Sonia Poulton's documentary

I'll leave the complete nonsense that you wrote about exoneration and statement signing unchallenged because I don't want to drag the thread off topic, suffice to say they are irrelevant to the point at hand, which is the acceptability or otherwise of airing documentaries about matters of great public interest when there is an ongoing police investigation into those matters but no-one has yet been arrested or charged.

What are you on about?  If it is about Tom Watson hounding Leon Brittain to be prosecuted on zero evidence, yet refusing to sign the letter demanding that Lord Janner be prosecuted then you are just wrong..and btw very rude with it.  

And I still totally stand by my concerns about a documentary possibly interfering with an investigation of the nature of the McCann case, that is totally different to the alleged sex abuse scandal among politicians

Yes I agree: no need at all to describe something with which you disagree as complete nonsense.

Let's all be polite, please.

AndyB wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:It has been stated that OPERATION GRANGE have a deadline

I took that to mean that Sonia Poulton has given them a deadline along the lines of "Either you provide me with a substantive response to what I've put to you by such and such a date or I'll just say that we put this to the Met but they refused to comment"

No, I agree with DFM, there is no way Sonia Poulton would be giving the Met deadlines...that's just ridiculous

BTW Thanks Freedom, there's no need for that, and it isn't nonsense anyway, it happens to be true, Tom Watson is only keen to pursue alleged conservative abusers, but the blinkers go on when it comes to Labour members

Once again there is am emphasis on interviews and Sonia supposedly asking the questions we all want answered. Whilst this is commendable in some sense it's not likely to get any results in reality. Can we really see Mitchell or Payne answering the critical questions put to them by an investigative journalist (could someone point out her previous investigations cause I must have missed them) they've never heard of. The blog is trying to keep the publicity going (many will say why not?)

Hongkong Phooey wrote:Once again there is am emphasis on interviews and Sonia supposedly asking the questions we all want answered. Whilst this is commendable in some sense it's not likely to get any results in reality. Can we really see Mitchell or Payne answering the critical questions put to them by an investigative journalist (could someone point out her previous investigations cause I must have missed them) they've never heard of. The blog is trying to keep the publicity going (many will say why not?)

Sonia Poulton by her own admission has only been following the disappearance of Madeleine for about 3 or 4 years, so how come she has now made herself an authority on Madeleine.  Has she been burning the midnight oil for the past 3 or 4 years catching up on all the blogs and looking into every crevice and dodgy statement made by the Tapas 9 that most of us who have been here for 8 years may have missed.

With regard to her previous investigations, there is nothing of significance to put her name to, although she was on the sofa with Philip Schofield and Holly Willoughby last week making a complete prat of herself.  She objected to Perez Hilton posting a selfie of himself and his son in the bath.  Philip Schofield called her "hysterical".  I rarely agree with PS on anything but did on this occasion, stupid, stupid, woman makes a bl**dy mountain out of a molehill.  FGS, it was an innocent, fun photo of a father with his son, SP had to get her name in the papers and TV making it out it was something vile -

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3262128/Has-bath-time-lost-innocence-Parents-head-head-backlash-Perez-Hilton-s-shower-selfie-toddler.html

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:It has been stated that OPERATION GRANGE have a deadline

I took that to mean that Sonia Poulton has given them a deadline along the lines of "Either you provide me with a substantive response to what I've put to you by such and such a date or I'll just say that we put this to the Met but they refused to comment"

No I took it that OG have a deadline re the £2million given to them.

I'm sure is SP approached anyone in authority with those demands regarding her doc, the answer would be "go boil your head" or something along those lines.

ETA: Don't forget we're talking about a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION into the disappearance of a 3 year old girl, not a street mugging or taking slates of a church roof.  Do you really think that a £12million plus investigation by SY could be thwarted by Sonia Poulton with her video cameraman.

Of course I don’t think a single journalist could thwart an investigation. Grange is going to continue until it achieves whatever it is that the Home Office wants it to achieve irrespective of Sonia. I do, though, think you’re being a little naive about journalists and their trade.

Imagine a journalist following up allegations that a (married) minister is having an affair and has asked for a comment but is being stonewalled. Surely you can imagine them saying something like this?: “Minister, we’ve been trying to get a comment from you regarding your relationship with Miss Bimbo McTop-Heavy but you haven’t responded to our requests for an interview. Unless you get back to us by the end of the week and provide us with an innocent explanation, we’ll publish the pictures of you leaving the hotel with Miss McTop-Heavy in your arms and invite our readers to form their own conclusions”

I’ve assumed that your deadline reference was to this from earlier in this thread

candyfloss wrote:There is an update on Cristobell's blog re the timing of the documentary and interfering with the investigation, posted today.

Interesting last paragraph......


We are all on tenterhooks at the moment, something appears to be happening - Operation Grange have a deadline.  Sonia has all the footage and all the interviews and is ready to go!



http://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk

If you read the article, it talks about the need to be fluid right up until the last minute yet she has all the interviews and is ready to go. If she’s ready to go, why not just do it unless she’s waiting for the final piece of the jigsaw?  I’m speculating that the final piece could be a response (or not) from Grange about something (I have no idea what) so that she can include the response in the documentary or, if they still refuse to respond, something along the lines of “we put these questions to grange but they refused to comment”. Perhaps waiting for this response is what’s dragging the process out?

That’s how I read it anyway. Of course you could be right and it’s the Home Office giving Grange the deadline but what relevance does that have to an article about Sonia’s documentary? Perhaps Cristobell can clarify what she meant about a deadline

Freedom wrote:Yes I agree: no need at all to describe something with which you disagree as complete nonsense.

Let's all be polite, please.  

To suggest that anyone has been exonerated from allegations of CSA when there are several on going police investigations is even more nonsense than suggesting that the McCann's have been exonerated of any responsibility for Madeleine's disappearance. Would you be as critical of members here for using the word nonsense about such a claim about the McCann's?

I'd also point out that politeness includes not making outrageous and untrue statements as distractions from the discussion at hand

I have rarely seen such a ridiculous interview as the one you refer to DFM. I was/still am reserving judgement on Sonia's documentary and I backed her all the way when she stood up for Brenda, however that was a cringeworthy performance and I am sorry to say, an embarassment.
She came over as a shrieking banshee, getting hysterical over nothing at all. An excuse to have a rant, I thought.
It is because of attitudes like that, that normal people are afraid to take photos of their own kids and schools no longer permit parents to film the Nativity play.
Yes we know people will use images for nefarious reasons but they can photoshop any image anyway.
Perez Hilton, who is imo a bit of an attention junkie, makes his living by being in the public eye, but why on earth should he not be allowed to post an innocent father and son moment if he so chooses?
Stick to more worthwhile causes Sonia please and don't cheapen your crusading for CSA victims by claiming tentative links to normal family activities.

AndyB wrote:

Freedom wrote:Yes I agree: no need at all to describe something with which you disagree as complete nonsense.

Let's all be polite, please.  

To suggest that anyone has been exonerated from allegations of CSA when there are several on going police investigations is even more nonsense than suggesting that the McCann's have been exonerated of any responsibility for Madeleine's disappearance. Would you be as critical of members here for using the word nonsense about such a claim about the McCann's?

I'd also point out that politeness includes not making outrageous and untrue statements as distractions from the discussion at hand

Leon Brittain has been totally and absolutely exonerated..janner has not! Read the facts, and just hope that no one decides to accuse you of having abused them 30 years ago, without any evidence, and that even after 2 exhaustive investigations clearing your name, people are still accusing you.

AndyB wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:It has been stated that OPERATION GRANGE have a deadline

I took that to mean that Sonia Poulton has given them a deadline along the lines of "Either you provide me with a substantive response to what I've put to you by such and such a date or I'll just say that we put this to the Met but they refused to comment"

No I took it that OG have a deadline re the £2million given to them.

I'm sure is SP approached anyone in authority with those demands regarding her doc, the answer would be "go boil your head" or something along those lines.

ETA: Don't forget we're talking about a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION into the disappearance of a 3 year old girl, not a street mugging or taking slates of a church roof.  Do you really think that a £12million plus investigation by SY could be thwarted by Sonia Poulton with her video cameraman.

Of course I don’t think a single journalist could thwart an investigation. Grange is going to continue until it achieves whatever it is that the Home Office wants it to achieve irrespective of Sonia. I do, though, think you’re being a little naive about journalists and their trade.

Imagine a journalist following up allegations that a (married) minister is having an affair and has asked for a comment but is being stonewalled. Surely you can imagine them saying something like this?: “Minister, we’ve been trying to get a comment from you regarding your relationship with Miss Bimbo McTop-Heavy but you haven’t responded to our requests for an interview. Unless you get back to us by the end of the week and provide us with an innocent explanation, we’ll publish the pictures of you leaving the hotel with Miss McTop-Heavy in your arms and invite our readers to form their own conclusions”

I’ve assumed that your deadline reference was to this from earlier in this thread

candyfloss wrote:There is an update on Cristobell's blog re the timing of the documentary and interfering with the investigation, posted today.

Interesting last paragraph......


We are all on tenterhooks at the moment, something appears to be happening - Operation Grange have a deadline.  Sonia has all the footage and all the interviews and is ready to go!



http://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk

If you read the article, it talks about the need to be fluid right up until the last minute yet she has all the interviews and is ready to go. If she’s ready to go, why not just do it unless she’s waiting for the final piece of the jigsaw?  I’m speculating that the final piece could be a response (or not) from Grange about something (I have no idea what) so that she can include the response in the documentary or, if they still refuse to respond, something along the lines of “we put these questions to grange but they refused to comment”. Perhaps waiting for this response is what’s dragging the process out?

That’s how I read it anyway. Of course you could be right and it’s the Home Office giving Grange the deadline but what relevance does that have to an article about Sonia’s documentary? Perhaps Cristobell can clarify what she meant about a deadline

Gosh, I don't want to sound rude but you have a lot of faith in a "journalist" who really doesn't have much in the way of journalism to her name.  Do you really think that SY are going to have any conversation/contact with someone with no real credentials, if her name was Kate Adie it may be a different matter, but who the hell is Sonia Poulton to SY?

I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think SY are going to even answer any of SP's questions.

Of course Sonia didn't issue Operation Grange a deadline or an ultimatum. I don't know how anyone could have taken that from what I said, lol.

Operation Grange have a deadline. [full stop]. They have £2m, not an open cheque, the case is clearly coming to an end, it is not going to carry on ad infinitum. An end is now in sight.

susible wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Freedom wrote:Yes I agree: no need at all to describe something with which you disagree as complete nonsense.

Let's all be polite, please.  

To suggest that anyone has been exonerated from allegations of CSA when there are several on going police investigations is even more nonsense than suggesting that the McCann's have been exonerated of any responsibility for Madeleine's disappearance. Would you be as critical of members here for using the word nonsense about such a claim about the McCann's?

I'd also point out that politeness includes not making outrageous and untrue statements as distractions from the discussion at hand

Leon Brittain has been totally and absolutely exonerated..janner has not!  Read the facts, and just hope that no one decides to accuse you of having abused them 30 years ago, without any evidence, and that even after 2 exhaustive investigations clearing your name, people are still accusing you.

Is there an update to this from Friday's Guardian?

Brittan has been exonerated by the police of allegations of raping a woman, but his name had also been passed to police as one of a series of high profile figures involved in a Westminster child sex ring. The credibility of one of the key witnesses concerning these allegations was seriously questioned by Panorama.

Agree Cristobell...wait..what?

I do believe that Grange will provide a resolution, it certainly does have a time limit on it, and I am of the opinion that the extra 2 million is to tie up all of the loose ends and hopefully make arrests and bring charges, in my ever optimistic opinion..

Can someone kindly link to the FOI questions and answers about OG? I think there is an element of misinterpretation here.

chirpyinsect wrote:

susible wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Freedom wrote:Yes I agree: no need at all to describe something with which you disagree as complete nonsense.

Let's all be polite, please.  

To suggest that anyone has been exonerated from allegations of CSA when there are several on going police investigations is even more nonsense than suggesting that the McCann's have been exonerated of any responsibility for Madeleine's disappearance. Would you be as critical of members here for using the word nonsense about such a claim about the McCann's?

I'd also point out that politeness includes not making outrageous and untrue statements as distractions from the discussion at hand

Leon Brittain has been totally and absolutely exonerated..janner has not!  Read the facts, and just hope that no one decides to accuse you of having abused them 30 years ago, without any evidence, and that even after 2 exhaustive investigations clearing your name, people are still accusing you.

Is there an update to this from Friday's Guardian?

Brittan has been exonerated by the police of allegations of raping a woman, but his name had also been passed to police as one of a series of high profile figures involved in a Westminster child sex ring. The credibility of one of the key witnesses concerning these allegations

I think this is the woman who has accused everyone and anyone, and whose stories lack all credibility, some of the accused have been able to prove absolutely that they could not have been in the places she claims.  Also she claimed that she had never met a politician, then backtracked when it was pointed out to her that those she was accusing were politicians...say no more.

I'm all for prosecuting the guilty in current or historical abuse cases whether the victims were adults or children, but there has been a sinister twist to many of these recent allegations as it seems that Tom Watson is behind encouraging the police to investigate cases against certain individuals but not others

Anyway, this is way off topic and I still stand by my original point that the McCann case and the historical CSA cases are totally different imo

susible wrote:Agree Cristobell...wait..what?    

I do believe that Grange will provide a resolution, it certainly does have a time limit on it, and I am of the opinion that the extra 2 million is to tie up all of the loose ends and hopefully make arrests and bring charges, in my ever optimistic opinion..

Well, there's a first, lol.

You might also be surprised to know that I agree with you on Tom Watson.

Cristobell wrote:

susible wrote:Agree Cristobell...wait..what?    

I do believe that Grange will provide a resolution, it certainly does have a time limit on it, and I am of the opinion that the extra 2 million is to tie up all of the loose ends and hopefully make arrests and bring charges, in my ever optimistic opinion..

 



Well, there's a first, lol.  

You might also be surprised to know that I agree with you on Tom Watson.

Well, we ultimately want the same thing..the truth about Madeleine, and if I'm honest I don't really care how we get it, just as long as we do, preferably with some arrests, charges and convictions thrown in.

And thanks for the agreement about Tom Watson, we need to get the truth about these historical scandals and people going about smearing others for political gain isn't going to help the genuine victims

susible wrote:
What are you on about? [off-topic stuff snipped]

And I still totally stand by my concerns about a documentary possibly interfering with an investigation of the nature of the McCann case, that is totally different to the alleged sex abuse scandal among politicians

The nature of the allegations is, of course, completely different but I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about principles and the principle in both cases is the same. Either you have concerns "about airing a documentary ahead of any charges and subsequent trial" or you don't.

Irrespective of the Madeleine McCann case and CSA, what is your view of the acceptability or otherwise of airing documentaries about matters of great public interest when there is an ongoing police investigation into those matters but no-one has yet been arrested or charged?

Secondly how is it that you have concerns about Sonia Poulton’s unaired documentary about a case in which the MET has no jurisdiction and the only people interviewed have been Portuguese, but none about Panorama investigating just one of many witnesses to CSA where there are several active investigations within the jurisdiction of the UK authorities and for which at least one person, Harvey Proctor, has been interviewed under caution?

susible wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Freedom wrote:Yes I agree: no need at all to describe something with which you disagree as complete nonsense.

Let's all be polite, please.  

To suggest that anyone has been exonerated from allegations of CSA when there are several on going police investigations is even more nonsense than suggesting that the McCann's have been exonerated of any responsibility for Madeleine's disappearance. Would you be as critical of members here for using the word nonsense about such a claim about the McCann's?

I'd also point out that politeness includes not making outrageous and untrue statements as distractions from the discussion at hand

Leon Brittain has been totally and absolutely exonerated..janner has not!  Read the facts, and just hope that no one decides to accuse you of having abused them 30 years ago, without any evidence, and that even after 2 exhaustive investigations clearing your name, people are still accusing you.

I'd love to read the facts about Leon Brittan's exoneration of allegations of child sexual abuse. Can you provide a link please?

When you have a witness who lacks any credibility, and has been supported by a somewhat dodgy outfit that are out to damage the reputation of only conservative politicians but can equally brush under the carpet, other allegations about labour politicians then the whole thing stinks,. I don't know what evidence the accuser has, apart from hearsay, only that others that have been accused by the same person have been able to prove they couldn't possibly have been where she said they were at the times of the alleged abuse.

As for the documentary, I have always said I will reserve judgment on it until after I have seen it, with the proviso that I hope it doesn't potentially damage the investigation. I still stand by that, so please stop ranting on about politicians and historical CSA cases being aired on Panorama, two totally different things...

To be honest the whole debacle is making me lose the will to live. I just want truth and justice for Madeleine McCann..

Cristobell wrote:Of course Sonia didn't issue Operation Grange a deadline or an ultimatum.  I don't know how anyone could have taken that from what I said, lol.

Operation Grange have a deadline. [full stop].   They have £2m, not an open cheque, the case is clearly coming to an end, it is not going to carry on ad infinitum.  An end is now in sight.  

My thoughts on the £2m is that it was given to last to the end of this tax year,and if there is no conclusion they will get more money on the 6th april to take them into 16/17.

Of course i could be wrong and they will crack the case soon but i doubt it.

@ Susible

So do you now accept that Leon Brittan hasn't been exonerated of child sexual abuse?

The principle about making documentaries about cases under police investigation is the same regardless of the different nature of the two cases that we're discussing here. I could just as easily have made up a fictional bank robbery or corrupt government business deal but chose Panorama because its a recent, real documentary. And the only reason I keep discussing it (I'm not ranting - and you accuse me of being rude!) is that you seem unwilling to address the reasonable questions that I've asked you about a view you've already publicly expressed.

You're entitled to a view on whether such documentaries should be made and, as it happens, I think that believing that they shouldn't is as equally valid as my view that they can be. What I'm objecting to is the seeming hypocrisy of saying its ok for the BBC to do it to undermine allegations against politicians but its wrong for Sonia to try to right the balance of fair reporting in the McCann case. Both are active police investigations that are are yet to arrest or charge anyone. Why object to Sonia doing what is, in journalistic terms, exactly the same thing that the BBC has just done?

AndyB wrote:@ Susible

So do you now accept that Leon Brittan hasn't been exonerated of child sexual abuse?

No, it is extremely doubtful he will ever be investigated for CSA, firstly, he is dead and secondly there are serious doubts about the credibility of the accuser, so as far as I am concerned, yes, he has been exonerated,

As for the rest, please refer to my previous post, my opinion has not changed.

susible wrote:

AndyB wrote:@ Susible

So do you now accept that Leon Brittan hasn't been exonerated of child sexual abuse?

No, it is extremely doubtful he will ever be investigated for CSA, firstly, he is dead and secondly there are serious doubts about the credibility of the accuser, so as far as I am concerned, yes, he has been exonerated,

As for the rest, please refer to my previous post, my opinion has not changed.

ONE OF his accusers has been undermined the rest haven't. That isn't exoneration and you know it. I stand by what I said before and that is the idea that Leon Brittan has been exonerated of CSA is nonsense.

I wasn't asking for your opinion, its very clear what that is, I was asking for the rational behind the opinion but it seems there is none.

You can believe whatever you want to believe in terms of historical allegations, my mind is made up, and as for the most part are the minds of the police and the CPS, particularly where Leon Brittain is concerned, as for others, who knows, time will tell...

I can't be bothered to explain my rationale to you again, I have already done that, several times, it is you who is making comparisons with the panorama programme, not me, and if you can;t see the difference, then there is nothing more that I can say.