An open letter from Sonia Poulton to Jim Gamble

by Mo 28.01.15 19:49

Open letter to Jim Gamble #mccann

Following your Twitter attack on me yesterday - and continued today - I reiterate my request to invite you for an interview with regard the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

I was shocked by your vitriolic outburst regarding doorstepping the McCanns. Given that you were not there when it occurred I find you speak without full knowledge of the situation. For a former policeman to speak without understanding of what I have or have not done, is worrying given your high media profile around this case.

For the record, I approached the McCanns at their Leicester home. This is a practice you have publicly applauded when it applied to a single, older woman expressing an opinion e.g. Brenda Leyland also from Leicester. And yet, apparently, it is not to your taste when it comes to those who are at the heart of a story of enormous public investment.

Doorstepping, in matters of public interest, is a valid journalistic tool and I stand-by my decision to do it in this case.

This approach followed interview requests to the McCanns and I made it clear that there were unanswered questions - even more than the 48 police questions that Kate refused to answer when it came to searching for her child - and I sought to help by using whatever appropriate tools I have at my disposable. It is the McCanns who use the expression 'No Stone Unturned' and I believe what I set out to do then, and continue to do, assists rather than obstructs that.

When I received no response to an interview, after several requests over the period of a year, I realised that I had a public duty to pursue this. Thus, myself and a small camera crew went to the McCanns house and asked to talk with them.

Kate, I should point out, didn't find my approach at all 'attacking' as you insist on shrieking all over Twitter, until I told her why I was there and what questions the public - the very public who have been funding the search both through private donations and the current Operation Grange investigation - want answering.

I am not dissuaded from this action even by your use of emotive words in an apparent attempt to create a negative narrative about this documentary and what we are setting out to do. I am relieved that the wider discerning public are finally getting a glimpse of the machinations of those claiming to seek justice for Madeleine McCann.

I have previously asked you for an interview for the documentary I am making called 'The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann'. This is for a number of reasons.

There is your involvement in calling for legal punishment of those you regard as 'trolls' when, in fact, they are mostly just the people who dispute the official version of events surrounding Madeleine's disappearance.

Also, I wish to address the fact that you were involved in the Sky report by Martin Brunt - which featured the doorstepping of Brenda Leyland several days before her death - coupled with your euphoric public congratulations of this action on the day the report was repeatedly aired.

The Sky report, as you know, was based on a so-called dossier of those who oppose the official abduction story. I am given to understand that I feature in that dossier, as did Brenda Leyland. It is no secret that people involved in said dossier were in contact with you prior to Martin Brunt doorstepping Brenda Leyland. People, I have evidence of, who were involved in continually bullying and provoking Brenda Leyland.

Given that experts and commentators have now had a chance to examine Brenda Leyland's social network output regarding the case, and have concluded that she was not a 'troll', I believe - along with many others - that you have questions to answer regarding your role in her public hounding.

I am making this an open letter because I am aware of the deep public interest surrounding the disappearance of Madeleine, not least the millions of pounds that hard-pressed British taxpayers are funding for this, but also because you chose to be public in your condemnation of me and this documentary.

It is also, unquestionably, a unique-ly 'online case' in some regards in that many, many people globally have flocked to the Internet to express their horror at the case receiving such biased reporting in mainstream media.

It is an open secret that the McCann's version of events is widely disputed. Due, in part, to the inability of the couple and their friends to present a consistent account of events. This is out there in the public domain thanks to the work of the Portuguese Police. So it is that people have taken, en masse, to the Internet to express anger, dismay and frustration at the coverage which frequently fails to match reality.

I know you are aware that there are significant rumours surrounding your involvement with the McCanns during the time you were in public office at CEOP. I have seen the tweets that people send to you and the Facebook comments made about you.

I understand what it means to be smeared and I believe that I have a responsibility, as a journalist (of almost three decades), to put those accusations to you. I am not interfering with any on-going police investigation just doing what journalists are supposed to do.

I find it alarming, as do many Twitter observers, that you chose to use social media in a futile attempt to undermine me professionally with childish insults. All the while encouraging your followers to behave in a mob-like fashion towards me. Is this not contrary to what you claim to represent?

However, as many have pointed out, your public attacks have merely served to reinforce what people already believe regarding your somewhat blinkered approach to this case. Certainly, the way you have behaved over the last 24 hours towards myself and others has presented us with the perfect way to illustrate this in the documentary.

As a former policeman, I cannot fathom why you continue to insist that an abduction is the only reasonable conclusion to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

For those who have taken time to truly look at the case - those same people you block on Twitter and refer to as ranters and trolls - and away from the PR-led version of the media coverage, it is clear that there is so much more to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann than we are frequently led to believe.

I wonder, have the facts become immaterial in your quest to defend the McCanns at any cost? I am happy to be proved wrong.

So, Mr. Gamble, what is it to be? I offer you a full recorded interview (and a final mutual agreement of your contribution to the documentary) so you can be assured that your message will not be taken out of context.

I hope, rather than continuing to behave in a deeply unprofessional, evasive and questionable manner, that you take up this invitation.

If you choose not to, then people will make up their own mind why this might be. Your call.

Sonia Poulton
January 28, 2015

by secrets and lies 28.01.15 20:04

Well done, Sonia.

I find this reasonable, logical and to the point.

Over to Gamble now.

by ultimaThule 28.01.15 20:05

< sigh > The curse of the aberrant apostrophe strikes again.

Am I the only one who didn't know that Sonia Poulton is a 'former policeman'?

It's to be hoped that, rather than presumably causing Ms P to continue to behave in a 'deeply' (as opposed to shallowly?) unprofessional manner etc etc, Mr Gamble takes up her invitation.

by jowie 28.01.15 20:14

Excellent letter Sonia, well done. Those seeking to know the truth all support you.

by Maggs Shaw 28.01.15 20:33

If this is a sample of Sonia's journalistic abilities, then I am shocked! I think perhaps knowing this was going to be viewed by the world, she might just have taken the time to proof read it!

As pointed out very nicely by Ultima Thule, I was also not aware that Sonia was a former policeman.

by PEANUT66 28.01.15 20:41

Whatever anybody thinks, a few apostrophe's surely don't matter.
Sonia is searching for the truth as everyone else is.!

Truth and justice for Madeleine!

by pennylane 28.01.15 20:50

Well said Sonia! clapping

by The Rooster 28.01.15 21:05

Why are you so at odds with the content of Ms Poulton's open letter Maggs Shaw?

by aiyoyo 28.01.15 21:26

Open letter - transparent, Good !

Jim McGamble cannot deny the existence of the letter.

Educated guess says SP is likely to feature him in her documentary.
Let's see how he's going to defend his role (involvement) in the Mcs case?

by annysmithgold 28.01.15 21:30

Interesting, SP is a brave woman. She's really poking the hornets nest. Whatever her motives or timing, I say good on her.

by secrets and lies 28.01.15 21:32

Yes, Rooster.

I would also like to know, Maggs Shaw. What is the issue with the letter other than the fact she didn't proof read it?

by **PeterMac** 28.01.15 21:51

We live in interesting times !

by **Tony Bennett** 28.01.15 22:08

secrets and lies wrote:Yes, Rooster.

I would also like to know, Maggs Shaw. What is the issue with the letter other than the fact she didn't proof read it?

I am not speaking for Maggs Shaw.

But I think the letter would have been much better without the constant finger-jabbing, e.g.:

* attack on me

* your vitriolic outburst

* you speak without full knowledge of the situation

* speak without understanding

* not to your taste

* your use of emotive words

* you chose to use social media in a futile attempt to undermine me professionally with childish insults

* encouraging your followers to behave in a mob-like fashion towards me

* your somewhat blinkered approach to this case

* the way you have behaved over the last 24 hours towards myself and others

* continuing to behave in a deeply unprofessional...

*evasive and...

*questionable manner

by Maggs Shaw 28.01.15 22:30

Tony Bennett wrote:
secrets and lies wrote:Yes, Rooster.

I would also like to know, Maggs Shaw. What is the issue with the letter other than the fact she didn't proof read it?
I am not speaking for Maggs Shaw.

But I think the letter would have been much better without the constant finger-jabbing, e.g.:

* attack on me

* your vitriolic outburst

* you speak without full knowledge of the situation

* speak without understanding

* not to your taste

* your use of emotive words

* you chose to use social media in a futile attempt to undermine me professionally with childish insults

* encouraging your followers to behave in a mob-like fashion towards me

* your somewhat blinkered approach to this case

* the way you have behaved over the last 24 hours towards myself and others

* continuing to behave in a deeply unprofessional...

*evasive and...

*questionable manner

If we are to receive a hard hitting, entirely factual, full of evidence documentary from Sonia, one that is without a doubt believable and original, I would at the very least expect her to be able to write a coherent and credible letter.

I agree Tony, the letter would have been far more worthy had references to 'herself' been omitted

Taking care of detail is paramount.
.

I have not linked the article to this thread, but this is the title and can be searched......so it would appear that just by leaving out the letter 's' the government has had to pay out £9 million pounds.

Government in £9 million payout after single letter blunder causes business to collapse

A High Court judge has found Companies House liable for the demise of Taylor & Sons Ltd, after they mistakenly recorded that it had been wound up

by Silverspeed 28.01.15 22:53

An open letter from Sonia Poulton to Jim Gamble B8dprhYCcAAu5q2

Jim Gamble's response.

by plebgate 28.01.15 23:38

Fair play, SP has let the World know what went on and I don't blame her for pointing out what she perceives as personal attack against her.

by noseyparker 28.01.15 23:59

Jim Gamble being a former police officer must be able to see that there is more holes in the Mcscamms fairy tale of events than in my string vest.Gamble is only aligning himself with the Mcscamms promote himself regardless of what happened to a 4 year old child and he should be ashamed of himself.Good for Sonia Poulton for showing these people for what they are no matter what her motives are

by Kitti007 29.01.15 7:36

Perhaps HE is the 'McCann troll' who is going to be outed

by pennylane 29.01.15 8:58

Kitti007 wrote:Perhaps HE is the 'McCann troll' who is going to be outed

I said that from the get go. He's certainly in it up to his eyeballs.

by pennylane 29.01.15 9:27

Silverspeed wrote:

Jim Gamble's response.

I cannot believe he held the position he did at CEOP. He has blatantly ignored the McCann changes to their version of events, the blood and cadaver dog alerts, their refusal to take a lie detector or answer questions, and their shocking failure to search for their child on the night she disappeared, not to mention the drugged state the twins were in on that ill fated night. I could go on and on about the red flags hanging over the McCanns heads. Gamble has become a demented PR man for the child neglecting parents. He's biased and unprofessional, and I find it shocking that he was once in a position of protecting children from harm. sad

by deafoldbat 29.01.15 9:55

by ScarletLaw 29.01.15 10:17

Mo wrote:
Open letter to Jim Gamble #mccann

Following your Twitter attack on me yesterday - and continued today - I reiterate my request to invite you for an interview with regard the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

I was shocked by your vitriolic outburst regarding doorstepping the McCanns. Given that you were not there when it occurred I find you speak without full knowledge of the situation. For a former policeman to speak without understanding of what I have or have not done, is worrying given your high media profile around this case.

For the record, I approached the McCanns at their Leicester home. This is a practice you have publicly applauded when it applied to a single, older woman expressing an opinion e.g. Brenda Leyland also from Leicester. And yet, apparently, it is not to your taste when it comes to those who are at the heart of a story of enormous public investment.

Doorstepping, in matters of public interest, is a valid journalistic tool and I stand-by my decision to do it in this case.

This approach followed interview requests to the McCanns and I made it clear that there were unanswered questions - even more than the 48 police questions that Kate refused to answer when it came to searching for her child - and I sought to help by using whatever appropriate tools I have at my disposable. It is the McCanns who use the expression 'No Stone Unturned' and I believe what I set out to do then, and continue to do, assists rather than obstructs that.

When I received no response to an interview, after several requests over the period of a year, I realised that I had a public duty to pursue this. Thus, myself and a small camera crew went to the McCanns house and asked to talk with them.

Kate, I should point out, didn't find my approach at all 'attacking' as you insist on shrieking all over Twitter, until I told her why I was there and what questions the public - the very public who have been funding the search both through private donations and the current Operation Grange investigation - want answering.

I am not dissuaded from this action even by your use of emotive words in an apparent attempt to create a negative narrative about this documentary and what we are setting out to do. I am relieved that the wider discerning public are finally getting a glimpse of the machinations of those claiming to seek justice for Madeleine McCann.

I have previously asked you for an interview for the documentary I am making called 'The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann'. This is for a number of reasons.

There is your involvement in calling for legal punishment of those you regard as 'trolls' when, in fact, they are mostly just the people who dispute the official version of events surrounding Madeleine's disappearance.

Also, I wish to address the fact that you were involved in the Sky report by Martin Brunt - which featured the doorstepping of Brenda Leyland several days before her death - coupled with your euphoric public congratulations of this action on the day the report was repeatedly aired.

The Sky report, as you know, was based on a so-called dossier of those who oppose the official abduction story. I am given to understand that I feature in that dossier, as did Brenda Leyland. It is no secret that people involved in said dossier were in contact with you prior to Martin Brunt doorstepping Brenda Leyland. People, I have evidence of, who were involved in continually bullying and provoking Brenda Leyland.

Given that experts and commentators have now had a chance to examine Brenda Leyland's social network output regarding the case, and have concluded that she was not a 'troll', I believe - along with many others - that you have questions to answer regarding your role in her public hounding.

I am making this an open letter because I am aware of the deep public interest surrounding the disappearance of Madeleine, not least the millions of pounds that hard-pressed British taxpayers are funding for this, but also because you chose to be public in your condemnation of me and this documentary.

It is also, unquestionably, a unique-ly 'online case' in some regards in that many, many people globally have flocked to the Internet to express their horror at the case receiving such biased reporting in mainstream media.

It is an open secret that the McCann's version of events is widely disputed. Due, in part, to the inability of the couple and their friends to present a consistent account of events. This is out there in the public domain thanks to the work of the Portuguese Police. So it is that people have taken, en masse, to the Internet to express anger, dismay and frustration at the coverage which frequently fails to match reality.

I know you are aware that there are significant rumours surrounding your involvement with the McCanns during the time you were in public office at CEOP. I have seen the tweets that people send to you and the Facebook comments made about you.

I understand what it means to be smeared and I believe that I have a responsibility, as a journalist (of almost three decades), to put those accusations to you. I am not interfering with any on-going police investigation just doing what journalists are supposed to do.

I find it alarming, as do many Twitter observers, that you chose to use social media in a futile attempt to undermine me professionally with childish insults. All the while encouraging your followers to behave in a mob-like fashion towards me. Is this not contrary to what you claim to represent?

However, as many have pointed out, your public attacks have merely served to reinforce what people already believe regarding your somewhat blinkered approach to this case. Certainly, the way you have behaved over the last 24 hours towards myself and others has presented us with the perfect way to illustrate this in the documentary.

As a former policeman, I cannot fathom why you continue to insist that an abduction is the only reasonable conclusion to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

For those who have taken time to truly look at the case - those same people you block on Twitter and refer to as ranters and trolls - and away from the PR-led version of the media coverage, it is clear that there is so much more to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann than we are frequently led to believe.

I wonder, have the facts become immaterial in your quest to defend the McCanns at any cost? I am happy to be proved wrong.

So, Mr. Gamble, what is it to be? I offer you a full recorded interview (and a final mutual agreement of your contribution to the documentary) so you can be assured that your message will not be taken out of context.

I hope, rather than continuing to behave in a deeply unprofessional, evasive and questionable manner, that you take up this invitation.

If you choose not to, then people will make up their own mind why this might be. Your call.

Sonia Poulton
January 28, 2015

I would've posted Brenda's actual posts as evidence of non-trolling and set it out as a set of questions for him to answer personally because I think he'll cherry pick on what to answer, if he does actually respond. But I think she means well.

by tiny 29.01.15 10:51

Looks like most of you agree with gamble in your onslaught of Sonia poulton.

Tweet of the week from Gamble..@JimGamble_INEQE: @SoniaPoulton I've worked with a lot of strong prof independent journalists who are ferocious in their search for the truth. IMO ur not one.

by whatsupdoc 29.01.15 11:00

Well done to Sonia for her work.

I think the letter was written in a hurry as there are quite a few grammatical errors but it's the content which should be noticed first and foremost. The phrase "As a former policeman" was badly inserted.
If people read the letter then it will be more knowledge to the public who are only told what the press want them to read.

IMO...
A big thumbs down to Tony...OTT...have a break but not a Kate Kat. big grin

To the other nitpickers...if you can do better than Sonia, get off your ass and do it!

Just for the record, I have been collecting info and have sent it out to various people. I have copies of Brenda's and many other people's tweets (public accounts only) so others now know who the real evil trolls are. I do object to the use of the word troll despite how Prof Greene (sp) describes it. I think the media think troll sounds cool and associate it with the word evil.

I applaud Richard D. Hall and Sonia Poulton for trying. clapping1

Let's give them a chance and see how the docu turns out.

by espeland 29.01.15 11:38

whatsupdoc wrote:Well done to Sonia for her work.

.....

IMO...
A big thumbs down to Tony...OTT...have a break but not a Kate Kat.

To the other nitpickers...if you can do better than Sonia, get off your ass and do it!

.....

I applaud Richard D. Hall and Sonia Poulton for trying.

Let's give them a chance and see how the docu turns out.

by Doubter 29.01.15 11:48

whatsupdoc wrote:Well done to Sonia for her work.

I think the letter was written in a hurry as there are quite a few grammatical errors but it's the content which should be noticed first and foremost. The phrase "As a former policeman" was badly inserted.
If people read the letter then it will be more knowledge to the public who are only told what the press want them to read.

IMO...
A big thumbs down to Tony...OTT...have a break but not a Kate Kat.

To the other nitpickers...if you can do better than Sonia, get off your ass and do it!

Just for the record, I have been collecting info and have sent it out to various people. I have copies of Brenda's and many other people's tweets (public accounts only) so others now know who the real evil trolls are. I do object to the use of the word troll despite how Prof Greene (sp) describes it. I think the media think troll sounds cool and associate it with the word evil.

I applaud Richard D. Hall and Sonia Poulton for trying.

Let's give them a chance and see how the docu turns out.

by Joss 29.01.15 14:51

Does anyone know why SP is waiting until after BL's inquest to air her documentary? Is it out of respect for Brenda Leyland or for some other reason, like she is still putting her documentary together? TIA.

by whatsupdoc 29.01.15 15:05

Just guessing but I would think that there is quite a lot of administrative work involved in making a documentary and it's not just scribbling a few notes and taking a camera crew out.

There could be reasons associated with Brenda...respect and also extra footage may have been planned.

I don't understand the reasons for Sonia to have revealed her plans. Maybe she is hoping for some reactions.

by ultimaThule 29.01.15 15:08

It seems to me the question should be 'where' is SP going to air her documentary, Joss? Is it probable that a mainstream broadcaster will be prepared to air what promises to be a controversial piece on the McCann case while Op Grange is ongoing?

by Joss 29.01.15 15:53

ultimaThule wrote:It seems to me the question should be 'where' is SP going to air her documentary, Joss? Is it probable that a mainstream broadcaster will be prepared to air what promises to be a controversial piece on the McCann case while Op Grange is ongoing?

Yes ultimaThule, that too, definitely. I did speculate about that yesterday, if it was going to be a youtube video presentation or something in msm? Will be interesting to see by whom it will be aired if it going to be by msm?