Poulton admits she's been harrassing the McCann family

xxxxxxxhttp://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t10803p290-sonia-poulton-update

[snipped]

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

No-one sane, whatever their other views, will disagree with that closing remark.

Just a reminder for Poulton and the rest of the shrieking lynch mob:




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIH-AX2LlYA


Madeleine McCann - Parents and friends are not suspects

They're not the 'truthseekers' they like to pretend they are. They are just a scummy bunch of vigilantes, trampling on the human and civil rights of other people.

Madeleine McCann - Parents and friends are not suspects

They're not the 'truthseekers' they like to pretend they are. They are just a scummy bunch of vigilantes, trampling on the human and civil rights of other people.

You have that in one, Bonny.

I came across this elsewhere:

TRUE!

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

She really is desperate for adoration if she thinks what a couple of ageing, alkie stoners think of anything is valuable. And anyway, she's bessie mates with Mutton; she tells Mutton what news stories really mean, apparently, because Mutton doesn't understand difficult stuff.

http://davidbretisagod.forumotion.co.uk/t1110-sykes-take-on-when-trolls-fall-out-and-wannabes-trying-to-be-someone

Oh my word! He/she always seems to get it right.

From injustice:

Quote from: Alfred R Jones on Today at 06:20:40 PM
You cannot be serious. BL courted Martin Brunt. She tweeted at him regularly. She wanted his attention. Therefore it is she who should not have been surprised when he did turn his attention to her. The McCanns, by not responding to Pointy Poulton made it very clear they did NOT want to talk to her but she went ahead anyway, turned up on their doorstep and tried to force Kate into an interview situation. You seriously think Kate should have been expecting that?! What about all the other people Poulton has doorstepped for this interview. You think Dr Gaspar should have been expecting it too? Sonia may not have access to Sky rolling news but she will certainly be intending to get as wide a circulation for her video as possible so don't try and excuse her on that score either.

But none of this is in anyway relevant to the fact that Poulton decried the tactic of doorstepping Brenda and positively championed it when applied to the McCanns. This is blatant hypocrisy and double-standards of the highest order.

BTW, call me a fool al you like if it makes you feel better about yourself, I'd rather be called that than a hypocrite any day.



Quite. Leyland wasn't just twittering at Martin Brunt, she was emailing him, too. And David Cameron, the Yard, the Media, Clarence Mitchell, Uncle Tom Cobley and all. She was desperate for attention, and furious when she was ignored.

The McCanns made it crystal clear they DIDN'T want to speak to Poulton - who in their right mind would? She was too unprofessional to take NO for an answer; she was convinced she was entitled to harrass them in their own home.

Who the Hell does she think she is - the Gestapo? No-one owes the likes of her anything.

DR Laverty BA Hons @drlavertyx · 1h 1 hour ago
@roddersbuck @paulrogers002 @1matthewwright1 Poulton's behind a troll blog that calls me a rapist. No supporting evidence, just heresay

Poulton doesn't 'do' evidence, she manipulates the mwah-mwahs on blind faith. In the end, she never produced a scrap of evidence against Icke, either.

In reality, she is a no-talent, vile person. No one owes her anything and it is time for her to go away.

Annienonymous2 ‏@annienonymouss
I do love reminding people that conspiracy to pervert the course of justice is punishable by a maximum sentence of life imprisonment #mccann

Best make sure Poulton knows that, then, as she's not only harrassing the McCanns - witnesses in an ongoing Yard investigation, in case she'd forgotten.

She's also boasting about hassling other people:

Challenge Gov't ‏@ChallengeGovt 15h15 hours ago
@CarlaSpade @zodiaczephyr I think so, is that correct, Sonia; that you approached Dr Gaspar? @SoniaPoulton #sweepyface


Sonia Poulton
‏@SoniaPoulton
@ChallengeGovt @CarlaSpade @zodiaczephyr yes, it was brief but I spoke with her. Can say no more. All in doc.

So unprofessional!

According to Poulton's good chum Mutton:


Sonia Poulton is a respected, not a so called, journalist who has been commissioned to make a documentary

COMMISSIONED? By whom? Who is actually paying her bills, then? I don't recall her having been hired to do this coming up before; haven't we been led to believe she's doing this off her own bat in the dubious interests of 'truth seeking'?

Her name is mud in the 'alternative media' for various reasons, mostly involving her back-stabbing people. Which leaves the MSM.

Looks like those that suspect Poulton is sailing under a false flag may well be right and this is actually going to be another VILE TROLL story.

Any sign of an explanation for this:

Cristobell wrote:
Sonia Poulton is a respected, not a so called, journalist who has been commissioned to make a documentary that a lot of people do not want to see aired.

Who - or what organisation - is footing the bill? We were led to believe that Poulton did this off her own bat, waving the rusty sword of Truthseeking, but it would appear that money is involved?

So, bizarrely, Poulton claims that David Icke is 'smearing' her - despite the fact that anyone that can read English can see it's the other way round. But she won't do anything about it because:

Sonia Poulton
‏@SoniaPoulton
@AbduMuhd @davidicke libel action is costly.

Not if you're telling the truth, sweetcheeks. Onlookers would be forgiven for suspect she isn't.

Now, who is really behind her COMMISSIONED mockumentary?

Now the way it typically works in TV land is that the actual station e.g., Sky would buy the rights to a program after being interested in the pitch made by say, Poulton.

Then, if they really had done this, they would ask for a script and would agree to x amount to fund the production. All the legalities would be worked out by their legal dept/lawyers and contacts signed etc. Producers etc would be appointed amongst other matters. Then production would go ahead.

This is the simplified version, as it is a little more complex than that in reality.

Oh, I do not have a clue if Poulton has been commissioned or not. Hypothetically speaking, if it turned out to be true, I do not know if it would be Sky, BBC, ITV or anyone else.

Oh......IMO

What, Sky TV like the one Martin Brunt works for? The Sky that she was on a few days ago, doing some sofa stuff? The same Sky?

Oh my! YES, Bonny.

Cristobell30 January 2015 at 06:31
05.30 - Are Tony Bennett's attacks on Sonia Poulton and myself for trying to get the truth out to the public really necessary? Smacks of jealousy and a maniacal need to protect the McCanns to me.

So, who said, a few days ago:

I hasten to add, I have no idea what Bennett are accusing Sonia of, I stopped reading his nonsense a long time ago



People could be forgiven for thinking she's obsessed with Bennett, and hangs on his every word. I do hope she isn't jealous because she didn't make it onto the famed 'Six mistresses' shortlist?

She really does appear to have 'remembering' issues.

OMG! His mistresses list? Maybe she got kicked out, even?

Poulton is always accusing people of not being transparent.

So why the lack of transparency from her? Why did she lead people to believe she was financing her mockumentary herself, only to have her devoted fan Hutton put her size nines in it yet again and reveal that Poulton has, in fact, been COMMISSIONED to do this?

How much money does Poulton expect to make from hassling people? Is she on a retainer? Who is footing the bills? If she won't come clean about this, she cannot blame people for not trusting her; she really isn't being very transparent, is she?

People need to know - WHO COMMISSIONED POULTON?

Commissioned makes it sound so formal and important, doesn't it?

She should give everyone a clue......

Not very transparent to be taking money to further her fading career at the expense of a missing child and her family, is it? Many would say it's downright tacky and exploitative.

And not in the least bit transparent. She owes it to all those fools that are hanging on her every word to tell them who is footing the bill, IMO.

It is a far cry from transparent, Bonny.

I do so hope that it is not something completely independent on a lower than shoe-string budget with that spot squishing cameraman?

That would be tres embarrassing to say the least.