On this mornings LBC: Sonia Poulton and John O'Connor

by **Nina** 19.09.15 10:17

With acknowledgements to Cheryl Lavinia Moncrieffe a member of the Justice for Madeleine Facebook group.

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

Sorry Mods I see this has been posted on another thread. My error, please remove. Thank you.

by **Jill Havern** 19.09.15 10:42

It's fine to stay here on its own thread Nina, not everyone will see it posted amongst another thread thumbsup

by kinell 19.09.15 11:16

Jon Gaunt also discussing McCann investigation [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by aiyoyo 19.09.15 12:20

John O' Connor, former Metropolitan police, had been very careful with his words, doing a balancing act of not offending the McCanns but at the same time giving his view that the money plough uniquely to this missing child case is worth it if there are resolutions and clearly OG believe there is resolution inside to be had for it to carry on.

He also mentioned the word "murder".....there we have it.....

SP gave a relatively good interview , mentioning there should have been a reconstruction and mentioning also people should read the police files.

by Guest 19.09.15 15:57

I've just had a listen and must say for the moment I'm astonished that such propaganda is being put out there in the public domain - who or what is this 'Leading Britain's Conversation' outlet?

My first question is why someone like Sonia Poulton has been invited to speak on the subject, she is not investigating the case - she had no authority to investigate the case of a missing child, that is a job for the police and the police alone. IIRC, last October when the documentary was first pronounced, she stated publicly that the death of Brenda Leyland aroused her interest in the case of MBM, which prompted her to start filming a documentary with the working title 'The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann'. There are a significant number of people out there who have been scrutinizing every angle of this case right from the very beginning and are therefore, far more qualified to opine on the subject than Poulton. I agree that she did take the trouble to urge people to look up the PJ files (of course after promoting her threatened documentary) but I don't think recommending the internet as a reliable information source was very advisable, nor was the topic under discussion relative to public awareness. There are a load of dubious characters lurking on the internet whose motives are questionable where this case is concerned. Oh, and I do believe I picked up the word troll somewhere along the line.

Somewhere in her spiel she made some comment which to me indicated that she has been listening to the wrong people while investigating the case over the past year. Oddly enough, I also noticed a couple of days ago a particular blogger published a piece which accords with the Poulton view that Operation Grange are 'on the case', which may (or may not) eventually justify the enormous financial outlay on this isolated missing child. I disagree!

John O'Connor came across to me as a bias PR mouthpeice - again I think his words were ill-advised considering the severity of this ambiguous case. Must say I was knocked back by his statement: 'If there is a review later on.... which I think here will be...' (or words to that effect). So we are now talking a review of an investigation instigated by the UK government (+associated bodies) which was a result of a review undertaken by the Metropolitan Police, instigated by the UK government (+associated bodies) which was the result of a 'botched' and unprofessional investigation carried out intitally by the Portuguese police? All because the McCann parents made a plea (not unprecedented) to the Prime Minister and was subsequently catapulted into 10M+ expenditure by News International? He also, more than once, referred to the case as 'unique'. The case itself is not unique!

I will listen again later to make sure I've got this right..

by **Tony Bennett** 19.09.15 21:27

aiyoyo wrote:Sonia Poultonm gave a relatively good interview, mentioning there should have been a reconstruction and mentioning also people should read the police files.

I disagree with your main conclusion, but concede that she did at least mention what she called 'The Portuguese Police Files'. It would have been much much better had she said: 'Visit the McCannFiles' site. But she didn't.

It was safe for Sonia Poulton to call for a 'reconstruction'. She knows better than most that this will never happen.

There was no challenge whatsoever to what the interviewer or John O'Connor said.

It seems that Sonia Poulton has been 'hearing things' and that John O'Connor says 'things seem hopeful...there may be a resolution in sight'. On what possible basis could they both, in unison, be saying this? Think about it!

It seems Sonia was asked to come on because 'she is making a film about the case'. So why not invite on Richard Hall, who HAS made a SUCCRESSFUL film about the case?

There is no way on earth that the mainstream media are going to change tack on this case.

I think Sonia was invited on simply to lend support for Grange to continue and to suggest to the listeners that there might be significant developments in the months ahead -which is exactly what she did do.

She is a 'journalist'. And she says she has been 'hearing things'.

Must be true, then.

I made some notes on the main things that were said in this 12-minute broadcast:

+++++++++++++++++++++++

"We're hearing things - and there may be a resolution; let Grange continue!" - Poulton and O'Connor

Interviewer

Grange has been given 6 months

£2 million more can be spent till next spring

McCanns said they were ‘extremely grateful’

She vanished in 2007 when she was only 3

Grange has spent £10 million

One cannot be anything other than sympathetic to the McCanns

Their plight ‘touched the heart of the nation’

Im asking: ‘Did they get extra resources because they are attractive, middle-class and very media-savvy?

I’ve got retired detective John O’Connor here and Sonia Poulton, a journalist who is making a film about Madeleine McCann

Sonia Poulton

I’ve been making the film for nearly a year

We are treating the McCanns differently

Compare the McCann case with the Ben Needham case

There are many reasons why so much money has been spent on the Madeleine McCann case

There is an ongoing investigation, so I have to be careful what I can say

The reasons they got so much help?

1. They had the backing of 3 Prime Ministers – that’s unprecedented

2. The parents are indeed media-savvy

3. There has been a high profile PR machine working for them

We are in the realms of something else altogether

1 child goes missing every 5 minutes

My researching this story has been utterly heartbreaking

There are a number of victims in this story

At the start of this, would I have said it was a good idea to spend £10 million on this investigation? No way!

But now I’ve changed my mind. I think it should continue

And these are my reasons

I was critical of Operation Grange to begin with

But now I am starting to believe that there may be new developments in the case

I am certainly hearing things

I think we should plough on ahead with this

It was a good idea to start from Ground Zero

There was a change of command in December

DCI Andy Redwood left and DCI Nicola Wall replaced him

I have every reason to believe that we might see new developments

One thing I would say and that is that there must be a reconstruction

John O’Connor

This case is unique

It’s clear that the Portuguese got on the wrong track

Just think of the punishment they put the poor parents through

Grange has been re-investigating

They are doing things that the Portuguese Police should have done years ago

They’ve said they’re not doing a running commentary

Their investigation is confidential

It is a matter for the police to decide

If they think there’s a chance of a resolution, then the cost and resources are immaterial

They are doing exactly the right thing

The parents are entitled to all the available resources

They have a huge amount of intelligence and information

The Senior Investigating Officer has the knowledge and is the best person to decide, we should go by her advice

Things seem hopeful to me

There may be a resolution in sight

Sonia Poulton

The working title of my film is ‘The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann. There will be a trailer out next month, on the anniversary of the death of Brenda Leyland, she was quite inaccurately accused – and called a troll

Go online, go to the Portuguese Police files, there’s a mass of information there, you’ll find it eye-opening, I promise you

Interviewer

The parents are desperate to save her and get her back

by Guest 19.09.15 23:03

I've just had another listen and picked up this little gem from the mouth of John O'connor..

".. this is unique - errmm - they have got the ... through their own efforts have got the.. attention of the world - err - they through their own efforts as well, through their own private investigators have generated a huge amount of intelligence and information and that's probably why it's taking so long to resolve it all.."

He goes on to say..

"..and to know there is no st.. - no resolution in sight.."

[was he about to say no stone unturned?]

This brings me to question who supplied this ex-copper with this information. Again I ask, IF Operation Grange are moving forward towards solving this long outstanding case - how much time and money do they need - surely they either have positive evidence/information/intelligence or they don't so why the procrastination?

by espeland 20.09.15 0:16

surely they either have positive evidence/information/intelligence or they don't so why the procrastination?

Didn't a CPS representative join one of SY's visits to Portugal early this year? If so it wouldn't have been to tell the Portuguese why they couldn't prosecute anyone in their own country, would it? Clearly it would have been to explain why a prosecution over here wasn't feasible and perhaps to indicate what would be needed to make a prosecution here stick. Haven't the PJ recently been very enthusiastic about their relationship with SY?

£10 million is certainly a lot of money, but not in comparison with many other police investigations. Surely if there is any thought that the McCanns were involved, the police would have to continue their investigation in order to discourage copy-cat crimes.

I'm disappointed to see you refer even now to her "threatened documentary" in your 3.57 post. Do you really doubt it exists, after Sonia's LBC interview? As to your comments re her suitability, she's a journalist not a bulletin-board detective - if/when the facts become known most of what has been posted on this and other boards will be shown to be totally irrelevant.

by **Tony Bennett** 20.09.15 0:48

espeland wrote:
Didn't a CPS representative join one of SY's visits to Portugal early this year?

I think you might be referring to this CPS visit (the only one AFAIK) that was reported in June 2013, but actually took place IIRC in April that year: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] That was by Alison Saunders, then their top legal expert, now the accident-prone Director of Public Prosecutions - and she took another senior legal colleague with her. I'm not aware of any more recent visit.

If so it wouldn't have been to tell the Portuguese why they couldn't prosecute anyone in their own country, would it? Clearly it would have been to explain why a prosecution over here wasn't feasible and perhaps to indicate what would be needed to make a prosecution here stick.

One presumes they discussed legal issues bit no-one knows exactly what.

Haven't the PJ recently been very enthusiastic about their relationship with SY?

I don't think so. On the contrary, there has in the recent past been talk of 'open warfare' between the two forces. All I've seen is the most reluctant level off co-operation possible, just going through the motions to humour the British. The long delays in dealing with English rogatory letters have been tanglble evidence for this lack of co-operation. There's no sign that I've ever seen that the Portuguese are doing anything active these days

£10 million is certainly a lot of money, but not in comparison with many other police investigations.

Seriously, only relatively high-profile murder, terrorist and mass child abuse/drug dealing crimes or fraud cases cost a lot more than £10 million

Surely if there is any thought that the McCanns were involved, the police would have to continue their investigation in order to discourage copy-cat crimes.

There isn't any such thought, Grange officers have repeatedly said in verbal and written statements and in answer to FoI Act questions etc. etc. that the McCanns and the Tapas 7 are not suspects. There is no way they can go back on those statements

I'm disappointed to see you [Verdi] refer even now to her "threatened documentary" in your 3.57 post. Do you really doubt it exists, after Sonia's LBC interview?

I do. Just like I've doubted al her other broken promises

As to your comments re her suitability, she's a journalist not a bulletin-board detective

But most of the bulletin-board detectives know a lot more about the facts of the case than she does

- if/when the facts become known most of what has been posted on this and other boards will be shown to be totally irrelevant.

Except in one respect. It will prove that, in this case at least, the amateur internet detectives were 8 or more years ahead of the so-called 'real' ones

by Liz Eagles 20.09.15 7:22

Snipped from Tony's post

"but concede that she did at least mention what she called 'The Portuguese Police Files'. It would have been much much better had she said: 'Visit the McCannFiles' site. But she didn't."

.............................

Tony, I just googled Madeleine Mccann Portuguese Police Files and was immediately presented with the McCannfiles.

I'm no fan of Sonia Poulton, but credit where it's due, she mentioned the files and encouraged people to look at them. To criticise her for not saying McCannFiles is a bit nitpicking imo. It might also not be the done thing to point exactly to a specific website.

by Guest 20.09.15 8:32

I think Grange will continue as far as Amarals appeal at the very least.

There is a high correlation between investigation activity and court appearances.

It was very predictable.

by Angelique 20.09.15 9:02

aquila wrote:Snipped from Tony's post

"but concede that she did at least mention what she called 'The Portuguese Police Files'. It would have been much much better had she said: 'Visit the McCannFiles' site. But she didn't."

.............................

Tony, I just googled Madeleine Mccann Portuguese Police Files and was immediately presented with the McCannfiles.

I'm no fan of Sonia Poulton, but credit where it's due, she mentioned the files and encouraged people to look at them. To criticise her for not saying McCannFiles is a bit nitpicking imo. It might also not be the done thing to point exactly to a specific website.

Yes I agree with this.

I believe it's the lure of fame and money but with it comes of necessity to refer to PJ Files.

I also think she is banking on being associated with the Review/Investigation into Madeleine's disappearance. She is keen to make sure she has sole use of her documentary Title.

"The working title of my film is ‘The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann"

by Mark Willis 20.09.15 10:22

Given this Poulton documentary will, at best, arrive on Youtube then, excuse me, but what is the "untold" bit?
Richard Hall told it all, after every one of us searched and compiled his composite of what we already knew.
If she thinks her sitting comfortably on a SKY sofa and her being a journalist will add weight to revealing the truth then she is mistaken. Myself, like so many others, trust her about as far as one could launch Mitchell.
Especially when you know that Hutton is on board.
How many alarm bells and self congratulatory egos can one stand?

by Angelique 20.09.15 10:35

Mark Willis wrote:Given this Poulton documentary will, at best, arrive on Youtube then, excuse me, but what is the "untold" bit?
Richard Hall told it all, after every one of us searched and compiled his composite of what we already knew.
If she thinks her sitting comfortably on a SKY sofa and her being a journalist will add weight to revealing the truth then she is mistaken. Myself, like so many others, trust her about as far as one could launch Mitchell.
Especially when you know that Hutton is on board.
How many alarm bells and self congratulatory egos can one stand?

Ah, yes, "the untold bit".

Agree Richard D Hall has told all that is "known and available" and excellently done. But the untold bit, is that which has yet to be exposed. Maybe SP hopes that years down the line some of it will appear?

by Mark Willis 20.09.15 10:52

If there is any "untold bit" that in any way denigrates the McStory then she can kiss goodbye to her reserved seat on SKY. So expect nothing useful. We saw her on TPV, we saw her & Hutton's detrimental-to-the-truth Sun nonsense.
So, TPV, The Sun and SKY = what? Answer? Junk. Advice? Avoid.

by **Tony Bennett** 20.09.15 11:03

Mark Willis wrote:If there is any "untold bit" that in any way denigrates the McStory then she can kiss goodbye to her reserved seat on SKY. So expect nothing useful. We saw her on TPV, we saw her & Hutton's detrimental-to-the-truth Sun nonsense.
So, TPV, The Sun and SKY = what? Answer? Junk. Advice? Avoid.

Thank you @ Mark Willis for calling the Sonia Poulton situation exactly as it is.

By the way, can anyone point me to any one statement Sonia Poulton has ever made where she clearly states that in her opinion Madeleine McCann died in the McCanns' apartment and may have hidden her body?

I can't find even one

by Mark Willis 20.09.15 11:11

You cannot find one, Tony? You won't.

by **Tony Bennett** 20.09.15 11:31

Mark Willis wrote:You cannot find one, Tony? You won't.

Exactly so.

But what we can find, if we examine Sonia's actual record on the McCann case, is things like:

1. Giving a free, unchallenged platform on the PTV to the confusing bilge uttered by Stephen D. Birch

2. Giving a free, unchallenged platform on the PTV to the confusing bilge uttered by fantasist barrister Michael Shrimpton

3. Arranging with Rupert Murdoch's The Sun to feature she-who-must-not-be-named as a 'vile anti-McCann bitch' over two pages of Britain's best-read newspaper

4. Publicly criticising the world's best-read Madeleine McCann forum by far (CMOMM) as a 'cess-pit'

5. Aggressively hounding someone with a camera and a microphone outside the door of the Inquest into the death of Brenda Leyland, and

6. Appearing on the mainstream media countless times and, even gjven opportunities, saying nothing whatsoever that actually challenges the McCanns' version of events.

One brief mention of 'The Portuguese Police Files' may be a straw that some clutch on to - but that's all we have so far.

By their fruits ye shall know them

by Mo 20.09.15 12:00

I usually like reading threads on this forum but am becoming fed-up with the tittle tattle about Sonia by Tony, Mark and Verdi. You seem to be acting like a tag team, to you to me, to you to me. As I see it John O'Connor has now retired and won't be fully up to speed with the case so he has only given his opinion and not that of OG. As for Sonia the problem there is she probably knows just a bit more than you! You keep harping on about Richard D Halls DVD's which I might add the first set were excellent- as for Phantoms it was like a script from the forum. I purchased the DVD's by the way and didn't wait to watch them FOC! Give it a rest please!!!

by joyce1938 20.09.15 12:15

I also watched The Phantoms by Richard Hall last night. Mo, I agree it was like you mentioned, all the things we have all been aware of over ages now. I think that Mr Bennett had helped him with info too. That's what I had thought before I watched it. I mean no disrespect to anyone trying to look into all this, but I just am getting fed up with the problems of people getting at each other, possibly a whole lot of what we think we have learned will be just floss at end of it. joyce1938

by Mark Willis 20.09.15 12:18

Tony Bennett wrote:
Mark Willis wrote:You cannot find one, Tony? You won't.
Exactly so.

But what we can find, if we examine Sonia's actual record on the McCann case, is things like:

1. Giving a free, unchallenged platform on the PTV to the confusing bilge uttered by Stephen D. Birch

2. Giving a free, unchallenged platform on the PTV to the confusing bilge uttered by fantasist barrister Michael Shrimpton

3. Arranging with Rupert Murdoch's The Sun to feature she-who-must-not-be-named as a 'vile anti-McCann bitch' over two pages of Britain's best-read newspaper

4. Publicly criticising the world's best-read Madeleine McCann forum by far (CMOMM) as a 'cess-pit'

5. Aggressively hounding someone with a camera and a microphone outside the door of the Inquest into the death of Brenda Leyland, and

6. Appearing on the mainstream media countless times and, even gjven opportunities, saying nothing whatsoever that actually challenges the McCanns' version of events.

One brief mention of 'The Portuguese Police Files' may be a straw that some clutch on to - but that's all we have so far.

By their fruits ye shall know them

Amen. QED.

by **Tony Bennett** 20.09.15 12:19

Mo wrote:I usually like reading threads on this forum but am becoming fed-up with the tittle tattle about Sonia by Tony, Mark and Verdi. You seem to be acting like a tag team, to you to me, to you to me.

I would suggest that the three of us are concerned for the truth in this case and are therefore united in our doubt about someone who has not demonstrated respect for the truth in this case so far

As I see it John O'Connor has now retired and won't be fully up to speed with the case so he has only given his opinion and not that of OG.

He always says exactly what the powers-that-be want him to say. LBC knew exactly what they were doing by inviting him and Sonia Poulton on to their show, and knew in advance what they were going to say. They knew Sonia Poulto nwould not dare to rock the boat

As for Sonia the problem there is she probably knows just a bit more than you!

She must have learned a lot in the past 2 years, then, since she gave credence to the attention-seeking crackpots Birch and Shrimpton. What does she actually know more about? Grange? The McCanns' private investigators? What really happened to Madeleine? Whether the Last Photo is genuine or photoshopped? Whether Martin Smith was an honest witness?

You keep harping on about Richard D Halls DVD's

Because they are informative and successful

which I might add the first set were excellent - as for Phantoms it was like a script from the forum.

Is that a bad thing?

I purchased the DVD's by the way and didn't wait to watch them FOC! Give it a rest please!!!

Right from the outset I said that if Sonia Poulton was capable of making an informative and revelatory documentary about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, then I would be all for it. I've spoken up this morning because, once again, I see signs on what she said on the LBC broadcast yesterday that she is not going to deliver anything like what she's promised. But you've asked nicely, so I'll try and not mention her for a while

by Mark Willis 20.09.15 12:22

Mo wrote:I usually like reading threads on this forum but am becoming fed-up with the tittle tattle about Sonia by Tony, Mark and Verdi. You seem to be acting like a tag team, to you to me, to you to me. As I see it John O'Connor has now retired and won't be fully up to speed with the case so he has only given his opinion and not that of OG. As for Sonia the problem there is she probably knows just a bit more than you! You keep harping on about Richard D Halls DVD's which I might add the first set were excellent- as for Phantoms it was like a script from the forum. I purchased the DVD's by the way and didn't wait to watch them FOC! Give it a rest please!!!

No.
No one is part of any team, here. We all have our own opinions.
Do not conflate your observation with reality.
Poulton and Hutton are a team and their record so far would make a no-legged man run away.
I doubt that anyone knows any more than anyone else, apart from two slightly unpopular doctors, as were.

by Richard IV 20.09.15 12:23

joyce1938 wrote:I also watched, the phantoms by Richard hall ,last night . Mo I agree it was like you mentioned ,all the things we have all been aware of over ages now . I think that mr Bennett had helped him with info too . that's what I had thought before I watched it . I mean no disrespect to anyone trying to look into all this , but I just am getting fed up with the problems of people getting at each other ,possably a whole lot of what we think we have learned ,will be just floss at end of it . joyce1938

I`m pleased Richard D. Hall has made these videos - I know most sceptics know most of it but he is also managing to reach a larger audience who don`t know all the details.

As for the sniping, I agree with you Joyce - it`s getting beyond ugly.

by sallypelt 20.09.15 12:39

Richard IV wrote:
joyce1938 wrote:I also watched, the phantoms by Richard hall ,last night . Mo I agree it was like you mentioned ,all the things we have all been aware of over ages now . I think that mr Bennett had helped him with info too . that's what I had thought before I watched it . I mean no disrespect to anyone trying to look into all this , but I just am getting fed up with the problems of people getting at each other ,possably a whole lot of what we think we have learned ,will be just floss at end of it . joyce1938

I`m pleased Richard D. Hall has made these videos - I know most sceptics know most of it but he is also managing to reach a larger audience who don`t know all the details.

As for the sniping, I agree with you Joyce - it`s getting beyond ugly.

On the subject or RDH, I was watching Youtube late last night and the interview with Stephen Birch. I didn't take too much notice initially, but I was curious about his claims, as there's been so much written about it, but I haven't really be that interested. I brushed it off as him being another nut job. HOWEVER, listening to what he was saying, and putting aside the "Madeleine's under the driveway" theory, I can't fault what he says. Everything that he says about S Carpenter and the proximity of Murat's garden to apartment 5A, and the activities of the T9 on the 3 May 2007 are all spot on.

This is the link to the Youtube interview. I don't know what others think about it, but it would be interesting to know:

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

by Guest 20.09.15 12:51

Mo wrote:I usually like reading threads on this forum but am becoming fed-up with the tittle tattle about Sonia by Tony, Mark and Verdi. You seem to be acting like a tag team, to you to me, to you to me. As I see it John O'Connor has now retired and won't be fully up to speed with the case so he has only given his opinion and not that of OG. As for Sonia the problem there is she probably knows just a bit more than you! You keep harping on about Richard D Halls DVD's which I might add the first set were excellent- as for Phantoms it was like a script from the forum. I purchased the DVD's by the way and didn't wait to watch them FOC! Give it a rest please!!!

Sorry Mo, that you find my interest in the 'Untold Story of Madeleine McCann' offensive, I can only suggest you avoid reading threads relative to the subject matter. Can only speak for myself but all the time she puts herself up front with promises of new developments, you will find me waiting on the doorstep (to coin a phrase) in fervent anticipation of a release date for this promised documentary slash film.

Believe it or not, I'm genuinely interested to see this long awaited production. After all the promises and little teasers she's caste to whet the appetite, I don't think it unreasonable to question the delay/s, nor indeed to question her true motives which would appear to be contrary to expectations.

You say John O'Connor is a retired policeman and most likely not up to speed on the case. I totally agree but will add if that be the case he is perhaps the wrong person to be interviewed on the subject. IF his input was supposed to be an opinion of the amount of money spent on the case, then he should have confined his words to that alone and not commented on the parents position nor the official Portuguese police investigation - thus inviting criticism.

I grant you, it is possible that Poulton knows more than me about this case but I do find that hard to believe considering her relatively late appearance on the scene. I wonder if she's ever read the PJ files? I fear she is being guided by the wrong star which could so easily result in unmitigated disaster rather than what I have been hoping for - 'The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann'.

I really hope I'm wrong and she will fulfill her promises in good time.

by Richard IV 20.09.15 13:20

sallypelt wrote:
Richard IV wrote:
joyce1938 wrote:I also watched, the phantoms by Richard hall ,last night . Mo I agree it was like you mentioned ,all the things we have all been aware of over ages now . I think that mr Bennett had helped him with info too . that's what I had thought before I watched it . I mean no disrespect to anyone trying to look into all this , but I just am getting fed up with the problems of people getting at each other ,possably a whole lot of what we think we have learned ,will be just floss at end of it . joyce1938

I`m pleased Richard D. Hall has made these videos - I know most sceptics know most of it but he is also managing to reach a larger audience who don`t know all the details.

As for the sniping, I agree with you Joyce - it`s getting beyond ugly.
On the subject or RDH, I was watching Youtube late last night and the interview with Stephen Birch. I didn't take too much notice initially, but I was curious about his claims, as there's been so much written about it, but I haven't really be that interested. I brushed it off as him being another nut job. HOWEVER, listening to what he was saying, and putting aside the "Madeleine's under the driveway" theory, I can't fault what he says. Everything that he says about S Carpenter and the proximity of Murat's garden to apartment 5A, and the activities of the T9 on the 3 May 2007 are all spot on.

This is the link to the Youtube interview. I don't know what others think about it, but it would be interesting to know:

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

I am listening to it and am half way through. I didn`t know that Berry and Balu saw GM at the back of RM`s property at 10.20pm.

I must say that SB`s findings were credible until he started losing credibility, by maybe answering questions when he`d had a few, and acting a bit bonkers. His reputation then waned IMO.

Next bit I didn`t know was about SC and MJS witness statements missing and the large amount of money allegedly paid into MJS`s company account.

ETA Going off topic here I know - perhaps we should transfer over to SB`s thread. What do other posters think.

by sallypelt 20.09.15 13:43

Richard IV wrote:
sallypelt wrote:
Richard IV wrote:
joyce1938 wrote:I also watched, the phantoms by Richard hall ,last night . Mo I agree it was like you mentioned ,all the things we have all been aware of over ages now . I think that mr Bennett had helped him with info too . that's what I had thought before I watched it . I mean no disrespect to anyone trying to look into all this , but I just am getting fed up with the problems of people getting at each other ,possably a whole lot of what we think we have learned ,will be just floss at end of it . joyce1938

I`m pleased Richard D. Hall has made these videos - I know most sceptics know most of it but he is also managing to reach a larger audience who don`t know all the details.

As for the sniping, I agree with you Joyce - it`s getting beyond ugly.
On the subject or RDH, I was watching Youtube late last night and the interview with Stephen Birch. I didn't take too much notice initially, but I was curious about his claims, as there's been so much written about it, but I haven't really be that interested. I brushed it off as him being another nut job. HOWEVER, listening to what he was saying, and putting aside the "Madeleine's under the driveway" theory, I can't fault what he says. Everything that he says about S Carpenter and the proximity of Murat's garden to apartment 5A, and the activities of the T9 on the 3 May 2007 are all spot on.

This is the link to the Youtube interview. I don't know what others think about it, but it would be interesting to know:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I am listening to it and am half way through. I didn`t know that Berry and Balu saw GM at the back of RM`s property at 10.20pm.

I must say that SB`s findings were credible until he started losing credibility, by maybe answering questions when he`d had a few, and acting a bit bonkers. His reputation then waned IMO.

Next bit I didn`t know was about SC and MJS witness statements missing and the large amount of money allegedly paid into MJS`s company account.

ETA Going off topic here I know - perhaps we should transfer over to SB`s thread. What do other posters think.

Richard, I am aware of SC missing first statement, but there is the one that he gave to the Leicester police. That is quite extensive. I believe his wife gave a statement to, but it's never been made available. If I am mistaken about his wife's statement, then please could someone let me know.

I am aware about the calls "Maddie, Maddie" heard by SC's wife? around 9:10-9:20 pm on the 3rd May. So, by discrediting SB outright, are we missing something? Is there something that he knows that we don't?

Stay on topic, please. Mod.

by aiyoyo 20.09.15 14:09

Tony Bennett wrote:There is no way on earth that the mainstream media are going to change tack on this case

I go along with that - that MSM won't change tack, unless the 'abduction' as official line is changed.

I think Sonia was invited on simply to lend support for Grange to continue and to suggest to the listeners that there might be significant developments in the months ahead -which is exactly what she did do.

My deduction is she wasn't invited. RatherAndrew Pierce of LBC (Leading Britain's Conversation) might have been approached by SP, thus meeting her objective to plug her film.

Why I say this - because Andrew Pierce seemed clueless about SP's film that she'd to correct him on the such basic info as duration she spent working on the film. It shows he didn't have even basic info regarding her work and hadn't bothered to gather basic info or basic research on the work of the person/s he invited to his in-conversation, which is not usual of what hosts do if they are in control.
He did not ask them any questions. He did not ask SP to elaborate about her film, neither did he ask them who their source was when they alleged to knowing of resolution/development in OG . Even Andrew Pierce must know they can't have gotten that from OG.

LBC isn't mainstream nationwide. We have not heard of Andrew Pierce or LBC's interest in McCann's case, why now?

Also, Andrew Pierce came across as totally clueless about other aspects of the case. Apart from saying the obvious ie general common knowledge info given out in the MSM, he does not seem clued in on the case, neither did he engage them in interactive conservations in a radio-talk-progamme that is supposed to be on "Leading Britain's conversation". Who was leading it ? Not Andrew Pierce !

You'd think if the radio host was interested in having conversation with guests that he invited onto his programme he would involve them in interactive exchanges of conversation, and not just be about letting them say their respective piece and that was it. It gives the impression the interest in talking about the Mccann's case did not originate from him, but from the other side. I won't discount the probability that John O' Connor came on the programme at the behest of SP, as a side cast.

As for SP, she has proved once again her inept use of language. When she said " we are treating the McCanns differently" and "we are in the realms of something else altogether" you have to wonder at her definition of "we". She can't have regarded/included herself an official authority on the McCanns case.....surely!

Her "one child goes missing every 5 minutes" can't have been factual - likely she nicked that from the infamous ambassador, Kate McCann. Not a good sign - meaning she hadn't done her own research.

The rests of what she said were mainly her opinions on Grange as well as plugging of her documentary. There was absolutely no leading questions from Andrew Pierce. He showed no interest in asking/finding out for his audience more about SP's film, on why she interests herself in the case, why she got herself involved in the case?

All those are indications (to me anyway) that he'd been approached (hence used as platform) rather than he being interested in the case that brought about the conversation topic during his watch.

Just my take on it, that's all.

by Mo 20.09.15 14:37

Tony Bennett wrote:
Mo wrote:I usually like reading threads on this forum but am becoming fed-up with the tittle tattle about Sonia by Tony, Mark and Verdi. You seem to be acting like a tag team, to you to me, to you to me.

I would suggest that the three of us are concerned for the truth in this case and are therefore united in our doubt about someone who has not demonstrated respect for the truth in this case so far

Although there has been a few snippets from Sonia I am not understanding 'not demonstrated respect for the truth'

As I see it John O'Connor has now retired and won't be fully up to speed with the case so he has only given his opinion and not that of OG.

He always says exactly what the powers-that-be want him to say. LBC knew exactly what they were doing by inviting him and Sonia Poulton on to their show, and knew in advance what they were going to say. They knew Sonia Poulto nwould not dare to rock the boat

Do do you know all this as fact?

As for Sonia the problem there is she probably knows just a bit more than you!

She must have learned a lot in the past 2 years, then, since she gave credence to the attention-seeking crackpots Birch and Shrimpton. What does she actually know more about? Grange? The McCanns' private investigators? What really happened to Madeleine? Whether the Last Photo is genuine or photoshopped? Whether Martin Smith was an honest witness?

Sonia I would assume must have learned a lot in the past 2 years. As Sonia has already said there has been a lot more research than she thought (avenues leading to others). I am sure she is doing what other journalists do when making a documentary. I think we have to remember here that there is an ongoing investigation so whatever Sonia has come up with she will have to give two sides to the story.

You keep harping on about Richard D Halls DVD's

Because they are informative and successful

Personally I thought the first set of DVD's were fab and Phantoms a flop ( no disrespect to RD Hall). IMO

which I might add the first set were excellent - as for Phantoms it was like a script from the forum.

Is that a bad thing?

See above

I purchased the DVD's by the way and didn't wait to watch them FOC! Give it a rest please!!!

Right from the outset I said that if Sonia Poulton was capable of making an informative and revelatory documentary about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, then I would be all for it. I've spoken up this morning because, once again, I see signs on what she said on the LBC broadcast yesterday that she is not going to deliver anything like what she's promised. But you've asked nicely, so I'll try and not mention her for a while

There's an ongoing investigation - you have no idea what is in the documentary just speculating from a 5 Minute or so interview on the radio. Thank you for your last sentence

Just one other thing Tony, if you find any typo's please do not correct as you have done with Verdi up thread - It would make me feel like I was back at school!