That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Social Media :: Sonia Poulton: The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann film
Page 1 of 4 • Share
Page 1 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4 
That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Tony Bennett 11.06.15 8:12
Put here for reference, starting with Tigger's blog post yesterday - then Vikki Scott's 'take', and finally mine:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
LOSING THE PLOT by ‘Tigger’ on Fytton.blogspot.com
This post will be up for a short time. Just so that it reaches the parts other beers blogs/forums don't.
The case has become more and more about personalities who haven't so much looked for solutions as a place in the spotlight. So this is my take on the explanation offered by Sonia Poulton. If my tone is thought too harsh, just think what I would post on the main actors in the McCann saga.
LOSING THE PLOT
(Tigger’s comments in red)
IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION: WHEN CAN I SEE YOUR MADELEINE #MCCANN DOCUMENTARY?, by Sonia Poulton
I write this with some trepidation, knowing full well it will be examined to within an inch of life. And not always by friendly and welcoming eyes.
Tigger: To keep it short: either you’re a gutsy ‘go for the truth’ professional journalist or you’re a poor weak woman. Make a choice - I see you already have.
Myself and a production crew have been filming this documentary for over seven months. Initially we planned to do the whole thing, start to finish, in a couple of months.
Events changed that.
The story developed. Brenda Leyland's inquest was delayed until March 2015, we waited for the Gonçalo Amaral Lisbon result, I waited for various responses and FOIs (delayed, again) to come in.
Tigger: The FOI’s sound interesting, which were they and which ones were delayed? They are usually answered within a fairly short time-frame.
Just to make this clear. This documentary is not a YouTube video. It has been made to specific broadcasting standards and the process involved is considerably more time-consuming and costly than that involved in a YouTube which (as I know well) is essentially a record-edit-upload process.
Tigger: Yes, fine.
If only it were that straightforward.
But then this is a media story that needs to go beyond online and into the mainstream media. That's what online campaigners tell me all the time - and they are right.
I have worked in msm for decades and I also make You Tubes, I love doing it all, but the former requires such stringent disciplines and standards to be met, legally, technically and visually, that I knew I needed a production company to back me making this film.
Tigger: Yes - and? The main point here is that it is essential to find an MSM company willing to screen it. Be a terrible disappointment if all that time and money is spent and have it end up on YouTube.
For the reality is - and anyone who knows this case will also know there are media and legal issues attached - I am loathe to give away too much information because I am aware of how problematic that could be for us.
Tigger: Most people are simply asking when and where, nothing about the content which we cannot judge until it is screened.
From the outset I knew I would struggle to get a broadcaster to fund it the way
Tigger: (insert: but ?)
I realised, over a number of years, that the story needed to be told.
I had already been warned off by a msm producer of my acquaintance. Other colleagues (and journalist friends) have expressed similar concerns about my curiosity of the case over the years.
Tigger: Brave woman…
In order to make this documentary I needed to be able to take a package to a broadcaster. It could not be footage, to be chopped and edited according to someone else's idea of how it should be portrayed, but a complete, honest and whole film package that I would not allow to be tampered with.
I don’t understand this at all. Surely a completed product will be shown to the broadcaster who will almost certainly edit it for legal and time reasons as well as conforming to a ‘house style’. Showing bits of footage would not be enough. A script and a storyboard style presentation is the usual way to go I understand.
Tigger: The underlined sentence shows this is a lost cause - not even David Attenborough could demand those conditions. No top documentary maker could.
If you know how msm works (and I mean REALLY know) you will know this requirement of mine is me coming with A VERY TALL ORDER, indeed. But then you will also know that that is what this story requires.
The disappearance of Madeleine McCann - and the multiple issues attached to that - is a story that very much needs updating in the way the public perceive it.
I was inspired, as a journalist and broadcaster, to pursue this by the shocking (and I'm still shocked) death of Brenda Leyland. I address this tragedy fully in the film and over the course of months as I, and a small camera crew, attended her inquests.
People will be left in no doubt about my position on Brenda Leyland - and about the events that led to her death, and those events subsequent to her death.
Tigger: The death of Brenda Leyland needs to be addressed, but is the public interested in your position in this matter? Surely the only important matter is how this came about and who is responsible?
Let me say this at this point:
Yes, I am a professional journalist - despite detractors trying every trick to undermine my hard won and decent reputation in my industry - but I am also passionate as well as professional.
Tigger: Irrelevant, this is not about your own opinion of yourself, we want to know about the documentary. You’ve started apparently by door-stepping Kate McCann, with a camera crew in attendance. In my book that is not clever. That wouldn’t help getting an MSM airing for a start.
Those who oppose this documentary, and there are a few, have tried to use that against me. They have failed. I am proud to be emotionally engaged with my work, I do not want to be one of those 'professionals' who are so 'professional' that they can do a job like, say, watch child abuse images without so much as a flicker of emotion.
Tigger: Again irrelevant, this is all about you - and getting child abuse into it is no doubt a good media ploy but so far has nothing to do with the McCann case. Stick to the facts.
I don't want to be the type of person who is able to emotionally detach from the wickedness of the world in the course of their 'job'. We should never acclimatise to what is wrong, that's how I see my work. I view passion as a help not a hindrance, a strength not a weakness.
Tigger: Yes, yes, we got that. In spades.
Anyone who knows me will know this and in this film I make that point very clearly.
Tigger: Why? This sounds like the film will tell the world all about you and your emotions.
I do this by going to the people at the heart of this story (while being clear not to interfere in any way with the ongoing police investigation) and by asking questions of public interest. (Many millions of pounds of public interest, in fact, and that's just the financial cost of this case to the public).
Tigger: Errm yes, where else would you go? Is there an alternative?
In this documentary, I tackle the anomalies that exist. All the stuff that is in the public domain - only you wouldn't know it judging by the lack of real investigation media organisations have conducted around this case. On that point, at least, I agree with Clarence Mitchell - the McCann's spokesman who appears in the documentary.
Tigger: Actually, the information that is in the public domain has been put there by people who read the files and did research. Media have never done any real research, they’ve printed what sells.So Clarence would agree with you on that but does he give his opinion? I would think he is delighted with the lack of real investigation.
So, forgive me for going the long way around answering the question: when will your documentary be aired?
Tigger: We noticed.
The short answer is I can't yet tell you. At the moment. That's me being as transparent as I can without giving ammunition to the enemies of this project.
Tigger: Transparency isn’t the issue here. Not even content, just when. How would this give ammo to - ‘the enemies of this project?’
The film is, and has been for weeks, in post-production. We have started broadcast meetings about it. Several broadcast executives have expressed a keen interest in getting involved. Myself, and a small trusted team, are (through necessity) playing our cards close to our collective chests.
Tigger: Gosh! just like Enid Blyton and the Five!
Those who want justice for Madeleine McCann will understand and appreciate that. Those with other agendas, will not. Either way, we get to know who's who.
Tigger: Ahh! I wondered when that was coming. I don’t know how I will live with being an ‘enemy of the project’ without having another agenda. What should I do? Is there a club for the EoPs?
This documentary has taught me so much and not least that the enemies of it are not always immediately identifiable. I have learnt that there are detractors who claim to be on the side of justice for Madeleine McCann - in terms of finding out what happened and where she might be - but are, in actuality, the opposite.
Tigger: My goodness me! These revelations have stunned me too. People/enemies pretending to be other than they are. Politics will never be the same again.
Some of these have already become the most vocal and scathing opponents of a film - this film - that has yet to be aired. Odd behaviour. Or maybe not.
Tigger: Not really, the thing was promised about 9 months ago. The gestation period is about up.
Finally, I would like to say a big thank you to every single person who has informed me on the intricacies of this story - and also made me aware of the many dubious and opportunistic characters who surround it.
This experience has been an education - a harrowing and sad one, at times - and one I believe I have conveyed in our film for the public, at large, who are not clued-up like many of those online.
Thank you for your patience. As soon as I have broadcast details, I will let you know.
Oh, and one more thing, we will shortly release a two-minute trailer to social media to give people a flavour of what to expect. Again, I have to wait for the go-ahead but as soon as I can, I will.
Have a lovely week.
Sonia X
Sonia Poulton June 8, 2015
____________________
Tigger’s Conclusions:
What strikes me about this - presumably - ‘Open Letter’ from Ms. Poulton is that most of it is about herself, her emotions and the enemies who don’t believe her.
She has divided the world into ‘enemies of the documentary’ , and presumably true believers. Detractors try to undermine her. Well they would wouldn’t they?
She writes this with ‘trepidation’ as it will be read ‘to within an inch of life’.
Isn’t it the point that it will be read attentively?
Fair enough that there are unforeseen events and delays. But why is it so hard to give a ball-park figure of at least finishing the thing? Never mind the screening.
We are promised a few clips on YouTube, we now know that Clarence Mitchell agrees with her on the media, we have had a clip of filming near a pond. Early on a photograph of Ms. Poulton holding a microphone being filmed by the crew. That’s it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This post will stay up for about a week, then I will take it off again as I much prefer to write about the McCann case which is of far more importance than slighted posters/bloggers/journalists who are taking up valuable time that is better spent trying to find out what really happened.
Leicester Police looked at the ‘dossier’ of ‘trolls’ and has officially given their opinion that there was nothing illegal or actionable in it.
That may have been a bit of a disappointment to those who compiled it. I seems to be even more of a disappointment to those who want hero/heroine status by fearlessly trolling on the McCann hashtag. So the in-fighting continues, reminiscent of the playground of a somewhat backward school.
All that energy is now switched to creating enemies in their own camp. Fifth column and all that. Get a life is my advice.
Just to lighten up - a screenshot from quite a few years ago (August 2012) - the MSM doing their best in this case. Just as they are leaking real information under 'pro' headlines these days.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
LOSING THE PLOT by ‘Tigger’ on Fytton.blogspot.com
This post will be up for a short time. Just so that it reaches the parts other beers blogs/forums don't.
The case has become more and more about personalities who haven't so much looked for solutions as a place in the spotlight. So this is my take on the explanation offered by Sonia Poulton. If my tone is thought too harsh, just think what I would post on the main actors in the McCann saga.
LOSING THE PLOT
(Tigger’s comments in red)
IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION: WHEN CAN I SEE YOUR MADELEINE #MCCANN DOCUMENTARY?, by Sonia Poulton
I write this with some trepidation, knowing full well it will be examined to within an inch of life. And not always by friendly and welcoming eyes.
Tigger: To keep it short: either you’re a gutsy ‘go for the truth’ professional journalist or you’re a poor weak woman. Make a choice - I see you already have.
Myself and a production crew have been filming this documentary for over seven months. Initially we planned to do the whole thing, start to finish, in a couple of months.
Events changed that.
The story developed. Brenda Leyland's inquest was delayed until March 2015, we waited for the Gonçalo Amaral Lisbon result, I waited for various responses and FOIs (delayed, again) to come in.
Tigger: The FOI’s sound interesting, which were they and which ones were delayed? They are usually answered within a fairly short time-frame.
Just to make this clear. This documentary is not a YouTube video. It has been made to specific broadcasting standards and the process involved is considerably more time-consuming and costly than that involved in a YouTube which (as I know well) is essentially a record-edit-upload process.
Tigger: Yes, fine.
If only it were that straightforward.
But then this is a media story that needs to go beyond online and into the mainstream media. That's what online campaigners tell me all the time - and they are right.
I have worked in msm for decades and I also make You Tubes, I love doing it all, but the former requires such stringent disciplines and standards to be met, legally, technically and visually, that I knew I needed a production company to back me making this film.
Tigger: Yes - and? The main point here is that it is essential to find an MSM company willing to screen it. Be a terrible disappointment if all that time and money is spent and have it end up on YouTube.
For the reality is - and anyone who knows this case will also know there are media and legal issues attached - I am loathe to give away too much information because I am aware of how problematic that could be for us.
Tigger: Most people are simply asking when and where, nothing about the content which we cannot judge until it is screened.
From the outset I knew I would struggle to get a broadcaster to fund it the way
Tigger: (insert: but ?)
I realised, over a number of years, that the story needed to be told.
I had already been warned off by a msm producer of my acquaintance. Other colleagues (and journalist friends) have expressed similar concerns about my curiosity of the case over the years.
Tigger: Brave woman…
In order to make this documentary I needed to be able to take a package to a broadcaster. It could not be footage, to be chopped and edited according to someone else's idea of how it should be portrayed, but a complete, honest and whole film package that I would not allow to be tampered with.
I don’t understand this at all. Surely a completed product will be shown to the broadcaster who will almost certainly edit it for legal and time reasons as well as conforming to a ‘house style’. Showing bits of footage would not be enough. A script and a storyboard style presentation is the usual way to go I understand.
Tigger: The underlined sentence shows this is a lost cause - not even David Attenborough could demand those conditions. No top documentary maker could.
If you know how msm works (and I mean REALLY know) you will know this requirement of mine is me coming with A VERY TALL ORDER, indeed. But then you will also know that that is what this story requires.
The disappearance of Madeleine McCann - and the multiple issues attached to that - is a story that very much needs updating in the way the public perceive it.
I was inspired, as a journalist and broadcaster, to pursue this by the shocking (and I'm still shocked) death of Brenda Leyland. I address this tragedy fully in the film and over the course of months as I, and a small camera crew, attended her inquests.
People will be left in no doubt about my position on Brenda Leyland - and about the events that led to her death, and those events subsequent to her death.
Tigger: The death of Brenda Leyland needs to be addressed, but is the public interested in your position in this matter? Surely the only important matter is how this came about and who is responsible?
Let me say this at this point:
Yes, I am a professional journalist - despite detractors trying every trick to undermine my hard won and decent reputation in my industry - but I am also passionate as well as professional.
Tigger: Irrelevant, this is not about your own opinion of yourself, we want to know about the documentary. You’ve started apparently by door-stepping Kate McCann, with a camera crew in attendance. In my book that is not clever. That wouldn’t help getting an MSM airing for a start.
Those who oppose this documentary, and there are a few, have tried to use that against me. They have failed. I am proud to be emotionally engaged with my work, I do not want to be one of those 'professionals' who are so 'professional' that they can do a job like, say, watch child abuse images without so much as a flicker of emotion.
Tigger: Again irrelevant, this is all about you - and getting child abuse into it is no doubt a good media ploy but so far has nothing to do with the McCann case. Stick to the facts.
I don't want to be the type of person who is able to emotionally detach from the wickedness of the world in the course of their 'job'. We should never acclimatise to what is wrong, that's how I see my work. I view passion as a help not a hindrance, a strength not a weakness.
Tigger: Yes, yes, we got that. In spades.
Anyone who knows me will know this and in this film I make that point very clearly.
Tigger: Why? This sounds like the film will tell the world all about you and your emotions.
I do this by going to the people at the heart of this story (while being clear not to interfere in any way with the ongoing police investigation) and by asking questions of public interest. (Many millions of pounds of public interest, in fact, and that's just the financial cost of this case to the public).
Tigger: Errm yes, where else would you go? Is there an alternative?
In this documentary, I tackle the anomalies that exist. All the stuff that is in the public domain - only you wouldn't know it judging by the lack of real investigation media organisations have conducted around this case. On that point, at least, I agree with Clarence Mitchell - the McCann's spokesman who appears in the documentary.
Tigger: Actually, the information that is in the public domain has been put there by people who read the files and did research. Media have never done any real research, they’ve printed what sells.So Clarence would agree with you on that but does he give his opinion? I would think he is delighted with the lack of real investigation.
So, forgive me for going the long way around answering the question: when will your documentary be aired?
Tigger: We noticed.
The short answer is I can't yet tell you. At the moment. That's me being as transparent as I can without giving ammunition to the enemies of this project.
Tigger: Transparency isn’t the issue here. Not even content, just when. How would this give ammo to - ‘the enemies of this project?’
The film is, and has been for weeks, in post-production. We have started broadcast meetings about it. Several broadcast executives have expressed a keen interest in getting involved. Myself, and a small trusted team, are (through necessity) playing our cards close to our collective chests.
Tigger: Gosh! just like Enid Blyton and the Five!
Those who want justice for Madeleine McCann will understand and appreciate that. Those with other agendas, will not. Either way, we get to know who's who.
Tigger: Ahh! I wondered when that was coming. I don’t know how I will live with being an ‘enemy of the project’ without having another agenda. What should I do? Is there a club for the EoPs?
This documentary has taught me so much and not least that the enemies of it are not always immediately identifiable. I have learnt that there are detractors who claim to be on the side of justice for Madeleine McCann - in terms of finding out what happened and where she might be - but are, in actuality, the opposite.
Tigger: My goodness me! These revelations have stunned me too. People/enemies pretending to be other than they are. Politics will never be the same again.
Some of these have already become the most vocal and scathing opponents of a film - this film - that has yet to be aired. Odd behaviour. Or maybe not.
Tigger: Not really, the thing was promised about 9 months ago. The gestation period is about up.
Finally, I would like to say a big thank you to every single person who has informed me on the intricacies of this story - and also made me aware of the many dubious and opportunistic characters who surround it.
This experience has been an education - a harrowing and sad one, at times - and one I believe I have conveyed in our film for the public, at large, who are not clued-up like many of those online.
Thank you for your patience. As soon as I have broadcast details, I will let you know.
Oh, and one more thing, we will shortly release a two-minute trailer to social media to give people a flavour of what to expect. Again, I have to wait for the go-ahead but as soon as I can, I will.
Have a lovely week.
Sonia X
Sonia Poulton June 8, 2015
____________________
Tigger’s Conclusions:
What strikes me about this - presumably - ‘Open Letter’ from Ms. Poulton is that most of it is about herself, her emotions and the enemies who don’t believe her.
She has divided the world into ‘enemies of the documentary’ , and presumably true believers. Detractors try to undermine her. Well they would wouldn’t they?
She writes this with ‘trepidation’ as it will be read ‘to within an inch of life’.
Isn’t it the point that it will be read attentively?
Fair enough that there are unforeseen events and delays. But why is it so hard to give a ball-park figure of at least finishing the thing? Never mind the screening.
We are promised a few clips on YouTube, we now know that Clarence Mitchell agrees with her on the media, we have had a clip of filming near a pond. Early on a photograph of Ms. Poulton holding a microphone being filmed by the crew. That’s it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This post will stay up for about a week, then I will take it off again as I much prefer to write about the McCann case which is of far more importance than slighted posters/bloggers/journalists who are taking up valuable time that is better spent trying to find out what really happened.
Leicester Police looked at the ‘dossier’ of ‘trolls’ and has officially given their opinion that there was nothing illegal or actionable in it.
That may have been a bit of a disappointment to those who compiled it. I seems to be even more of a disappointment to those who want hero/heroine status by fearlessly trolling on the McCann hashtag. So the in-fighting continues, reminiscent of the playground of a somewhat backward school.
All that energy is now switched to creating enemies in their own camp. Fifth column and all that. Get a life is my advice.
Just to lighten up - a screenshot from quite a few years ago (August 2012) - the MSM doing their best in this case. Just as they are leaking real information under 'pro' headlines these days.
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Vikki Scott on Sonia Poulton
by Tony Bennett 11.06.15 8:21
Vikki Scott's 'take'on Sonia Poulton and Rosalinda Hutton:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE LUNATICS HAVE TAKEN OVER THE ASYLUM
By Vikki Scott
Originally published on the Justice for Madeleine page, but since censored and removed. If you try to access this article, a note from their Admin says: “This post has been removed”.
The Justice for Madeleine FB page currently has 33,985 members, also on the #justiceformadeleine hashtag.
Vikki’s post has however been posted on another Madeleine McCann FB group: the Madeleine McCann Debate group, which has 1,753 members.
Vikki Scott published this article about Sonia Poulton on 8 June:
THE LUNATICS HAVE TAKEN OVER THE ASYLUM.
A precognitive statement by Terry Hall if ever there was one. Were The Fun Boy Three to release that single now it would serve as the perfect anthem for what now laughingly passes for debate of the McCann conundrum on Twitter and many other dark recesses of the internet, Facebook included in some cases.
That it is impossible for personalities not to be attacked when 'discussing' a case with such polarised views is something those engaging have to put up with. Casualties of war and all that, but what we are witnessing lately has gone beyond name-calling and slight ridicule. No, what we witness now is an all-out assault to destroy reputations, research and possibly ruin certain people’s lives.
What we are seeing now is verging on apostasy. The investigation into what happened to Madeleine McCann has been abandoned by some in favour of venomous attacks on those who were previously allies to the cause, 'fighting' for the same truth to emerge, namely what was the fate of the little child and at whoses hands did she suffer.
There are many theories into what happened to Madeleine but the only certainty is, we don't know, other than she is no longer with us, whether you believe she is dead or being held by a loving family/paedophile (delete as applicable) and is lost forever or findable.
There are theories as to what date she met her fate, how she met her fate, the reasons why there seems to be a cover-up and why so much assistance is being given to the parents.
The theories are endless.
Was Tanner lying?
Does Smithman exist ?
How long was David Payne in the apartment, if at all on that fateful evening on 3 May 2007?
What did Kate shout when she gave the alarm and why?
You get the picture.
30,000 documents to pore over, yet the pressing priority at the moment seems to be to attack each other in the vilest way possible.
Most people who are sure the parents are responsible for Madeleine's demise are, quite rightly, fighting Goncalo Amaral's corner. Yet many of these same people do not agree with his theory and timeline.
Textusa has a faithful following and an enviable number of views of the blog site.
Do these two come in for attacks for the crime of not going along 100% with other theories and from the very people who purport to be batting for the same side? Not very often.
Neither are subject to personal attacks by those who ostensibly fight for the same truth, even if their theories are questioned, so when I see the disgusting very personal attacks being launched now I have to ask: why and what is the true agenda?
The only people trying to ridicule Amaral and Textusa are those who see it as a life mission to protect Kate and Gerry at any cost and ridicule anyone who cannot see the light of innocence shining from their stricken eyes.
So why are we seeing so-called sceptics turning on other sceptics with the gusto that would see them earning rapid promotion within the ranks of Stop The Myths?
It is no revelation that I have no faith in the much vaunted 'revelatory' documentary everyone is waiting for with bated breath. Nor do I think it is a coincidence that these attacks have gained momentum since the ‘alternative’ journalist, Sonia Poulton rode into town on the coat tails of the tragic death of Brenda Leyland.
Ms Poulton has found a willing ally in one Rosalinda Hutton, a.k.a. Cristobell, who already had a reputation for stretching the truth and throwing her toys out of the pram when forum/Facebook group members refused to kneel at the altar of her words of wisdom.
Although I am reluctant to give either a name check, it needs to addressed as to why Tony Bennett has now become the target of Ms Poulton's smears.
For months now we have contradictory statement after contradictory statement with regard to her documentary which, thanks to her self- promotion, some people think is going to blow the lid off the murky world of McCann.
She told us it was going to be aired by mainstream media. Hang on, make that a debut in the USA now. It was going to be screened after Brenda's inquest, no wait, after the conclusion of the trial in Portugal. The only recurring theme throughout has been the teasers telling her panting audience that she has door-stepped Kate McCann and others and is going to imminently reveal a personality ‘close to the McCanns that will shock us'.
Still waiting.
We have also been made privy to the fact that she has been ‘troll’ hunting those who have ‘defamed’ her (get the theme?) and that there are many many people who are trying to stop her from producing this masterpiece.
Get over yourself Poulton. Richard Hall's videos have had over a million views with, I have no doubt, far superior research than your troll-fest - and without the self-promotion that is another recurring theme of this production.
I don't doubt this will earn me the accusation that I am working for ‘the other side’, because anyone who casts doubt on this forthcoming extravaganza is obviously in the pay of the McCanns - as how could anyone possibly not slavishly hang on her every word?
The above notwithstanding, say I give Ms Poulton the benefit of the doubt. Each to their own, and if the job gets done, all power to her. So I have to ask why, with the aid of Hutton and her attack dog with a big gun (what is they say about men who love guns?) has she launched an unprovoked attack on Mr Bennett?
It is no secret that Hutton has made it her life mission to sully his reputation and research ever since she received a seven-day suspension from the forum, The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann, to cool off after one of her ever-increasing outbursts.
Suspension mind you, not ban as she purported. Buoyed by her ‘success’, revelling in announcing herself as a bitch who loves to ‘squish’ in the train wreck of an article in The Sun (arranged by guess who – yes, Sonia Poulton), she regaled her adoring public with tales of death threats from Mr Bennett - although as with all of her assertions no-one has yet see proof of these ridiculous claims. But, hey, it makes for great copy for the blog.
We get it, Cristobell, you don't like Tony. You are playing in the major league now. Out on location, making THE documentary. So why is your new bezzie mate Poulton now attacking Mr Bennett? Why are you two accusing him of being a ‘McCann stooge’? What on earth has this got to do with any search for ‘truth’? And why, having forced him to go to the effort of putting his personal details online for your delectation do you respond with ‘kiss my a**e’ ? Have you any idea how ridiculous you look?
And not content with that, the pair of you continue the attacks on Twitter, including, Ms Hutton, our Very own Ben Thomson in your attacks.
We get it. No-one can compete with you as an ‘attractive, articulate woman’. That your words are awaited by the online community with bated breath is a given, so it begs the question, what do you hope to achieve and what is YOUR game?
You demand answers, yet refuse to answer the most innocuous ones asked of you. You have been proven a liar. Even Poulton won’t back you in your assertions against Ben, yet still you refuse to apologise. Is it so difficult to admit the world of Cristobell may be wrong sometimes? Still, I understand - after all, as you keep reminding us, you are a ‘better writer’, which is no more than we expect from a ‘Lecturer in English'. Is there no end to your talents ?
See - from where I am sitting, Tony is not the one whoring himself out to Murdoch's Sky whilst purporting to be outraged by the way Brenda was hounded to death by that very organisation.
Nor does he or Ben feel the need to ridicule and rubbish other people's work and research.
I don't recall Mr Bennett or any other ‘anti’ McCann group giving house room to the lunatic Birch like Ms Poulton did for a full half-hour.
Love or loathe Mr Bennett I would put money on the fact that most of us have arrived at our conclusions based on much of the early research done by him. Research most of us have neither the time or inclination to undertake ourselves. I doubt the numbers now awake to the lies of McCann would be any the wiser were it not for Mr Bennett.
Serious researchers are not interested in the identities of those who support the McCanns and are not seeking out ‘fat hairy pros’ to ‘out’ in public.
Neither of you have any self-awareness. You speak of dignity yet engineered a farce at Brenda's inquest. You scream ‘foul’ at Martin Brunt yet revel in the prospect of doing the very same thing. Indeed, Ms Hutton is now blaming ‘anti-McCanns'’for Brenda's suicide.
Indeed, your latest tome tells us how you can see why the MSM are disgusted with anti campaigns and that you have nothing for contempt for us. Remind us again which side of the fence you sit - or do you need to consult your new found pals over in the ‘pro’ Debate camp ?
Your adoring fans are salivating at the prospect of this forthcoming documentary. I hope they are not disappointed. I'm sure they won’t be.
Madeleine had become lost in the cesspit of sensationalism and I'm sure most of your adoring fans will be happy when they see you trying to humiliate ordinary men and women who support Kate and Gerry.
Yes, some go too far, but that statement can be applied to both sides of the argument - and all you two are doing are stoking the fire. Credible journalists don’t need to provide a running commentary on their projects. They are judged on results - and they certainly don't make personal attacks on anyone who may not agree with their way of working.
So what results has Poulton shown to give us faith in this forthcoming expose? I'm still waiting for the ‘Unmasking of a Messiah’, the promised ‘'outing’ of David Icke following Ms Poulton 's sudden departure from his TV station.
If I recall correctly, that was put on hold due to ‘legal reasons’. Yet this very same lady tells us she cannot afford a legal team to take on one man who was building a website for her? How odd. Money seems no object for the McCann project?
I wonder who is funding it? - as it is being run past legals now prior to its outing? Is it surprising that her former colleagues in the alternative media community refer to her as 'controlled opposition'?
So I have to wonder, what exactly is your game ? How did Sonia manage to breach the state-of-the-art security system purported to be installed at chez McCann? How come Clarence hasn’t been on the front pages decrying the attack on the vulnerable mother of a missing child? Why do Sky tolerate and pay a woman who purports to denounce them for their support of the McCann family?
Team McCann must be rubbing their hands with glee. To those who can’t wait to get pull up the sofa for a evening’s exciting viewing, ask yourself, just who is behind it?
On second thoughts, take no notice of me. After all, I'm just another shill, throwing a spanner in the works, trying to destroy all attempts to explain to the world ‘The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann’.
Update. It seems Ms Poulton is now to be in talks with broadcasters but has no idea when (or presumably where) it will be aired? I have to wonder who produces a film, then has the legalities ironed out, not knowing if it will ever be marketable to a wide audience. Must be a money-no-object production? Seems rather at odds with previous announcements.
Stop it Vikki. I bet you are one of those dark mysterious individuals who have been plotting to undermine this gem.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE LUNATICS HAVE TAKEN OVER THE ASYLUM
By Vikki Scott
Originally published on the Justice for Madeleine page, but since censored and removed. If you try to access this article, a note from their Admin says: “This post has been removed”.
The Justice for Madeleine FB page currently has 33,985 members, also on the #justiceformadeleine hashtag.
Vikki’s post has however been posted on another Madeleine McCann FB group: the Madeleine McCann Debate group, which has 1,753 members.
Vikki Scott published this article about Sonia Poulton on 8 June:
THE LUNATICS HAVE TAKEN OVER THE ASYLUM.
A precognitive statement by Terry Hall if ever there was one. Were The Fun Boy Three to release that single now it would serve as the perfect anthem for what now laughingly passes for debate of the McCann conundrum on Twitter and many other dark recesses of the internet, Facebook included in some cases.
That it is impossible for personalities not to be attacked when 'discussing' a case with such polarised views is something those engaging have to put up with. Casualties of war and all that, but what we are witnessing lately has gone beyond name-calling and slight ridicule. No, what we witness now is an all-out assault to destroy reputations, research and possibly ruin certain people’s lives.
What we are seeing now is verging on apostasy. The investigation into what happened to Madeleine McCann has been abandoned by some in favour of venomous attacks on those who were previously allies to the cause, 'fighting' for the same truth to emerge, namely what was the fate of the little child and at whoses hands did she suffer.
There are many theories into what happened to Madeleine but the only certainty is, we don't know, other than she is no longer with us, whether you believe she is dead or being held by a loving family/paedophile (delete as applicable) and is lost forever or findable.
There are theories as to what date she met her fate, how she met her fate, the reasons why there seems to be a cover-up and why so much assistance is being given to the parents.
The theories are endless.
Was Tanner lying?
Does Smithman exist ?
How long was David Payne in the apartment, if at all on that fateful evening on 3 May 2007?
What did Kate shout when she gave the alarm and why?
You get the picture.
30,000 documents to pore over, yet the pressing priority at the moment seems to be to attack each other in the vilest way possible.
Most people who are sure the parents are responsible for Madeleine's demise are, quite rightly, fighting Goncalo Amaral's corner. Yet many of these same people do not agree with his theory and timeline.
Textusa has a faithful following and an enviable number of views of the blog site.
Do these two come in for attacks for the crime of not going along 100% with other theories and from the very people who purport to be batting for the same side? Not very often.
Neither are subject to personal attacks by those who ostensibly fight for the same truth, even if their theories are questioned, so when I see the disgusting very personal attacks being launched now I have to ask: why and what is the true agenda?
The only people trying to ridicule Amaral and Textusa are those who see it as a life mission to protect Kate and Gerry at any cost and ridicule anyone who cannot see the light of innocence shining from their stricken eyes.
So why are we seeing so-called sceptics turning on other sceptics with the gusto that would see them earning rapid promotion within the ranks of Stop The Myths?
It is no revelation that I have no faith in the much vaunted 'revelatory' documentary everyone is waiting for with bated breath. Nor do I think it is a coincidence that these attacks have gained momentum since the ‘alternative’ journalist, Sonia Poulton rode into town on the coat tails of the tragic death of Brenda Leyland.
Ms Poulton has found a willing ally in one Rosalinda Hutton, a.k.a. Cristobell, who already had a reputation for stretching the truth and throwing her toys out of the pram when forum/Facebook group members refused to kneel at the altar of her words of wisdom.
Although I am reluctant to give either a name check, it needs to addressed as to why Tony Bennett has now become the target of Ms Poulton's smears.
For months now we have contradictory statement after contradictory statement with regard to her documentary which, thanks to her self- promotion, some people think is going to blow the lid off the murky world of McCann.
She told us it was going to be aired by mainstream media. Hang on, make that a debut in the USA now. It was going to be screened after Brenda's inquest, no wait, after the conclusion of the trial in Portugal. The only recurring theme throughout has been the teasers telling her panting audience that she has door-stepped Kate McCann and others and is going to imminently reveal a personality ‘close to the McCanns that will shock us'.
Still waiting.
We have also been made privy to the fact that she has been ‘troll’ hunting those who have ‘defamed’ her (get the theme?) and that there are many many people who are trying to stop her from producing this masterpiece.
Get over yourself Poulton. Richard Hall's videos have had over a million views with, I have no doubt, far superior research than your troll-fest - and without the self-promotion that is another recurring theme of this production.
I don't doubt this will earn me the accusation that I am working for ‘the other side’, because anyone who casts doubt on this forthcoming extravaganza is obviously in the pay of the McCanns - as how could anyone possibly not slavishly hang on her every word?
The above notwithstanding, say I give Ms Poulton the benefit of the doubt. Each to their own, and if the job gets done, all power to her. So I have to ask why, with the aid of Hutton and her attack dog with a big gun (what is they say about men who love guns?) has she launched an unprovoked attack on Mr Bennett?
It is no secret that Hutton has made it her life mission to sully his reputation and research ever since she received a seven-day suspension from the forum, The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann, to cool off after one of her ever-increasing outbursts.
Suspension mind you, not ban as she purported. Buoyed by her ‘success’, revelling in announcing herself as a bitch who loves to ‘squish’ in the train wreck of an article in The Sun (arranged by guess who – yes, Sonia Poulton), she regaled her adoring public with tales of death threats from Mr Bennett - although as with all of her assertions no-one has yet see proof of these ridiculous claims. But, hey, it makes for great copy for the blog.
We get it, Cristobell, you don't like Tony. You are playing in the major league now. Out on location, making THE documentary. So why is your new bezzie mate Poulton now attacking Mr Bennett? Why are you two accusing him of being a ‘McCann stooge’? What on earth has this got to do with any search for ‘truth’? And why, having forced him to go to the effort of putting his personal details online for your delectation do you respond with ‘kiss my a**e’ ? Have you any idea how ridiculous you look?
And not content with that, the pair of you continue the attacks on Twitter, including, Ms Hutton, our Very own Ben Thomson in your attacks.
We get it. No-one can compete with you as an ‘attractive, articulate woman’. That your words are awaited by the online community with bated breath is a given, so it begs the question, what do you hope to achieve and what is YOUR game?
You demand answers, yet refuse to answer the most innocuous ones asked of you. You have been proven a liar. Even Poulton won’t back you in your assertions against Ben, yet still you refuse to apologise. Is it so difficult to admit the world of Cristobell may be wrong sometimes? Still, I understand - after all, as you keep reminding us, you are a ‘better writer’, which is no more than we expect from a ‘Lecturer in English'. Is there no end to your talents ?
See - from where I am sitting, Tony is not the one whoring himself out to Murdoch's Sky whilst purporting to be outraged by the way Brenda was hounded to death by that very organisation.
Nor does he or Ben feel the need to ridicule and rubbish other people's work and research.
I don't recall Mr Bennett or any other ‘anti’ McCann group giving house room to the lunatic Birch like Ms Poulton did for a full half-hour.
Love or loathe Mr Bennett I would put money on the fact that most of us have arrived at our conclusions based on much of the early research done by him. Research most of us have neither the time or inclination to undertake ourselves. I doubt the numbers now awake to the lies of McCann would be any the wiser were it not for Mr Bennett.
Serious researchers are not interested in the identities of those who support the McCanns and are not seeking out ‘fat hairy pros’ to ‘out’ in public.
Neither of you have any self-awareness. You speak of dignity yet engineered a farce at Brenda's inquest. You scream ‘foul’ at Martin Brunt yet revel in the prospect of doing the very same thing. Indeed, Ms Hutton is now blaming ‘anti-McCanns'’for Brenda's suicide.
Indeed, your latest tome tells us how you can see why the MSM are disgusted with anti campaigns and that you have nothing for contempt for us. Remind us again which side of the fence you sit - or do you need to consult your new found pals over in the ‘pro’ Debate camp ?
Your adoring fans are salivating at the prospect of this forthcoming documentary. I hope they are not disappointed. I'm sure they won’t be.
Madeleine had become lost in the cesspit of sensationalism and I'm sure most of your adoring fans will be happy when they see you trying to humiliate ordinary men and women who support Kate and Gerry.
Yes, some go too far, but that statement can be applied to both sides of the argument - and all you two are doing are stoking the fire. Credible journalists don’t need to provide a running commentary on their projects. They are judged on results - and they certainly don't make personal attacks on anyone who may not agree with their way of working.
So what results has Poulton shown to give us faith in this forthcoming expose? I'm still waiting for the ‘Unmasking of a Messiah’, the promised ‘'outing’ of David Icke following Ms Poulton 's sudden departure from his TV station.
If I recall correctly, that was put on hold due to ‘legal reasons’. Yet this very same lady tells us she cannot afford a legal team to take on one man who was building a website for her? How odd. Money seems no object for the McCann project?
I wonder who is funding it? - as it is being run past legals now prior to its outing? Is it surprising that her former colleagues in the alternative media community refer to her as 'controlled opposition'?
So I have to wonder, what exactly is your game ? How did Sonia manage to breach the state-of-the-art security system purported to be installed at chez McCann? How come Clarence hasn’t been on the front pages decrying the attack on the vulnerable mother of a missing child? Why do Sky tolerate and pay a woman who purports to denounce them for their support of the McCann family?
Team McCann must be rubbing their hands with glee. To those who can’t wait to get pull up the sofa for a evening’s exciting viewing, ask yourself, just who is behind it?
On second thoughts, take no notice of me. After all, I'm just another shill, throwing a spanner in the works, trying to destroy all attempts to explain to the world ‘The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann’.
Update. It seems Ms Poulton is now to be in talks with broadcasters but has no idea when (or presumably where) it will be aired? I have to wonder who produces a film, then has the legalities ironed out, not knowing if it will ever be marketable to a wide audience. Must be a money-no-object production? Seems rather at odds with previous announcements.
Stop it Vikki. I bet you are one of those dark mysterious individuals who have been plotting to undermine this gem.
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
SONIA POULTON RESPONDS TO SIX QUESTIONS
by Tony Bennett 11.06.15 8:31
My own 'take' on Sonia Poulton's 8 June statement:
------------------------------------
SONIA POULTON RESPONDS TO SIX QUESTIONS
On 4 June I posted up on CMOMM a list of six questions to Sonia Poulton, after she publicly - and falsely - accused me of being a ‘paid pro-McCann stooge’.
She has responded to me in a rambling post, dated 8 June, titled: “In answer to the question: When can I see your Madeleine #McCann documentary?”
I’ll make a few comments on what she said in that response below.
But first, how did she answer my six questions?
1. How much have SKY News paid you for your chat show appearances, or otherwise, in the past 12 months?
Poulton’s answer: I’m not saying.
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?
Poulton’s answer: I’m not saying.
3. Were you, as claimed by Hutton, commissioned by anyone to produce your documentary, if so by whom and on what terms?
Poulton’s answer: No direct answer, but it’s perfectly clear from her response that she has NOT been ‘commissioned’ by anyone to produce this documentary. It follows that when her close friend Rosalinda Hutton said Poulton HAD been commissioned to make her film, she was being untruthful.
4. Have you got any TV company anywhere to show your proposed documentary, if so whom?
Poulton’s answer: Not yet.
5. It has been suggested that you are proposing to put out your documentary on ‘Pay Per View’ TV. Is this correct?
Poulton doesn’t answer this question.
6. When is your documentary going to be shown, and where?
Poulton cannot say anything definite about where her documentary will be shown (if at all) – and after 9 months of waiting for it, we are still told it will be ‘weeks’ more before it comes out.
---------------------------------
I now make a few specific comments on Poulton’s response, as follows:
I write this with some trepidation, knowing full well it will be examined to within an inch of life. And not always by friendly and welcoming eyes.
Myself and a production crew have been filming this documentary for over seven months. Initially we planned to do the whole thing, start to finish, in a couple of months.
REPLY: Dave Eden stated publicly on film back in October that he was working on Poulton’s documentary - and that it would be out ‘within a week’ (!)
Events changed that.
The story developed. Brenda Leyland's inquest was delayed until March 2015, we waited for the Gonçalo Amaral Lisbon result, I waited for various responses and FOIs (delayed, again) to come in.
Just to make this clear. This documentary is not a YouTube video. It has been made to specific broadcasting standards and the process involved is considerably more time-consuming and costly than that involved in a YouTube which (as I know well) is essentially a record-edit-upload process.
REPLY: I think Richard Hall would probably claim that his two Madeleine documentary films were also technically ‘up to broadcasting standard’ - and of course he travelled to Praia da Luz to do ‘on location’ filming for his first documentary. This included entering the Salsalitas property of Raplh and Sally Eveleigh - Robert Murat’s uncle and aunt, and a visit to the Palmeras Golf Club, the place where Robert Murat eventually admitted meeting certain people on the afternoon of 3 May 2007 after initially lying to the Portuguese Police about where he was and what he was doing that day.
If only it were that straightforward.
But then this is a [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] that needs to go beyond online and into the mainstream media. That's what online campaigners tell me all the time - and they are right.
REPLY: Fully agreed. I very much doubt whether the mainstream media will allow you to tell the ‘Untold Story of Madeleine McCann’, but if you think you can do it, go for it.
I have worked in msm for decades and I also make You Tubes, I love doing it all, but the former requires such stringent disciplines and standards to be met, legally, technically and visually, that I knew I needed a production company to back me making this film.
REPLY: So who is your ‘production company’? It’s basically Alan Taylor-Shearer, the bloke who did the zit-squeezing video, and Dave Eden, isn’t it?
For the reality is - and anyone who knows this case will also know there are media and legal issues attached - I am loathe to give away too much information because I am aware of how problematic that could be for us.
From the outset I knew I would struggle to get a broadcaster to fund it the way I realised, over a number of years, that the story needed to be told.
REPLY: So when your friend Rosalinda Hutton claimed months ago that you had been ‘commissioned’ to make this film, her claim was false, wasn’t it?
I had already been warned off by a msm producer of my acquaintance. Other colleagues (and journalist friends) have expressed similar concerns about my curiosity of the case over the years.
In order to make this documentary I needed to be able to take a package to a broadcaster. It could not be footage, to be chopped and edited according to someone else's idea of how it should be portrayed, but a complete, honest and whole film package that I would not allow to be tampered with.
REPLY: So that ‘honest and complete package’ still isn’t ready?
If you know how msm works (and I mean REALLY know) you will know this requirement of mine is me coming with A VERY TALL ORDER, indeed. But then you will also know that that is what this story requires.
The disappearance of Madeleine McCann - and the multiple issues attached to that - is a story that very much needs updating in the way the public perceive it.
REPLY: ‘Updating’?
I was inspired, as a journalist and broadcaster, to pursue this by the shocking (and I'm still shocked) death of Brenda Leyland.
REPLY: Which was caused by SKY News’ oppressive ‘outing’ of her, repeated at 15-minute intervals for a whole day, when she had committed no crime. Yet you have been are regularly employed by SKY News ever since you announced your documentary project. Did you complain to OFCOM about SKY’s conduct?
I address this tragedy fully in the film and over the course of months as I, and a small camera crew, attended her inquests.
People will be left in no doubt about my position on Brenda Leyland - and about the events that led to her death, and those events subsequent to her death.
Let me say this at this point:
Yes, I am a professional journalist - despite detractors trying every trick to undermine my hard won and decent reputation in my industry - but I am also passionate as well as professional.
Those who oppose this documentary, and there are a few, have tried to use that against me. They have failed. I am proud to be emotionally engaged with my work, I do not want to be one of those 'professionals' who are so ‘professional’ that they can do a job like, say, watch child abuse images without so much as a flicker of emotion.
I don't want to be the type of person who is able to emotionally detach from the wickedness of the world in the course of their ‘job’. We should never acclimatise to what is wrong, that's how I see my work. I view passion as a help not a hindrance, a strength not a weakness.
Anyone who knows me will know this and in this [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] that point very clearly.
I do this by going to the people at the heart of this story (while being clear not to interfere in any way with the ongoing police investigation)
REPLY: So…the McCanns, the Tapas 7, Clarence Mitchell, Brian Kennedy, Edward Smethurst, Martin Smith, DCI Andy Redwood, DCI Nicola Wall, Francisco Marco (Metodo 3 boss), Marcos Aragao Correia, Kevin Halligen, Henri Exton, Tim Craig-Harvey and, oh, Rebekah Brooks?
and by asking questions of public interest. (Many millions of pounds of public interest, in fact, and that's just the financial cost of this case to the public).
In this documentary, I tackle the anomalies that exist. All the stuff that is in the public domain
REPLY: What about all the secret and hidden stuff not in the public domain that people have been researching for years?
- only you wouldn’t know it judging by the lack of real investigation media organisations have conducted around this case. On that point, at least, I agree with Clarence Mitchell - the McCann's spokesman who appears in the documentary.
REPLY: You and Clarence Mitchell agree about the things that have not been investigated properly?
So, forgive me for going the long way around answering the question: when will your documentary be aired?
The short answer is I can't yet tell you. At the moment. That's me being as transparent as I can without giving ammunition to the enemies of this project.
The film is, and has been for weeks, in post-production. We have started broadcast meetings about it. Several broadcast executives have expressed a keen interest in getting involved. Myself, and a small trusted team, are (through necessity) playing our cards close to our collective chests.
REPLY: Nothing tangible then. No definite information about when and where it might be screened, then?
Those who want justice for Madeleine McCann will understand and appreciate that. Those with other agendas, will not. Either way, we get to know who’s who.
This documentary has taught me so much and not least that the enemies of it are not always immediately identifiable. I have learnt that there are detractors who claim to be on the side of justice for Madeleine McCann - in terms of finding out what happened and where she might be - but are, in actuality, the opposite.
REPLY: How very much I agree with that statement!
Some of these have already become the most vocal and scathing opponents of a film - this film - that has yet to be aired. Odd behaviour. Or maybe not.
Finally, I would like to say a big thank you to every single person who has informed me on the intricacies of this story - and also made me aware of the many dubious and opportunistic characters who surround it.
REPLY: Oh yes, there are definitely dubious and opportunistic characters ‘surrounding’ the Madeleine McCann story just now.
This experience has been an education - a harrowing and sad one, at times - and one I believe I have conveyed in our film for the public, at large, who are not clued-up like many of those online.
Thank you for your patience. As soon as I have broadcast details, I will let you know.
Oh, and one more thing, we will shortly release a two-minute trailer to social media to give people a flavour of what to expect. Again, I have to wait for the go-ahead but as soon as I can, I will.
REPLY: Ah, so someone she hasn’t told us about yet must give Poulton the ‘go-ahead’.
Have a lovely week.
Sonia X
Sonia Poulton
June 8, 2015
------------------------------------
SONIA POULTON RESPONDS TO SIX QUESTIONS
On 4 June I posted up on CMOMM a list of six questions to Sonia Poulton, after she publicly - and falsely - accused me of being a ‘paid pro-McCann stooge’.
She has responded to me in a rambling post, dated 8 June, titled: “In answer to the question: When can I see your Madeleine #McCann documentary?”
I’ll make a few comments on what she said in that response below.
But first, how did she answer my six questions?
1. How much have SKY News paid you for your chat show appearances, or otherwise, in the past 12 months?
Poulton’s answer: I’m not saying.
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?
Poulton’s answer: I’m not saying.
3. Were you, as claimed by Hutton, commissioned by anyone to produce your documentary, if so by whom and on what terms?
Poulton’s answer: No direct answer, but it’s perfectly clear from her response that she has NOT been ‘commissioned’ by anyone to produce this documentary. It follows that when her close friend Rosalinda Hutton said Poulton HAD been commissioned to make her film, she was being untruthful.
4. Have you got any TV company anywhere to show your proposed documentary, if so whom?
Poulton’s answer: Not yet.
5. It has been suggested that you are proposing to put out your documentary on ‘Pay Per View’ TV. Is this correct?
Poulton doesn’t answer this question.
6. When is your documentary going to be shown, and where?
Poulton cannot say anything definite about where her documentary will be shown (if at all) – and after 9 months of waiting for it, we are still told it will be ‘weeks’ more before it comes out.
---------------------------------
I now make a few specific comments on Poulton’s response, as follows:
I write this with some trepidation, knowing full well it will be examined to within an inch of life. And not always by friendly and welcoming eyes.
Myself and a production crew have been filming this documentary for over seven months. Initially we planned to do the whole thing, start to finish, in a couple of months.
REPLY: Dave Eden stated publicly on film back in October that he was working on Poulton’s documentary - and that it would be out ‘within a week’ (!)
Events changed that.
The story developed. Brenda Leyland's inquest was delayed until March 2015, we waited for the Gonçalo Amaral Lisbon result, I waited for various responses and FOIs (delayed, again) to come in.
Just to make this clear. This documentary is not a YouTube video. It has been made to specific broadcasting standards and the process involved is considerably more time-consuming and costly than that involved in a YouTube which (as I know well) is essentially a record-edit-upload process.
REPLY: I think Richard Hall would probably claim that his two Madeleine documentary films were also technically ‘up to broadcasting standard’ - and of course he travelled to Praia da Luz to do ‘on location’ filming for his first documentary. This included entering the Salsalitas property of Raplh and Sally Eveleigh - Robert Murat’s uncle and aunt, and a visit to the Palmeras Golf Club, the place where Robert Murat eventually admitted meeting certain people on the afternoon of 3 May 2007 after initially lying to the Portuguese Police about where he was and what he was doing that day.
If only it were that straightforward.
But then this is a [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] that needs to go beyond online and into the mainstream media. That's what online campaigners tell me all the time - and they are right.
REPLY: Fully agreed. I very much doubt whether the mainstream media will allow you to tell the ‘Untold Story of Madeleine McCann’, but if you think you can do it, go for it.
I have worked in msm for decades and I also make You Tubes, I love doing it all, but the former requires such stringent disciplines and standards to be met, legally, technically and visually, that I knew I needed a production company to back me making this film.
REPLY: So who is your ‘production company’? It’s basically Alan Taylor-Shearer, the bloke who did the zit-squeezing video, and Dave Eden, isn’t it?
For the reality is - and anyone who knows this case will also know there are media and legal issues attached - I am loathe to give away too much information because I am aware of how problematic that could be for us.
From the outset I knew I would struggle to get a broadcaster to fund it the way I realised, over a number of years, that the story needed to be told.
REPLY: So when your friend Rosalinda Hutton claimed months ago that you had been ‘commissioned’ to make this film, her claim was false, wasn’t it?
I had already been warned off by a msm producer of my acquaintance. Other colleagues (and journalist friends) have expressed similar concerns about my curiosity of the case over the years.
In order to make this documentary I needed to be able to take a package to a broadcaster. It could not be footage, to be chopped and edited according to someone else's idea of how it should be portrayed, but a complete, honest and whole film package that I would not allow to be tampered with.
REPLY: So that ‘honest and complete package’ still isn’t ready?
If you know how msm works (and I mean REALLY know) you will know this requirement of mine is me coming with A VERY TALL ORDER, indeed. But then you will also know that that is what this story requires.
The disappearance of Madeleine McCann - and the multiple issues attached to that - is a story that very much needs updating in the way the public perceive it.
REPLY: ‘Updating’?
I was inspired, as a journalist and broadcaster, to pursue this by the shocking (and I'm still shocked) death of Brenda Leyland.
REPLY: Which was caused by SKY News’ oppressive ‘outing’ of her, repeated at 15-minute intervals for a whole day, when she had committed no crime. Yet you have been are regularly employed by SKY News ever since you announced your documentary project. Did you complain to OFCOM about SKY’s conduct?
I address this tragedy fully in the film and over the course of months as I, and a small camera crew, attended her inquests.
People will be left in no doubt about my position on Brenda Leyland - and about the events that led to her death, and those events subsequent to her death.
Let me say this at this point:
Yes, I am a professional journalist - despite detractors trying every trick to undermine my hard won and decent reputation in my industry - but I am also passionate as well as professional.
Those who oppose this documentary, and there are a few, have tried to use that against me. They have failed. I am proud to be emotionally engaged with my work, I do not want to be one of those 'professionals' who are so ‘professional’ that they can do a job like, say, watch child abuse images without so much as a flicker of emotion.
I don't want to be the type of person who is able to emotionally detach from the wickedness of the world in the course of their ‘job’. We should never acclimatise to what is wrong, that's how I see my work. I view passion as a help not a hindrance, a strength not a weakness.
Anyone who knows me will know this and in this [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] that point very clearly.
I do this by going to the people at the heart of this story (while being clear not to interfere in any way with the ongoing police investigation)
REPLY: So…the McCanns, the Tapas 7, Clarence Mitchell, Brian Kennedy, Edward Smethurst, Martin Smith, DCI Andy Redwood, DCI Nicola Wall, Francisco Marco (Metodo 3 boss), Marcos Aragao Correia, Kevin Halligen, Henri Exton, Tim Craig-Harvey and, oh, Rebekah Brooks?
and by asking questions of public interest. (Many millions of pounds of public interest, in fact, and that's just the financial cost of this case to the public).
In this documentary, I tackle the anomalies that exist. All the stuff that is in the public domain
REPLY: What about all the secret and hidden stuff not in the public domain that people have been researching for years?
- only you wouldn’t know it judging by the lack of real investigation media organisations have conducted around this case. On that point, at least, I agree with Clarence Mitchell - the McCann's spokesman who appears in the documentary.
REPLY: You and Clarence Mitchell agree about the things that have not been investigated properly?
So, forgive me for going the long way around answering the question: when will your documentary be aired?
The short answer is I can't yet tell you. At the moment. That's me being as transparent as I can without giving ammunition to the enemies of this project.
The film is, and has been for weeks, in post-production. We have started broadcast meetings about it. Several broadcast executives have expressed a keen interest in getting involved. Myself, and a small trusted team, are (through necessity) playing our cards close to our collective chests.
REPLY: Nothing tangible then. No definite information about when and where it might be screened, then?
Those who want justice for Madeleine McCann will understand and appreciate that. Those with other agendas, will not. Either way, we get to know who’s who.
This documentary has taught me so much and not least that the enemies of it are not always immediately identifiable. I have learnt that there are detractors who claim to be on the side of justice for Madeleine McCann - in terms of finding out what happened and where she might be - but are, in actuality, the opposite.
REPLY: How very much I agree with that statement!
Some of these have already become the most vocal and scathing opponents of a film - this film - that has yet to be aired. Odd behaviour. Or maybe not.
Finally, I would like to say a big thank you to every single person who has informed me on the intricacies of this story - and also made me aware of the many dubious and opportunistic characters who surround it.
REPLY: Oh yes, there are definitely dubious and opportunistic characters ‘surrounding’ the Madeleine McCann story just now.
This experience has been an education - a harrowing and sad one, at times - and one I believe I have conveyed in our film for the public, at large, who are not clued-up like many of those online.
Thank you for your patience. As soon as I have broadcast details, I will let you know.
Oh, and one more thing, we will shortly release a two-minute trailer to social media to give people a flavour of what to expect. Again, I have to wait for the go-ahead but as soon as I can, I will.
REPLY: Ah, so someone she hasn’t told us about yet must give Poulton the ‘go-ahead’.
Have a lovely week.
Sonia X
Sonia Poulton
June 8, 2015
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Guest 11.06.15 8:51
Can someone cut to the chase and ask her a simple question?
Does this documentary show how the McCann and friends story doesn't make sense?
Does this documentary show how the McCann and friends story doesn't make sense?
Guest- Guest
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Mark Willis 11.06.15 12:17
I doubt it. If it does then don't expect to see it on a TV near you, soon.BlueBag wrote:Can someone cut to the chase and ask her a simple question?
Does this documentary show how the McCann and friends story doesn't make sense?
Mark Willis- Posts : 638
Activity : 885
Likes received : 239
Join date : 2014-05-14
Age : 69
Location : Beverley
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Guest 11.06.15 12:20
The question can be asked.Mark Willis wrote:I doubt it. If it does then don't expect to see it on a TV near you, soon.BlueBag wrote:Can someone cut to the chase and ask her a simple question?
Does this documentary show how the McCann and friends story doesn't make sense?
Then perhaps we can get on with other things.
Guest- Guest
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Liz Eagles 11.06.15 12:30
I'm beginning to think it's better to believe in Santa - at least he has a specific remit, a specific product, a specific persona and an unwavering deadline.Mark Willis wrote:I doubt it. If it does then don't expect to see it on a TV near you, soon.BlueBag wrote:Can someone cut to the chase and ask her a simple question?
Does this documentary show how the McCann and friends story doesn't make sense?
Santa and his reindeers do what it says on the sleigh.
Liz Eagles- Posts : 11153
Activity : 13562
Likes received : 2218
Join date : 2011-09-03
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Mark Willis 11.06.15 12:33
It has been asked, may times, especially on Twitter.BlueBag wrote:The question can be asked.Mark Willis wrote:I doubt it. If it does then don't expect to see it on a TV near you, soon.BlueBag wrote:Can someone cut to the chase and ask her a simple question?
Does this documentary show how the McCann and friends story doesn't make sense?
Then perhaps we can get on with other things.
The responses from Poulton are as evasive as a blue tennis bag.
Mark Willis- Posts : 638
Activity : 885
Likes received : 239
Join date : 2014-05-14
Age : 69
Location : Beverley
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Mark Willis 11.06.15 12:34
aquila wrote:I'm beginning to think it's better to believe in Santa - at least he has a specific remit, a specific product, a specific persona and an unwavering deadline.Mark Willis wrote:I doubt it. If it does then don't expect to see it on a TV near you, soon.BlueBag wrote:Can someone cut to the chase and ask her a simple question?
Does this documentary show how the McCann and friends story doesn't make sense?
Santa and his reindeers do what it says on the sleigh.
That made me laugh.
Mark Willis- Posts : 638
Activity : 885
Likes received : 239
Join date : 2014-05-14
Age : 69
Location : Beverley
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by joyce1938 11.06.15 13:38
Yes maybe its time to let itlie down and if its coming out ,we shall get to know ,cant see much point in keep going on about it ,must be another conversation ,mind you most has been said over again ,and still we don't know where the child is . joyce1938
joyce1938- Posts : 890
Activity : 1013
Likes received : 124
Join date : 2010-04-20
Age : 85
Location : england
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by lj 11.06.15 17:42
aquila wrote:I'm beginning to think it's better to believe in Santa - at least he has a specific remit, a specific product, a specific persona and an unwavering deadline.Mark Willis wrote:I doubt it. If it does then don't expect to see it on a TV near you, soon.BlueBag wrote:Can someone cut to the chase and ask her a simple question?
Does this documentary show how the McCann and friends story doesn't make sense?
Santa and his reindeers do what it says on the sleigh.
Good one!
____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?" Gerry
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
lj- Posts : 3329
Activity : 3590
Likes received : 208
Join date : 2009-12-01
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Guest 11.06.15 22:42
Tony Bennett today @ 9.31 am says:
REPLY: So who is your ‘production company’? It’s basically Alan Taylor-Shearer, the bloke who did the zit-squeezing video, and Dave Eden, isn’t it?
You missed a vital ingredient - Rosalinda Cristobell-Hutton. Or is she assuming the role of co-director?
REPLY: So who is your ‘production company’? It’s basically Alan Taylor-Shearer, the bloke who did the zit-squeezing video, and Dave Eden, isn’t it?
You missed a vital ingredient - Rosalinda Cristobell-Hutton. Or is she assuming the role of co-director?
Guest- Guest
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Tony Bennett 11.06.15 23:06
@ VerdiVerdi wrote:Tony Bennett today @ 9.31 am says:
REPLY: So who is your ‘production company’? It’s basically Alan Taylor-Shearer, the bloke who did the zit-squeezing video, and Dave Eden, isn’t it?
You missed a vital ingredient - Rosalinda Cristobell-Hutton. Or is she assuming the role of co-director?
Er, I think her main role is as Poulton's PR adviser.
I have been turning over in my mind again this picture:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
It was taken outside the McCanns' house.
Now, if that had been me and a cameraman, I would have been arrested.
If it had been say Mr Joe Bloggs from Rothley and a cameraman, I think he would have been arrested.
If it had been anyone else in the U.K. or the world and a cameraman - apart from Sonia Poulton and a cameraman - I suggest that they would also have been arrested.
So why wasn't Sonia Poulton, her cameraman, and the third bloke who took a picture of them both, arrested?
How were these three able to stroll up to the house, knock on the door and take a few photographs while they were about it?
Why have we not heard the McCanns complaining about this outrageous attempted doorstepping of the McCanns and their children?
I suggest it's because this visit and photograph were authorised at a high level.
And what was the purpose anyway of Poulton publishing that photograph?
That one photograph disturbs me, as I want to know who authorised it to be taken
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by lj 11.06.15 23:16
Tony Bennett wrote:@ VerdiVerdi wrote:Tony Bennett today @ 9.31 am says:
REPLY: So who is your ‘production company’? It’s basically Alan Taylor-Shearer, the bloke who did the zit-squeezing video, and Dave Eden, isn’t it?
You missed a vital ingredient - Rosalinda Cristobell-Hutton. Or is she assuming the role of co-director?
Er, I think her main role is as Poulton's PR adviser.
I have been turning over in my mind again this picture:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
It was taken outside the McCanns' house.
Now, if that had been me and a cameraman, I would have been arrested.
If it had been say Mr Joe Bloggs from Rothley and a cameraman, I think he would have been arrested.
If it had been anyone else in the U.K. or the world and a cameraman - apart from Sonia Poulton and a cameraman - I suggest that they would also have been arrested.
So why wasn't Sonia Poulton, her cameraman, and the third bloke who took a picture of them both, arrested?
How were these three able to stroll up to the house, knock on the door and take a few photographs while they were about it?
Why have we not heard the McCanns complaining about this outrageous attempted doorstepping of the McCanns and their children?
I suggest it's because this visit and photograph were authorised at a high level.
And what was the purpose anyway of Poulton publishing that photograph?
That one photograph disturbs me, as I want to know who authorised it to be taken
That's what I thought when I saw it.
____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?" Gerry
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
lj- Posts : 3329
Activity : 3590
Likes received : 208
Join date : 2009-12-01
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Liz Eagles 11.06.15 23:18
and me.lj wrote:Tony Bennett wrote:@ VerdiVerdi wrote:Tony Bennett today @ 9.31 am says:
REPLY: So who is your ‘production company’? It’s basically Alan Taylor-Shearer, the bloke who did the zit-squeezing video, and Dave Eden, isn’t it?
You missed a vital ingredient - Rosalinda Cristobell-Hutton. Or is she assuming the role of co-director?
Er, I think her main role is as Poulton's PR adviser.
I have been turning over in my mind again this picture:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
It was taken outside the McCanns' house.
Now, if that had been me and a cameraman, I would have been arrested.
If it had been say Mr Joe Bloggs from Rothley and a cameraman, I think he would have been arrested.
If it had been anyone else in the U.K. or the world and a cameraman - apart from Sonia Poulton and a cameraman - I suggest that they would also have been arrested.
So why wasn't Sonia Poulton, her cameraman, and the third bloke who took a picture of them both, arrested?
How were these three able to stroll up to the house, knock on the door and take a few photographs while they were about it?
Why have we not heard the McCanns complaining about this outrageous attempted doorstepping of the McCanns and their children?
I suggest it's because this visit and photograph were authorised at a high level.
And what was the purpose anyway of Poulton publishing that photograph?
That one photograph disturbs me, as I want to know who authorised it to be taken
That's what I thought when I saw it.
Liz Eagles- Posts : 11153
Activity : 13562
Likes received : 2218
Join date : 2011-09-03
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Doug D 11.06.15 23:26
TB:
‘Why have we not heard the McCanns complaining about this outrageous attempted doorstepping of the McCanns and their children?’
We are assuming it’s genuine. Could easily have been ‘green screened’ as a publicity shot.
‘Why have we not heard the McCanns complaining about this outrageous attempted doorstepping of the McCanns and their children?’
We are assuming it’s genuine. Could easily have been ‘green screened’ as a publicity shot.
Doug D- Posts : 3719
Activity : 5286
Likes received : 1299
Join date : 2013-12-03
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Tony Bennett 11.06.15 23:33
Not only were Sonia Poulton and her crew not arrested...aquila wrote:lj wrote:Tony Bennett wrote:
That one photograph disturbs me, as I want to know who authorised it to be taken
That's what I thought when I saw it.
and me.
...but instead...
...she has appeared monthly on the SKY Nws sofa and been paid for it...
...she was commissioned by the Sun newspaper to find a really vicious, nasty, hateful internet 'troll' to appear in a 2-page feature on, well, internet trolls (and she found one within about 2 minutes!)...
...and only today two BBC jourrnos have been chasing her up to appear on their programmes.
Exactly how does a ranting, screeching dissenter doing a video puporting to denounce (a) the media hounding Brenda Leyland to death and (b) the McCanns, the mainstream media and the powers-that-be for an (alleged) almighty cover-up, get feted by the mainstream media in this way?
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Tony Bennett 11.06.15 23:34
That would then be a deliberate deception of the public on her part, surely unworthy of any serieus investigative journalist?Doug D wrote:TB: ‘Why have we not heard the McCanns complaining about this outrageous attempted doorstepping of the McCanns and their children?’
We are assuming it’s genuine. Could easily have been ‘green screened’ as a publicity shot.
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Guest 12.06.15 0:17
My sentiments exactly. They wouldn't even get close to the property unless it was by prior arrangement. Can you imagine Kate or Gerry McCann answering the door to some unknown entity followed by a great burly bloke with a video camera, they would have been straight on to the local nick unless it was by prior arrangement.Tony Bennett wrote:@ VerdiVerdi wrote:Tony Bennett today @ 9.31 am says:
REPLY: So who is your ‘production company’? It’s basically Alan Taylor-Shearer, the bloke who did the zit-squeezing video, and Dave Eden, isn’t it?
You missed a vital ingredient - Rosalinda Cristobell-Hutton. Or is she assuming the role of co-director?
Er, I think her main role is as Poulton's PR adviser.
I have been turning over in my mind again this picture:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
It was taken outside the McCanns' house.
Now, if that had been me and a cameraman, I would have been arrested.
If it had been say Mr Joe Bloggs from Rothley and a cameraman, I think he would have been arrested.
If it had been anyone else in the U.K. or the world and a cameraman - apart from Sonia Poulton and a cameraman - I suggest that they would also have been arrested.
So why wasn't Sonia Poulton, her cameraman, and the third bloke who took a picture of them both, arrested?
How were these three able to stroll up to the house, knock on the door and take a few photographs while they were about it?
Why have we not heard the McCanns complaining about this outrageous attempted doorstepping of the McCanns and their children?
I suggest it's because this visit and photograph were authorised at a high level.
And what was the purpose anyway of Poulton publishing that photograph?
That one photograph disturbs me, as I want to know who authorised it to be taken
Guest- Guest
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Guest 12.06.15 0:19
I don't think even Poulton would pull a stunt like that. That would have more negative repercussions than any attempted door-stepping at chez Rothley.Doug D wrote:TB:
‘Why have we not heard the McCanns complaining about this outrageous attempted doorstepping of the McCanns and their children?’
We are assuming it’s genuine. Could easily have been ‘green screened’ as a publicity shot.
Guest- Guest
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Joss 12.06.15 4:01
I was under the impression SP's documentary was a definite, going to be aired by someone, media outlet? in the U.S.A.? She doesn't mention America in her long winded explanation though? Maybe that deal fell through?
As far as doorstepping the McC's, if she really did that? then she is no better than what Brunt did to Brenda Leyland, IMO. And i don't see how that helps in Madeleine's case for the search for the truth?
As far as doorstepping the McC's, if she really did that? then she is no better than what Brunt did to Brenda Leyland, IMO. And i don't see how that helps in Madeleine's case for the search for the truth?
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Yet another Poulton lie?
by Tony Bennett 12.06.15 8:36
I don't have Poulton's post or tweet to hand, but IIRC she said as a fact that she already had a U.S. outlet (unnamed, of course!) who had committed to showing her film.Joss wrote:I was under the impression SP's documentary was a definite, going to be aired by someone, media outlet? in the U.S.A.? She doesn't mention America in her long winded explanation though? Maybe that deal fell through?
That looks, then, like yet one more Sonia Poulton lie for the collection
ETA: By contrast to the continuous promotion by Poulton of a documentary that hasn't happened, Richard D. Hall's TWO documentaries on the McCann case, lasting a total of over 7 hours, and which cover a huge amount of ground in the Madeleine McCann case, have now been viewed on YouTube and elsewhere by an estimated 1.1 million - and led directly to Jenny Kleeman and the Guardian considering making a film about public opposition to the McCanns' abduction claim, and to a request to film at one of his meetings
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Guest 12.06.15 8:37
Maybe there was a prior arrangement and that she clouded her intentions.Verdi wrote:My sentiments exactly. They wouldn't even get close to the property unless it was by prior arrangement. Can you imagine Kate or Gerry McCann answering the door to some unknown entity followed by a great burly bloke with a video camera, they would have been straight on to the local nick unless it was by prior arrangement.Tony Bennett wrote:@ VerdiVerdi wrote:Tony Bennett today @ 9.31 am says:
REPLY: So who is your ‘production company’? It’s basically Alan Taylor-Shearer, the bloke who did the zit-squeezing video, and Dave Eden, isn’t it?
You missed a vital ingredient - Rosalinda Cristobell-Hutton. Or is she assuming the role of co-director?
Er, I think her main role is as Poulton's PR adviser.
I have been turning over in my mind again this picture:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
It was taken outside the McCanns' house.
Now, if that had been me and a cameraman, I would have been arrested.
If it had been say Mr Joe Bloggs from Rothley and a cameraman, I think he would have been arrested.
If it had been anyone else in the U.K. or the world and a cameraman - apart from Sonia Poulton and a cameraman - I suggest that they would also have been arrested.
So why wasn't Sonia Poulton, her cameraman, and the third bloke who took a picture of them both, arrested?
How were these three able to stroll up to the house, knock on the door and take a few photographs while they were about it?
Why have we not heard the McCanns complaining about this outrageous attempted doorstepping of the McCanns and their children?
I suggest it's because this visit and photograph were authorised at a high level.
And what was the purpose anyway of Poulton publishing that photograph?
That one photograph disturbs me, as I want to know who authorised it to be taken
I'm trying to give her the benefit of the doubt.
She's either genuine about finding out what happened to Madeleine,
or doesn't really know what she's doing and is just after a story, any story, and blows with the wind,
or this has been a big sting operation all along against "trolls".
I really think we'll have to wait and see.
There'll be hell to pay if it turns out it's a sting.
Guest- Guest
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by joyce1938 12.06.15 10:14
How about that there was no one home away on a trip maybe ? then anyone could use that view out side a front door ? joyce1938
joyce1938- Posts : 890
Activity : 1013
Likes received : 124
Join date : 2010-04-20
Age : 85
Location : england
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Joss 12.06.15 10:23
Yes that is what i had thought too, that her doco. was a sure thing being aired from the U.S.A. because of the potentially controversial material which may have caused her legal problems in the U.K. that perhaps no one in the U.K. wanted anything to do with it, but who knows really.Tony Bennett wrote:I don't have Poulton's post or tweet to hand, but IIRC she said as a fact that she already had a U.S. outlet (unnamed, of course!) who had committed to showing her film.Joss wrote:I was under the impression SP's documentary was a definite, going to be aired by someone, media outlet? in the U.S.A.? She doesn't mention America in her long winded explanation though? Maybe that deal fell through?
That looks, then, like yet one more Sonia Poulton lie for the collection
ETA: By contrast to the continuous promotion by Poulton of a documentary that hasn't happened, Richard D. Hall's TWO documentaries on the McCann case, lasting a total of over 7 hours, and which cover a huge amount of ground in the Madeleine McCann case, have now been viewed on YouTube and elsewhere by an estimated 1.1 million - and led directly to Jenny Kleeman and the Guardian considering making a film about public opposition to the McCanns' abduction claim, and to a request to film at one of his meetings
And Richard D. Hall has done an excellent job without all the brouhaha, and delivered the goods on the mysterious disappearance of Madeleine McC, the other side to the usual stories that have been portrayed on MSM, & to give a more balanced view to the public. I have no idea about J. Kleeman and where that will go?
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Joss 12.06.15 10:29
Hi joyce, Yes that could be a possibility for sure. Unless she actually spoke with a K. McC ?joyce1938 wrote:How about that there was no one home away on a trip maybe ? then anyone could use that view out side a front door ? joyce1938
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Mark Willis 12.06.15 10:32
Nothing of use to those who hold the "alternative view(s)" to the Mc-narrative will ever appear on British TV, currently.
The opposite obtains, like the promotion of the Mcs on SKY via Summers and Swan and Brunt.
As you say, we already have the best (so far) definitive account(s) on film thanks to the Richard Hall videos.
I think my senses tell me...wait..it's coming through...what's that? Bandwagon jumpers? Oh, right...
The opposite obtains, like the promotion of the Mcs on SKY via Summers and Swan and Brunt.
As you say, we already have the best (so far) definitive account(s) on film thanks to the Richard Hall videos.
I think my senses tell me...wait..it's coming through...what's that? Bandwagon jumpers? Oh, right...
Mark Willis- Posts : 638
Activity : 885
Likes received : 239
Join date : 2014-05-14
Age : 69
Location : Beverley
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Joss 12.06.15 10:39
I totally agree.Mark Willis wrote:Nothing of use to those who hold the "alternative view(s)" to the Mc-narrative will ever appear on British TV, currently.
The opposite obtains, like the promotion of the Mcs on SKY via Summers and Swan and Brunt.
As you say, we already have the best (so far) definitive account(s) on film thanks to the Richard Hall videos.
I think my senses tell me...wait..it's coming through...what's that? Bandwagon jumpers? Oh, right...
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by Mark Willis 12.06.15 10:50
It's not exactly a secret, is it, Joss?
Where does that leave those who proclaim forthcoming copy (printed piece in newspapers) or televised Maddy films that question the Mcs' version?
Firmly on the office table.
Only Richard Hall has done what he said he would do in regard to "putting it out there".
That, and Goncalo's "Truth of the Lie" which, given his book is banned in the UK, might have given Poulton a clue as to the likelihood of getting anything similar on UK terrestrial TV.
Where does that leave those who proclaim forthcoming copy (printed piece in newspapers) or televised Maddy films that question the Mcs' version?
Firmly on the office table.
Only Richard Hall has done what he said he would do in regard to "putting it out there".
That, and Goncalo's "Truth of the Lie" which, given his book is banned in the UK, might have given Poulton a clue as to the likelihood of getting anything similar on UK terrestrial TV.
Mark Willis- Posts : 638
Activity : 885
Likes received : 239
Join date : 2014-05-14
Age : 69
Location : Beverley
Re: That Sonia Poulton documentary update 8 June: The detailed reponses of 'Tigger', Vikki Scott and Tony Bennett
by hentie 12.06.15 10:58
Mark Willis wrote:Nothing of use to those who hold the "alternative view(s)" to the Mc-narrative will ever appear on British TV, currently.
The opposite obtains, like the promotion of the Mcs on SKY via Summers and Swan and Brunt.
As you say, we already have the best (so far) definitive account(s) on film thanks to the Richard Hall videos.
I think my senses tell me...wait..it's coming through...what's that? Bandwagon jumpers? Oh, right...
Exactly my thoughts.
All talk and no substance...
Also, why has it taken so long for SP to show any interest?
Many of us have been here a long time, then she and her 'partners' breeze in.....
I smell a rat.
hentie- Madeleine Foundation
- Posts : 756
Activity : 1020
Likes received : 266
Join date : 2009-11-26
Page 1 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
Similar topics» Sonia Poulton 'Teaser Trailer' out now (4 Oct 2015)
» Sonia Poulton and the Madeleine McCann case, 7 October 2014 to 7 October 2016
» 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
» Sonia Poulton Update
» Sonia Poulton Documentary
» Sonia Poulton and the Madeleine McCann case, 7 October 2014 to 7 October 2016
» 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
» Sonia Poulton Update
» Sonia Poulton Documentary
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Social Media :: Sonia Poulton: The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann film
Page 1 of 4
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
