The punishment for making a false allegation

by **Tony Bennett** 29.11.09 13:40

In Elizabethan times, the making of a false allegation by someone was considered such a serious crime that, on conviction, a person found guillty of making a false allegation was branded with the initials: 'F.A.' on their forehead.

That was a very effective way of (a) deterring people going around making false allegations against someone else and (b) making sure that those who did make them didn't do so again.

I think the time may have come for reviewing the sentencing guidelines for those who deliberately or recklessly make false allegations against someone who is innocent.

However, I think the punishment for making a false allegation in Elizabethan times was a touch on the tough side

by Guest 29.11.09 13:43

What about putting them in to the stocks on market day and pelting them with balls of their own sh*t launched with the aid of a catapult..oh and rubber gloves? :flower:

by Guest 29.11.09 13:44

Nothing like getting sued for £50,000 in these days is it Bennett for lying

by Guest 29.11.09 13:48

murat_fan wrote:Nothing like getting sued for £50,000 in these days is it Bennett for lying

Nothing like pot and kettle mentality..refering to your cronies kicking off that Bennet didnt blank out the recipitent.

by Guest 29.11.09 13:57

Bennett is always droning on about privacy and such. Thats why they pointed it out i presume.

by Guest 29.11.09 14:06

Tony Bennett wrote:In Elizabethan times, the making of a false allegation by someone was considered such a serious crime that, on conviction, a person found guillty of making a false allegation was branded with the initials: 'F.A.' on their forehead.

That was a very effective way of (a) deterring people going around making false allegations against someone else and (b) making sure that those who did make them didn't do so again.

I think the time may have come for reviewing the sentencing guidelines for those who deliberately or recklessly make false allegations against someone who is innocent.

However, I think the punishment for making a false allegation in Elizabethan times was a touch on the tough side

Oh, the irony.

by Autumn 29.11.09 14:14

sym wrote:What about putting them in to the stocks on market day and pelting them with balls of their own sh*t launched with the aid of a catapult..oh and rubber gloves? :flower:

Great idea sym, the mental image in my head of Amberslob, Bren and Debbie in the stocks being pelted with their own sh*t has brightened up my day no end :lol: :lol: :lol:

by Guest 29.11.09 14:15

murat_fan wrote:Bennett is always droning on about privacy and such. Thats why they pointed it out i presume.

And I am pointing out that you lot moaning is pot and kettle.

by Guest 29.11.09 14:17

Saphire wrote:
sym wrote:What about putting them in to the stocks on market day and pelting them with balls of their own sh*t launched with the aid of a catapult..oh and rubber gloves? :flower:

Great idea sym, the mental image in my head of Amberslob, Bren and Debbie in the stocks being pelted with their own sh*t has brightened up my day no end :lol: :lol: :lol:

Good Saphire I am glad...be worse it being their own shit, somehow more insulting..now how many names would we need on a petitioon to try and make this law?? lol!

by Guest 29.11.09 18:34

Tony Bennett wrote:In Elizabethan times, the making of a false allegation by someone was considered such a serious crime that, on conviction, a person found guillty of making a false allegation was branded with the initials: 'F.A.' on their forehead.

That was a very effective way of (a) deterring people going around making false allegations against someone else and (b) making sure that those who did make them didn't do so again.

I think the time may have come for reviewing the sentencing guidelines for those who deliberately or recklessly make false allegations against someone who is innocent.

However, I think the punishment for making a false allegation in Elizabethan times was a touch on the tough side

I'd like to see that done to you for all the false allegations you have made against the McCanns.

To see you carrying on like this is sweet irony indeed.

If only you could see how it makes you look - carrying on like a big pansy when no-one has accused you of murdering a family member, disposing of their body, lying to the police and then launching a worldwide international fraud.

by Guest 29.11.09 18:40

Tony Bennett wrote:In Elizabethan times, the making of a false allegation by someone was considered such a serious crime that, on conviction, a person found guillty of making a false allegation was branded with the initials: 'F.A.' on their forehead.

That was a very effective way of (a) deterring people going around making false allegations against someone else and (b) making sure that those who did make them didn't do so again.

I think the time may have come for reviewing the sentencing guidelines for those who deliberately or recklessly make false allegations against someone who is innocent.

However, I think the punishment for making a false allegation in Elizabethan times was a touch on the tough side

Wow, first time ever I might have agreed with you.

I think making malicious, knowingly false accusations is unforgivable.

by Guest 29.11.09 22:43

Tony Bennett wrote:In Elizabethan times, the making of a false allegation by someone was considered such a serious crime that, on conviction, a person found guillty of making a false allegation was branded with the initials: 'F.A.' on their forehead.

That was a very effective way of (a) deterring people going around making false allegations against someone else and (b) making sure that those who did make them didn't do so again.

I think the time may have come for reviewing the sentencing guidelines for those who deliberately or recklessly make false allegations against someone who is innocent.

However, I think the punishment for making a false allegation in Elizabethan times was a touch on the tough side

Are you doing a research what may become of you once found guilty of fraud and making allegations to others???

by **Tony Bennett** 29.11.09 23:13

Chicane wrote:Are you doing a research what may become of you once found guilty of fraud and making allegations to others???

'clarity' and 'Chicane' [nearly said 'chicanery' there],

You may not have understood something.

It is one thing for a person like Ms Butler to go running to the police, having been expelled from membership of an organisation for very valid reasons, and make a highly specific allegation that a person has committed fraud, knowing fine well that it is untrue.

It is quite another thing to analyse a crime which has been in the public domain, citing official police enquiries and documents, come to a conclusion which as it happens is identical to the conclusion reached by the original senior detective in the case, and then write a booklet about it. That's not a crime. But it might well attract a letter from a certain law firm which represents characters like Robert Maxwell and Trafigura.

by scrafen 29.11.09 23:19

Tony Bennett wrote:In Elizabethan times, the making of a false allegation b

what was the punishment for "fraud" in elizabethan times ?

by Guest 29.11.09 23:35

Tony Bennett wrote:
Chicane wrote:Are you doing a research what may become of you once found guilty of fraud and making allegations to others???
'clarity' and 'Chicane' [nearly said 'chicanery' there],

You may not have understood something.

It is one thing for a person like Ms Butler to go running to the police, having been expelled from membership of an organisation for very valid reasons, and make a highly specific allegation that a person has committed fraud, knowing fine well that it is untrue.

It is quite another thing to analyse a crime which has been in the public domain, citing official police enquiries and documents, come to a conclusion which as it happens is identical to the conclusion reached by the original senior detective in the case, and then write a booklet about it. That's not a crime. But it might well attract a letter from a certain law firm which represents characters like Robert Maxwell and Trafigura.

I happen to think that you know full well that much of the guff you have published on the McCanns is untrue.

Rightly or wrongly, it looks to me as if Deborah believes you actually are a fraud.

As you decided that despite constant affirmations you would love to see the McCanns in court, you actually passed up the offer at the first opportunity, I feel I am entitled to my belief that you knowingly made false allegations against them.

by Guest 29.11.09 23:39

It is one thing for a person like Ms Butler to go running to the police, having been expelled from membership of an organisation for very valid reasons, and make a highly specific allegation that a person has committed fraud, knowing fine well that it is untrue.

In actual fact you expelled her AFTER her allegations, so stop twisting stuff again.

Putting it the other way round is a blatant attempt to muddy the waters. We are actually paying attention to the stuff you write Bennett, even if we don't actually believe a word of it, so you had better be a bit more careful.

by **Tony Bennett** 29.11.09 23:51

trunky wrote:I happen to think that you know full well that much of the guff you have published on the McCanns is untrue.

REPLY: Most of it is sheer fact. There are some opinions in there as well, it was those that may have caused a problem with the High Court if things had gone that far.

Rightly or wrongly, it looks to me as if Deborah believes you actually are a fraud.

REPLY: Do you think that is a genuinely-held belief of hers?

As you decided that despite constant affirmations you would love to see the McCanns in court,

REPLY: No, I never ever said that.

you actually passed up the offer at the first opportunity,

REPLY: Hmmm, with Adam Tudor of Carter-Ruck on a semi-permanent libel retainer from the McCanns at £500 an hour and David Kirwan of Kirwans stating every 10 minutes: "Libel law is very uncertain - You face financial ruin''. Not a great offer.

I feel I am entitled to my belief that you knowingly made false allegations against them.

REPLY: As with all beliefs, it is a question of how reasonable it is to hold those beliefs. Professor Jones of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia believes fervently in man-made climate change. But the 3,000 e-mails leaked from his Unit last week tell a different story - he and his colleagues here and in the U.S. - supposedly academics of integrity - were shown to have deliberately suppressed data that the world has cooled in the past 10 years. How reasonable is his belief?

CLIMATEGATE on Google News:

U-turn on climate change 'cover up' as university says it will publish leaked ...
Daily Mail - Carol Driver - ‎13 hours ago‎
'Thanks to these leaked emails a lot of little people can begin to make some impact on this monolithic entity that is the climate change lobby. ...
Climategate: University of East Anglia U-turn in climate change row Telegraph.co.uk
University does U-turn on scientists' disputed statistics Sydney Morning Herald
The great climate change science scandal Times Online
The AtlanticWire (blog) - Hot Air (blog)
all 88 news articles

by **Tony Bennett** 30.11.09 0:01

trunky wrote:In actual fact you expelled her AFTER her allegations, so stop twisting stuff again.

Wholly wrong.

9am Weds 4 Nov - Debbie Butler given notice of expulsion.

Later on 4 Nov - Goes to bank to freeze account. Goes to talk to Det. Sgt. Ryder at Maidstone Police Office who describes her as 'gibbering' and takes no notice, believing her complaints to be false and malicious.

5 Nov - Steve Marsden headlines former Madeleine Foundation website: 'Serious fraud in Madeleine Foundation' based on ms Butler's claims.

There was no allegation of fraud prior to her expulsion.

by **Jill Havern** 30.11.09 0:04

Gibbering? Really... not so's I'd noticed :lol:

by Guest 30.11.09 0:09

Oh FFS, stop changing the damn subject!!

The facts are that you were told your leaflet was factually incorrect and potentially libellous and you went ahead with it anyway. You convinced yourself and your followers that the McCanns would do nothing, on the basis of god knows what, and that spurred you on to even more outrageous actions.

You based your publications on the work of a sacked cop, and the 'conclusions' of a police interim report written 11 months before the file was sent to the prosecutor. It was even compiled before all the DNA results were in. Your 'opus' also contains much newspaper comment and rumour.

I dont think any balanced and reasonable person who had appraised themselves of ALL the facts would ever have laid their reputation on the line unless they were suffering from some kind of disordered ego. And I also think you knew there were false allegations, but chose to persist with them.

So even if Butler is wrong in her allegations, there is bugger all to choose between the two of you.

by Guest 30.11.09 0:11

Tony Bennett wrote:
trunky wrote:In actual fact you expelled her AFTER her allegations, so stop twisting stuff again.
Wholly wrong.

9am Weds 4 Nov - Debbie Butler given notice of expulsion.

Later on 4 Nov - Goes to bank to freeze account. Goes to talk to Det. Sgt. Ryder at Maidstone Police Office who describes her as 'gibbering' and takes no notice, believing her complaints to be false and malicious.

5 Nov - Steve Marsden headlines former Madeleine Foundation website: 'Serious fraud in Madeleine Foundation' based on ms Butler's claims.

There was no allegation of fraud prior to her expulsion.

NONSENSE

she was making allegations of fraud well before that, on the MF website. She may not have gone to the cops before then, but she was telling anyone who would listen.

And that is why you expelled her.

I am heartily sick of your lies and obfuscations - you must think the whole damn world is daft!

by Guest 30.11.09 0:13

Tony Bennett wrote:
Chicane wrote:Are you doing a research what may become of you once found guilty of fraud and making allegations to others???
'clarity' and 'Chicane' [nearly said 'chicanery' there],

You may not have understood something.

It is one thing for a person like Ms Butler to go running to the police, having been expelled from membership of an organisation for very valid reasons, and make a highly specific allegation that a person has committed fraud, knowing fine well that it is untrue.

Well the more you demonise Butler the less you convince me and btw that goes for Butler too. If Butler was here I would tell her the same. You should both shut up and wait for the outcome of the police investigation and by that time we will all know if you or Butler did the right thing. Right?

Tony Bennett wrote:It is quite another thing to analyse a crime which has been in the public domain, citing official police enquiries and documents, come to a conclusion which as it happens is identical to the conclusion reached by the original senior detective in the case, and then write a booklet about it. That's not a crime. But it might well attract a letter from a certain law firm which represents characters like Robert Maxwell and Trafigura.

You can write as many books as you like, it doesn't change the fact that to the law Kate and Gerry McCann are innocent. You are not investigating the investgations, you are only throwing mud and all kind of
allegations to a family of a missing child. If you think something is wrong with the investigations, why are you not researching to look for more evidence to built a case and then write a book. It is a crime to spread serious allegations to this family without a shred of evidence.

Oh btw, Chicane is a British music group that did pioneering work in the area of transmusic, great music if you have a moment google Don't give up - er..not meant to be a message to you lol!

by Guest 30.11.09 0:13

trunky wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
trunky wrote:In actual fact you expelled her AFTER her allegations, so stop twisting stuff again.
Wholly wrong.

9am Weds 4 Nov - Debbie Butler given notice of expulsion.

Later on 4 Nov - Goes to bank to freeze account. Goes to talk to Det. Sgt. Ryder at Maidstone Police Office who describes her as 'gibbering' and takes no notice, believing her complaints to be false and malicious.

5 Nov - Steve Marsden headlines former Madeleine Foundation website: 'Serious fraud in Madeleine Foundation' based on ms Butler's claims.

There was no allegation of fraud prior to her expulsion.

NONSENSE

she was making allegations of fraud well before that, on the MF website. She may not have gone to the cops before then, but she was telling anyone who would listen.

And that is why you expelled her.

I am heartily sick of your lies and obfuscations - you must think the whole damn world is daft!

Pretty good reason for expulsion I would say. go and accuse your boss or colleagues of fraud, see the reaction

by Guest 30.11.09 0:18

From the MF website, Nov 5th:

Steve,

I cannot believe you have just posted this. The two of you - you and Debbie - seem to have gone utterly insane:

http://madeleinefoundation.org/main/2009....-debbie-butler/

There is absolutely nothing in what Debbie says, same as for much else that she has said in the past two weeks. In fact it is an outrageous and deliberate lie. The accounts have been scrupulously kept and Debbie has always known about all payments in and out of The Foundation, as my frequent e-mails to hear bear testimony. No cheques have been paid out since 2 October when we met Kirwans in Liverpool.

Your own creibility will suffer as a result of this Steve. Very much so. I cannot afford to take libel proceedings agisnt you or issue writs, but this is almost an unpardonable offence the two of you have committed. It would be very hard for me to forgive this one. Especially as in fact the Foundation owes me money in respect of postage etc. as yet unclaimed.

I must insist you remove this straightaway and apologise for posting it up.

By the way, I went to the bank several days ago, properly notified them there was a dispute according to established procedure, explained that a new Committee was in operation, and added that new signatories to the account would be provided after our meeting on 14 November.

And none of this happened until after you had expelled her, huh?

by Guest 30.11.09 0:19

sym wrote:
trunky wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
trunky wrote:In actual fact you expelled her AFTER her allegations, so stop twisting stuff again.
Wholly wrong.

9am Weds 4 Nov - Debbie Butler given notice of expulsion.

Later on 4 Nov - Goes to bank to freeze account. Goes to talk to Det. Sgt. Ryder at Maidstone Police Office who describes her as 'gibbering' and takes no notice, believing her complaints to be false and malicious.

5 Nov - Steve Marsden headlines former Madeleine Foundation website: 'Serious fraud in Madeleine Foundation' based on ms Butler's claims.

There was no allegation of fraud prior to her expulsion.

NONSENSE

she was making allegations of fraud well before that, on the MF website. She may not have gone to the cops before then, but she was telling anyone who would listen.

And that is why you expelled her.

I am heartily sick of your lies and obfuscations - you must think the whole damn world is daft!

Pretty good reason for expulsion I would say. go and accuse your boss or colleagues of fraud, see the reaction

You dont give a damn that he just lied to you here on this forum, claiming that she made the accusations because she was expelled?

When it was the other way round?

Is there NOTHING this person can do that will make you go - WTF?????