HE'S STALKING THE McCANNS AGAIN, THIS TIME A MEMBER OF THE EXTENDED FAMILY

I cannot believe what I have just read on twitter and I'm not going to repeat it here. However, the goons are now hellbent on further shattering the lives of members of Madeleine's extended family.

So a teacher's partner admits that he enjoys vintage horror films which (invariably actually) contain "damsel in distress" scenes? He has a go at creating his own stills - all adult, all fantasy. No real action, no-one gets hurt. In FACT, none of the images would be deemed more than a PG rating. It is a fact, that they are no more realistic than images of "damsels" being eaten by aliens or giant spiders. There is no salacious talk - in fact the discussion centres more how the background photography was obtained. Some of us might think it's a bit weird or geeky, but then some people might think knitting/yoga/trainspotting/fishing is not our cup of tea either.

Live and let live? Don't be silly, this is an extended member of Madeleine McCann's family. The McCanns must be demonised wherever possible. The individual himself - who didn't actually become a member of the family until the year following Madeleine's disappearance, has sought no publicity from the case, I didn't even know of his existence until this past week.

Now Tony Bennett is demanding answers to certain questions - all contrived as "concern" for child protection. It is pure Sh!t stirring and nothing else. Why? Because this man's wife is a teacher. No doubt a letter demanding answers to these questions is already winging itself towards the Local Authority in question and they will have to investigate because it IS a local authority and the "concerns" raised are regarding child protection - even although children don't even come into it.

Where will it all end? I know teachers whose partners own guns - is that a child protection issue worthy of having the teacher investigated? Come to think of it, I know teachers who own guns. I know a teacher who owns a dangerous dog. I know plenty of teachers who live fast and loose lives, who swear like troopers and drink like fish. I'm sure a few of them take drugs too.

It is agonising to watch this constant chip, chip, chipping away at this family who have suffered the most unimaginable pain in their lives by people who aren't fit to lick their boots. Bennett in particular has devoted the past six and a half years to seeking out twisted ways to "get at" the McCanns via their friends, family and associates. According to his most recent posts, this "research" has been going on for a while. You see the man in question didn't post openly using his real details. Instead, he did what most people do online and used a nickname. Unfortunately, he also did what many others do, and wasn't careful enough about completely covering his online tracks and so these very determined shit-stirrers were able to identify him with a reasonable degree of certainty - and do their worst.

It's a disgrace and I really hope the McCanns throw the book at Bennett & co this time. Unfortunately, that too could play right into Bennett's hands. You see, he has already played the "evil McCanns trying to jail/bankrupt a poor pensioner card" - and failed because a)the McCanns made it clear to Judge Tug that they did NOT want him jailed and b) Carter Ruck waived their fee leaving him only a modest and affordable fine to pay. Now that there is only a few months left of his suspended sentence to run, what better publicity for this attention-seeker than to behave in such a way that would get him jailed in time for Christmas?

That couldn't actually be the plan could it?

coco wrote:someone needs to stop Bennett dribbling on his keyboard with excitement .

I have not checked the 'Deviant Art' website recently and don't really want to have to go there - but the information I have from another is that he has certainly been posting away merrily there this year.

Now, as to this being a police matter, I don't actually think it is.

True, we have the Obscene Publications Act, but that has been watered down and neutered by our MPs, in support of those who wish us all to be exposed to ever more obscenity, so I don't think he has broken any law. The women he uses in his 'art' /photography appear to be 18-plus.

However, given Rickwood's admission that he has had a lifelong interest in women in peril and fantasises about cartoon strips where the main character sinks slowly to her death, he must clearly be kept away from children - and that is why there must be an urgent investigation by Ullapool High School and the relevant education authority into Philomena McCann's knowledge of his depraved interest and whether Rickwood poses a risk to anyone at the school.

Particularly after they negligently employed pervert Martin Ingram who, as we have seen on this thread, had already proved to have been an unsuitable teacher of children at a previous school.

----------

It has been shown time and time again that people who fantasise about things may well carry them out.

One recent example much-discussed on this forum three years ago was the murder of Joanna Yeates by Vincent Tabak.

Other examples include Anders Breivik (Norway) and many of the mass shootings in schools and colleges in the U.S.

I have no doubt there will be some clever sods out there claiming that fantasising about killing women is 'just a harmless hobby'.

Broho wrote:He just cannot learn his lesson can he?  He seems to have some sick and perverted obsession.

Broho wrote:He really wants to go to jail as a martyr for Gonc?  

 As we have seen, Tony Bennett is "doing it again" - i.e. trying by whatever means possible, to harass the family of Madeleine McCann. This time, he is attempting to hurt them via faux "concern" for the pupils at the school where Madeleine's aunt teaches.

I won't go into any details but will say that the Goon and his disciples are on a hiding to nothing for the following reasons:-

1) Scotland has a veritable obstacle course of red tape when it comes to schools and school trips. We joke about it, but it's no joke when you have to fill out a mountain of paperwork each time you take a group of pupils on a trip - whether it be to the park across the street or the North Pole. There are risk assessments and permission slips for everything. We are almost at the stage of having to write out a risk assessment for doing a risk assessment - and I barely exaggerate about this.

ANYONE who comes in close/regular contact with the little darlings has to be "disclosed" - i.e. background checked by Disclosure Scotland. That includes parents who volunteer to assist with regular school activities. Accompanying a school trip abroad would almost certainly necessitate disclosure. Close contact with young and/or vulnerable people requires "Enhanced Disclosure" - this means they really dig into your past and present. It is a lengthy and costly process which we have to pay for ourselves, but it is essential for registration with the GTCS - our professional regulator.

Successful disclosure states that the person concerned is(and I am quoting from my own):-

   "free from criminal convictions, reprimands, warnings and cautions."

2)Bennett's demand to know who is responsible for hiring a teacher who was later convicted of a s.e.x offence is an easy question to answer. There is something called a "selection panel". For an unpromoted teaching post, this may consist only of the headteacher and the head of the department which has the vacancy. Promoted posts have more people in the selection panel.

The successful interviewee must prove that they are a) qualified to do the job b) registered with the GTCS - which in turn requires c) successful disclosure and d) suitable references. These are all checked BEFORE the candidate is interviewed.

In Scotland there can be months between the post being advertised and the interviews taking place.

The last bit of the selection process is dependent upon the interview and an observed lesson. The interview process can take a full day.

The struck-off teacher in question was a first-time offender. His disclosure investigations would have turned up a clean record. He was GTCS registered and therefore Enhanced Disclosed, all the selection panel therefore had to do was to base their hiring decision on his interview and observation lesson.

3) Also with regard to said struck off teacher - his case is done and dusted. He has been to court and sentenced. His case is already concluded by the GTCS (he asked to be removed from the register). i.e. the decisions have all been taken and there is no more to be said on the matter.

4) With regard to Madeleine's uncle, he has done nothing illegal. His "artwork" if it can be called that, is no more grisly than images depicting a grown man being eaten by a giant spider. I have a kiosk picture of myself going over Niagara Falls in a barrel - if it was real, it would have resulted in certain death - does that make it a "snuff" image? Don't be silly.

At most, these images would get a PG rating. There are no children involved. Most of the discussion around the images pertains to the techy side of their creation. There is nothing to suggest that his "other" comments are anything other than tongue in cheek. No-one was hurt, or likely to get hurt. The images are pure fantasy and most importantly, there is absolutely NOTHING to suggest that he is a danger to anyone. What teachers do in their private time is no-one else's business as long as it isn't illegal and isn't presenting a threat to young people. What teachers' partners do in their own time is simply no-body's business.

Bennett and his cohorts can do their "maiden aunts with a fit of the vapours" or "faux concerned citizen" stuff till they are blue in the face and it will not change these facts. They've said they reported this to the police. I suspect they were told to take a hike since no crime has been committed. I also suspect that as a result, they have resorted to plan B which is to make this public with the intention of hurting the family through humiliation and innuendo. It is my opinion they will fail at this too,

All Madeleine's aunt has to do is to show the authorities how they are being targeted by a very well documented hate campaign and Bennett & co will not be entertained. I hope Bennett's latest victims do this tomorrow, just before they speak to their lawyers (if they haven't already done so). The community in which they live is almost certainly aware that the family are targets of weirdos who are likely to be far more dangerous than anyone with an interest in cult horror movies which get PG rated at most. Madeleine's aunt is beloved by her pupils. She is one of those teachers who gives her time and effort to her profession. Not every teacher is up for taking a busload of pupils away for a week abroad. There is an unbelievable amount of effort involved in preparing for this for a start. Teachers who do it on a regular basis generally win the admiration of other staff members, pupils and parents. If Bennett and his cohorts think they can destroy this with a nasty little smear campaign, he's deluded - but then we knew that.

Finally, it's always a shock when a teaching colleague turns out to be a p.a.e.dophile (I've been there), but it happens and they are usually very good at hiding it. The school tends to close ranks when it happens in order to protect the pupils. No doubt there would have been an emergency staff meeting at which staff members were warned about media interest and told not to talk about it. This is standard practice.

I can just imagine Bennett chortling and rubbing his hands with glee at the thought that he has finally found something with which to hurt Madeleine's family, but as I said above, he really is on a hiding to nothing. As usual.

Firstly, they are claiming this man is some sort of pervert and from their comments about Madeleine, contacting the detective heading the UK investigation into her abduction etc any reasonable person would infer that they wish people to think there is a connection to madeleine's disappearance. However, their basis for these claims amounts once again to nothing. Even IF it is this mans art page, there is nothing illegal, sexual, amoral, unethical, pornographic or violent etc on it. Its no more perverse than Ophelia, the game lara croft or the new Sandra bullock film gravity when it comes down to it. Yes, its women in quick sand, but is that any different from images of men in perilous situations? The man likes quick sand images, so what? He does not say he gets sexual kicks from it, wants it to be real etc. Its classic anxiety dream imagery, nothing suspicious. In -the UK it is possible to go into ordinary family supermarkets and buy pornographic magazines, s.e.x toys and lubricants, card shops sell fluffy handcuffs etc so a picture of a woman in quicksand is hardly shocking. In short there is nothing in these images that raises concerns to a normal person. But Bennett and the other antis claim images of madeleine eating ice cream or playing with eye shadow are sexually provocative, and refer to them and Madeleine as Lolita, so normal does not apply to them.

Secondly, as far as I am aware there is no proof this is the same person. Bennett claims it has been researched for years and it is a similarity in usernames that link him to the art account. Aside from the question of why people have been researching this man for years, there is also the question of how they got hold of the username that they claim was used to book a school trip. There is also the fact that since they have admitted investigating this man for years they have had plenty of time to set up false profiles etc. They are pathetic enough to put the time sand effort in to do this. There us also the fact that people use identical usernames to completely different people on different usernames. Its not a case of one username to cover all forums etc. Plus many emails and usernames are very similar, one may use the letter o, a strangers may be identical but uses the number 0 instead etc and this may happen even if people live in the same town etc.once again the antis have made claims without really making sure they are right about the identity if their victim let alone the actual claims.

Who the h*ll is the Goon to decide what should and shouldn't be taught on the national curriculum? He is parroting on about the struck-off teacher teaching lessons about Jack the Ripper. Well actually, crime IS an important aspect of the curriculum and JTR is an excellent example of how one serial criminal affected the politics of the day (not to mention the sociological aspects of the crime).

I have known JTR to be used in Information Science workshops for school pupils too. My school has a subscription to Ancestry and pupils use the old censuses to research information about population and living conditions. Pupils in several schools have done projects about JTR and used the old censuses to find entries for his victims. In fact, there was a news item on TV about this.

Just because they are learning about JTR, does not necessarily mean they are being shown the grisly post mortem images. Even if they were, kids nowadays see much worse on TV anyway. These images are freely available online, on TV and in books.

From a school's perspective, JTR would almost certainly be a senior project - i.e. over 16s.

If this was a person unconnected to the McCanns I probably wouldn't have thought anything of it but in view of other unusual friends and their own behaviour at times, it does leave me feeling uneasy.

Just for the record BTW, the anti-McCann fractal artist also seems to be the source of the struck-off teacher story. She tweeted it, then tweeted it again on #mccann. Dodgy then picked it up and ran with it.

   She and Dodgy seem to be quite pally:-

   Aartitwit:-

       @DodgyDrPayne @anotherviv @J4MBM << cough >> ‐Thu Nov 07 01:07:11 +0000 2013
       @DodgyDrPayne @anotherviv @J4MBM Official line he was having a Sh!t, then chatting to Jez Wilkens in the street, not sure which side of road ‐Thu Nov 07 01:06:46 +0000 2013
       @DodgyDrPayne @justiceMANz At midnight the lizards appear, didn't you know that? All rabbits must be in bed by then ‐Thu Nov 07 00:56:49 +0000 2013
       @jontaito @DodgyDrPayne ... and make absolutely sure you don't mention ANY names, otherwise some baddie might screenshot you ‐Thu Nov 07 00:19:03 +0000 2013

   DodgyDrPayne:-

       @aartitwit @IWILLNOTGOAWAY lol I hear you! x ‐Sun Nov 10 23:14:06 +0000 2013
       @aartitwit @IWILLNOTGOAWAY done x ‐Sun Nov 10 23:11:26 +0000 2013

   Bear in mind this is a former GP (who is apparently a surgeon's wife) discussing two other doctors with what must surely be one of the most disgusting and prolific internet trolls known.

   She protected her Twitter account not long the struck-off teacher stuff blew up and a McCann supporter asked her why she had stopped practicing medicine. According to the website which she displayed on her Twitter profile, she was a GP in Glasgow - home of the McCann family.

   As Bonny said, and as I have said a few times over the past week or so - "People who live in glass houses really shouldn't throw stones..."

:s_omg Is she still registered as a GP ?

Good heavens the thought of dealing with a GP like her...... with such empathy and compassion failure is quite sickiening and frightening

She is no longer a GP. Her website says she gave up medicine.

It gives me the creeps to think of a doctor - who is one of the people we should be able to trust most of all - behaving like this. She first came to my notice because she was fishing around in the files for anything which contradicted the McCann version of events. She found some OC staff member (kitchen worker?) who claimed that Kate raised the alarm at 9.30 or 9.40 and despite the fact that there are about 20+ others who confirm that the alarm was raised about 10pm, she really pushed this one which gave an earlier time.

Any rational person would conclude that if you've got 20+ witnesses (half of whom were directly involved) who all give the same version and there is one who might not even have been a direct witness gives a different version, then probability dictates that the one is likely to be "mistaken". Not aartitwit. She got very defensive and continued to push this one rogue witness testimony. I was therefore pretty shocked to discover she had been a GP. I like to think my doctors are intelligent. NOT that they will look at all the scenarios and favour the least likely one!

This wasn't an isolated incident either. She jumped on another piece of misinformation and pushed it too. Can't remember what it was though as by this time, I was wondering if she was a conspiracy theorist because she seemed to be most interested in scenarios which required conspiracy to work.

Sykes wrote:Jean the troll.  

If this was a person unconnected to the McCanns I probably wouldn't have thought anything of it but in view of other unusual friends and their own behaviour at times, it does leave me feeling uneasy.