THIS TIME IT'S ABOUT A TIMES ARTICLE

    Post  Sykes on Tue May 20, 2014 3:14 pm

    Re: The Times article 19 May 2014 mentions 'her murder'
    Tony Bennett Today at 2:19 pm

    tasprin wrote:

    Regarding Robert Murat: IIRC he was visited by Brian Kennedy and offered a job - very odd (surprised he didn't report him to the police). He once said (2008) there was a lot more to come out but nothing ever did. His mother was writing a book to put the record straight but that didn't materialise either.


    The meeting at which Brian Kennedy claims he offered Murat a job - helping to find Madeleine...

    1. Took place on 13 November 2007

    2. At the house of Robert Murat's aunt and uncle Sally & Ralph Eveleigh

    3. Who ran an 'adluts only' guesthouse - children aged under 14 were banned

    4. At this meeting Robert Murat and his mother were present, as was Murat's lawyer

    5. With Kennedy was his lawyer and the McCanns' lawyer, top - Rochdale-based - Freemason, Edward Smethurst

    6. The meeting was held in secret, but leaked out later

    7. The meeting was in effect a meeting of the lawyers for ALL THREE SUSPECTS in the case.

    8. Against that background, Kennedy's claim that he flew 2,000 miles to offer Murat a job, shall we say, lacks credibility.

    At the Cambridge Students Union in March 2009, Robert Murat spoke to a tumultuous reception at a debate on the morals of the tabloid press. Portraying himself as the 'victim' in all this - but obviously not mentioning his 17 lies about a missing girl when first questioned by the PJ on 15 May 2007 - he said that 'this will be the first and last time I speak about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann'.

    In fact, he said nothing at all about it - except how important it was to continue the search for her by all possible means.    

    In the weeks following this historic meeting between Kennedy and Murat, all the following happened:

    * Jane Tanner said she was no longer sure the person she'd seen on 3 May was Murat, and later even tried to claim that she'd ever positively ID'd him

    * Fiona Payne said she was no longer sure she'd seen Murat hanging around the Ocean Club on the evening of 3 May, and might have been wrong

    * Rachael Oldfield said she was no longer sure she'd seen Murat hanging around the Ocean Club on the evening of 3 May, and might have been wrong

    * Russell O'Brien said he was no longer sure she'd seen Murat hanging around the Ocean Club on the evening of 3 May, and might have been wrong

    Oh, and both the McCanns and Murat received healthy six-figure sums of agreed libel damages

    He just can't stop with his nasty insinuations can he?


    Last edited by Sykes on Tue May 20, 2014 8:34 pm; edited 1 time in total


    _________________
    Truth is the Daughter of Time

    Broho

    Posts : 798
    Join date : 2013-08-15

    Re: HE'S OFF AGAIN - THIS TIME IT'S ABOUT A TIMES ARTICLE

    Post  Broho on Tue May 20, 2014 6:58 pm

    Who ran an 'adluts only' guesthouse

    Whats an adluts?  Him and his peculiar mind.  What is wrong with having a small hotel that caters to adults and children over 14?  Many people want to go to a place for some peace and quiet.

    Has he also thought that it could relate to expensive insurance that made them come to that decision?

    All three suspects? We get to see more clearly how he failed miserably as a solicitor.
    avatar
    Sykes

    Posts : 6829
    Join date : 2011-07-17

    Re: HE'S OFF AGAIN - THIS TIME IT'S ABOUT A TIMES ARTICLE

    Post  Sykes on Tue May 20, 2014 7:42 pm

    Broho wrote:Who ran an 'adluts only' guesthouse

    Whats an adluts?  Him and his peculiar mind.  What is wrong with having a small hotel that caters to adults and children over 14?  Many people want to go to a place for some peace and quiet.

    Has he also thought that it could relate to expensive insurance that made them come to that decision?

    All three suspects?  We get to see more clearly how he failed miserably as a solicitor.
    Each time he mouths off these inanities I become surer that he is actually seeking matyrdom. He failed when he was slapped down by Mr Justice Tugenhadt and his 'moment of fame' was abruptly terminated by some succinct observations by the Learned Judge. Now all he can do is rehash old material and make up even more conspiracy rubbish. What surprises me is that his moonstruck followers actually believe his senile ramblings.


    _________________
    Truth is the Daughter of Time

    Broho

    Posts : 798
    Join date : 2013-08-15

    Re: HE'S OFF AGAIN - THIS TIME IT'S ABOUT A TIMES ARTICLE

    Post  Broho on Tue May 20, 2014 7:46 pm

    His followers wouldn't know a good lawyer if they saw one as they seem to think he knows what he's talking about.

    You just stated the obvious. He's senile.
    avatar
    Sykes

    Posts : 6829
    Join date : 2011-07-17

    Re: HE'S OFF AGAIN - THIS TIME IT'S ABOUT A TIMES ARTICLE

    Post  Sykes on Tue May 20, 2014 8:32 pm

    Broho wrote:His followers wouldn't know a good lawyer if they saw one as they seem to think he knows what he's talking about.  

    You just stated the obvious.  He's senile.
    I think maybe I was being a bit harsh; I think he is a sad and lonely old man, with few real friends. For someone like him the internet is probably all he has. Bitter, twisted and full of bile and hate. Sad readlly, I suppose, and one should feel sorry for him, but I can't, I really can't.


    _________________
    Truth is the Daughter of Time

    Sponsored content

    Re: HE'S OFF AGAIN - THIS TIME IT'S ABOUT A TIMES ARTICLE

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Sep 26, 2017 2:59 am