The Ramblings of Sonia Poulton - an introduction to People's Voice

There is a transcript of the interview kicking about but I'd rather not link to it.  It's from queen McCann supporter- Brenda Ryan.

I won't run the risk of my head exploding by listening to the rest of Michael Shrimpton's interview.

This man is actually still working as a solicitor, I understand.

 

Woofer wrote:

Woofer wrote:

Cristobell wrote:I actually object to my work being deleted at the request of another member and hope this will not be the case.

It shouldn`t be Cristobell

Other comment deleted - do NOT make false claims about this forum - ADMIN

Sorry - I just thought as Tony made the comment about `joining dates` it would be true.  I`m so relieved to hear its not.

Woofer, please look back at page 7 of this thread. You will see that it was you who made the comment; Tony merely responded with some factual information, he did not comment. Your repeated sarcasm is unwelcome. Please avoid it if you wish to remain a member here - ADMIN

ADMIN - Please double check - it was in fact Tony who responded with the `joining dates` not me.  He responded with these `joining dates` after I had expressed regret at the way Cristobel was being treated.  I don`t know why he posted these facts, he didn`t say, but I took it to denote a pecking order. Please accept my apologies if it was not - in which case it was a misunderstanding on my part.

Smokeandmirrors wrote:Hi Cristobell, I saw some of your interview though I missed the beginning. I thought you came across very well, just like a nice normal gentle person. Obviously you had to word things with care and talking to Skype is weird ( I know, I've tried it, and it's not like talking to someone in the same room) so I think you did well. Sadly it is not surprising that the McCann supporters have been true to type and been vile to you. It is how they always are, and very damaging to the McCanns their behaviour is too. A bit like scoring several hundred own goals a day!!

Anyway, I think you are very courageous to speak out knowing you could take a lot of flak with it, and I think you were very wise to point out that there are oddities within the case and your exchange with Sonia about the McCanns shills was brilliant, because they have reacted to type, so it proved your point the way they have reacted. 

I look forward to any more interview you do early next year after the libel case is concluded.

I echo Smoke & Mirrors to Cristobell. All kudos to you for going on TPV under your real identity and trying to say the points we all want to be known to the greater unaware public. I wonder how many anonymous posters would do the same? I thought you did well, and it is difficult to say everything you want to when someone else is driving the interview as well as being against the clock   

As for Shrimpton....Nothing but a disinfo agent imo, if it snows at Xmas it will be the Germans fault. He is put out there to turn the finger of suspicion away from the true culprits on the high profile cases such as Maddie, David Kelly, Robin Cook,  and throwing in a few truths as sweeteners. I believe he also worked on the 9/11 commission, which really says all you need to know. Back in January he did a radio Bristol interview bleating the same it was the Germans song sheet as he did on TPV. Below is the radio Bristow interview and my reply to it

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

This radio interview was broadcasted on Bristol Community Radio on 11th January 2013 by Michael Shrimpton, a barrister specialising in national security and intelligence law, who negotiated the national security aspects of the Pinochet case with the late Lt-General Vernon Walters, formerly Deputy Director of the CIA. He has represented and advised intelligence officers and is believed to have close connections to a number of Western intelligence services. He claims in this radio interview that jimmy saville supplied young children to the then Prime Minister of the UK, Edward Heath, *****************************

He goes on to claim that Dr Kelly was murdered, Dianna was murdered and that Robin Cook was murdered as he was about to expose the Dianna murder (what the hell is going in our establishment!)

Curiously, he then halfway through brings up Madeleine McCann and says

"In my report to the joint of intelligence committee, in the case of Madeleine McCann, She was going to be abused by a senior member of the European commission in Brussels whose name is known to British Intelligence, I can't identify him in Spyhunter but I know who it is, there is no way that Madeleine could ever be returned alive to her family because the danger would be even at her tender age of 4 she would recognise him and know who was abusing her. So the Germans had to murder her and indeed they eventually did sadly in December 2008

Now then Mr Shrimpton, you claim that British Intelligence & joint of intelligence committee (i.e. the government) know all about this and know she was killed in December 2008. Baring in mind the very highest level of protection and support the mccanns have always received since 10pm on May 3rd 2007, are you really saying that the mccanns have not been informed about this yet you can tell the nation on a radio station this fact? Come on Mr Shrimpton pull the other one it might have bells on it.

If with British Intelligence/government and even a barrister like yourself having this fact, the mccanns will have been informed and know what happened to their daughter
....Doesn't this then make the No Stone Unturned Ltd fund a fraud?

And for 4 years!!! wow! Even to this day, 19th January 2013, the mccanns are begging for monies from the public to 'search' and using tax payers monies to fund a review. This is a serious fraud the mccanns are committing here Mr Shrimpton

If the mccanns were never made aware of your claims, don't you think yourself, British Intelligence and the UK Government are guilty and totally responsible for allowing the public to continue giving their monies to a fund of a child you know is no longer alive to be found? Shouldn't you all be held to account for this?

And all these rehashed Maddie sightings that appear in the media over the past 4 years especially at interestingly certain points on anniversary dates, rehashed sightings such as the taxi driver, António Castela, which when rehashed 4 years later in 2012 had the dates of Maddie being in his cab changed from before to after the abduction time. I quote clarence mitchell on the 2008 version of the same story we were fed" The declarations of Mr. Castela are false. They are a perfect nonsense. He can only be mistaken when he says that at that time he transported Kate and Madeleine with three men. How is that possible, if at 20h35 several witnesses say that Kate and Gerry were sitting down on a table of the Tapas restaurant. It astonishes me that only now, ten months later, he talks about this. These are declarations that only cause pain to Kate and Gerry. The only sign to report is the one she has in the eye.”

But then in the rehashed 2012 version of the very same story which we were fed, he now says "Mr Castela did absolutely the right thing at the time by reporting his sighting to the PJ. It is clearly deeply shocking that he now tells us he has not been interviewed once by a detective in five years. This is exactly the sort of thing that needs to be looked at in the investigative review now being carried out by the Metropolitan Police. Kate and Gerry remain very happy that the Met are performing their role as efficiently as they can."

Which is the correct version? Which version is Clarence Mitchell lying through his teeth with..2008 or 2012? or both? how can anyone take these sightings' seriously and on merit when they completely change from one version to another. If Maddie had been killed by the Germans in December 2008 as you claim you & British Intelligence know, why was the 2012 rehashed version ever released into the public…isn’t this lying at the very least?

I can give you some links to the 2 versions of the very same story
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Now then, if on the other hand your claim about Madeleine McCann being abused and killed by the Germans in December 2008 are wrong...Why aren't the mccanns suing you? They do to others who purport any theory of Madeleine being dead. You've said on a radio station and we can all hear with your own voice your claims she is dead, and we know you first made these claims a few years back. Further more you say that you are going to make these claims in your forthcoming book 'Spy Catcher". So how come you get to be exonerated by the mccanns from making these claims, whilst at the very same time others (in positions of facts from the actual police investigation which we have all seen and freely available to be read) are being sued and their lives totally ruined?

Just like the António Castela taxi story, this is totally contradictory, inconsistent, and very clearly showing that there is another agenda going on here. One rule for one and one rule for others. if you are right and with the knowledge who knew for 4 years, wouldn't it be responsible and right to help those who are having their lives ruined by the mccanns instead of just letting this happen? After all, all they are trying to achieve is the truth whatever it is and you hold the truth for 4 years, apparently

I find it very curious that in an interview about a UK Prime Minister and the recently outed pedophile, which from the many evidences I have seen have no doubt you are correct on, you bring in the very same breath,  Madeleine McCann. I see victims who claim they were used & abused by the saville network bring up Madeleine McCann too. Its all very curious indeed why she is being talked about in events connected to Operation Fernbridge. I agree with another one of your points in your radio interview though, just prior to you bringing up Madeleine McCann, when you say that the perpetrators of these horrendous crimes normally turn to religion to ease this guilt. Just brings to mind the mccanns apparent sudden religious faith they threw down our throats since May 3rd 2007 and asking & calling for priests on the night she disappeared

Being of the opinion that the more one knows about the McCanns and their supporters the better, here is the link which Daisy was reluctant to post [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and which shows the villification anyone who publicly disagrees with TM's deceitful and distorted version of the truth can expect.

On a point of information, a number of these deluded creatures have made much of a recent reference in the Portugal News to the outcome of Dr Amaral's appeal against the injunction imposed on sales of his book which was lifted by the appellate court in 2010. This judgement was, in turn, appealed by the McCanns to no avail as it was upheld by the Supreme Court of Portugal in 2011.

Avid fans of the McCanns have used a certain ambiguity in Brendan de Beer's account of these facts to claim their hero and heroine scored a spectacular success when, in truth, all they achieved was to score yet another own goal which, given that fancy footwork is not their forte, is unsurprising.

ultimaThule wrote:Being of the opinion that the more one knows about the McCanns and their supporters the better, here is the link which Daisy was reluctant to post [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and which shows the villification anyone who publicly disagrees with TM's deceitful and distorted version of the truth can expect.  

On a point of information, a number of these deluded creatures have made much of a recent reference in the Portugal News to the outcome of Dr Amaral's appeal against the injunction imposed on sales of his book which was lifted by the appellate court in 2010.  This judgement was, in turn, appealed by the McCanns to no avail as it was upheld by the Supreme Court of Portugal in 2011.  

Avid fans of the McCanns have used a certain ambiguity in Brendan de Beer's account of these facts to claim their hero and heroine scored a spectacular success when, in truth, all they achieved was to score yet another own goal which, given that fancy footwork is not their forte, is unsurprising.  

Thank you for that     
I'm at a loss to see where the danger of prosecution lies in the contents of this interview.

There is none, tigger.  

To state there may be more than meets the eye with regard to a certain case and to give examples of discrepancies which have given rise to that opinion is one thing.  

To assert that certain individuals are without doubt guilty of committing heinous or any other crime(s) prior to lawful trial is another.

It seems that Martin Grime isn't willing to answer Sonia Poulton's questions - and neither, it appears, is Clarence Mitchell...

From the interview:

SONIA POULTON:  "...so those are the kind of questions that I have about it that don’t quite make sense to me and I’ve never found a good answer to it and Clarence Mitchell, their spokesman, is not supplying me with one, because I’ve now approached him twice, erm, about an interview and please, Clarence, I mean, you know the truth is that we’re the People’s Voice. We are happy to give everybody a voice in this".

Full marks for trying, anyway.

Although for the past six years, Clarence Mitchell's voice has been so effective that maybe he feels he doesn't need another chance to air them on 'The People's Voice' 

awww why not tempt Clarrie on to TPV to discuss stray dogs in Portugal and then throw in a few other questions.   

I was interested to read Tony's post about Tatchell being given a voice, I certainly wont watch now.    Trying to get the age of consent reduced is something I loathe and would certainly not watch anyone who has been associated with trying to get the law changed.

Christabell is getting slaughtered on Twitter, by JulyTrudy73 and her sidekicks. I would like to say to Christabell, you have more guts in your little fingernail, than the lot of those evil people put together.  One would think that TJ73 would be more mature, wouldn't you? After all, she's had her  71st birthday. Moreover, the woman has NEVER held a position of authority. In fact, she's just an insignificant person who is obsessed by those who are higher up the social scale than she is. Because the McCann's are doctors, therefore, in TJ73's eyes, they can't be guilty of ANY crime. I wonder were she'll disappear to when the truth finally comes out?  

Again, she's been up at the crack of dawn, clocking in, to do her 16 hour Twitter shift. She'll spend ALL day long tweeting the same thing over and over and over and ovezzzZZZZZzzzzzz, as she's done for years, or so I am told.

Sorry admin, for using this thread to address Christabell, regarding Twitter posts, but I wanted Christabell to read this post, as much of this post is about her appearance on The People's Voice. 

 I will  now refrain from using posts to post Twitter tweets.

I will also post this on the Twitter thread.

Chapeau to Cristobell.

You have the courage to stand up for Justice, and that's worthy of commending.

sallypelt wrote:Christabell is getting slaughtered on Twitter, by JulyTrudy73 and her sidekicks. I would like to say to Christabell, you have more guts in your little fingernail, than the lot of those evil people put together.  One would think that TJ73 would be more mature, wouldn't you? After all, she's had her  71st birthday. Moreover, the woman has NEVER held a position of authority. In fact, she's just an insignificant person who is obsessed by those who are higher up the social scale than she is. Because the McCann's are doctors, therefore, in TJ73's eyes, they can't be guilty of ANY crime. I wonder were she'll disappear to when the truth finally comes out?  

Again, she's been up at the crack of dawn, clocking in, to do her 16 hour Twitter shift. She'll spend ALL day long tweeting the same thing over and over and over and ovezzzZZZZZzzzzzz, as she's done for years, or so I am told.

Sorry admin, for using this thread to address Christabell, regarding Twitter posts, but I wanted Christabell to read this post, as much of this post is about her appearance on The People's Voice. 

 I will  now refrain from using posts to post Twitter tweets.

I will also post this on the Twitter thread.

Well, nothing's changed then in the pro camp!

Anyone with the guts to speak up for Madeleine gets slaughtered by senile and demented pros regardless.
Since there's not a shred of evidence to support abduction theory, apart from the mccanns say so, even that - their superficial Tannerman is eliminated,  verbose diatribe in their sole form of defence they know.  They cant say they are still looking for Tannerman can they?
 They can only attack to defend their position; no other way out since their cock and bull story about the evolving faceless-man has been taken out of the equation by the INVESTIGATORS.  

What is left is so patently obvious.

Tony Bennett wrote:It seems that Martin Grime isn't willing to answer Sonia Poulton's questions - and neither, it appears, is Clarence Mitchell...

From the interview:

SONIA POULTON:  "...so those are the kind of questions that I have about it that don’t quite make sense to me and I’ve never found a good answer to it and Clarence Mitchell, their spokesman, is not supplying me with one, because I’ve now approached him twice, erm, about an interview and please, Clarence, I mean, you know the truth is that we’re the People’s Voice. We are happy to give everybody a voice in this".

Full marks for trying, anyway.

Although for the past six years, Clarence Mitchell's voice has been so effective that maybe he feels he doesn't need another chance to air them on 'The People's Voice' 

Clarrie has been remarkably silent of late and it's to be hoped the deceptively damp sea air which wafts around Brighton Pavillion hasn;t caused him to suffer a bout of laryngitis.  

Oddly enough the UK press also appears to have lost its voice while the rabid avid fans of all things McCann have grown increasingly shrill about the current objects of their hate filled rants - of which you are one Tony and, as such, no less deserving of the sympathy which is usually reserved for women whose looks are singled out for ridicule because of the insensitivity of their detractors.

I chanced upon the name Michael Shrimpton earlier today, remembering his bizarre ramblings of yesteryear about Madeleine McCann's disappearance, I had a google around looking for confirmation that he was questioned at some stage of his less than illustrious career, about being in possession of child pornography (I think).  To cut a long story short..

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

Many of the results that came up on google linked to this forum  so I had a search through the archives but I didn't come across this interview between Sonia Poulton and Michael Shrimpton back in 2013 - after his publicized association with the MBM case.  No doubt it hasn't escaped the net but anyhow I think it's worth another airing.  I would appear to be another display of Ms Poulton's investigative journalistic skills.  The man comes across as being stark raving bonkers but Ms Poulton seemed to be sucked in by him.