Justice 4 ALL Madeleine McCann Family
You need to be a member of this forum in order to view its entire contents.
We welcome applications to join the forum from genuine caring compassionate people that wish to support Mr Mrs McCann in their never ending resolve to finding their daughter Madeleine and bringing her back home where she truly belongs.

All applicants are checked out so people with no sense, no moral compass, no rationality and only half a brain cell and even less grip on reality and who are devoid of all logic - need NOT apply!
This also applies to ex-members, who no longer want to be members, yet spend their lives viewing this forum and telling people they no longer want to be members.
This is said without prejudice with no one in particular in mind.

Bennett replies to email from Brenda Ryan

Go down

Bennett replies to email from Brenda Ryan

Post by Chicane on Fri Nov 20, 2009 11:46 pm

Just a thought you know/
Chaos Raptors

Bren sent an email demanding answers from Bennett earlier this week; he has given permission for his answers to her to be posted.

Bren's accusations are in plain type; his replies are in bold.

Date: 19 November 2009 18:44:27 GMT
To: Bren
Subject: Re: Drag up as much as you wish .......

--- On Wed, 18/11/09, Bren wrote:

From: Bren
Subject: Drag up as much as you wish .......
To: ajsbennett@btinternet.com
Date: Wednesday, 18 November, 2009, 9:59


You can run to raptors as much as you wish, it is no skin off of my nose, because all what has happened I have admitted to. I have never denied being on the Select committee submission, as I agree that the press should report in an unbiased manner and reflect both sides of the Madeleine McCann case.

As for your books, yes I did read it and I am not libel lawyer so I could not see any libel but when inconsistencies were pointed out on the forum, if you remember, I posted saying that would it not be best to issue an amendment statement with the books so that the facts are correct. These inconsistencies were posted about after I received your book and replied to you via PM.

REPLY: Yes, I remember. The inaccuracies were a handful and unintentional and did not detract from the thrust of the book.

Your leaflet drop in Rothley was a shot in the foot for the Foundation and if you had used your common sense you would have realised that Team McCann would not tolerate that behaviour.

REPLY: What you and others may not be aware of is that the burst of publicity about the Madeleine Foundation in connection with the leaflet drop led to an unprecedented number of hits on our website - hundreds of thousands of hits. They were curious to know about a group that was challenging the McCanns' abduction claims. What followed was an unprecedented number of orders for the '60 Reasons' booklet, and the '10 Reasons' leaflet, and shoals of emails, many offering congratulations for the '30 Reasons' article on our website and many others wanting to give practical help e.g. with translations. This all helped to illustrate that there are probably millions out there who are not persuaded by the McCanns' abduction claim. They wrote to us in large numbers saying how grateful they were to read all the arguments against the abduction theory, not having read all the facts in any of the British media.

Debbie has told me you were there in Rothley and yet you deny in a post on MM that you were there, which if I remember correctly you also stated in a letter to Carter Ruck. Can you confirm to me whether you attended the leaflet drop in Rothley irrespective of whether you delivered leaflets to the McCann's area or not?

REPLY: As I've said elsewhere and have never been evasive about it, I was in Leicestershire that day but as Grenville and Helene will confirm, I did not deliver one leaflet in the village of Rothley. I delivered a quantity in Mountsorrel.

If you want to know what I think about this, I will tell you straight I think you are acting in a hypocritical manner, as you had previously in the past tried your utmost to stop raptor and now you think he is going to speak the truth on your behalf.

REPLY: I will try to 'stop' raptor if he tells or pirnts untruths. His strapline is 'Because the truth matters'. If he prints the truth about ANY matter, I have no complaint about that whatsoever.

I told you from the moment of the leaflet drop it was morally wrong and that I did not approve of it. You persisted in getting members of the Foundation to post on 3a's about complaining to the PCC, you involved the 3a's members and you brought the possible legal implications of your actions to 3a's.

REPLY: You were free to censor any posts of mine or others on 3As.

And as Stevo was associated with the Foundation, albeit as a webmaster, further could have caused more problems for the 3a's because of his post about targeting the remaining Tapas members and a witness.

REPLY: By this time Stevo's role as a webmaster had become very controversial and I made known publicly in August/September that The Madeleine Foundation were seeking a new webmaster.

I have stated this on a blog, which you replied to and therefore have nothing to hide and I am therefore disgusted in your behaviour at a) bringing Debbie's son into this as you had no right to involve an innocent child and b) how you have run to a site that has done nothing but try to cause trouble for people in the past to get your case across.

REPLY: Noted. Who was it who brought Debbie's son to the 'Missing Madeleine' forum and allowed it to be published there?

And whilst we are on the subject of Debbie's son perhaps you could supply me with the name of the journalist and the paper he works for as I wish to register a complaint against this journalist and report his unethical reporting manner in harassing an innocent child.

REPLY: He claimed he was working for one of Britain's national dailies but declined to give his name when I asked. He was possibly freelance. He had clearly already researched members of Debbie's family, as he gave me what I knew to be accurate details about them, and he also claimed he had spoken to Debbie's ex-husband and gave me a credible account of a conversation he had already had with him.

I await your answers to my questions, I do not need a load of waffle, just a confirmation of name and paper of journalist and yes or no to whether you were in Rothley.

This email is private and confidential to you and therefore I do not give permission for it to be posted on any sites or forwarded to any other person.

REPLY: I do not trust you to report my replies accurately, so this e-mail is liable to be copied elsewhere and any other communication received from you is also liable to be copied elsewhere. Those like yourself who liberally copy private emails and 'pm's to others cannot expect to avoid similar treatment.



Edited to add, also on


with Majic's comments.

Number of posts : 197
Location : Amsterdam
Registration date : 2009-09-02


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum