Journalist Sonia Poulton promises "The untold story of Madeleine McCann".

[Lyall]

They're concerned about writing something that may be considered libelous of course, but it's not healthy for there to be a vacuum either.

[Eleanor]

They're concerned about writing something that may be considered libelous of course, but it's not healthy for there to be a vacuum either.

So what would you have them say?  Anything they might say would be picked over down to the last comma, as no doubt will be anything Sonia Poulton comes up with.
She is already suggesting that something awful went on, and she doesn't even know what she is talking about.
You and I know more about this Case than she ever will. And we probably know more than most Main Stream Media Reporters as well.
We can only contain our souls in patience for someone in authority to actually decide something legally.

I just hope that The Coroner won't be going into any detail beyond the probable state of mind of Brenda Leyland at the time.
I just feel desperately sad that she had no one to turn to who could have told her that anything she might have thought she had done, could and would be forgiven.

So why does Sonia Poulton want to add to the distress of Brenda's family?  It won't solve anything.  It won't make them feel any better.  But Sonia Poulton might get a few Media plugs and even a few bob in her pocket.

[Lyall]

I don't know what's really driving SP. She was genuinely angry in October but after months of communicating with the people she is on twitter who knows what her plans are (hopefully she can see that some of those people would love to provoke a confrontation, so long as SP is the one facing the consequences not them).

I listed earlier some of the aspects I think should have been addressed in the papers - or by other writers with credentials. When they're never discussed people that way inclined believe it's because of some great conspiracy, and they go hunting for people saying the same things in blogs or videos. People look for leaders don't they. In this unique case they can find no leaders in the media, so they look for them on social media. It's definitely not healthy. I think they understand this better in the US, possibly because they're a lot more used to cases like this one. It's pretty much unique in the UK of course.

[Eleanor]

I don't know what's really driving SP. She was genuinely angry in October but after months of communicating with the people she is on twitter who knows what her plans are (hopefully she can see that some of those people would love to provoke a confrontation, so long as SP is the one facing the consequences not them).

I listed earlier some of the aspects I think should have been addressed in the papers - or by other writers with credentials. When they're never discussed people that way inclined believe it's because of some great conspiracy, and they go hunting for people saying the same things in blogs or videos. People look for leaders don't they. In this unique case they can find no leaders in the media, so they look for them on social media. It's definitely not healthy. I think they understand this better in the US, possibly because they're a lot more used to cases like this one. It's pretty much unique in the UK of course.

That is what they are doing to her.  Driving her to make a fool of herself.  But she really should know better if she is who she wants us to believe she is.  And Angry is never good.
But why do people look for leaders who will churn out ill informed rubbish?
They will turn on her in a hand span if she doesn't come up with what they want.  Which she won't be able to.

I have spent some time on American Web Sites, not least in The Casey Anthony Case, and as far as I could see they are all raving mad with absolutely no respect for The Law.  Even The Prosecutor was a dick head.
Thank God for Judge Belvin Perry Junior.  What a man.  He had The Cadaver Dogs sussed with no problem whatsoever.
And it doesn't matter what anyone thought of Casey Anthony.  She was acquitted. and rightly so.

Sorry.  Going off topic there.  But my estimation of American Law went up by a thousand fold.

But in the end Sonia Poulton is not going to add one wit to The McCann Case.  Just another chancer.

[Wonderfulspam]

That is what they are doing to her.  Driving her to make a fool of herself.  But she really should know better if she is who she wants us to believe she is.  And Angry is never good.
But why do people look for leaders who will churn out ill informed rubbish?
They will turn on her in a hand span if she doesn't come up with what they want.  Which she won't be able to.

I have spent some time on American Web Sites, not least in The Casey Anthony Case, and as far as I could see they are all raving mad with absolutely no respect for The Law.  Even The Prosecutor was a dick head.
Thank God for Judge Belvin Perry Junior.  What a man.  He had The Cadaver Dogs sussed with no problem whatsoever.
And it doesn't matter what anyone thought of Casey Anthony.  She was acquitted. and rightly so.

Sorry.  Going off topic there.  But my estimation of American Law went up by a thousand fold.

But in the end Sonia Poulton is not going to add one wit to The McCann Case.  Just another chancer.

Any sign of Lisa Irwin yet?

She'll turn up alive & well won't she,...... just like Jeannete Zapata!

Those cadaver dog things are useless, I don't know why the fuzz even bother using them.

[Brietta]

I agree with you about some things, but that's the modern online world. The answer I think is less legislation/restriction of freedom of speech, not more of it. But more of it is what's in the pipeline, and sooner or later some of the people out there discussing the case will likely face consequences. But that's likely to make things worse not better, just like the action Sky News took did. One thing's for sure: there are no easy answers in a case as unique as this one.

You only have to think of the totalitarian states who severely restrict access to the internet to see that there are people in power who prefer that the masses are unable to see a viewpoint other than the state sponsored one.

The freedoms we have are precious and should be protected; but with freedom comes responsibility and that is something which is sadly lacking among those who have leapt onto the Madeleine McCann band wagon making her their own; even to the extent of stealing her name.

Sonia Poulton is just another in a long line of nobodies whose online activities are proof positive that with less legislation/restriction of freedom of speech comes only anarchy.

Maybe you should consider opening a thread on just exactly what it is that makes Madeleine McCann's case unique.

[Lyall]

You only have to think of the totalitarian states who severely restrict access to the internet to see that there are people in power who prefer that the masses are unable to see a viewpoint other than the state sponsored one.

The freedoms we have are precious and should be protected; but with freedom comes responsibility and that is something which is sadly lacking among those who have leapt onto the Madeleine McCann band wagon making her their own; even to the extent of stealing her name.

Sonia Poulton is just another in a long line of nobodies whose online activities are proof positive that with less legislation/restriction of freedom of speech comes only anarchy.

Maybe you should consider opening a thread on just exactly what it is that makes Madeleine McCann's case unique.

No need, you can all read my thoughts when I publish book or books. I do have some I think unique views on the case, but of course that doesn't necessarily mean anyone will agree with me

I am either brilliant... or mad

[ferryman]

No need, you can all read my thoughts when I publish book or books. I do have some I think unique views on the case, but of course that doesn't necessarily mean anyone will agree with me

I am either brilliant... or mad

Which of your thoughts are "unique"?

[Lyall]

Which of your thoughts are "unique"?

I don't mean on whodunnit. I'm not attempting to solve the case, just describe it better than it has been.

You'll see, eventually.

[Lyall]

Last night Eleanor said: We can only contain our souls in patience for someone in authority to actually decide something legally.

I disagree. I think the vacuum surrounding the case isn't healthy for anyone, for either 'side' and for the people involved in the case. October's tragedy was sadly the ultimate demonstration of this. It may not be the last unless that vacuum is filled.

[stephen25000]

Last night Eleanor said: We can only contain our souls in patience for someone in authority to actually decide something legally.

I disagree. I think the vacuum surrounding the case isn't healthy for anyone, for either 'side' and for the people involved in the case. October's tragedy was sadly the ultimate demonstration of this. It may not be the last unless that vacuum is filled.

Well said Lyall.

Also, I wonder what would have been the outcry from mccann supporters, if it had been one of their brethren who had suffered Brenda Leyland's fate ?

[Lyall]

Well said Lyall.

Also, I wonder what would have been the outcry from mccann supporters, if it had been one of their brethren who had suffered Brenda Leyland's fate ?

It would have been many times greater still than what we've seen because unlike us they have powerful allies in the media (and elsewhere, including of course government). This is why it's really a bad idea I think for identities to be exposed as apparently SP plans. If that's done and anything happens to them there would be big trouble.

[stephen25000]

It would have been many times greater still than what we've seen because unlike us they have powerful allies in the media (and elsewhere, including of course government). This is why it's really a bad idea I think for identities to be exposed as apparently SP plans. If that's done and anything happens to them there would be big trouble.

On that, her threats to expose people could just be hot air, or of course simply done to provoke a reaction in these people, which it certainly has done.

Time will tell.

However, some might say, they deserve a taste of their own medicine.

[xtina]

What a good idea.

Actually, it might be difficult to anticipate what might happen until we see her video.  After that we can all have a lovely time deciding whether or not it is Libellous.  Personally, I doubt it will be because she isn't completely stupid.  But if not then what on earth will she say that hasn't already been said?

come on ....there is a hell of a lot that has not been said ....Sonia Poulton speaks of pleanty of evidence to prove there was no abduction...etc...etc....all it needs is to show there is another side to all this ....and the flood gates will open

[jassi]

There are also plenty of ways of  interpreting things without being libelous.
Spinmasters do it all the time.