SONIA POULTON EXPOSED PART 5

Re: Sonia Poulton on Murdoch's SKY News AGAIN - today (4 April 2015)
Post snook Today at 5:24 pm

Firstly, thank you Verdi ! I see the resident professional victim is at it again. I have never seen so many contradictory statements. What is all this rot about FOI? Has she missed the last 8yrs when people who know a darn sight more about the case than her have drawn a blank with requests for info ? Poulton is obviously very important if she managed two 'outstanding' FOI's. Sorry if I go on about this woman but I hate to see a nobody like her raising hopes of a break in the case. As for getting the 'legals' checked, I thought Poulton couldn't afford lawyers? I think seeing her bragging about her woes on FB is enough to confirm to anyone what a thoroughly nasty piece of work she is. There are going to be an awful lot of disappointed tweeters on #Mccann. To them I say, really? Didn't all the contradictory snippets and teasers give the game away? No wonder she teamed up with Hutton. They would spoil a good pair.

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton 3h3 hours ago
Me on #skynews talking #trolls #free speech #GCHQ #shills #targetactivists https://youtu.be/N1k5dX336Go

victoriaisangry ‏@snook1111pie 1m1 minute ago
@SoniaPoulton Brenda was trolled by Sky News, yes? So why is Poulton seen more & more frequently being paid by them for me, me, me? #mccann

Lance Boyle ‏@BoyleLance 42m42 minutes ago
@SoniaPoulton no mention of Brenda Leyland in your @SkyNews championing #freespeech then Sonia? #activistmyarse!!!

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton 39m39 minutes ago
@BoyleLance @SkyNews TROLL. And a fat, hairy STM one at that. Frightened aren't you? You know what we have. #big reveal

Cristobell Author ‏@RosalindaHu 36m36 minutes ago
Cristobell Author retweeted Sonia Poulton
They don't want to imprison trolls, they want to imprison subversives, they just need an excuse to do it. #mccann

It has to be asked - was she on something when she made her latest Sky News appearance today? Her eyes are out on stalks, she's waving her hands around constantly, and she's talking even more sh*te than usual......

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton 3m3 minutes ago
In answer to 1 of your questions @RosalindaHu it's not unusual for white, middle-class Establishment men (sworn to the crown) to target me.

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton 1m1 minute ago
@RosalindaHu Although Heaven knows why they do! *innocent face*

Worth remembering that, when Poulton is making these bizarre claims, that many of those she has trampled underfoot as she claws her way up the 'alternative media' ladder refer to her as 'controlled opposition'.

She makes a lot of noise, but that's all it ever is. She achieves naff all and causes trouble and bad feeling wherever she goes. And don't watch what she says, watch what she does. Like taking the Murdoch shilling repeatedly.

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton 11m11 minutes ago
@RosalindaHu btw Ros, I keep asking this and no luck so far: Where would I be able to see Mr. Bennett's details about monthly stipend?

Pamela Gurney Before the McCann case had we ever heard the name Sonia Poulton? I think not. She jumped on a bandwagon firstly via Icke TV interviewing Linda Hutton and when that fell through in a very nasty way she has had to find some other way of getting her name known so has pursued her own methods of trying to produce some documentary.
18 mins · Like

Cass Sidebotham She's crowing about you being identified and involved in whatever it is she thinks she has discovered. Surely someone can't just claim shit that's not true on a documentary!?
14 mins · Edited · Like

Pamela Gurney Well who knows. She is potty enough to.

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton 5h5 hours ago
@MrsWaspie @zampos Tony Bennett stop twisting the truth to meet your warped psychology. People are concerned for your health.

10 JUNE 2015 - SONIA POULTON ANNOUNCES THAT SHE HAS COMPLETELY LOST CONTROL OF HER PROJECT
Post Tony Bennett Today at 1:30 pm

A Crazy Stalker ‏@ officialTonyUK 2h 2 hours ago

@SoniaPoulton Any time-frame on the trailer Sonia? Good luck getting someone with the cajones to show the whole thing.

Sonia Poulton ‏@ SoniaPoulton 2h 2 hours ago

@ officialTonyUK within weeks, sorry I can't be more precise but it's out of my hands. Yes, we need that, thank you.

Does 'out of my hands' have some other meaning in Right-on, Keeping it Real world? And remember, that's just the trailer that is being discussed...

cajones????Maybe that's the hold-up? She needs an Afro- Peruvian musical instrument on the soundtrack?



Modified cajón; traditional cajones have the hole at the back, opposite the tapa

Oh, is her chum thinking of the macho Hispanic term, cojones? Spelling is soooo important when Keeping It Real.

LOSING THE PLOT
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.

IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION: WHEN CAN I SEE YOUR MADELEINE #MCCANN DOCUMENTARY?

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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 (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.
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.
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.

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.
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.
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.
Yes, yes, we got that. In spades.

Anyone who knows me will know this and in this film I make that point very clearly.
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).
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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

================

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.

Marta Newman ‏@MartaNewman 49m49 minutes ago
@SoniaPoulton Hello. Marta here from BBC Radio 5 Live Breakfast. Looking to speak to you? marta.newman@bbc.co.uk

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton 34m34 minutes ago
@MartaNewman just sent you a contact number, Marta

SONIA POULTON RESPONDS TO SIX QUESTIONS
Tony Bennett Today at 7:31 am
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 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.

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 film I make 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 ‏@SoniaPoulton 5h5 hours ago
@waynesmith1971 Plus, so many people are invested in maintaining status quo. I'm equally invested in being part of its destruction!

Re: Sonia Poulton Update
Post Joss Today at 3:04 am

Can You Be Tracked Down Just by Your IP Address?

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton 2h2 hours ago
@LeggeAngie I understand that there will be time wasters but I have recently filed several, all in public interest, and they were blocked.

This really is one of Poulton's better screw-ups:

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton ·
@siamesey @QUEENdePORTUGAL @Princessmc2014 I believe very much we are witnessing history. Detection in real time. Big up Isa!  

'Detection in real time'? I think not.....

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id58.html

18 May 2007

Trademark application filed

The campaign to find Madeleine McCann has applied for British and European trademarks to protect its fundraising, internet and print promotions. The applications, which were filed on May 18, seek to protect the name "Madeleine’s Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned". The European application also seeks protection for the provision of social services and advice for people affected by missing children.

Source: The Times 14 August 2007 (link)

Everyone except Sonia knowing about it EIGHT YEARS AGO isn't exactly 'detection in real time'.

You really would think that it would have sunk in with the armchair defectives by now - ANYTHING with McFadden/Kikitroll's pawprints on it is bogus, not least because of her fondness for inventing and photoshopping 'evidence'.

яє∂ 4 ℓιfє ‏@Red4Life6  17m17 minutes ago
@SoniaPoulton @LFCacManager @JamesMcC14 wow thought the poppy represented the combined forces of England Ireland Wales Scotland not royals

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton  15m15 minutes ago
@Red4Life6 @LFCacManager @JamesMcC14 actually, no. It represents much more including bloodshed. I'll wear a white poppy for peace.

яє∂ 4 ℓιfє ‏@Red4Life6  12m12 minutes ago
@SoniaPoulton @LFCacManager @JamesMcC14 your choice I'll wear a red one for my grandad and all others that fought for your right to speak

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton  10m10 minutes ago
@Red4Life6 @LFCacManager @JamesMcC14 you need history lesson for starters. I don't take life advice from people who conform without thought

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton 6h6 hours ago
@veniviedivici always digging. Got a special treat this week for the believers and non-believers alike!

Good to see she's so chummy with Laffinthug, the wannabee arsonist. As for the rest of it -

BFF Hutton:

She is not playing into anyone's hands. All the speculation, negativity and whining is coming from the 'are we there yet' brigade, they are tormenting themselves! A certain section of the anti McCann movement have done nothing but whinge for 8 years and when someone does take action, they complain! Just no pleasing some people.

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton 2h2 hours ago
@DaSteelManUK Xenophobic lie. Portugal is way down the list. Check US, New Zealand and Germany first. Portugal has suffered because of Brits

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton 11h11 hours ago
I DON'T know if #Corbyn failed abuse survivors. I DO know he's anti-austerity & his own party is behaving like right wing press towards him.

Cristobell Author ‏@RosalindaHu 22h22 hours ago
@StephenLees4 @ShellyAsquith @chunkymark Times have changed, cruel tory cuts will drive folk Left. #Jeremy4Leader

Mobyra:   No, the uninformed liar is her as Steel is correct in this case. Unicef statistics show Portugal has an appalling record where death from child abuse is concerned, on par with Mexico & the US.

Re: McCanns SILENCED Tony Bennett!!! (To PREVENT UK learning the TRUTH?)
Post aquila Today at 1:39 pm

Here is one of the latest tweets on Sonia Poulton's Twitter. This is Sonia Poulton, who is a 'social campaigner' and 'truth seeker'. The same Sonia Poulton who interviewed the loopy Stephen Birch, encouraged Rosalinde Hutton to do an interview on TPV and a disastrous Sun 'I'm a troll' expose.

Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton Aug 2
Beautiful day! I apologise if I've missed your message on here. I'm not around much at moment but will return ASAP.

Sonia is such a tease isn't she!

Two so called freedom fighting women (Hutton and Poulton) who are against just about everything whilst seemingly all for everything at the same time - revolutionaries! (as long as it suits their cyber mawking behaviour) are seemingly dedicated to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and seeking 'truth'. Add to that the girl power and inspirational quotes - Jeez, it's like stepping back into a very bad inspirational training course your company sent you on in the 1990's because they hadn't bothered to invest in your career and sent you on a pseudo-babble jolly to keep the troops happy. That 'fuzzy, loved-up feeling' abounds in Poulton and Hutton's tweets/blogs. 'Mwah', 'Hun' etc. I'm female and find it revolting.

What exactly has Sonia Poulton done to uncover what happened to Madeleine McCann? Some people have responded to Poulton's request for information. Oh dear, how silly those people are to imagine they are in the bosom (I'll be accused of sexism with the use of bosom) of a journalist who cares or even a journalist that can possibly make her employers screen something controversial - wake up and smell the coffee.

Tony Bennett is perfectly correct when he criticises Poulton and Hutton. Neither of them have stuck in an FOI, despite Hutton, on one of her hate blogs about Tony Bennett saying something along the lines of she'd be prepared to be locked up for her right to freedom of speech (usual bullshit) and how Tony Bennett is a fool. Poulton and Hutton are interested in trolls and themselves. They are not interested in Madeleine McCann. I place them on the same sofa as Katie Hopkins.

Just my opinion.

tigerloaf » Tue Sep 29, 2015 10:20 pm

Exactly half of the following statements are confirmed truth. The others are very strong rumours, but even all of these are based on proven facts. I leave you to work out which are which.

1 Sonia Poulton has failed to get anyone to publish her home movie.

2 Sonia Poulton has still not finished her home movie.

3 The reason Sonia Poulton has not managed to get anyone to publish her home movie is that the quality is atrocious.

4 The reason Sonia Poulton has not managed to get anyone to publish her home movie is that she has an agenda which makes the legal risks too great.

5 Sonia Poulton has directly been challenged as to the content of her home movie by lawyers.

6 Sonia Poulton has no intention of producing her complete home movie.

7 Sonia Poulton ignores the moronic posts of her loser boyfriend because she has no common sense.

8 Sonia Poulton ignores the moronic posts of her loser boyfriend because they suit her purpose.

9 Sonia Poulton has "mugged" (metaphorically) a whole series of people who have not yet realised what her game is.

10 Sonia Poulton believes she is in an impregnable cocoon and her actions are not visible or known.

11 Sonia Poulton is fixated on fame but lacks the ability to truly achieve it. Even Hopkins outshines her on every level.

12 Since Sonia Poulton sold her soul to the man in the turquoise tracksuit she has been a lauging stock.

13 Sonia Poulton is too ashamed to admit that she has no permission from the family of Brenda Leyland to mock the poor woman's name to promote her home movie clip.

14 Sonia Poulton has not asked any member of Brenda Leyland's family for permission to use their mother's / wife's name to publicise her own warped home movie.

15 Sonia Poulton is herself an online cyberstalker.

16 Sonia Poulton takes positive pride in befriending online one of the people who most clearly cyberstalked Brenda Leyland.

Rob1 » Wed Sep 30, 2015 11:00 am

Sonia Poulton's boyfriend tweeted last week that Jihadi John had Maddie. Someone also posted a gun picture which he allegedly posted to supporters of K+G. Not too professional?

Tony Bennett would be doing a public service for once if he addresses these issues and makes clear how unprofessional they are. I think a documentary could be made about Sonia Poulton's activities. For example, bullying the lady who attended the inquest. Also using Brenda's death anniversary to promote herself. Also supporting cyberbullies who manipulated Brenda to join in with hounding of an innocent person whilst also stabbing her in the back with a sock game.

If she really wanted to clear Brenda's name, then she would use the defence of her manipulation by these cyberbullies. Instead she calls them 'lovely lady' and is their friend.