SONIA POULTON EXPOSED PART 3

Interesting to see how many forkers think Poulton has done something totally reprehensible; some are even wondering if she's done it on purpose to make them look bad.

Especially as she's pulled this stunt right in the middle of the Lisbon court case, the Yard investigation, and the coroner's investigation into Leyland's death. All important matters, that she seems to be trying to sabotage.

Easy to see why the more cynical might wonder just which 'side' she is actually on. It's the work of minutes to find many victims of abuse who detest Poulton and her thuggish crew, for making use of them when it suits her ends, then turning on them and smearing them all over the internet.

And then there was her very public of the Ickes.

She may, of course, be just an unpleasant, manipulative egotist, or she may be something far worse. Time will tell, as ever.

I think she's going to shaft her fan club. Just about everything she says has more than one meaning. And there is NO profit in slagging off the McCanns on YouTube, it's career suicide.

I read that Sonia Poulton appeared on Sky News this morning. I don't know what she was talking about as I didn't watch it. I believe it was something to do with mothers who smoke but can't confirm that.

This is a journalist who has taken to defending Brenda Leyland whilst openly opposing Sky News/Martin Brunt's treatment of her. Today she apparently took the Sky shilling and appeared on Sky News.

Hey, everyone has to earn a few quid.

Check out soniapoulton.com - go to the bottom of the homepage and check it out - the 'contact us', 'faq's', 'advertising' and 'copyright' sections. They are quite enlightening.

xxxxxhttp://soniapoulton.com.websitebuilder.prositehosting.co.uk/
(remove xxxxx to access link)

Lorraine ‏@PickieHolden 50m50 minutes ago
@SoniaPoulton @collywobbles54 @TeddyShepherd if the #McCann's were truly innocent people like @JimGamble_INEQE wouldn't be interested in ya

Sonia Poulton@SoniaPoulton
@PickieHolden @collywobbles54 @TeddyShepherd @JimGamble_INEQE that's how our team perceive it too.

Judith Fullerton@JudithF_qubni
@JimGamble_INEQE @TweetsbyGill timelines of some McCann activists reveal disturbing psychology dressed up as motivation for justice #oxygen

Judith Fullerton ‏@JudithF_qubni 4h4 hours ago
@JimGamble_INEQE @TweetsbyGill no attention infuriates them so best policy is to ignore #oxygen

Jim Gamble
‏@JimGamble_INEQE
@JudithF_qubni @TweetsbyGill I agree however sometimes things r so wrong. A frenzied rant 2the mother of a missing child needs 2bchallenged

4:17 AM - 28 Jan 2015
Judith Fullerton ‏@JudithF_qubni 3h3 hours ago
@JimGamble_INEQE @TweetsbyGill unprofessional work practice will isolate her further. Driven by biases & misinformation

Re: Sonia Poulton Update
Post Maggs Shaw Today at 5:49 pm

Sonia flits from one story to another. If her research and accuracy is to be the on the same scale as other cases/causes she has 'all of a sudden appeared to champion' then I am very sceptical at the attention to detail she will adopt.

She has worked for Sky for many years now, so it has to be asked 'why has she not brought the MM case to the MSM before?' IMO it is because she likes the 'enemy troops' softened up a bit before she rides in on her white horse shouting 'look how brave I am'! I am more inclined to interpret her 'bravery' as stupidity. Especially if you note some of the 'guests' she has given air space to and the topics they were permitted to sit there and spout, all without hard evidence.

I may be incorrect, but, surely a true journalist would 'rip an arm off' to be given the opportunity to 'get both sides of a story' She doesn't, when she decided to take on the Hollie Greig Case and support Robert Green, she was furnished with masses of evidence showing that the case was untrue. She even had chance to meet the 'oppo', but announced on her 'show' that the oppo were hiding, which was totally untrue. She decided however, to give a convicted criminal a platform, in order that he could spread his lies even further, him getting arrested in the process.

It was quite obvious that she did not bother to read anything, she just believed what she was told and broadcasted it.

I sincerely hope, for all the ardent supporters on this forum, for all the hard work put in by everyone in unraveling the lies of the McCanns that Sonia does not ruin anything. I also hope that her ridiculous 'doorstepping' or whatever she wishes to name it, does not give the McCanns any more ammunition to use so they could secure and bolt down more law suits. Even worse, manage to push themselves further up the ladder of protection. I am sure the McCanns would welcome any morsel at this moment in time to gain sympathy.

A case of cognitive dissonance, because Sonia can 'troll on twitter' and 'doorstep' and call it out as 'all in the public interest' but if anyone dares to ask her questions or challenge her views they are TROLLS! The documentary has to remain as a wonder in waiting, but I for one, will not be holding my breath for too long.

An open letter from Sonia Poulton to Jim Gamble

Post  Mo Today at 7:49 pm
Open letter to Jim Gamble #mccann

Following your Twitter attack on me yesterday - and continued today - I reiterate my request to invite you for an interview with regard the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

I was shocked by your vitriolic outburst regarding doorstepping the McCanns. Given that you were not there when it occurred I find you speak without full knowledge of the situation. For a former policeman to speak without understanding of what I have or have not done, is worrying given your high media profile around this case.

For the record, I approached the McCanns at their Leicester home. This is a practice you have publicly applauded when it applied to a single, older woman expressing an opinion e.g. Brenda Leyland also from Leicester. And yet, apparently, it is not to your taste when it comes to those who are at the heart of a story of enormous public investment.

Doorstepping, in matters of public interest, is a valid journalistic tool and I stand-by my decision to do it in this case.

This approach followed interview requests to the McCanns and I made it clear that there were unanswered questions - even more than the 48 police questions that Kate refused to answer when it came to searching for her child - and I sought to help by using whatever appropriate tools I have at my disposable. It is the McCanns who use the expression 'No Stone Unturned' and I believe what I set out to do then, and continue to do, assists rather than obstructs that.

When I received no response to an interview, after several requests over the period of a year, I realised that I had a public duty to pursue this. Thus, myself and a small camera crew went to the McCanns house and asked to talk with them.

Kate, I should point out, didn't find my approach at all 'attacking' as you insist on shrieking all over Twitter, until I told her why I was there and what questions the public - the very public who have been funding the search both through private donations and the current Operation Grange investigation - want answering.

I am not dissuaded from this action even by your use of emotive words in an apparent attempt to create a negative narrative about this documentary and what we are setting out to do. I am relieved that the wider discerning public are finally getting a glimpse of the machinations of those claiming to seek justice for Madeleine McCann.

I have previously asked you for an interview for the documentary I am making called 'The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann'. This is for a number of reasons.

There is your involvement in calling for legal punishment of those you regard as 'trolls' when, in fact, they are mostly just the people who dispute the official version of events surrounding Madeleine's disappearance.

Also, I wish to address the fact that you were involved in the Sky report by Martin Brunt - which featured the doorstepping of Brenda Leyland several days before her death - coupled with your euphoric public congratulations of this action on the day the report was repeatedly aired.

The Sky report, as you know, was based on a so-called dossier of those who oppose the official abduction story. I am given to understand that I feature in that dossier, as did Brenda Leyland. It is no secret that people involved in said dossier were in contact with you prior to Martin Brunt doorstepping Brenda Leyland. People, I have evidence of, who were involved in continually bullying and provoking Brenda Leyland.

Given that experts and commentators have now had a chance to examine Brenda Leyland's social network output regarding the case, and have concluded that she was not a 'troll', I believe - along with many others - that you have questions to answer regarding your role in her public hounding.

I am making this an open letter because I am aware of the deep public interest surrounding the disappearance of Madeleine, not least the millions of pounds that hard-pressed British taxpayers are funding for this, but also because you chose to be public in your condemnation of me and this documentary.

It is also, unquestionably, a unique-ly 'online case' in some regards in that many, many people globally have flocked to the Internet to express their horror at the case receiving such biased reporting in mainstream media.

It is an open secret that the McCann's version of events is widely disputed. Due, in part, to the inability of the couple and their friends to present a consistent account of events. This is out there in the public domain thanks to the work of the Portuguese Police. So it is that people have taken, en masse, to the Internet to express anger, dismay and frustration at the coverage which frequently fails to match reality.

I know you are aware that there are significant rumours surrounding your involvement with the McCanns during the time you were in public office at CEOP. I have seen the tweets that people send to you and the Facebook comments made about you.

I understand what it means to be smeared and I believe that I have a responsibility, as a journalist (of almost three decades), to put those accusations to you. I am not interfering with any on-going police investigation just doing what journalists are supposed to do.

I find it alarming, as do many Twitter observers, that you chose to use social media in a futile attempt to undermine me professionally with childish insults. All the while encouraging your followers to behave in a mob-like fashion towards me. Is this not contrary to what you claim to represent?

However, as many have pointed out, your public attacks have merely served to reinforce what people already believe regarding your somewhat blinkered approach to this case. Certainly, the way you have behaved over the last 24 hours towards myself and others has presented us with the perfect way to illustrate this in the documentary.

As a former policeman, I cannot fathom why you continue to insist that an abduction is the only reasonable conclusion to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

For those who have taken time to truly look at the case - those same people you block on Twitter and refer to as ranters and trolls - and away from the PR-led version of the media coverage, it is clear that there is so much more to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann than we are frequently led to believe.

I wonder, have the facts become immaterial in your quest to defend the McCanns at any cost? I am happy to be proved wrong.

So, Mr. Gamble, what is it to be? I offer you a full recorded interview (and a final mutual agreement of your contribution to the documentary) so you can be assured that your message will not be taken out of context.

I hope, rather than continuing to behave in a deeply unprofessional, evasive and questionable manner, that you take up this invitation.

If you choose not to, then people will make up their own mind why this might be. Your call.

Sonia Poulton
January 28, 2015

xxxxhttp://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t10928-an-open-letter-from-sonia-poulton-to-jim-gamble
(remove xxxx to access link)

Brietta:  I think that may be quite an unprecedented epistle.

In my opinion she has given a classic account of harassment when she states she repeatedly asked Dr McCann for an interview over the period of a year then presented herself uninvited on the doorstep demanding one.

After that little diatribe aimed at Jim Gamble I think hell will freeze before he will acquiesce to be in the same room with her as would anyone with any sense.

Quite extraordinary behaviour.

Jim Gamble
‏@JimGamble_INEQE
@SoniaPoulton thank you for this note. It confirms that you do irony well. I will let my reputation speak for me & yours for you.

Jim Gamble
‏@JimGamble_INEQE
@ad_mills @SoniaPoulton problem is I see no balance or professionalism here. Done #hardtalk #newsnight & many, many professional interviews

Sonia Poulton has made out to us all that she is in the midst of producing a sensational documentary about the doorstepping of Brenda Leyland, coupled with 'The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann'.

Now, who is the main target of us all who condemn the over-the-top, sensationalised public 'outing' of a lonely, troubled divorcee?

Why, Martin Brunt, and his bosses, the Editor and Producer of SKY News.

If she is really going to attack SKY News for hounding Brenda Leyland to death, why is it that of all the possible hundreds of commentators SKY News should choose to comment thios morning on women and smoking, Sonia Poulton is the one to be chosen?

I am more troubled every time I read about Sonia Poulton.

Could she yet end up back-stabbing the very people she now professes to support?

It has happened before.

There are people out there - people abused in childhood - who trusted Sonia Poulton with their stories - only for Sonia Poulton to turn right against them when she wrote about them.

Along with all our other concerns, her previous track record of back-stabbing, coupled with her still being a SKY News favourite, are red flags for me - even if for hardly anybody else.

ETA: I looked up the Wikipedia article about Sonia Poulton. It seems that the powers-that-be over at Wikiepdia are proposing to delete her entry which appears to be nothing more than a self-penned article quoting from her blog. The latest comment made by the committee who recommend that the article about her is deleted says:

"SONIA POULTON: Lack of substantial coverage in multiple reliable independent secondary sources. I agree that the subject of the article is a lightweight that does not meet any of our notability guidelines. None of the 24 sources listed represents substantial coverage; they are either routine, tangential, trivial or do not meet the requirements of our sourcing policies. Even taken together, and together with the similar sources I found in my own web searches, they don't add up to much, at all. She is simply too minor a figure in the British journalistic world to merit a stand-alone article, and even less significant on a global scale. Nothing worth merging or saving. Can be deleted in its entirety"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sonia_Poulton

Comment: I have just removed a couple of blatant errors/exaggerations from the intro claiming she is a broadcaster and she has worked for international organizations. Quite honestly, once you strip away the hype she is quite a marginal journalist, occasionally writing columns as a freelancer for UK national newspapers and occasionally making guest appearances on UK TV and radio shows. Just deleted another unsupported statement "contributed to The Jeremy Vine Show on Radio 2 for THREE years" - Poulton does not even claim this on her own website. --Penbat (talk) 12:16, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Jim Gamble ‏@JimGamble_INEQE 58m58 minutes ago
@ad_mills I suppose so. Coping with loss of a child is hard enough without this. It seems opinion of a few is used 2 justify vilification

tigerloaf » Wed Jan 28, 2015 10:35 pm
Why is it I wonder that all the anti McCanns whose names begin with the letter 'B' seem to be either as thick as the proverbial p** s*** or as ignorant and incompetent as the buffoon, Bennett, whose ludicrous research earned him nothing more than the right to hand over a small fortune each month in reparation for his incompetence and stupidity?

Babaloo (sic) is the latest variant on the theme.

I have no intention of doing this idiot's research for her or him save to say - start at 28 September and open your eyes.

As for Poulton's antics today.

How much more evidence does one need to see that this is a lunatic as opposed to a genuine journalist at work?

No response to the perfectly reasonable question as to why she has spent weeks chasing the author of the dossier? That is because there can only be one reason and it has nothing to do with journalism. Poulton is the best example of a troll on the #McCann tag though she almost certainly does not recognise the fact. When you are as biased as this woman is, when you have as closed a mind as this woman has then you simply cannot see the reality which is staring you in the face and you certainly cannot profess to be an investigative journalist.

Poulton is not attempting to find Madeleine McCann. That was a lie she told in her letter today. Not one single action in her entire history of posting and shrieking about this case has ever shown her to be interested in finding the missing little girl at the heart of the case. Not a single one.

Poulton is only interested in pursuing the lunatic delusions which she has been gathering from some of the sickest trolls to inhabit Twitter, from drug addled old liars like Hutton, from barking mad conspiracy crackpots like Birch, from the self-styled 'researchers' like Bennett and his entourage, and from disgusting criminal fraudsters like Butler. She is pursuing these lunatic delusions because that is the only way she can be heard in this world. She is a rent-a-mouth who, given the chance to make a fast buck and get her face on the television or her name in the paper, would take poisoned shillings from the worst crooks, crazies and even her avowed enemy the MSM.

Today, she replied to me with a laughable claim about her new-found role as a MSM lackey. I laugh in your face Ms Poulton. You may dream of such a role, you may be willing to sell out your oft-shrieked principles for such a role, you may be desperate to be seen to be holding such a role but the truth is that you are a jobbing fluff writer and rent-a-gob and nothing more. Anyone who tells you differently is winding you up.

Instead of such self-aggrandising and silly claims why not just answer the question posed on the other thread or is actually getting to the nitty gritty of your actions a shade too close to the truth about your true intentions? You have no answer other than the one I proposed on your behalf - that your intention was and still is to hound the compilers of the dossier - have you? And why is that? Because there is no other logical reason why you would be so desperate to know those names? Unfortunately for you, the information isn't coming your way.

The police know, they are a step ahead of you. Of course, they should know because the compilers were working with the police not against them as you so frequently do. There is so much that you patently do not (and probably never will) understand about what is going on that each time you open your mouth to shriek you demonstrate yet more ignorance as opposed to understanding. And you profess to be about to produce a little movie to explain it all. It is most amusing to watch. Even you might close that mouth of yours one day soon just long enough to listen or open your eyes to look and see what is going on around you. I think you've been very naive indeed and one day soon you may well realise that. Till then, I shall continue to enjoy the spectacle you are providing as a diversion to the actual work being undertaken by the police. Even though your antics are shedding no light on the matter at all, at least they provide me and those I converse with on the subject with a few laughs now and then.

We all hope Madeleine will be found and in the meantime we try to support her parents (who you might have forgotten have been investigated by the police and against whom no evidence of any crime at all has been found) in their endeavours. A shame that you could not put your energies into such actions rather than in following in the footsteps of that guru of the lunatics, Icke, and finding a conspiracy around every corner for you to play at investigative journalist with.

And one final thing for the moment, Ms Poulton, till I see that you have replied to my challenge and answered the very short and simple question posed to you, then you really are in no position to go around demanding that others answer questions are you? That would be yet another demonstration of how hypocritical you appear to be would it not?

* attack on me

* your vitriolic outburst

* you speak without full knowledge of the situation

* speak without understanding

* not to your taste

* your use of emotive words

* you chose to use social media in a futile attempt to undermine me professionally with childish insults

* encouraging your followers to behave in a mob-like fashion towards me

* your somewhat blinkered approach to this case

* the way you have behaved over the last 24 hours towards myself and others

* continuing to behave in a deeply unprofessional...

*evasive and...

*questionable manner

http://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/news/crime-court/danny_o_shea_trial_suspected_mob_organiser_not_violent_court_hears_1_2023543

Danny O’Shea trial: Suspected mob organiser ‘not violent’, court hears

Kevin Richards, 33, of North Circular Road, Willesden allegedly recruited a 10-strong gang of armed thugs to track down the culprits after Paul Boadi, 35, of Hertsmere Road, Poplar, was robbed of his BlackBerry mobile.

But 18-year-old Danny O’Shea, who was not connected to the phone theft, was stabbed to death yards from his front door in Butchers Road, Custom House a week later on December 2, 2011.

Christopher Nathaniel, 40, a sports agent, allegedly instigated the attack through Richards after Boadi, his business partner and flatmate, was mugged.

But character witness Sonia Poulton, a Daily Mail columnist who dated Richards’ father for four years, said she did not believe he was guilty because he was a ‘grounding influence’ to his peers.

She told the court: ‘It was horrific, I thought there had been a mistake because it didn’t make any sense to me and wasn’t in his character’, she told the court.

Ms Poulton said Richards was stabbed at the age of 15 which had a ‘profound effect’ on his attitude to life.

She said Richards did not fit the negative stereotype of young black men in London.

Doubtless he was turning his life around.

It's a fine example of the sort of circles she mixes in. Her last boyfriend's son was charged with murder - he eventually got off, but......

Her current boyfriend is an ex-jailbird that blew his lottery millions on guns and shiny toys, before he lost the lot in some dubious scheme in Kyrghistan.

She was mwah-mwahing at Butler until Butler was convicted of defrauding her own parents. She may still be for all anyone knows. Certainly, few of the haters condemned Butler for her sickening crime, and some even sunk so low as to support her.

Long story short - is there anything at all about Poulton that would leave a sane, intelligent person to believe she's a good judge of either situations or people?

I would've posted Brenda's actual posts as evidence of non-trolling and set it out as a set of questions for him to answer

It seems Ms.Screech was put on this earth to ask questions...........never answer them. Odd that.

But... if she has even a part functioning "investigative" brain....where is the evidence of this?

This is a woman who....on the say so of known trolls, who we all know, twist the PJ Case Files....who alter and edit videos to suit......who deliberately feed rumours against the McCanns and pass them round as fact knowing full well they aren't....It's hard to believe that Poulton has had more than a cursory glance at the Files and definitely she cannot have read the Portuguese Attorney Generals Final Report or the FSS Final Analysis....or she wouldn't be talking such sh#te that she does.

Maybe the person who suggested that Screech might be playing a double bluff against the trolls...might just be correct. It maybe explains why she hasn't actually involved herself in finding out the facts about the case..... only getting herself involved and seemingly taking the word of longterm trolls.

We all hope Madeleine will be found and in the meantime we try to support her parents (who you might have forgotten have been investigated by the police and against whom no evidence of any crime at all has been found) in their endeavours.

Cristobell Author retweeted
Ian Spence @IanSpence6 · 3 hrs 3 hours ago
@JimGamble_INEQE of course not. I'm saying that no one from SY that I know of has made the statement that the McCanns are in no way suspects

Weiss ‏@w_nicht 2h2 hours ago
@missypuddleduck @SoniaPoulton I'm not supporter of door stepping...at all. Call/email and asking for a interview is the right way, imo.

Sonia Poulton @SoniaPoulton
@w_nicht @missypuddleduck done many times. Have paper trail to prove it.

I have just realised - Poulton's tried to smear Jim Gamble in exactly the same way she did David Icke, and others. It's all innuendos and blackmail about 'what people will think', and never a scrap of evidence, never mind proof, of anything.

It may be time for Operation Grange to step in and have a word with her, as she is actively meddling in an ongoing Yard investigation.

And a libel trial and a coroner's inquest.

This is Hutton:

Sonia Poulton on the other hand has a big audience, and quite rightly.  She is attractive, intelligent, erudite***** and has her finger on the pulse of current and popular culture - and she presents the news and information in a format that is instantly accessible to EVERY viewer.  And that is what gives her the edge.  She is able to read and digest the news then pick out the key points so the viewer and reader doesn't have to.  We are grateful for this.  

Post  aquila Today at 1:50 pm
I see Sonia Poulton didn't 'doorstep' Jim Gamble after inviting him for interview and yet there's a bit of a mini spectacular spat on Twitter between the two of them.

It's all...silly...that's the only word I can find to describe it - oh and pointless would be a second choice.

What I see at the moment is a pile of tweets, a lot of forum comment with the focus on Sonia Poulton and Jim Gamble. Cristobell is doing a very nice line in slagging off Tony Bennett with yet another of her rants and invoking 'sisters are doing it for themselves. It's bonkers.

What I see at the moment is the empty promise of a broadcast that may or may not be aired. The pre-amble, the announcement, the 'I'm going to make a bloody difference and get to the bottom of all of this'.

It's pathetic really. Investigative journalists don't let the public know about their investigation do they? Surely they don't if they're passionate and professional about getting to the truth. Do you announce that you might have something to say but you'll wait until after the inquest of the deceased person (whose cause you are passionate about) who was doorstepped by Sky which is likely to have lead to her death and then doorstep the McCanns and announce it? No, you don't. It's bonkers. It's more than bonkers, it's destructive.

Investigative journalism...mmmm....send the McCanns a few emails/letters requesting an interview, tell everyone you've been doing it for a year with either no reply (most likely) or a polite decline, turn up at their house and knock their door. Nothing meaningful to report.

Send Jim Gamble a load of tweets, invite him for interview, receive a 'dear John' decline, go doorstep the McCanns and continue to gob off on Twitter to Jim Gamble (and Lord knows I can't stand Jim Gamble as I've made clear on this forum), send him a long open letter which is mostly about yourself being attacked by his response to just about anything you've said.

I really am fed up to the back teeth with attention seeking women.

In the meantime, there is a Lisbon trial verdict to be given and the Brenda Leyland inquest. I sincerely hope Sonia Poulton doesn't turn up at the inquest with a camera crew to ask people outside the court about their opinion. I'm not sure that's beneath her.

Sorry, I know I'll get battered for this post but I needed to get it off my chest.

It is not OK to doorstep anyone.

DR Laverty BA Hons ‏@drlavertyx 2h2 hours ago
Up to date Poulton News

https://davidbretisagod.forumotion.co.uk/t1093p30-sonia-poulton-exposed-part-3 …

Paul Rogers ‏@paulrogers002 2h2 hours ago
@drlavertyx Impressive find. I note she's prejudging the #McCann issue too, as everything else..

DR Laverty BA Hons ‏@drlavertyx 2h2 hours ago
@paulrogers002 Very thin ice at the moment. Her detractors are far more in number than I ever imagined. I will pursue her for an apology

Paul Rogers ‏@paulrogers002 2h2 hours ago
@drlavertyx She was very foolish to blunder into #McCann hornets nest and expect not to get stung! A measure of her arrogance/desperation.

Sykes wrote:Poulton might like to take note of where her fellow conspiraloon Chris Spivey is due to be today.

In the dock, facing charges of harrassing the grieving family of the late Drummer Lee Rigby, murdered so horribly by scum last year.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2711721/Blogger-arrested-2am-raid-home-claiming-Lee-Rigbys-murder-anti-Islam-HOAX.html

This is Spivey.

Sonia Poulton @SoniaPoulton · 1m 1 minute ago
Occasionally I get blogs that say very nice things about me. xxxxxhttp://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk and others make me LOL xxxxxhttp://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk