Wednesday, 27 December 2017

SHINING A LIGHT INTO A DARK PLACE

JILL HAVERN & TONY BENNETT - AN UNHOLY ALLIANCE

For a number of years, five to be exact, the CMoMM forum, headed by Jill Havern and Tony Bennett, has, whilst claiming to be against the McCanns, consistently attacked, smeared, and lied about a huge number of 'anti McCanns', far over and above the number of attacks they have visited upon the vile trolls supporting the McCanns, during the same period. In fact, as I shall prove later in this blog, the duplicitous pair have allowed pros onto the forum, to stir the pot, and fight their dishonest battles for them. Before I move on to that, and many other points, I would like to describe how I became a victim of Jill and Tony's deceitful, and dangerous games.
It was around 2015 when I first became suspicious of the activities of Tony Bennett. Here was a man, who had in 2013 been found guilty of breaching a court ruling, imposed on him in 2009, and yet continued (and does to this day) to fall foul of that very court ruling. For anybody who is interested in reading the build up to the court ruling, they can do so here:

Build up to court ruling against Tony Bennett

Final court ruling


The crux of the order however, can be learned from the following quote:
"In exchange for the McCanns and Edward Smethurst reducing their combined costs claim against him from a total of around £420,000, to £35,000 - a 92% reduction overall - Tony has been required to:
* Withdraw his appeal against Mr Justice Tugendhat’s judgment,
* Withdraw his application to vary three of the sixteen different undertakings he gave to the McCanns and the High Court in November 2009,
* Agree to be bound for life by the 16 undertakings he gave to the Court and the McCanns in November 2009, and
* Agree to make no further Application either to lift the stay on the McCanns’ original Libel Claim. or to vary or
discharge any of the undertakings he gave in November 2009."
One of the orders Tony Bennett was given in 2009, and as can be seen above, is bound to for life, was this:
"The Defendant undertakes not to repeat allegations that the Claimants are guilty of, or are to be suspected of, causing the death of their daughter Madeleine McCann; and/or of disposing of her body; and/or of lying about what had happened and/or of seeking to cover up what they had done.”
Now, to my point. As I have said for a number of years, and as is proven beyond any doubt from the above quotes, Tony Bennett did indeed do a deal with the McCanns. He received a 92% reduction of the costs he was ordered to pay, despite being found guilty of a breach, and despite still breaking the court order to this day - how very charitable. Tony himself even alluded to the reaching of an agreement with the following words after the hearing:
"I'm sorry for the distress I've caused to them - I'm hoping the way forward will result in both of us drawing a line under the situation."
The way forward - hmmm, just what was that way forward Tony? Clearly not to stop discussing the case, or as per the order, accuse the McCanns "of lying about what had happened and/or of seeking to cover up what they had done.”
As any of you who have read CMoMM will know, Tony Bennett forcefully imposes the theory that Madeleine died/disappeared before the 3rd May 2007, the very date the McCanns, and the tapas 7 claim Madeleine was "abducted". In what universe does that claim not directly oppose the court order? If Madeleine disappeared before the 3rd, and the McCanns say she didn't, then the only possibility is that the McCanns are lying, and seeking to cover up what they had done". There are no two ways about it.
Interestingly, and perhaps crucially, is this quote from Tony, shortly after the ruling, and it's in relation to Jill Havern, and her reasons for setting up the forum. If you're under the impression it was to find out the truth about what happened to Madeleine McCann, you're wrong:
"I start by thanking once again the forum-owner (Jill Havern), who originally set up ‘The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann’, largely to help me, and who has remained loyal and helpful throughout all the ups and downs of the last four years."
So very much like the fund for Madeleine, which was never set up with the sole purpose to help search for Madeleine, but to protect Kate and Gerry. The CMoMM forum was set up largely to help Tony - not to find out the truth, but to help Tony - and help Tony it has.
It is my firm belief that Tony has been a conduit for the McCanns. With his wild theories, his attacks on antis, his dogged determination to force a scripted scenario upon those who follow him, his campaigns against anyone who disagrees with him, his close connections to pro McCanns, and the speed, and ferocity at which he shuts down anybody who might hold vital information, an insight to the case, or wish to promote the facts of the case, away from his controlling ways.
SONIA POULTON
The reason Bennett, and Jill Havern turned on me so viciously.
For a number of years Tony Bennett has done his level best to attack, amongst others, Sonia Poulton. There are many pages on the "largely to help (Tony)" CMoMM forum - indeed there is a full section dedicated to attacking and smearing Sonia. As many of you will know, I am an admin at Justice For Madeleine; a group that Tony tried to have shut down after we stopped a former group member, and CMoMM member continually, and unfairly attacking Sonia Poulton. That is a rule we have always had on the group, and one we stick to. Bennett's obsession to harm the wellbeing of Sonia has been evident for many years, and is something I found utterly sickening.
I am lucky enough to know Sonia on a personal level. When she announced she would be making a documentary, (one that Bennett and his team have poured cold water on since it's making was announced), I was very eager to find out what Sonia's intentions were. Would she put the facts of the case across diligently, and accurately, or would she flirt with some of the myths of the case? I decided the best thing to do, would be to ask Sonia directly, when I did so, she suggested we have a chat on the phone. We talked at great length, Sonia asked my advice on what I thought should be in the documentary, and what I felt were myths, or unsubstantiated claims. A great deal of work was then done by Sonia on a daily basis, all the while suffering attacks from Tony Bennett, and his pro McCann friends - oh, you forgot I said I would show proof of his links to pros, and that he colluded with them? More to come.
It was during a period when the attacks upon Sonia began to reach their worst, and were emanating from a team of pro McCanns, and Bennett, that I approached Jill Havern via PM. I asked Jill to show some empathy, to stop the relentless harassment, and stalking of Sonia on her "largely to help (Tony)" CMoMM forum - Jill agreed, and put all the posts that attacked Sonia into a members only area - a small blessing given the low number of members interacting on the forum.
At that time, Sonia was in the middle of a court case, she had brought against a prolific pro McCann and friend of Tony Bennett's - Darren Laverty. Laverty and his cronies have a long history of lying, stalking, threatening, harassing, and attacking survivors of child abuse - vulnerable people that the establishment would sooner see silenced, people that Sonia sought to help - as this blog unfolds, you will see how Tony fits right in with these people - for now though, allow me to show you some screenshots that will give you a better idea of the type of person Darren Laverty is. 

If we are to judge a man by the company he keeps, what are we to make of Anthony Bennett over his alliance with this creature?  Bennett, so supercilious about others' bad language and vulgarity, seemingly has no problem with his friend's sickening public outbursts:











The case, fell apart at the eleventh hour, the reasons for which I won't go into, suffice to say a certain child abuse apologist, and barrister called in favours for her friend Laverty. Tony used this opportunity to his agenda- fuelled advantage. All the pages that had previously been hidden, suddenly reappeared, and Bennett took to Twitter to bask in glee, throwing more hatred toward Sonia, and thoroughly enjoying the schadenfreude in seeing her suffer - receiving information directly from the aforementioned pro McCann - Darren Laverty. During this time Sonia struggled on, and tried her best to continue filming, researching, and producing the documentary. Finding herself up against the inevitable problems of creating a documentary the McCanns would have fought tooth and nail against, as well as facing daily abuse from Tony and his friends. Just what motivated Tony to do all he could to demoralise, and cause suffering to Sonia? Surely  any true anti would welcome another documentary on the case...wouldn't they?
THE FUND FOR GONCALO AMARAL

The attacks upon Sonia weren't the only time Bennett colluded with pro McCanns. When Leanne Baulch headed the Go-fund me campaign for Goncalo Amaral, Bennett, armed with false information from Darren Laverty once more, decided to take to the pages of the CMoMM forum, and try his level best to cast doubt upon the fund's authenticity. Remember, that without this fund, Goncalo Amaral would have been unable to appeal the original verdict that of the case the McCanns had against him - resulting in a ban on his book, and a very real chance of bankruptcy. Indeed the very things the McCanns sought to do to Bennett, before he reached a deal with the couple.

Here's a link to Laverty casting doubt upon the fund.



...and here, a link to a pro McCann blog that promoted the words of Bennett, and shows how he was also doing the very same as Laverty (also note the involvement of CMoMM member "Cloak and Dagger", AKA Frances Gallagher - another whose links to pro McCanns are very well documented:

Link to Bennett attempting to smear the fund for Goncalo Amaral


SO WHY DID HAVERN AND BENNETT ATTACK MYSELF
My crime, to defend both Sonia, and Leanne - or to look at it another way, to defend the truth.
In light of the resurrected attacks upon Sonia, that were upon a forum overtly bearing the name of Madeleine McCann, but, covertly, from the fingertips of Bennett and his pro McCann friends, I decided to make a stand. Each day, on twitter, I asked Bennett how he was still able to comment on the case, despite a court ruling preventing him from doing so. What followed, was both unbelievable, sick, and despicable.
Yeah right...

JILL HAVERN'S LIES
Jill Havern, the woman who, according to Tony set up her forum, using the name of Madeleine McCann, but with the purpose of helping him, began to lose her mind. She accused me of a number of things. The link below is to my own Facebook page, and shows how Jill was easing herself into a rhythm of lies, and attempts to discredit me:


As can be seen, I countered those lies from Jill with inarguable facts, even as can be seen below, offering Jill the opportunity to resolve our issues privately. 





In hindsight, showing Jill up as a liar, for what were fairly mild lies, was a mistake. What followed, was far, far worse, and utterly despicable.
Jill stated on her forum, and without the slightest bit of evidence, that I was guilty of 8 crimes, the worst of which being sexual assault, the screenshot for which is below:



So Jill accused me of the following crimes:

1. Threats to kill (other than Tony).
2. Threats of violence.
3. Persistent (and continuing) stalking/harassment.
4. Sexual assault.
5. Fraud.
6. Blackmail.
7. Making a false statement to police.
8. Obtaining a pecuniary by deception. 

Interestingly, Tony Bennett (on the screenshot, and link below), confidently, and dishonestly, denied these claims were ever made, after Jill had deleted her lies. He even dragged Cherry Berry into the mix, who had seen the claims, but was accused of lying as well (more on the terrible way Cherry was treated later). Unfortunately for Tony, and Jill, they presumed I was stupid, and hadn't archived the libellous claims.




Link to Tony Bennett lying again. 

I had seen through Tony's game, but worse for him, I wasn't going to let it drop. They now needed to silence me, and would stop at nothing to do so, even accusing me of being another poster, known only to me as Andrew, a former CMoMM member, who they claim rang Tony, and issued a death threat back in 2014/15. It was at this point I contacted the police. A twitter/forum spat is one thing, to falsely and maliciously accuse another of sexual assault, for no other reason than to cause that person harm, is beyond sick. Not only did they put me in danger - as they discussed openly where I used to live, examined photographs from my Facebook profile for clues about my movements, they also tweeted links to their lies, with a hashtag attached to the name of the small town I lived in. What that meant was that anybody from my area who was interested in news in my town, would be met with links to Havern's lies. This course of action caused me severe distress, I became ill, I didn't feel safe leaving my own home, and became withdrawn. My health deteriorated further, culminating in me collapsing at home, and being rushed to hospital via an ambulance, due to a bout of pneumonia. Nice people...

CONTACT WITH THE POLICE
Jill has continually claimed that I have never contacted the police over both her accusations, and those of Tony Bennett.
Well Jill, as you already know, I did contact the police, they did investigate your claims, and, as can be seen from the emails below, they stated that you were guilty of harassment, and defamation of character. Of course you know why that is...

I have never been involved in, nor have I committed any of the crimes you claimed I was guilty of.



As for Bennett, and his stance that I called his home phone in the early hours of the morning, and issued a death threat, I also contacted the police regarding that matter. In fact I spoke directly to the original investigating officer, PC Sunderland of Essex police, who stated I was never, and had never been a person of interest, and that the case was now closed. I did offer to travel to Essex to give a statement, but was told that wouldn't be necessary. Once again, I did everything I could to resolve the issue. Sorry to disappoint you Tony, but once again, you've made a complete fool out of yourself, by mixing reality with your own warped fantasies.

Two emails of my correspondence with PC Sunderland, (as is my right, I have withheld some personal information):




PC Sunderland's reply:


CHERRY BERESFIELD
Cherry has been a great friend to me over the years. She has never once lied to me, and doesn't get involved in any trouble, preferring instead to stick to the facts of the case. In fact, you would be extremely hard pushed to find anyone with a bad word to say about her. Unfortunately, and against my advice (which incidentally I have given to many who wished to back me up), Cherry called Jill and Tony out on their lies. She did so in her usual polite manner, stating that, as is true, she had seen the emails from the police. She also said that she had seen my driving licence, which she had, that proved I wasn't "Andrew", due to our birth dates being different, and (rather obviously), our names being different. For her troubles, Cherry was banned from CMoMM (the forum set up to help Tony), accused of being a liar, and smeared, whilst having her right to reply taken away.
Both Jill and Tony owe Cherry a huge apology, I have proved I was telling the truth, and therefore proven Cherry to be totally correct in what she said in my defence as well.
Cherry's crime? To tell the truth.

THE PLOT THICKENS
Cherry isn't alone, the list of anti McCann that have been attacked by the forum to "help" Tony, is ever growing. People such as JillyCL, Isabelle, Carla, Carole, Ann, Linda, Teddy and no doubt others I have missed here. The collective forum "voice" rounds upon anyone who might hold vital, or useful information - former Met detective, Colin Sutton for example, the man who told us that Operation Grange hadn't been carried out in the correct manner, and who could have told us so much more, had Bennett not done all in his power to chase Mr Sutton away.
Again, the question must be asked - for what purpose?
Bennett wouldn't need half of these facts to throw an accusation about - he can actually do that with no substance at all.
Indeed, a true measure of how respected the owner of the CMoMM forum is, can be seen from the following two tweets by Jill Havern.

Link to original tweet.
Little wonder then, that despite bragging about being the most popular Madeleine McCann forum in the world <snort> Jill had to advertise on twitter, for a Portuguese translator.

But back to business.
Jill and Tony weren't acting alone with their lies and smears against me; they had enlisted the help of another pro McCann - Simon Just. Just (AKA @MajorLeak2017 on twitter), another close friend of Darren Laverty, and one who displays exactly the same sort of behaviour, is a vicious troll who also likes to invent totally baseless stories about those he wishes to silence. Unlike Laverty however, Jill allowed this pro McCann nasty to join her forum, and post his accusations up in the form of a blog, for all to see.
I ask again, why would Jill Havern and Tony Bennett allow a pro McCann troll, one with a PIN notice from police for previous illegal activities online, to post on their forum, with the sole purpose of discrediting an anti McCann? Any port in a storm, or something far more sinister.

THE FINAL LINK
So far I've shown Jill and Tony's links to pro McCanns, and how they work hand in glove, but I've saved the best for last. The Needle Blog, is frequented by Simon Just, Darren Laverty, and Tony Bennett, when they fancy a spot of anti McCann bashing. What is most intriguing however, is who The Needle Blog supports - none other than the leading pro McCann site, used by all the main pro trolls. Proof, if it's still needed at this point:

















...and who do we see here on Stop The Myths?

Link to Stop The Myths

Why it's Rebecca Sherlock/Flannely, the sick ghoul who attended Brenda Leyland's inquest, after previously hounding her on twitter, and celebrating her passing by posting a youtube link to "Another One Bites The Dust". Rebecca's trolling has been well documented over the years, in this blog, others, and on twitter. Not surprising then that she also peddled the lie that I was a sex offender, and took to twitter to support Jill Havern.

*Coincidentally, and as this blog sits finished, waiting to be published in the morning, Jill has had another petty swipe at me on twitter, with a vague threat. Click on the link below to Jill's tweet, and then hover over the two likes that she has received. Who do we see supporting Havern yet again? Yep, it's Rebecca Sherlock/Flannely once more*

Link to Sherlock supporting Jill Havern once again. 
Anybody still in any doubt about the nefarious actions of Jill and Tony, a pair of born liars with an agenda poles apart from real truth seekers?
Let's have a look at the words of John Blacksmith, owner of The Blacksmith Bureau blog:
"25 July 2017 at 13:56
I’ve finished with the thread’s specific subject but I’m struck by JJ’s post, 10.12, and Margaret, 21.23 about the timing of the Pit’s about-turn after which the site became a “weird place”.
The significant dates are given in those posts. 2013 was when the investigative review turned into an investigation.
People are claiming that Bennett works undercover to assist the McCanns.
From 2013 to date, among the insanity of thousands of claims, we have three directions of repeated critical attack led by Havern and Bennett.
1) Relentless assaults on the Smiths and their sighting, which Grange made clear is a critical lead under investigation.
2) Clear statements that Amaral’s conclusions, and therefore the 2007 PJ investigation are mistaken.
3)Repeated infantile attacks on operation Grange and Scotland Yard.
--
We can ask a question: What is it that the McCanns show real signs of fearing?
Their statements in court, “Madeleine” and the OFM show that one terror is the Smith sighting. Another, naturally, is Goncalo Amaral. The Smith sighting is being studied and unpicked in Operation Grange.
So these three major fears of the McCanns match exactly the above three subjects that Bennett dismisses as misguided or worthless daily.
On the other side, what does the Pit constantly push as the correct key to the case?
The one thing that the McCanns never show any signs of worrying about: a conspiracy to protect them by politicians, bent police officers “like Gamble”, mysterious millionaires like Kennedy, Freemasons or others unknown.
Check the record: the McCanns – in glaring contrast to their behaviour and comments regarding the three subjects above – are completely unconcerned about what people say or claim about such a plot. In “Madeleine”, for example, KM works like one of the Springer spaniels to sniff out areas of danger to subvert or buttress: do a “find” on the e-text of Madeleine and you’ll see buttresses erected to strengthen the Tanner sighting, the Payne visit, other “abductor” sightings, 10PM in 5A, Oldfield’s check and so on.
But she doesn’t bother with conspiracies. Far from hiding her “protection”, she boasts of it as if she wants us to believe the conspiracy theory – which, of course, she does.
She gloats at the support from Gordon Brown, the Blairs, Gamble, Kennedy and Smethurst, Control Risks, Scotland Yard etc.
Kate McCann is the main source for the conspiracy theory.
Lastly, Jill Havern. The lies and inability to state facts come from the top at COMM. In this letter, having described Grange as a “farce” she writes (to the PM!):
“This is despite the fact that when the Portuguese investigation was shelved in July 2008, it EXPLICITLY DECLARED that they were looking at two distinct alternatives: 1) abduction by a stranger or (2) the parents, the McCanns, having hidden Madeleine’s body to prevent an autopsy, and having staged a hoax abduction.”
The sentence is a complete invention and she’s sent it to the PM in June 2017! Is she also actually mad?"
I am not alone in believing that CMoMM is a front - that it's real purpose is to help Tony Bennett. The help I believe those who run the forum give to Tony, is, as I said before, to forcibly ram certain theories down the throats of the readers. Theories that the McCanns would far rather be accepted, than the truth. Think about it, Tony claims that:
1. Smithman isn't Gerry McCann - The Smith sighting is something the McCanns have desperately tried to cover up.
2. Madeleine wasn't seen by any indepenedent witness after 29th April 2007 - she of course was, but stating that she wasn't, has any would be investigators, looking at the wrong date entirely.

Back to Bennett's court case, and the deal now proven to have taken place between him, and the McCanns. A deal that saw him receive a 92% discount on a sum of money he was told to pay Kate and Gerry, yet has seen him continue to comment on the case, and directly accuse the McCanns of covering up the facts relating to the disappearance of Madeleine.
The above case was put to the court by the McCanns' lawyers, during their failed attempt to extort money from Goncalo Amaral:
"Judge – What about the public in the UK?
GMC says that, thanks to the legal actions, the content of the book hasn't been published by the MSM, but small minority groups, in the UK, have launched campaigns of persecution against them, based on the book.
Judge – Can you name them?
GMC – Yes, we had legal actions against the Madeleine Foundation and the name is Anthony Bennett.
Judge – What relation exists between this group and the publication of the book?
GMC says that AB used parts of the book, interviewed Gonçalo Amaral and invited him on a forum.
Judge – Did the group exist before the publication?
GMC isn't sure about that. But he's able to say that the material they used was based on the allegations of the book. They published pamphlets that said that Madeleine hadn't been abducted. They distributed them to his neighbours and in the whole Leicestershire. This led AB to receive many warnings from his juridical counsels and finally to be sued." 
Link to court transcript of Gerry McCann
What we see above is the McCanns cleverly using Tony Bennett's case, in an attempt to take down Goncalo Amaral. I wonder, had they been successful, would the McCanns have given Snr. Amaral a 92% reduction in his costs, so much as to see themselves out of pocket, as they did with Bennett - not a chance.
Further to my point, Tony Bennett has openly admitted to doing the main part of the research for Richard D Hall's documentaries. Again, these documentaries push Bennett's theories (above), yet they still remain available, and unchallenged. The McCanns could, should they choose to do so, apply to the court for Bennett to be jailed for a further breach of his court order, yet they don't.
I ask again, why?
I've seen the excuse that the McCanns would have to disprove Hall's documentaries to have them removed, that is of course hogwash. I refer once again to Bennett's order:
"The Defendant undertakes not to repeat allegations that the Claimants are guilty of, or are to be suspected of, causing the death of their daughter Madeleine McCann; and/or of disposing of her body; and/or of lying about what had happened and/or of seeking to cover up what they had done.”
As a self confessed researcher for the Hall DVD's, Tony is again in breach of his court order, and yet he still evades prosecution. In fact the McCanns, by agreeing to reduce their costs, actually made a loss when they twice defeated Bennett in court.
Does that sound like the Kate and Gerry we have come to know?
Come on Tony, you're quick to quote the bible when it comes to dishonesty, yet yourself and Jill have lied continually for a number of years. You've done your level best to bring down any anti McCann who stands against your vile controlling ways, and you've done so through vicious untruths. The game is up, time to tell your employers - nobody believes you.

Oh, one more thing...

You asked for this Jill, no literally, you asked for it...







I didn't even go into how you used Matt Hasker, a young estate agent who lives 20 minutes from your own home, to troll myself, Carla Spade, and Andrew on twitter. It was blatantly obvious he hadn't been following the case, yet he managed to find himself on your forum, then to twitter, and straight to our accounts, armed with, and repeating your lies - that Jill, is incitement.

By accusing me of the crimes you did, and knowing what you alleged was false, you showed your true colours. Especially with the sexual assault lie. There are many, many people who have had their lives shattered by sexual abuse. What you and your associates have done is beyond despicable, more so given the high number of people around you who have suffered the effects of that type of crime. You disgust me, in fact you disgust most people.

As for you Tony, it's high time you gave up the pretence; you're a charlatan, a fake, a liar, and a nasty, vicious old man. You've used that fetid forum for your own personal gain, and been caught more times than a dose of clap in Chavsville.





...and so it was written in The Bible 

"
Lying lips are an abomination to the LORD, But those who deal faithfully are His delight."

Proverbs 12:22





85 comments:

  1. Chilling exposé of what lies beneath.
    I remember years ago when Anthony Bennett released the email addresses of everyone who supported his MM foundation into the public domain. It was never explained. Was he always a plant, there to harvest data on doubters for the McCann machine?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Did he ever apologise or even explain that? If he did I can't see it online.

      Delete
    2. Never. In fact he lied further by claiming I was under investigation from the police. When I contacted the police, they told me that Bennett had contacted them, but that he had absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing by myself.

      Delete
  2. Hi Lucy, it's funny you should mention that. I was going to include it in the blog, in fact there's a great number of things I didn't, and perhaps should have added, but I didn't want to make it so long that people would lose interest. I'm sure as the day progresses, a lot of people will add bits and pieces that highlight the corrupt behaviour of both Jill Havern, and Tony Bennett.

    ReplyDelete
  3. As someone new to this case initially I could not understand why the supposed anti-mccanns were arguing with you, with time I have been able to see for myself how their ideas are pushed as the only ideas and other very good researchers are mocked. Thanks for the background information, I hope you have recovered from your illness. Hopefully OG will conclude the case with answers in 2018.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi, an thanks for taking the time to comment. In an ideal world we'd be left alone to do what we are here for. Unfortunately, for what I believe to be the reasons I mention in the blog, certain people can't or won't ever let that happen.

      Delete
  4. Tony Bennett presided over a Madeleine Foundation meeting I attended in Nottingham, around 2010/11 I think. Many people including myself traveled hundreds of miles to attend, with an air of anticipation and high expectation. Some even came in from overseas. Here at last was an opportunity to discuss all we wanted to, without inhibition.

    Bennett was a weak, ineffectual chair. One man arrived with his ingrained belief that this was a big pharma cover up and the government may be protecting the manufacturers of Calpol. A few people found this semi-interesting, but the speaker was a thick skinned ex-pharmacist who loved the sound of his own voice and couldn't set his theory aside to listen to anyone else's. Bennett allowed this to dominate most of the entire meeting, to a lot of people's annoyance.

    We did laugh about it when a group of us met up for a drink later, but all this has got me thinking.

    Was the discussion deliberately being controlled and steered away from far more intriguing and controversial pastures?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't say I'm surprised, but good to have an insight from someone who has met the odious Bennett. You mention control, that's exactly what I think Bennett and Havern's role has been for the past few years. Control what is discussed, throw out ridiculous theories, and attack anybody who thinks differently. The McCanns would love us all to be thought of as lunatics with a grudge - Tony Bennett certainly tries to make that so.

      Delete
    2. People traveled from as far as northern France for that meeting. I agree it was shambolic, but the question remains, was that deliberate?

      Delete
    3. I wish I'd been there...I think. Is there anything Bennett does that isn't underhand in some way? I shall put a new comment on the main thread below. You've probably both seen what I'm going to say before, but some readers may not have done.

      Delete
  5. Both Bennett, and Havern often crow about how he was once a solicitor, as if it gives him a higher stamding in society than others. What they don't discuss is the fact he was found guilty of conduct unbefitting of a solicitor by the Law Society, in 2003:

    Anthony John Stuart Bennett
    Application 8788/2003;
    Admitted 1995;
    Hearing 9 September 2003;
    Reasons 20 October 2003

    "The SDT ordered that the respondent, of 22 Laceys Avenue, Leverton, Boston, Lincolnshire PE22 0BG (formerly of 66 Chippingfield, Harlow, Essex CM17 0DJ), who did not hold a current practising certificate, be reprimanded for unbefitting conduct in that he had failed to comply with a finding of inadequate professional serviced dated 20 July 2001, confirmed on appeal on 30 August 2001; he had failed to act in the best interests of clients in that he had acted for them in a private capacity thereby outside the scope of the Solicitors Indemnity Fund Rules 1995; he had acted in breach of principle 17.01 in that he had accounted to clients in a personal capacity and not as an employee of his firm, thereby failing to act with frankness and good faith towards his employers; and that as a result he had brought the profession into disrepute. The SDT found that he had been misguided in the way he had approached his aim of helping people. It was important that solicitors complied with directions of the regulatory body and did not ignore them merely because they disagreed with them. The respondent had not previously appeared before the SDT and did not have a practising certificate. He had indicated that he did not intend to return to the profession. The SDT accepted the respondent’s undertaking to comply with the decision of inadequate professional service within 28 days of the hearing, and would therefore not make the order sought by the applicant regarding the enforcement of that decision. The respondent was ordered to pay costs of 3,000."

    ReplyDelete
  6. A woman calling herself Margaret Martin is inveigling her way into groups and forums, trying to fundraise for Anthony Bennett. Why does Bennett need money? He tried to sabotage Amaral's fund. Anyway, sShe gets kicked out swiftly enough and a lot of people think it's a sock account.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I got banned from CMoMM for saying Gerry McCann is the man the Smiths saw. I also wondered why they try to discredit the senior social worker Yvonne Martin as a busybody, which is EXACTLY what the "pro" forums do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You and many, many others Emma. If you don't fall into line, you're out, and attacked for having an evidence based opinion. They love nothing more than banning people, before launching into a series of relentless onslaughts. People have had enough of their dirty tricks campaign. I'm just one in a long list of people who've been treated appallingly.

      Delete
  8. A well presented blog with quite shocking details about attacks on well-respected people like Cherry. And let's not forget the attacks on Mike Hitchen, one of the first people to try to draw attention to the discrepancies in the McCann case. Thanks for an excellent post.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Anna, and thanks for coming here to comment. As you can see, the other entries on this blog would be non existent without your wonderful blog, your excellent translation of Goncalo Amaral's book, and other translations you have done.

      The way Cherry was treated was absolutely disgusting. As you know, you'd struggle to meet a kinder, more honest, and more respected person anywhere. She's a lovely lady, and a valued friend.

      Delete
  9. Everybody knows that Polyenne is a Haven sock yes? She posts in the cesspit about the cesspit being world famous and other obvious crawling stuff to try and make it look good looooooool

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Purple Ronnie is another of hers. It's dead as a doornail even her socks can't revive it.

      Delete
    2. Not the Queen of Sheba5 January 2018 at 09:45

      I don't know if she was on her own forum in that name but she was on the MMM one, along with Luna, Luz and Laura - just a few I recall without looking others up. She flounces off after a while and deletes the accounts.

      "Sock spotting" is an interesting pastime!

      Delete
  10. Manys thank for shining light into cesspitamabob. Explain whys it went pro in 2013. Remind me of Deals or No Deals. You wins prize.
    Aleksandr Orlov

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thank you from me too, AnnaEsse, for posting here. Things have been bizarre beyond words in recent times on the Havern forum - just one example, when Tony claimed that Ben and Andrew had posted on another forum to say they were the same person; it was absolute nonsense.

    I did wonder if he was intentionally trying to destroy any credibility that he had left.

    It is sad to see what has happened to the forum.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Did anyone else notice Jill sneaking into Candyflosses forum and quickly being sussed out? http://maddiemccannmystery.forumotion.co.uk/t32p1000-say-hello-and-introduce-yourself-here

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yes. Spot on.
    Aleksandr Orlov

    ReplyDelete
  14. See Sharon's come out from behind the lamppost and is spamming Twitter with their Madeleine died 29th April hogwash *rolls eyes*

    ReplyDelete
  15. I got banned from that group by him a while back for debating religious issues with him. He is so dogmatic and blinded by any ideas other than his own. As a person with academic background I challenged his one sided views on a number of occasions on the subjects of racism and found his views to be quite obnoxious.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No wonder the old goat doesn't believe in evolution. He's not very evolved himself.

      Delete
  16. I went to a couple of Bennett's foundation meetings and he sent me updates for various things he was doing then years later out of the blue he phoned me and said he had to make a trip my way and could he drop in.

    This took me by complete surprise and to be honest I found him to have a rather sinister countenance so I made my excuses.

    Months later, I got an email from him full of fire and brimstone obsessing over my children, who he has never met and never will.

    It totally unnerved me and I am just so, so relieved I went with my instincts and declined to let him visit our home.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tony Bennett's Terrifying Eyes27 December 2017 at 23:51

      I don't know what you mean.

      Delete
  17. I've always thought Anthony Bennett had "something of the night" about him and it's a view shared by many friends. Seeing the type of person he champions has made me realise it's far worse than any of us thought.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Some interesting comments here from people as to their feelings about Tony Bennett.

    There is a members only topic on his forum about this blog. Needless to say there has been no attempt to answer the claims, other than to deny any connection with Darren Laverty.

    I like the irony of this comment from Tony's sidekick Verdi: they both certainly know about attack being the best form of defence.

    "Bendrew is all wind and wee-wee. If he had anything meaty to offer against you, Tony and CMoMM, he wouldn't be whinging behind the safety curtain.

    It's all manglewordling.

    You know what they say - the best form of defence is attack".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bennett who usually goes to such great lengths to counter any evidence, finds himself in a position where he can't.

      As for Laverty being a core participant on the csa inquiry, and Bennett using that as some sort of guarantee to the man's standing in society. Has he conveniently forgotten about the things he's accused Jim Gamble, the former head of CEOP of - including suggestions of him covering up murders in Ireland? Obviously I'm no fan of either, but come on Tony, you'll have to do better than that. You're flapping and floundering - dare I say it flefflering. You've ignored ALL my points because you know they're true. As for stating my blog was an abusive rant, people have their own eyes Tony, it's far from a rant, and not abusive in any way. Let's see you defend the indefensible. Come on, pull a rabbit out of the hat, or, as would be the more honourable thing to do, admit you lied, admit Jill lied, apologise to all those you've harmed over the years, and admit the pair of you have conned the members of your forum for your own personal gain. It's over Tony.

      Delete
    2. MIJ tweeted Baldy's defence this morning. It was a weak attempt to distance Laverty from Baldy but with a note of optimism that hinted should Laverty shine in his core participant role he'd be back in the fold. TB really is too far gone to see that it would make no difference whatsoever the outcome. Laverty's sentiments are inexcusable and they are words he has chosen to share on social media. What must be said behind closed doors?

      Delete
    3. Yes, Pseudo Nym, where's the customary line-by-line rebuttal we've become accustomed to from Bennett? He can't do it this time because it's all true, all there in black and white with the proof attached.

      Delete
  19. I have always wondered why no one mentions Gerrys MySpace blog post about taking the apartment fridge to the dump and how friendly and helpful everyone was. I read it before he deleted it so can't unseen it, which is why I don't believe him. I can't be the only one who read it even though it wasn't up for long.

    But why does anyone ever question The Mccanns (as they are now known) about it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3nScN89Klo Sorry seems to be the hardest word (for narcissistic sociopaths who, when shown up, incontrovertibly, as the Machiavellian liars they are will never do what any normal person would do and just apologise.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed. They cannot, will not, ever admit they were in the wrong. Everything is always someone else's fault.

      Delete
  21. Havens hell hole now only open to members.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Dirty pair of pros. Thank you for exposing them.

    ReplyDelete
  23. What will Natasha Donn think?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Their 'response' has certainly fallen short of the kind of support they were probably hoping for. Maybe it's something to do with Jill's best effort at defending herself is to insist she, and now the police, has proof that Ben is Andrew. Funny, because if she'd read the blog twice like Tony did, she would have seen Ben prove the exact opposite.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anonymous at 14.13. What do you mean? Most of the topics are visible to non-members.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Latest news isn't.

      Delete
    2. Hi Graham. I just deleted your reply by mistake; I should have worn my specs. I've looked into this, and it would seem you're both right. There seems to be an issue with certain devices, and not others. I know from past experience, that if the privacy settings are altered, and then changed back, that it can affect some mobile device views.

      Delete
  26. Why does Jill show off writing and posting up letters to operation grange when it's an ongoing investigation so she knows they can't disclose anything? She's trying to make a name for herself but it looks silly.

    ReplyDelete
  27. It's Not A Shopping Trolley It's A Mancase On Wheels30 December 2017 at 00:48

    Baldy's beggar, Margaret Martin and another woman are doing his PR on the cesspit FB page, badly. Like a poor man's Bell Pottinger loooooooool

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From the CMOMM Facebook page, where Michael Jones (now removed) dared to raise this question "Tony Bennett got sued by the mccanns but they knocked about 400k of the legal fees on condition he didnt ever say anything to do with saying that mccann got shut of Maddie ..But he still supposedly anti-mccann so how has he got away with this ?"

      Many people responded, then the beggar Margaret Martin stepped in to slap them down with this grovelling response.

      Margaret Martin Right can we let it rest here?? Tomorrow is not just another day but another year. We have heard from Tony so can we let that lovely gentleman get on with his life and other projects he has planned. Happy New Year Tony and to all the other lovely folk on this site.

      Lovely gentleman. Margaret (not his real name) you need to open your eyes. Bennett is only here to gather support for his misleading nonsense that seeks to undermine Amaral and take the heat off Gerald with all this 29th April tripe.

      Delete
    2. I've encountered "Margaret" before. Her only contribution to the case has been to beg for money for Tony, and to gush about what a great man he is - even likening him to Goncalo Amaral, I kid you not. Very reminiscent of Tom Moore and his multiple accounts.

      Delete
  28. A very aggressive pro who's a friend of Nigel Nessling, Andy Griffin, rolled up on Twitter to say how OK Jill and Tony are last night. Just what they need right now roflmao

    ReplyDelete
  29. I used to think that COMMM was a genuine site dedicated to the search for the truth but just lately I'm getting really hacked off with the poster called , 'Verdi.' Every time that a poster posts a 'theory' that doesn't follow the official COMMM line he/ she is downright obnoxious and condescending. No one is allowed to have a thought of their own which considering the supposed aim of the COMMM forum is a search for the truth is a bit troubling. I find 'BlueBag' equally dismissive of anyone's contribution other than his own supposed pearls of wisdom. When just a few posters like this rule the content of the site by disparaging other posters, you have to wonder what the hidden agenda is.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I got picked on for asking them not to speak ill of the dead Mrs Pamela Fenn who they were calling a liar. Even Kate Mccann didn't go that far. I left because it's much too cliquey.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The clique is smaller than it appeaes when you consider it's a lot of sock accounts belonging to the owners of the forum.

      Delete
  31. https://twitter.com/PeritaRisus/status/947404716362928128

    ReplyDelete
  32. Verdi is a bitter, lonely old exile, and was never a Bennett fan when posting elsewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Bennett has posted allegations of (his) impropriety in a toilet. Again. He really is his own worst enemy.

    ReplyDelete
  34. That didn't do George Michael's career any harm!

    I would never have known about the allegation if Tony hadn't broadcast it.

    There have been some hilarious comments on their topic about your blog, particularly the one about wild accusations being made without a shred of evidence.

    Heaven forbid that anyone on that forum would ever do such a thing!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed. It is blatantly obvious that the only place posting accusations without any evidence, is CMoMM. Bennett is desperately hanging onto all he has left. Stating as fact that I am the "Andrew" account on twitter, so he can lie further to the few who believe him. I've never accused him of being friends with Nigel Nessling. I don't know who controls the Andrew account, and neither does Bennett.

      I look forward to the police getting in touch with me, and hopefully, a day or two in court with "Mr Bennett". You can bet your life he'll not reach a dodgy deal with me, neither will the disgraceful Jill Havern.


      Delete
  35. He has just posted on his forum that you have accused him of being a friend of Nigel Nessling and involved in paedophile activity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry for the late reply Alice. The holidays are over now, so I'm busy, busy again. Bennett is unable to pin anything bad on me, so he uses this "Andrew" account, to project their accusations as my own. The proof of him conning his members just keeps stacking up. I've never been afraid to say anything in my own name, from this blog, or my one and only twitter account. I have no need, and no time to have secondary accounts.

      Delete
  36. Did you see old Walker getting shirty and slipping up about Aleksandr Orlov's mock up of CMoMM as a decrepit old house? He had to show the original picture to defend his mates Jill and Tony.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did. In fact the only people I've seen defend Jill or Tony, are the pros.

      Delete
  37. Pseudo Nym, I don't know whether you are Andrew or not but I have a way that you can prove once and for all that you're not! Do a long winded post on here on Thursday night after closing time and if the post is coherent, we can presume you are not him!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hahaha! It's a deal, better still, I'll record a series of tongue twisters.

      Red lorry, yerrow lolly, yed lorry, rello wally..hic! Ah shit, last orders!

      Thanks for that Anon.

      Delete
  38. Name redacted (from J4M FB group)

    Felt I had to leave a message of support Ben. Haven't followed the page for weeks but curiosity made me look again. I had wondered why you had suddenly stopped posting and this explains it all. As someone who has felt helpless through victimisation by others I know how debilitating it is. No matter how strong you are!

    When I first wanted to find out more about Madeleine's disappearance I unfortunately stumbled upon Mr Bennett on the forum which I didn't know at the time was dedicated to him. He quickly shut me out when I asked questions about Smithman. It still irks me that he did a crafty edit to make me look stupid then closed down my right of reply. Lost respect for him and that forum and because I didn't want to give up searched again and found JFM.
    I hope more people turn away from CMOMM because it is destructive in the search for the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  39. So, tales of your imminent arrest have been greatly exaggerated? How long can they ride these obvious lies out? I'd say it's over.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Still no arrest. Just another lie from Bennett.

      Delete
  40. Were they to delete every post maligning McCann doubters that forum would be an empty shell. That's all that is holding it together now.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Gerry McCann is Smithman5 January 2018 at 09:39

    CMoMM now consists of a handful of people shouting into the void. The League of Gentlemen, Edward and Tubbs parodies are spot on. Every time they kick someone out for not toeing the narrow party line they cry "we didn't burn him!"

    ReplyDelete
  42. So now a credible journalist Gemma O'Doherty is going to tackle the anomalies in the McCann case and shed some light on the Donegal links. She won't take her audience on a meandering scenic tour for hours just to embed the lie that Gerry McCann isn't Smithman so watch the cesspit turn on her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You weren't wrong. The band of bullies is using this positive development to drag Sonia Poulton through the mud again. Human excrement.

      Delete
  43. Hang on a sec. 00.12. There's absolutely no proof that Gerry WAS 'Smithman' . Nor, that he wasn't. Calling the statement that Gerry wasn't Smithman , a lie is totally misleading. The jury is out and still undecided.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, but the methods used by CMoMM to prove Gerry wasn't Smithman, are dishonest, misleading, and employ other flawed theories to back up their claims. As for the jury being still undecided, the general consensus, despite the very forceful efforts of CMoMM, is that Gerry is indeed Smithman. You are quite correct, we can't possibly know either way for sure, but for one side to claim with absolute certainty - to the point they ban, and edit the comments of those who disagree, then actively seek to destroy said person's credibility - strongly points to an ulterior motive.

      Delete
  44. It was as sure a thing, as night following day. If Gemma doesn't go begging CMoMM for help, or can't be controlled by them, then the all too familiar war games will begin. I had to laugh at Verdi's bragging about how the "group" are so fantastic, and seemingly flawless.

    Might I remind Verdi of Bennett stalking the wrong Smith family for two years. Not to mention their ludicrous accusations of me being Andrew, that included disgusting lies of me being guilty of 8 crimes I am not, the worst of which being a crime/crimes of sexual assault. Hell, they couldn't even get the distance between Durham and Northallerton correct - claiming it was 15 miles LOL...and why were they looking at Durham as my home city? The presence of a small church, in the background of a photograph of me, in a village they presumed was Durham. For the record, that village was Topcliffe. The castle grounds of Durham would engulf the entirety of the village, and then some. Top research skills CMoMM, we stand in awe!

    ReplyDelete
  45. I do not know for sure that Bennett is actually working for the Doctors but what I do know is that he is a right wing, religious and racist bigot, a woman hater, homophobic maniac and victim-blamer, an anti-science, evangelical evolution denier. He is a sleazy middle-class arrogant failed lawyer and a bitter, nasty piece of work who is anti working class and extremely xenophobic especially towards Irish people he believes we are populated from Drogheda to Donegal with paramilitaries and drug dealers who are in cahoots with the McCanns in some international paedophile ring. He believes Gerry (a Catholic in yer face Celtic supporter) is involved with senior Masons who burn their parents to death in mysterious fires. He believes a whole Irish family from the respectable business man granda to the wee children have all colluded to protect Robert Murat. The man is an utter lunatic. If I had to give an award for the biggest "Grassy Knoller" on the planet he would definitely beat Alex Jones.
    His latest nonsense is trying to discredit a highly respected, award winning Irish journalist, just as he tried with Colin Sutton and others. Well it ain't happenin' this time Tony Gemma will blow you and the McCanns out of the water. Gemma unlike his Richard D Hall actually believes that Neil Armstrong walked on the Moon - imagine that Tony -A real investigative reporter not as in the silly language of your infantile forum a "pretendy" one (I cringe when I think of these people thank fuck they banned me because of the Smiths)

    ReplyDelete
  46. The widest centre parting in England16 January 2018 at 10:54

    Jill is gloryseeking again, ostentatiously posting her "research group's" (lmao!) questions she has sent to the coroner about Kevin Halligen's unexplained death, in the cesspit. She's looking for praise for harassing the coroner's office for the past two days.

    Q - how old is Jill? She's middle aged in that 80's profile picture she used to use, so is baldy her toyboy?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Grandstanding again eh, because her letter to Theresa May was met with such a fantastic response. What a complete waste of hers and everyone else's time.

      Delete
    2. Alan Bennett NO RELATION16 January 2018 at 11:26

      Her letters are designed to appeal to the youth section of the forum, i.e. the under 75s

      I wrote a play about her, A Lady Of Letters

      Delete
  47. Great to see how many hundreds of thousands have read your blog now and are wising up to this pair's dirty tricks campaign Ben, congratulations.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Edward. Hope you're well. It wouldn't do anywhere near as well if it wasn't for every one of us. Take care mate.

      Delete
  48. You have to laugh. On 15th January, this was added to a thread: "It is essential to ensure that CMOMM is not used as a platform for direct accusations or any other libelous commentary.

    Mod."

    Better go clean up the cesspit then, may take a few years.

    ReplyDelete
  49. MMRG "we pursue the wrong guy for two years"29 January 2018 at 10:13

    Jill's now hectoring Adrian Gatton in a drunk and disorderly fashion, yelling WHAT'S HIS GAME? Way to go, scare another useful source of information away then rub your hands like it's a good job well done.

    Verdi's contribution on the Jim Gamble thread is eye popping. "I once knew a bloke, a homosexual, who was having problems with local authorities for harbouring a fourteen year old boy for his entertainment. He had to flee the country before being arrested and imprisoned and/or deported - he went to Thailand!"

    Boasting about a dodgy friend!

    ReplyDelete
  50. To be fair to Verdi for once, he didn't say that the person concerned was a friend, just someone he knew.

    The Adrian Gatton stuff was mind-boggling though; as if anyone, after being insulted, would want to join a forum like that. Colin Sutton certainly discovered what a mistake he'd made by joining.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Proving they are all batshit crazy in the cesspit, Sharon has written this today, following the publication of Gemma O'Doherty's piece in the Village paper: This story has probably be created to keep the focus on May 3rd 2007 and is probably a bungled attempt to discredit our findings of Madeleine having died 4 days earlier.

    They use the idea that it may have been Gerry that Smith saw just to get the public excited and add credibility to the 3rd May tales. Once 3rd of May theory is publicly accepted, they will probably say that it wasn't Gerry after all, it was Madeleines and her abductor.

    A very cunning move imo.

    They really imagine the cesspit is some kind of renowned hub where everyone descends to read their wild ideas!

    Gemma is a conspiracist, her entire investigative report designed to undermine them.

    They all need sectioned in a locked ward.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You think that's bad Kyle? Look at this for sheer pottiness https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14903p25-gemma-o-doherty-maddie-did-the-bbc-bend-the-truth#380984 and tell me if anyone can beat that. The masterful CAPITALISATIONS are a hoot, as usual, and Bennett has worked himself up into a frenzy that O'DOHERTY" has DARED to contradict his RESEARCH GROUP's hallowed FINDINGS. His research group that hounded the WRONG Smith family for two years, THAT research group. Unreal.

      Delete
    2. I haven't yet recovered from Verdi's comment that Gemma hasn't contacted the forum so where has she got her information from.

      I'm looking forward to today's dose of unintentional hilarity.

      Delete
  52. Other cesspit members are responding to Bennett's epic O'DOHERTY rant by saying they too believe Gerry McCann is Smithman. lmfao!

    ReplyDelete