Re: The bad smell surrounding Sonia Poulton

by wombat42 on 04.02.15 9:10

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by mad world on 14.02.15 23:37

How i wish i could claim to be l-azzerri..cuts through the bullshit with a chainsaw

by Smokeandmirrors on 16.02.15 9:43

Over the last couple of weeks Sonia Poulton has claimed that individuals are trying to stop her documentary coming out. If you are reading this Sonia, please can you clarify this. Without naming names, are you able to state wether your detractors are industry colleagues or members of the general public commentariat. Also, please can you clarify how you define trying to stop your documentary being aired? If free speech/opinion, which happens not to be in your favour is considered "trying to stop" - by what means can this stop any documentary being released, and as there is no known broadcaster for this as yet, how can anyone be accused in this way? Even your detractors will watch your documentary with great interest, as no doubt they are interested to see how you have processed 8 yrs of information.

by hentie on 16.02.15 12:29

Richard D Hall was able to produce over 4 hours of forensic analysis. Why should it be any different for SP to produce a documentary?

by Ayniia on 16.02.15 21:36

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Richard D Hall was able to produce over 4 hours of forensic analysis. Why should it be any different for SP to produce a documentary?

IMHO she's making such a fuss about it...uhm I'm expecting to be disappointed with what she delivers.Plus her picture at Mc's doorstep...makes me think that wouldn't happen if she talked to kate and asked though questions...but i'll wait to see...

by Angelique on 17.02.15 1:37

I just get the feeling something is not quite right - not what it seems.

I think she has taken the shilling - either TM or Murdoch.

by hentie on 17.02.15 7:41

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Richard D Hall was able to produce over 4 hours of forensic analysis. Why should it be any different for SP to produce a documentary?
IMHO she's making such a fuss about it...uhm I'm expecting to be disappointed with what she delivers.Plus her picture at Mc's doorstep...makes me think that wouldn't happen if she talked to kate and asked though questions...but i'll wait to see...

I agree. Richard D Hall produced his excellent series of DVD's without fuss. So much drama attached to SP and her henchwoman....and what has it achieved so far!
Nothing in the interest of Madeleine or those who seek the truth. In fact damaging.

by Liz Eagles on 17.02.15 18:55

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Richard D Hall was able to produce over 4 hours of forensic analysis. Why should it be any different for SP to produce a documentary?
IMHO she's making such a fuss about it...uhm I'm expecting to be disappointed with what she delivers.Plus her picture at Mc's doorstep...makes me think that wouldn't happen if she talked to kate and asked though questions...but i'll wait to see...
I agree. Richard D Hall produced his excellent series of DVD's without fuss. So much drama attached to SP and her henchwoman....and what has it achieved so far!
Nothing in the interest of Madeleine or those who seek the truth. In fact damaging.

So much drama...for a forthcoming event that may or may not take place, that doesn't seem to have any authenticity, that seems to have a very loud siren without substance, without transparency, without a definitive subject...it's bullshit isn't it!

by LombardySkeptik on 17.02.15 19:03

Its a TV show - made with primarily commercial interests in mind - Nothing wrong with that

All that we have seen about this so far is publicity - Nothing wrong with that either - its part of media business (or any other)

It may even be essential for actual airing on an appropriate channel

I have no expectations that - if this happens - that it will add anything to the debate............but happy to be surprised

by Liz Eagles on 17.02.15 20:13

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Its a TV show - made with primarily commercial interests in mind - Nothing wrong with that

All that we have seen about this so far is publicity - Nothing wrong with that either - its part of media business (or any other)

It may even be essential for actual airing on an appropriate channel

I have no expectations that - if this happens - that it will add anything to the debate............but happy to be surprised

Oh come on (or come off it)....Sonia Poulton does something to solve the McCann case and aired on mainstream television?

I'd rather trust my email address with Carole Malone.

by hentie on 17.02.15 20:17

aquila wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Richard D Hall was able to produce over 4 hours of forensic analysis. Why should it be any different for SP to produce a documentary?
IMHO she's making such a fuss about it...uhm I'm expecting to be disappointed with what she delivers.Plus her picture at Mc's doorstep...makes me think that wouldn't happen if she talked to kate and asked though questions...but i'll wait to see...
I agree. Richard D Hall produced his excellent series of DVD's without fuss. So much drama attached to SP and her henchwoman....and what has it achieved so far!
Nothing in the interest of Madeleine or those who seek the truth. In fact damaging.
So much drama...for a forthcoming event that may or may not take place, that doesn't seem to have any authenticity, that seems to have a very loud siren without substance, without transparency, without a definitive subject...it's bullshit isn't it!

I'm not holding my breath!!!!! big grin

by LombardySkeptik on 17.02.15 20:30

aquila wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Its a TV show - made with primarily commercial interests in mind - Nothing wrong with that

All that we have seen about this so far is publicity - Nothing wrong with that either - its part of media business (or any other)

It may even be essential for actual airing on an appropriate channel

I have no expectations that - if this happens - that it will add anything to the debate............but happy to be surprised
Oh come on (or come off it)....Sonia Poulton does something to solve the McCann case and aired on mainstream television?

I'd rather trust my email address with Carole Malone.

Hence no expectations

by Liz Eagles on 17.02.15 21:24

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
aquila wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Richard D Hall was able to produce over 4 hours of forensic analysis. Why should it be any different for SP to produce a documentary?
IMHO she's making such a fuss about it...uhm I'm expecting to be disappointed with what she delivers.Plus her picture at Mc's doorstep...makes me think that wouldn't happen if she talked to kate and asked though questions...but i'll wait to see...
I agree. Richard D Hall produced his excellent series of DVD's without fuss. So much drama attached to SP and her henchwoman....and what has it achieved so far!
Nothing in the interest of Madeleine or those who seek the truth. In fact damaging.
So much drama...for a forthcoming event that may or may not take place, that doesn't seem to have any authenticity, that seems to have a very loud siren without substance, without transparency, without a definitive subject...it's bullshit isn't it!

I'm not holding my breath!!!!!

Anyone with a noodle of nous knows this Poulton production will be about trolling.

by aiyoyo on 19.02.15 9:36

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Well i gather most of the words were uttered by RH, otherwise the article could not have printed them? Perhaps the 'nice man' got them misconstrued, but nevertheless it comes across as an awful article.
And i agree, the word Troll is stupid to describe anyone.
Why are these people stooping so low to get their point, whatever that is, across in such a classless way?
It would not have been useful at all if The Sun had been handed over someone that was focused on ramming home some salient points, or inundated him with questions that needed to be 'put to the McCanns' and come to the table with no issues or gripes of their own. The 'nice man' quite possibly did a better job translating the rantings than we have been led to believe.

Sonia's choice was just perfect and the victim was led like a lamb to the slaughter.

She wasnt lamb to the slaughter. Effectively she served herself on the plate.
The Sun had been handed someone with self serving interest to get attention and plug her book. She was mentioned as an "author" albeit her book was not named (iirc).
She missed the opportunity when she did not use it to speak up for Madeleine, as simple as that.

Whether she was deliberatey chosen or she volunteered because she's besy mate with SP so wanted to help SP is beside the point. The salient point being the objective was not met at all. If the objective was on "trolls" both pros and antis - the why, how,what and henceforth - it did not come out like that at all - on why doubters of Mcs twit about the case and was met with vitriol from pro-mcs trolls.

In the finished the piece was about RH's self professed life story and on why she "trolled" on the social media/twitter with her giving the nice-man a whole list of reasons why she retaliate to trolls. And in the finished also the Mcs were made to look honourable and noble in their dignified silence where this episode of "troll" is concerned.

Will this piece set back SP if her intention is genuinely to tell the "Untold story of Madeleine" per se - for Madeleine sake ? You BET !

If SP's doc is about trolling or will include trolling, you can bet on it RH's piece in the Sun will boomerang on them and come back to haunt them in a negative way. And you can almost bet your bottom dollar the media will reference that piece for balance reporting. Not that they are concerned about balancing for the truth, but balancing the stories emanated from both sides - meaning telling it as it is as the nice-man in the Sun is reported to have said / rather twitted.

by **Tony Bennett** on 19.02.15 12:58

It looks like Sonia Poulton, Rosalinda Hutton and Stephen D Birch are all singing from the same hymn sheet.

I have just received this short message from Birch:

QUOTE

Why are you still free, why have the McCann’s not locked you up – you a nutcase !

Sonia and I are at least trying to find Madeleine, you just intent on boosting your ego with chatroom pricks - grow up man !

UNQUOTE

Birch's message is coming over loud and clear.

'We are the heroes and heroines; you, Bennett, are a egotistical nutcase who ought to be locked up'.

Hardly surprising, was it, that the two people Poulton chose to interview for David Icke's 'People's TV' were Hutton and Birch...

by noseyparker on 19.02.15 14:23

Must be hitting a nerve keep it up Mr.Bennett clapping

.from a chatroom prick big grin

by jeanmonroe on 19.02.15 15:35

Sonia and I are at least trying to find Madeleine
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Is that a 'live' Madeleine or, "sadly, a 'dead' Madeleine", (DCI MAHOGANY, OG) THEY are 'trying' to 'find'?

Thought Birch said Madeleine was 'brown bread' under Murat's drive!

So THEY won't have to 'look far' to 'find' her, will THEY?

"What am i not getting? What am i not 'seeing'?

thinking

by Smokeandmirrors on 19.02.15 16:16

This obsession of those three with Tony is getting beyond a joke, they are completely insane

by plebgate on 19.02.15 17:12

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:It looks like Sonia Poulton, Rosalinda Hutton and Stephen D Birch are all singing from the same hymn sheet.

I have just received this short message from Birch:

QUOTE

Why are you still free, why have the McCann’s not locked you up – you a nutcase !

Sonia and I are at least trying to find Madeleine, you just intent on boosting your ego with chatroom pricks - grow up man !

UNQUOTE

Birch's message is coming over loud and clear.

'We are the heroes and heroines; you, Bennett, are a egotistical nutcase who ought to be locked up'.

Hardly surprising, was it, that the two people Poulton chose to interview for David Icke's 'People's TV' were Hutton and Birch...

How exactly are they trying to find Maddie?

Two police forces have not been able to find Maddie, so how does he think they are going to find her?

by Liz Eagles on 19.02.15 19:53

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:This obsession of those three with Tony is getting beyond a joke, they are completely insane

Putting Birch's claims into perspective (this was the man who took to Facebook and asked people to donate a quid).

I wrote this little ditty December 2013.

The man from the Cape said 'let's go'
Straight to Portugal?
No, no, no, no,
Via London you see, to get lawyers for me
and some scanning equipment ho ho.

Well off to UK Capeman flew
So determined was he that he knew
That this case could be solved
If he was involved
And the PJ were without a clue

His team were in awe of their chief
They agreed with their master's belief
So whilst waiting around before scanning the ground
Surveillance was part of their brief

'We'll meet up in that garden in Luz'
'When Murat's dogs are taking a snooze'
'Trespassing don't matter, just don't make a clatter'
'We will find her, we've nothing to lose'

Now Capeman flew back to the Cape
He took to the net and went ape
His ramblings became famous
Some came from his anus
And on youtube he now has a tape

Poor old Capeman's a humourless fellow
Whose behaviour is not very mellow
He will triumph he says (well one of these days)
And his threats he is given to bellow

Capeman's findings are wrapped up in science
And he's proud of this special appliance
Just don't dare doubt his word or he'll give you the bird
You must treat him with total compliance

If you think Capeman's a loon
'Cos you're able to eat with a spoon
Just don't let it show, he won't have it you know
And expect insults to come very soon.

Editing to add: Tony, don't answer the phone to this idiot.

by lj on 19.02.15 21:49

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:It looks like Sonia Poulton, Rosalinda Hutton and Stephen D Birch are all singing from the same hymn sheet.

I have just received this short message from Birch:

QUOTE

Why are you still free, why have the McCann’s not locked you up – you a nutcase !

Sonia and I are at least trying to find Madeleine, you just intent on boosting your ego with chatroom pricks - grow up man !

UNQUOTE

Birch's message is coming over loud and clear.

'We are the heroes and heroines; you, Bennett, are a egotistical nutcase who ought to be locked up'.

Hardly surprising, was it, that the two people Poulton chose to interview for David Icke's 'People's TV' were Hutton and Birch...

So he believes the McCanns have the power to lock someone up?

Interesting

by Liz Eagles on 19.02.15 22:13

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:It looks like Sonia Poulton, Rosalinda Hutton and Stephen D Birch are all singing from the same hymn sheet.

I have just received this short message from Birch:

QUOTE

Why are you still free, why have the McCann’s not locked you up – you a nutcase !

Sonia and I are at least trying to find Madeleine, you just intent on boosting your ego with chatroom pricks - grow up man !

UNQUOTE

Birch's message is coming over loud and clear.

'We are the heroes and heroines; you, Bennett, are a egotistical nutcase who ought to be locked up'.

Hardly surprising, was it, that the two people Poulton chose to interview for David Icke's 'People's TV' were Hutton and Birch...

So he believes the McCanns have the power to lock someone up?

Interesting

lj, I think you've missed the point perhaps.

Tony went before the court for contempt of court. It was nothing to do with libel. Tony had already been silenced for the very fact he couldn't afford to fight.

He was held in contempt of court by Carter Ruck when they brought up many breaches and reduced them to 125 (if I remember correctly).

He was subsequently fined and given a custodial sentence, suspended. This was for contempt of court. It wasn't libel.

The fact that he was brought back into court for continuing to carefully voice his opinion was an eye-opener. To put it into some perspective (for me anyway) Carter Ruck were instructed to take Tony Bennett back to court. Where their monitored information came from is interesting. If CMoMM is a little backwater why the need to take notice? Why not just ignore him? What does Tony Bennett's opinion matter?

The fact that Tony hasn't been taken back into the court once more is something to ask Tony, the McCanns and Carter Ruck.

For what it's worth, I believe Tony to be an honest man. The leaflet drop in Rothley wasn't cricket.

by lj on 21.02.15 1:42

Thanks, Aquila, I am very aware of the injustice done to Tony.

What I meant to say is contempt of court is contempt of COURT not the McCanns. While they have been given through CR and all kind of connections too much influence on what was being said and done, not only against Tony, but also Dr Amaral, Brenda, and anyone that did not bend the way the conning couple would love them to bend, they still don't have that power, but that power lays with the court (not saying those are completely free of McCann influence).

BTW it is my opinion that all that improper handling from the ambassador pressuring the PJ, the politicians pressuring the Portuguese politicians pressuring the PJ, a forensic lab under influence, a SY trying to force the PJ, that all that (and more) is the reason for the cover-up. The McCanns are nothings, nobodies. They don't have anything on anyone important. It is all the improper handling of very important people that better not see the light. Especially when the couple they try to protect seems to be involved after all. I believe the whole reason for a whitewash is important people not wanting to look stupid.

Sorry for getting off topic

by comperedna on 24.03.15 15:31

The bad smell surrounding Sonia Poulton..... more of it.

I have just been watching a TV interview of two people on the subject of Angelina Jolie's decision to have an operation to have her ovaries removed because of the astonishingly high risk of her getting cancer. She has a long family history of cancer in female relatives, and had consulted many oncologists and came eventually to her own decison. One of the interviewees was a senior oncologist who dealt with this kind of awful situation, and the other was !!!???!!! Sonia Poulton. Lord knows why. She obviously just likes the sound of her own voice. Why is she given the opportunity to pontificate?

The oncologist gave detailed information about such serious cancer susceptibility and the limited options options open to patients. Sonia warbled on about how it would have likely been better to consider the wonderful alternative treatment involving apricot kernels and cannabis oil which had such a great record of success in cancer cure. (!) The oncologist did manage to get in a polite rejoinder saying that there was no evidence whatsoever that any of these alternative treatments had any effectiveness at all...

There she was, Poulton, putting herself out as some kind of pundit. Apalling! Tasteless of Sky to have her on at all. That's all I ever want to hear from La Poulton.

by **Tony Bennett** on 24.03.15 18:15

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:The bad smell surrounding Sonia Poulton...more of it.

Why is she given the opportunity to pontificate?

There she was, Poulton, putting herself out as some kind of pundit. Appalling! Tasteless of Sky to have her on at all.

To say the least, it is curious how Murdoch's SKY News keep turning to her - several times in the past year...wasn't it cigarette-smoking or something just a few weeks ago?

But then who was it who arranged that awful 2-pager in Murdoch's the Sun featuring Rosalinda Hutton as the 'anti-McCann bitch who gets a buzz out of attacking others on the internet'? Poulton again.

Poulton has been 'commissioned' to make a documentary about the McCanns. Or so she says. But she's buttoned up her lips (for once) about who has commissioned her.

Murdoch again?

P.S. What is all this about?

Poulton tweeted this about 11am today:

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton
#mccann do you believe abduction? Will you be interviewed for doc? Full recording for you. Even if you've smeared me I am happy to int. you