Sonia Poulton's documentary

Mimi wrote:About the door stepping - there is another way of looking at it - giving the McCanns a taste of their own medicine and showing them just what it`s like to be door stepped by the press.

Yes Mimi exactly the way I see it.

I think it's Kate and it's an impromptu knock on the door. This is why the footage is blurry, like you often get even with the BBC and ITV when they're following live action with one camera. It's the blurryness which proves this situation is an authentic unexpected event from Kate's point of view, if it had been set-up by prior agreement or the whole thing an acted scene the coverage would be clearer and with static cameras set up strategically.

Is this doorstepping a mistake or a masterstroke?

Yes, there is a case for saying it is wrong to doorstep anyone in any circumstances and this makes Sonia a hypocrite as she is citing Brenda's tragedy as the prompt that brought the film into production.

But on the other hand, there is the case put by the McCann supporters claiming that Brenda's doorstepping and the outrageous repeated broadcasting of it was justified. They cannot now turn around and say this knock on Kate's door is an outrage. There is also the case that Sonia is approaching Kate with a genuine question as to why she refused to answer the 48. The McCanns are already celebrities by their own hand and with unanswered questions surrounding them.

Brenda wasn't. She had never sought fame nor had ever contacted the McCanns. She was a private member of the public.

In doorstepping Kate is Sonia cleverly forcing the viewer into comparing the parallels? If this doorstepping of Kate McCann is risble, what does that makes Sky's treatment of Brenda Leyland?  Is this, in fact, the very reason Sonia did this and is this the pivot around which she will pitch her programme in order to condemn those who hounded Brenda to death?

Sonia has always said her documentary is to bring focus to what happened to Brenda. By doorstepping Kate the frame is drawn.

Just my thoughts. But got to say my interest was whetted by the trailer. Am I the only one?

As much as it was a tragedy the case is not about Brenda or her treatment it's about Madeleine.

Hongkong Phooey wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

Hongkong Phooey wrote:Is it the same house?
https://youtu.be/Myv7P81h2Bs

On reviewing again it does look like it is (would be stupid of Sonia to get the wrong house and blow the credibility apart)

I didn't really mean that she got the wrong house, it could have been a similar house used with a "friend" / "neighbour" answering the door who looked similar to KM.  What if KM didn't want to speak to SP and slammed the door in her face or one of the children or GM answered the door.

Just saying.......

I knew that it was the walk up the lane that threw me, there's clearly no lane in the YouTube video with Mitchell in it

Sorry can't do photos on tablet, but if you check back to the photos alleged to be Madeleine on her pink bicycle, you see the lane when she is pedalling along beside Gerry on his bike. I think it is the same one.

@ Dee coy - "If this doorstepping of Kate McCann is risble, what does that makes Sky's treatment of Brenda Leyland? "

Exactly.

chirpyinsect wrote: Sorry can't do photos on tablet, but if you check back to the photos alleged to be Madeleine on her pink bicycle, you see the lane when she is pedalling along beside Gerry on his bike. I think it is the same one.

Thanks Chirpy.

I won't judge the documentary because frankly there still isn't anything of substance to do so.

My answers to some questions raised here:

Is it Kate? I think it is.
Is it the right house? Having personally been on that road myself, absolutely.
Is it really possible to just walk up The Crescent and knock on the door? Yes. I did so weeks after the M's returned home when work took me to their direct neighbours. No heavies or protection in sight.

The only thing I want to know is if this documentary will make it onto a big TV channel. If it doesn't then I can't see it making any/much impact outside of the two big forums and Twitter.

Hongkong Phooey wrote:As much as it was a tragedy the case is not about Brenda or her treatment it's about Madeleine.

You're absolutely right, of course.

My interpretation - from what she has said - for Sonia making this film is to bring attention to the case via Branda's tragedy. I also think that the motives of the whole support network surrounding the McCanns is the reason this case remains unsolved. The actions of those supporting the McCanns from the media, to the establishment to the shills on Twitter have, sadly, become part of the case - they are an extension from it and form the current protection of the McCanns, in my opinion.

So it is very important to investigate these motives. Do that successfully and perhaps the solving of this case can move on?

The public are sick of the McCanns and most are immune to the nuances of the case. Sadly, I think the majority remain lulled into the belief that the McCanns are innocent. By bringing attention back by focussing on the terrible outrage of what happened to Brenda may give a new focus for those people.

And, as Sonia wrote in her press release, she cannot tread completely where she wants to because of the continuing investigations. She has to respect and not jeopardise those. But bring focus to the case and it's facts via Branda is something she can do.

Just my thoughts, and maybe I'mcompletely wrong in how this documetary will pan out. Still waiting to see, like everyone else.

Oh, for goodness sake, some of us have been trying to get the truth about Madeleine McCann's disappearance into the public domain for the past 8 years and now we have something tangible out there, some are going out of their way to find nonsensical things to whinge about!

Err, the message for those who missed is: Sonia is confronting this cover up of Madeleine's disappearance head on - not pussfyfooting behind closed doors or playing Cluedo in a forum for 8 years. She is asking the questions that matter, the ones we have all been discussing for 8 years, directly to the people who can answer them!

I watch a lot of real life documentaries, its a passion/obsession. The ones that hit home are the ones that stick with the story and the ones that use the drama of the story to keep the audience's attention. Sonia is spot on, she has gone for the key words and the key phrases, the ones that attracted the big audiences at the very beginning. For those who tend to forget why we are all here, we are fighting a huge injustice, an injustice that saw the tragic death of a child being cynically used, not only by her parents but by those we trust to protect us, to enrich and empower themselves. Worse still, our own mainstream media appeared to be 'in on it' - no one was speaking out for Madeleine! And those of us who did, suffered the consequences.

As to a comparison between Sonia doorstepping Kate McCann and Sky News doorstepping Brenda Leyland. Brenda was a lady who preferred to live a quiet, unassuming life, away from the limelight. She was the epitome of a private person. She used the name 'Sweepyface' online, because she knew if it was public knowledge that she did not believe the Kate and Gerry McCann, she would be universally despised and caste out of society, as indeed happened.

Kate on the other hand, has courted the media from the day her daughter disappeared. She and her husband shamelessly use the media to get everything they want. They paid £500k to keep their story on the front pages! All their press conferences and media appearance have been carefully stage managed and within their control and for 8 years they have been able to dodge direct questions that demand direct answers. In addition, Brenda had not lost a child in mysterious circumstances! Isn't about time someone asked Kate and Gerry to tell the truth about their daughter's disappearance? As to those comparing the two, there is no comparison.

TheTruthWillOut wrote:I won't judge the documentary because frankly there still isn't anything of substance to do so.

My answers to some questions raised here:

Is it Kate? I think it is.
Is it the right house? Having personally been on that road myself, absolutely.
Is it really possible to just walk up The Crescent and knock on the door? Yes. I did so weeks after the M's returned home when work took me to their direct neighbours. No heavies or protection in sight.

The only thing I want to know is if this documentary will make it onto a big TV channel. If it doesn't then I can't see it making any/much impact outside of the two big forums and Twitter.

TTWO, you say you "think" it's Kate but not 100% sure

Do you know where the lane is that SP is walking down, is it anywhere near the house?

You say you could walk up to the neighbour's house, but we're not talking about the neighbours, we're talking about the McCanns.  There would be be no need for protection or heavies (that's going too far, they would be too mean to pay for a 24 hour heavy anyway I would imagine), but a camera indoors looking out on to the garden or a spy hole in the front door.  How did SP know that Kate McCann would be at home at that precise time.  Perhaps she will tell us in due course.

Oh dear, I'm beginning to sound like "you know who", but I'm only asking obvious questions.  I will now wait until I see the full documentary.

ETA: Cristobell, I've just read your post.  Don't get angry, I'm only asking obvious questions.  We've all been let down too many times in the past, you had something to do with that, don't forget, so some of us are very sceptical.

If there is a full PJ/SY investigation going on to the tune of £12million, if KM didn't answer 48 questions that the Police put to her I doubt she's going to tell SP anything different.  I am allowed to have an opinion, it's a forum.  Don't shoot me down because I and others are a bit sceptical.

We can all dilly dally along the lane to our hearts' content via Google maps without bothering anyone!

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.7180226,-1.139084,3a,75y,180.25h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZB0TGMrbMvU_RdEToZfFjg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

The McCanns didn't doorstep Brenda Leyland, Martin Brunt did. As I don't believe in eye for an eye type scenarios, I still say it was wrong to doorstep Kate when there was every chance her children were in the house.

And I agree with others, tragic as it is, this case is not about Brenda, it's about Madeleine, and plenty of people have asked Kate about the 48 questions, she has never given a direct answer, except via family members who have said that she had already answered the questions in previous police interviews and that her lawyer advised her not to answer them again. So I don't really expect her to change her position now

Freedom wrote:We can all dilly dally along the lane to our hearts' content via Google maps without bothering anyone!

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.7180226,-1.139084,3a,75y,180.25h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZB0TGMrbMvU_RdEToZfFjg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Thanks for that although I wasn't talking about a lane that cars can drive down. I was referring to a very narrow lane, like a back pathway at the side of the houses which SP walked down to approach the house. I can't see that on the Google map unless I've missed it.

Don't worry about it, I will wait to see the full documentary.

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

TheTruthWillOut wrote:I won't judge the documentary because frankly there still isn't anything of substance to do so.

My answers to some questions raised here:

Is it Kate? I think it is.
Is it the right house? Having personally been on that road myself, absolutely.
Is it really possible to just walk up The Crescent and knock on the door? Yes. I did so weeks after the M's returned home when work took me to their direct neighbours. No heavies or protection in sight.

The only thing I want to know is if this documentary will make it onto a big TV channel. If it doesn't then I can't see it making any/much impact outside of the two big forums and Twitter.

TTWO, you say you "think" it's Kate but not 100% sure

Do you know where the lane is that SP is walking down, is it anywhere near the house?

You say you could walk up to the neighbour's house, but we're not talking about the neighbours, we're talking about the McCanns.  There would be be no need for protection or heavies (that's going too far, they would be too mean to pay for a 24 hour heavy anyway I would imagine), but a camera indoors looking out on to the garden or a spy hole in the front door.  How did SP know that Kate McCann would be at home at that precise time.  Perhaps she will tell us in due course.

Oh dear, I'm beginning to sound like "you know who", but I'm only asking obvious questions.  I will now wait until I see the full documentary.

From the fleeting glimpse in the video I think it is Kate, yes. I wan't there so not 100%.

I do know the lane and have been down it. The entrance is basically like a long private tarmac driveway with houses off it. The McCanns house is right at the end.

I have no idea if the McCanns have a camera and every door has a peep hole but after eight years and seemingly no scary incidents I don't think Kate answering the door is so surprising.

If Sonia knocking on the door was genuinely unannounced as depicted it shows just how comfortable Kate is answering the door without a care in the world, if nothing else.

ETA: Just seen your latest post. The lane you see Sonia on is the road. It is narrow and and just like a long driveway.

TheTruthWillOut wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

TheTruthWillOut wrote:I won't judge the documentary because frankly there still isn't anything of substance to do so.

My answers to some questions raised here:

Is it Kate? I think it is.
Is it the right house? Having personally been on that road myself, absolutely.
Is it really possible to just walk up The Crescent and knock on the door? Yes. I did so weeks after the M's returned home when work took me to their direct neighbours. No heavies or protection in sight.

The only thing I want to know is if this documentary will make it onto a big TV channel. If it doesn't then I can't see it making any/much impact outside of the two big forums and Twitter.

TTWO, you say you "think" it's Kate but not 100% sure

Do you know where the lane is that SP is walking down, is it anywhere near the house?

You say you could walk up to the neighbour's house, but we're not talking about the neighbours, we're talking about the McCanns.  There would be be no need for protection or heavies (that's going too far, they would be too mean to pay for a 24 hour heavy anyway I would imagine), but a camera indoors looking out on to the garden or a spy hole in the front door.  How did SP know that Kate McCann would be at home at that precise time.  Perhaps she will tell us in due course.

Oh dear, I'm beginning to sound like "you know who", but I'm only asking obvious questions.  I will now wait until I see the full documentary.

From the fleeting glimpse in the video I think it is Kate, yes. I wan't there so not 100%.

I do know the lane and have been down it. The entrance is basically like a long private tarmac driveway with houses off it. The McCanns house is right at the end.

I have no idea if the McCanns have a camera and every door has a peep hole but after eight years and seemingly no scary incidents I don't think Kate answering the door is so surprising.

If Sonia knocking on the door was genuinely unannounced as depicted it shows just how comfortable Kate is answering the door without a care in the world, if nothing else.

ETA: Just seen your latest post. The lane you see Sonia on is the road. It is narrow and and just like a long driveway.

Thanks for that information, I won't pursue it any further as it really doesn't matter in the scheme of things.

However, regarding their security, I read a long time ago, I'm not sure if it was Mitchell who said it, that the McCanns had to have a high tech, expensive security system put in place in their house because of all the "nutters" (or words to that effect).  Whether it was true or not is another matter, but if I was in their shoes and p*ssing people off for the past 8 years I would definitely have had a security system installed.

ETA: If it's not true, why does Mitchell lie all the time for the McCanns, only to garner sympathy for them I suspect.  I wonder if he sleeps well at night knowing how much he's earned from "missing Madeleine".

@ Cristobell, what nonsense, as far as I'm concerned Brenda has been latched onto and if you want to make a case then it's separate from this one. From the trailer what we have seen (so far) is a replication of Martin Brunt confronting an unaware innocent person (unfortunately no charges have been made) on their own doorstep. Does Sonia have the right to do this or does this make her as bad as Martin Brunt who you vilified.

Don't Forget Madeliene wrote:However, regarding their security, I read a long time ago, I'm not sure if it was Mitchell who said it, that the McCanns had to have a high tech, expensive security system put in place in their house because of all the "nutters" (or words to that effect). Whether it was true or not is another matter, but if I was in their shoes and p*ssing people off for the past 8 years I would definitely have a security system installed.

That did come to mind but I think that was typical spin from him. Wasn't it reported that the M's were worried about having their phones and internet 'tapped' by police?

CM then spun it it as being worried about 'nutters'?

I haven't seen the headlines of all tabloids shouting the doorstepped person is a vile troll. So, puhlease. Get off your high horse if you claim that this is the same as what allegedly happened to Brenda Leyland.

Burst wrote:I haven't seen the headlines of all tabloids shouting the doorstepped person is a vile troll. So, puhlease. Get off your high horse if you claim that this is the same as what allegedly happened to Brenda Leyland.

Not a good example burst, there has been headlines in the past that Kate was to be charged with murder, bit worse than being called a vile troll is it not.
Disclaimer: I am NOT sticking up for the McCanns but you can't call foul then commit the same 'crime' yourself.

Very good example instead. There's been no headline Kate is to be charged with murder as a result from this video. This just not the same as what "they", whoever they are, did with their campaign against Brenda Leyland.

There was no headline that Brenda was to be charged, she had committed no crime (as later confirmed). Your entitled to your opinion, mines is that this trailer plays straight into the McCann supporters hands, let's see if it gets any news coverage.

Hongkong Phooey wrote:@ Cristobell, what nonsense, as far as I'm concerned Brenda has been latched onto and if you want to make a case then it's  separate from this one. From the trailer what we have seen (so far) is a replication of Martin Brunt confronting an unaware innocent person (unfortunately no charges have been made) on their own doorstep. Does Sonia have the right to do this or does this make her as bad as Martin Brunt who you vilified.

Brenda has been latched onto?  Are you for real?  The poor woman lost her life because she dared to comment on this case, and it could easily have been any one of us.  She herself said in one of her last tweets that she hoped people would ask questions if she died in mysterious circumstances!  Why condemn those who are now asking the questions?

As for Martin Brunt, I have never vilified him.  As if!  I don't vilify people, it is not my style, I know the power of words.  I actually feel very sorry for Martin Brunt, I don't know why he did what he did, though I have my suspicions.  He was genuinely devastated by Brenda's death, how long was it before he returned to work?  I cannot and will not condemn people unless I fully understand their motives, and in Martin's case, I shudder at the 'evil' that is going on behind the scenes, I pity him.

Hongkong Phooey wrote:
There was no headline that Brenda was to be charged, she had committed no crime (as later confirmed). Your entitled to your opinion, mines is that this trailer plays straight into the McCann supporters hands, let's see if it gets any news coverage.

Being charged is your example. Not mine.

Cristobell wrote:

Hongkong Phooey wrote:@ Cristobell, what nonsense, as far as I'm concerned Brenda has been latched onto and if you want to make a case then it's  separate from this one. From the trailer what we have seen (so far) is a replication of Martin Brunt confronting an unaware innocent person (unfortunately no charges have been made) on their own doorstep. Does Sonia have the right to do this or does this make her as bad as Martin Brunt who you vilified.

Brenda has been latched onto?  Are you for real?  The poor woman lost her life because she dared to comment on this case, and it could easily have been any one of us.  She herself said in one of her last tweets that she hoped people would ask questions if she died in mysterious circumstances!  Why condemn those who are now asking the questions?

As for Martin Brunt, I have never vilified him.  As if!  I don't vilify people, it is not my style, I know the power of words.  I actually feel very sorry for Martin Brunt, I don't know why he did what he did, though I have my suspicions.  He was genuinely devastated by Brenda's death, how long was it before he returned to work?  I cannot and will not condemn people unless I fully understand their motives, and in Martin's case, I shudder at the 'evil' that is going on behind the scenes, I pity him.

I don't think many people will agree with that statement.  Martin Brunt was an adult, he knew what he was doing and what the repercussions were going to be, he didn't have to do it, he could have said "no I'm not doing that and I will resign if I have to", but he didn't.  

It all backfired on him, but he still has his job, Brenda doesn't have her life.

I don't know how you can feel sorry for Martin Brunt, I wonder if Brenda's family do.

As for how long he returned to work, we don't know if that was because Sky wanted to keep him out of the firing line and told him to lay low or because he was genuinely devastated.  I would guess the former seeing that his interview was shown on Sky all day long every 15 minutes.  It wasn't if she was a serial killer or an ISIS bomber or beheader, even they don't get that much coverage.