Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

by **Tony Bennett** 04.06.15 15:08

Today there has been a conversation between Sonia Poulton, Rosalinda Hutton (‘Cristobell’) and Collette Croft on Twitter. In that conversation Sonia has repeated an allegation that both she and Rosalinda Hutton (and certain others) have repeatedly made against me over the past year, namely that I have lied about having to pay the McCanns’ legal costs via Carter Ruck.

Sonia Poulton blocked me on Twitter months ago and I cannot respond directly to her accusations, so I am doing so here.

Colette Croft, by the way, was ‘RussianDoll’ when she was a member here. She and Rosalinda Hutton now both post regularly on candyfloss’s forum, which also promotes and links directly to Hutton’s blog, Cristobell Unbound, in which she has over the past year made false allegation upon false allegation against this forum and myself.

The three - Poulton, Hutton and ‘RussianDoll’ - communicate regularly with each other on Twitter and seem to act as a kind of ‘team of three’.

I realise that many members here do not want to read about personal accusations and counter-accusations. However, when someone purporting to be a genuine truth-seeker about Madeleine, namely Sonia Poulton, continuously repeats an allegation, including to her Twitter audience, and then demands a reply (knowing she has blocked me from even replying), I hope fellow members here will tolerate my response here and my putting it on the ‘McCann Case: Latest News’ thread, where it will be seen by the likes of Poulton, Hutton, ‘RussianDoll’ and anyone else who may believe these allegations.

@ Mods & Admin, please feel free to move this to another section of the forum if you think it’s inappropriate here.

Here are some extracts from today’s Twitter conversations:

Sonia Poulton @SoniaPoulton - 4 Jun

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] has Tony put proof online that he pays a monthly stipend? People disbelieve this. Think he's a stooge.



Collette Croft @collywobbles54 - 4 Jun [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Don't think so. Also I note that he treats you and Ros with equal contempt. He dislikes me also and has yet to retract his claim that I started the ‘TB works for the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] stuff’. I did not. I prefer to focus on the case facts and analysis and am disappointed about so much personal stuff. Cristobell Author @RosalindaHu - 4 Jun [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] I can't recall, but if he hasn't now is a good opportunity. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Rosalinda Hutton: Latest Twitter picture

For some reason, Moondamp_Roses, a CMOMM member I think, has chosen to retweet the above tweet to her 1,252 followers:

Retweeted by Moondamp_Roses @Moondamp_Roses - 4 Jun

The false allegations being made by Poulton and Hutton (and others) are essentially three:

1.   That I have lied about having to pay the McCanns’ legal costs of the contempt of court proceedings via a standing order of £125 a month to Carter Ruck

2.   That I am being paid by the McCanns and the McCann Team and am acting as their ‘stooge’, and

3.   That all my doubts about the truth of the Smiths’ sighting are prompted by my desire to help the McCanns avoid a trial, by (allegedly) undermining the credibility of the supposed main witness against them – Marin Smith (!).

On the first of these accusations, I have decided to take the unusual step of sharing details on CMOMM of my latest bank statement (redacted here and there for obvious personal security reasons), which proves my regular standing order to Carter Ruck of £125 a month.

Just for the record, I have already made a payment to Carter Ruck, from my savings, of £12,500 towards the McCanns’ costs (in 2013), and the payment (shown on the bank statement below) of £125.00 is now the 25^th payment I have made to them since the first one in May 2013. I have another 95 payments to make, ending with a final payment of £125 in April 2023, by which time I will be 75, if I live that long.

I ought to explain, for the curious, a couple of things about the bank statement:

1.   The income of £662.17 referred to as ‘Herts Pension’ is my main source of income, a local government pension which is paid to me calendar monthly

2.   The three payments made on 26 May are for a small amount of petrol bought in France last week on a short family holiday there

3.   I happened to ask for the bank statement on my visit there yesterday at 9.36am.

I hope that to all fair-minded people, I have now provided sufficient proof of those regular payments to Carter Ruck. Somehow, however, I think that certain people will continue to circulate their false allegations, or even demand further ‘proof’. Well, I am not going to go to the further trouble of producing my last 25 monthly bank statements, nor the next 95.

Without wishing to stir the pot any more than necessary, I would just like to add that not everyone who claims they want the truth about Madeleine really does so. A good many people who make such claims have quite different agendas.

Finally, may I once again warmly thank all those whom I have not been able to thank personally for their generous help towards my legal costs via the C.O.L.D. fund. I am trying to repay that generosity by continuing to take an interest in the case, within the strict legal limits allowed me. I appreciate your help very much. It is certainly a whole lot better than being attacked constantly from certain quarters and getting demands to prove how much I’ve been paying to Carter Ruck.

Having answered this publicly-posed demand by Poulton and Hutton for proof of my payments, I have certain questions for them which I hope they will be able to answer either here or elsewhere:

@ Sonia Poulton

1.   How much have SKY News paid you for your chat show appearances, or otherwise, in the past 12 months?

2.   Were you paid for arranging Hutton’s ‘I am an anti-McCann bitch’ interview in the Sun earlier this month, if so, how much?

3.   Were you, as claimed by Hutton, commissioned by anyone to produce your documentary, if so by whom and on what terms?

4.   Have you got any TV company anywhere to show your proposed documentary, if so whom?

5.   It has been suggested that you are proposing to put out your documentary on ‘Pay Per View’ TV. Is this correct?

6.   When is your documentary going to be showm, and where?

@ Rosalinda Hutton

1.   Were you paid for your interview by the Sun, if so, how much?

2.   Do you still stand by your description of CMOMM member ‘tigger’, Ben Thompson, writer ‘lazzeri-lies-in-the-sun’ and myself, as ‘snivelling little cowards and creeps’?



LATEST TONY BENNETT BANK STATEMENT, week 26 May to 2 June 2015

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

by Mark Willis 04.06.15 15:18

Such a shame you have to go to such lengths to exculpate your self and your good name.
That you have, I applaud.
I also applaud your own questions to those three which mirror my own. Especially Poulton.
Please carry on all your good work.

by Guest 04.06.15 15:33

Agree with you, MW.

I think RH is obsessed with Tony.

by Liz Eagles 04.06.15 15:37

I wouldn't hold my breath for an answer to any of your questions Tony. Hutton & Poulton don't do answers you see because they see themselves as crusaders (when not being victims).

Oh, has anyone seen a donation from Rosalinde Hutton to Amaral's fund yet? I'm surprised there's no donation in her own name as she writes blog after blog about her support for him.

So, Rosalinde Hutton AKA Cristobell, where's your donation to the Amaral fund in your own name? or are you waiting to see how the wind blows in case you get the offer to park your bottom on a telly sofa?

I'm at a loss as to why the Candyfloss forum promotes/gives a home to Cristobell and her blogs which are inaccurate, self-serving, self-seeking twaddle.

Step away from the coven.

by Joss 04.06.15 15:49

Hi Tony, I really don't think most on here have any doubts about your predicament with regards to the court case and what you were made to pay.
But i don't blame you for wanting to show those three censored

that you have nothing to hide, but they might have. Time will tell.

by Doug D 04.06.15 16:02

Thank you for that TB. Not and shouldn’t have been necessary, but there you go.

Tigger posted this on the 'M for Morocco' thread yesterday:

Snipped.
‘A British tourist from Yorkshire told police that he saw a girl resembling Madeleine outside the Ibis hotel in Marrakesh. His testimony was identical to that of another tourist, Marie Pollard, 45, from Norway, who claimed that she was “100 per cent convinced” that she saw Madeleine at a police station opposite.’

Why is it that everyone seems generally happy to accept a ‘100% convinced’ sighting of MM as nonsense, yet a 60/80% sighting of GM is seen as irrefutable by some and just leads to everybody falling out when some of us raise any doubts about the veracity of the Smith sighting?

I know many people are desperate to believe that it was GM carrying MM or a stooge through the streets and Redwood posting it up right next to GM’s head in the Crimewatch rubbish was their ‘proof’, but there are so many unexplained discrepancies in the Smith statements that doubt has just got to exist.

For some reason with the Smith sighting there doesn’t seem to be any acceptable middle ground of doubt, it either was or it wasn’t and there is no room for any ‘could have been’s.

Sad really, but that’s probably the way TM like it and are ready and able to play both sides of the argument off against each other.

Welcome back by the way Tigger.

eta
Just seen Cristobell's response to TB and I'm not even going to put it up. From someone allegedly seeking an honest debate????????????

by Gaggzy 04.06.15 16:03

Tony, I wouldn't have bothered with this. I'm sure some idiot will already be claiming that the statement was 'doctored' to add the Carter Ruck payment.

Why do you feel as if you have to prove yourself to these people or anyone else for that matter?

I don't agree with everything you've ever said, but most of what you have written has been well researched and stated clearly. Keep it up and don't let the 'bar stewards' grind you down.

by plebgate 04.06.15 16:08

I have never doubted what you say TB and I think it is shocking that people are demanding to know these questions of you.

What have any of those who have turned against you in the past ever done really. A bit of research here and there but mainly reading the posts on forums like this one and then blogging a rehash of those words.

I really am very sad to know that you have felt you have to account to these people.

As I have said before if they show me evidence that you are a stooge then I might believe it, but as you have also asked before - are they the stooges really and those who have supported the new site where name calling and accusations are made about this site.

Some IMO might even have pretended to fall out with the new site, who knows, but I am very wary of those who turned against you and this site.

Anyone would be mad not to be imo.

Best wishes to you. Keeeeeep daaaaaancing - it's a 10 from me. roses

by puzzled 04.06.15 16:16

Mark Willis wrote:Such a shame you have to go to such lengths to exculpate your self and your good name.

Indeed, it shouldn't have come to this.

I wonder if there is a "divide and conquer" strategy being played out here. Whatever, the people who do this sort of thing need to consider the impression it gives to the general public. There's already enough about "sick trolls" in the media.

by jeanmonroe 04.06.15 16:21

Doug D

eta
Just seen Cristobell's response to TB and I'm not even going to put it up. From someone allegedly seeking an honest debate????????????
----------------------------------------------------------------

Spoilsport!

Don't be 'shy'

Put up the RH 'response'

Unless she's 'invented' a few 'new' swear words, i don't think we'll be 'shocked', do you?

(I'm still 'waiting' to be 'shocked to the core' by the naming of the person, who HAS to keep the 'abduction' claim going, AT ALL COSTS!)

I'm only NINE (9) months older, since SP's 'imminent EXPOSURE' of this 'dastardly' online McCann 'supporter'!

At least a 'link'!

If you don't 'put it up' people might, might, think you are being a 'tease', like SP with her 'soon' documentary!

Bugger, that's me on the RH/SP 'naughty step'!

"write and be damned, Sir".

by Doug D 04.06.15 16:25

Just for you Jean. It's not shocking, just pathetic.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Still think you snivelling coward and as to rest, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

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

by Guest 04.06.15 16:30

That must be the most obnoxious aspect of these moronic trouble makers, you know, those that demand the right to freedom of speech but at the same time prevent you from defending yourself. I might say they're not worth the effort but I quite understand your desire to defend your honour, I certainly would in your shoes.

This damn twitter thing should be totally disbanded. It serves no useful purpose, just a vehicle for people like them to propagate evil. Proof in itself - why don't they exchange their venimous rants by email, why post on a public venue for the whole world to read? I think we all know the answer to that futile question?

Nasty nasty vicious time wasters.

ETA: Excuse my ignorance - who is Ben Thompson?

by Joss 04.06.15 16:39

Just love the latest Twit pic. of RH, LOL, doing her best... [Mod: deleted, offensive personal descriptions used]

Please delete mods if it is offensive [Mod: Done]

by Guest 04.06.15 16:42

It's all rather childish.

by Joss 04.06.15 16:49

BlueBag wrote:It's all rather childish.

Yeah, its trash talk.

by jeanmonroe 04.06.15 16:56

Cristobell Author

@RosalindaHu

Author 'How I Lost 3 Stone in 3 months and reversed my Metabolic Syndrome'
----------------------------------------
Huh! Is that it? (the 'response')

Jeanmonroe, sometime 'author'

Jean, Author "How I lost 100 pounds in 3 seconds!" (my bloody horse fell at Becher's Brook!)

It didn't reverse my 'mental syndrome', i still have a 'flutter'! winkwink

------------------------------------------------------------

Author RH: "Still think you snivelling coward and as to rest"

Well, that's NOT the 'best England' i've ever read! laughat

by Joss 04.06.15 17:05

jeanmonroe wrote:Cristobell Author

@RosalindaHu

Author 'How I Lost 3 Stone in 3 months and reversed my Metabolic Syndrome'
----------------------------------------
Huh! Is that it? (the 'response')

Jeanmonroe, sometime 'author'

Jean, Author "How I lost 100 pounds in 3 seconds!" (my bloody horse fell at Becher's Brook!)

It didn't reverse my 'mental syndrome', i still have a 'flutter'!
------------------------------------------------------------

Author RH: "Still think you snivelling coward and as to rest"

Well, that's NOT the 'best England' i've ever read!

by Joss 04.06.15 17:08

Verdi wrote:That must be the most obnoxious aspect of these moronic trouble makers, you know, those that demand the right to freedom of speech but at the same time prevent you from defending yourself. I might say they're not worth the effort but I quite understand your desire to defend your honour, I certainly would in your shoes.

This damn twitter thing should be totally disbanded. It serves no useful purpose, just a vehicle for people like them to propagate evil. Proof in itself - why don't they exchange their venimous rants by email, why post on a public venue for the whole world to read? I think we all know the answer to that futile question?

Nasty nasty vicious time wasters.

ETA: Excuse my ignorance - who is Ben Thompson?

Hi Verdi, Not sure who he is either?

by snook 04.06.15 19:47

Ben set up the Justice for Madeleine FB group which has over 34K members. Very well run and does not tolerate threats, accusations etc.I agree with all of the above. I think Hutton has missed her meds today. I commented on the Keegan thread that she is having another rant about Tony on a pro Mccann FB group. Apparently Tony is a menace with his FOI's!? Yet Poulton is being applauded for her 'outstanding' requests. Nice line by Hutton. 'I rarely criticise'. Whilst writing I should also like to echo the above sentiments. Why should Tony have to respond to the likes of those three?

by **Tony Bennett** 04.06.15 20:09

snook wrote:Ben set up the Justice for Madeleine FB group which has over 34K members. Very well run and does not tolerate threats, accusations etc. I agree with all of the above. I think Hutton has missed her meds today. I commented on the Keegan thread that she is having another rant about Tony on a pro-Mccann FB group. Apparently Tony is a menace with his FOI's!? Yet Poulton is being applauded for her 'outstanding' requests. Nice line by Hutton. 'I rarely criticise'. Whilst writing I should also like to echo the above sentiments. Why should Tony have to respond to the likes of those three?

OK. The only thing I know about Ben Thompson is that he contacted me a few weeks back and politely asked if he could reproduce or quote from one of my articles - to which I said 'Yes', of course. He told me he was Admin on the 'Justice for Madeleine' FB group.

The unfortunate thing about deliberate lies spread through e.g. Facebook and Twitter is that many people tend to believe them unless the person lied about is able to effectively rebut them. It was the constant 'drip drip' of innuendo by Poulton and Hutton that I lied about having to pay the McCanns and being their stooge that really forced me to respond today.

The only other thing about today's post of mine is that I hope it has shed further light on the true characters of folk like Poulton, Hutton and 'RussianDoll'.

I still keep an open mind about their true agenda, but I note that Poulton and Hutton have been closely collaborating now for about two years and, so far as I can see, not in a good way at all in terms of furthering the search for the truth in this case.

by snook 04.06.15 20:16

I think Mccann has given them a platform to advertise their 'talents'. Unfortunately neither have the intellect or know how to undertake a real investigation as you have Tony. Sour grapes and jealousy spring to mind. It is easier to attack than rebutt any of your findings with sensible considered argument.

by Joss 04.06.15 20:20

Thanks snook & Tony for clarifying who Ben Thompson is.

by Joss 04.06.15 20:26

Tony Bennett wrote:
snook wrote:Ben set up the Justice for Madeleine FB group which has over 34K members. Very well run and does not tolerate threats, accusations etc. I agree with all of the above. I think Hutton has missed her meds today. I commented on the Keegan thread that she is having another rant about Tony on a pro-Mccann FB group. Apparently Tony is a menace with his FOI's!? Yet Poulton is being applauded for her 'outstanding' requests. Nice line by Hutton. 'I rarely criticise'. Whilst writing I should also like to echo the above sentiments. Why should Tony have to respond to the likes of those three?
OK. The only thing I know about Ben Thompson is that he contacted me a few weeks back and politely asked if he could reproduce or quote from one of my articles - to which I said 'Yes', of course. He told me he was Admin on the 'Justice for Madeleine' FB group.

The unfortunate thing about deliberate lies spread through e.g. Facebook and Twitter is that many people tend to believe them unless the person lied about is able to effectively rebut them. It was the constant 'drip drip' of innuendo by Poulton and Hutton that I lied about having to pay the McCanns and being their stooge that really forced me to respond today.

The only other thing about today's post of mine is that I hope it has shed further light on the true characters of folk like Poulton, Hutton and 'RussianDoll'.

I still keep an open mind about their true agenda, but I note that Poulton and Hutton have been closely collaborating now for about two years and, so far as I can see, not in a good way at all in terms of furthering the search for the truth in this case.

Exactly, and you should be able to defend yourself against any lies people say about you. Shame on those silly people, and as you say, it has nothing at all to do with any search for truth for Madeleine.
I don't do FB or Twitter so have no idea what goes on there.

by Guest 04.06.15 20:27

Joss wrote:
Verdi wrote:That must be the most obnoxious aspect of these moronic trouble makers, you know, those that demand the right to freedom of speech but at the same time prevent you from defending yourself. I might say they're not worth the effort but I quite understand your desire to defend your honour, I certainly would in your shoes.

This damn twitter thing should be totally disbanded. It serves no useful purpose, just a vehicle for people like them to propagate evil. Proof in itself - why don't they exchange their venimous rants by email, why post on a public venue for the whole world to read? I think we all know the answer to that futile question?

Nasty nasty vicious time wasters.

ETA: Excuse my ignorance - who is Ben Thompson?
Hi Verdi, Not sure who he is either?

All has been revealed - in the nicest possible way smilie

!

by Guest 04.06.15 20:29

Joss wrote:Just love the latest Twit pic. of RH, LOL, doing her best [Mod: - offensive personal description removed - taste and decency]

Please delete mods if it is offensive

Joss - can the truth be offensive? winkwink

by Guest 04.06.15 20:43

Tony Bennett wrote:
snook wrote:Ben set up the Justice for Madeleine FB group which has over 34K members. Very well run and does not tolerate threats, accusations etc. I agree with all of the above. I think Hutton has missed her meds today. I commented on the Keegan thread that she is having another rant about Tony on a pro-Mccann FB group. Apparently Tony is a menace with his FOI's!? Yet Poulton is being applauded for her 'outstanding' requests. Nice line by Hutton. 'I rarely criticise'. Whilst writing I should also like to echo the above sentiments. Why should Tony have to respond to the likes of those three?
OK. The only thing I know about Ben Thompson is that he contacted me a few weeks back and politely asked if he could reproduce or quote from one of my articles - to which I said 'Yes', of course. He told me he was Admin on the 'Justice for Madeleine' FB group.

Thanks to you and snook for clarification.

The unfortunate thing about deliberate lies spread through e.g. Facebook and Twitter is that many people tend to believe them unless the person lied about is able to effectively rebut them. It was the constant 'drip drip' of innuendo by Poulton and Hutton that I lied about having to pay the McCanns and being their stooge that really forced me to respond today.

Not only Facebook and Twitter. It also applies to blogs and non-membership fora. Been there done it!

The only other thing about today's post of mine is that I hope it has shed further light on the true characters of folk like Poulton, Hutton and 'RussianDoll'.

In addition to Poulton and Hutton I've had my doubts about RussianDoll for quite a while. All three of the same dye.

I still keep an open mind about their true agenda, but I note that Poulton and Hutton have been closely collaborating now for about two years and, so far as I can see, not in a good way at all in terms of furthering the search for the truth in this case.

Self promotion is their only agenda in my opinion, they feed off each other. Two of a kind beyond a shadow of doubt!

~~~~~~

The interesting thing is, these two (or three) + all others of a like kind, spend most of their waking and sleeping hours attacking people like your goodself, people that have spent so much time and energy researching case material and drawing attention to the many discrepancies directly and indirectly connected to the case.

Says it all don't you think?

by **Tony Bennett** 04.06.15 21:05

Tony Bennett wrote:

Having answered this publicly-posed demand by Poulton and Hutton for proof of my payments, I have certain questions for them which I hope they will be able to answer either here or elsewhere:

@ Sonia Poulton [SNIPPED]

@ Rosalinda Hutton

1. Were you paid for your interview by the Sun, if so, how much?

Rosalinda Hutton has provided her answer to the above question on Twitter, as follows:

Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton - 4 June 2015
If Mr. Angry of Harlow and his merry little band of witches think I'm going to hand over my personal information for their collective delectation online, they are (hilariously) off their trollies

+++++

This answer is IMO extremely reminiscent of another very evasive answer given by one Dr Gerald McCann way back in May 2007.

He was aksed by a Portuguese journalist: "Do you already know Robert Murat?"

Instead of answering 'Yes' or 'No', he snarled, looked away from the interviewer and the camera impatiently, and answered angrily: "I am not going to comment on that". From which the obvious inference was that he DID already know Murat, but was not going to admit it.

I would suggest that Hutton's evasive answer can clearly be taken as an admission that she WAS paid by the Sun for that terrible article about her getting a 'buzz' from attacking others, and in which she was portrayed to the Sun's 6-million-plus readers as a vile anti-McCann troll.

If so, then to be PAID for an interview in which she signifiantly damaged the cause of the McCann-doubters is about as low as you can get - being paid by Murdoch to make McCann-doubters out to be vile trolls.

The attacks she has repeatedly made to her followers against CMOMM - by far the most-read Madeleine McCann forum on the internet - also raise serious further doubts about Hutton's - and Poulton's - true agenda in all of this

by MRNOODLES 04.06.15 21:16

Tony Bennett wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:

Having answered this publicly-posed demand by Poulton and Hutton for proof of my payments, I have certain questions for them which I hope they will be able to answer either here or elsewhere:

@ Sonia Poulton [SNIPPED]

@ Rosalinda Hutton

1. Were you paid for your interview by the Sun, if so, how much?
Rosalinda Hutton has provided her answer to the above question on Twitter, as follows:

Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton - 4 June 2015
If Mr. Angry of Harlow and his merry little band of witches think I'm going to hand over my personal information for their collective delectation online, they are (hilariously) off their trollies

+++++

I take that to mean, 'sod that, it could affect my dole money'. sarcastic

by **Tony Bennett** 04.06.15 22:04

By the way, it wasn't only Poulton and Hutton pouring scorn and doubt about my monthly payments to Carter-Ruck - 'tigger', back here again on CMOMM, was another.

Whilst she was away from us for a while at the other place, with Cristobell and her fans, this post by her (last year) was brought to my attention:

QUOTE tigger

As for TB getting his debilitating monthly payment to Carter Ruck in (I thought it was direct to TM) I know that the bulk of his fines are being paid by others - and even know who are doing so and what they are contributing, Mr. B.

So don't use that topic to drum up more deluded donors.

UNQUOTE

Hmm, well thanks for nothing, tigger.

Let me just correct these further untruths by tigger:

1. NONE of the 'fines' (she means costs) are 'being paid by others', as claimed. The only help I have had is via donations to the C.O.L.D. website

2. I am quite happy to disclose how much help I have had so far from C.O.L.D., it is just under £2,000 - out of a total costs bill of £27,500. So around 7%. Hardly 'the bulk of the fines' as tigger falsely claimed

3. She has no knowledge whatsoever of who has contributed to C.O.L.D. as this is confidential information known only to the C.O.L.D. Committee - unless that is a donor has volunteered to tigger how much s/he has donated

4. I don't know what she means about 'using a topic to drum up donors', as I've not done that. Perhaps she will come along here and explain

by **sharonl** 04.06.15 22:17

Linda Hutton, by her own admission, is a manic depressive (bipolar disorder). Here are some of the symptoms of the disorder:

Bipolar disorder is classified as a mood (or affective) disorder, and is characterised by mood swings from the extremes of elevated moods (called the manic phase) and low moods (called the depressive phase). Patients often experience normal moods (euthymic phase) between these extreme episodes.
In the depressive phase, individuals with bipolar disorder will have persistent feelings of sadness, anxiety, guilt, anger, irritability, isolation and/or hopelessness, disturbances in sleep and appetite, fatigue and loss of interest in usually enjoyed activities, and morbid/suicidal ideation.
In the manic phase, an individual will have increase in energy, grandiose or delusional ideas, racing thoughts, and a decreased need for sleep.
In addition to mood disturbance, an individual can also suffer from psychotic episodes, suffering a loss of contact with reality and may report hallucinations, delusions and exhibit personality changes.
Individuals suffering from bipolar disorder can exhibit different patterns of mood disturbance, with individual phases lasting days or months or being mainly manic or depressive in presentation, resulting in a clinical diagnosis of any of the six different forms of bipolar disorder

Huttons behaviour is totally unacceptable but it is most likely be down to diminished responsibility, in which case, as difficult as it may seem, we should ignore it. People with such disorders often crave attention, and we are giving her that attention which is encouraging her to continue with this. Also, she is not in a position to be reasoned with.

I think that under these circumstances, as difficult as it may seem, we should ignore her and move on.

Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".

Re: Tony Bennett responds to the claims of Sonia Poulton and Linda Hutton that he lied about having to pay Carter Ruck - and is acting as a 'paid stooge' for the McCann Team

Latest topics