In response to John Hemming’s concerns, Shaun Attwood has done the decent thing and corrected a recent video about Hemming and Esther Baker. His statement is here. Meanwhile, vile Sonia Poulton seems to have split with him and has released a misleading statement to her followers.
Shaun Attwood has released a video correcting the record about former MP John Hemming. His former collaborator Sonia Poulton has doubled down linking a misleading video.
In 2019 Shaun Attwood released a video on a number of topics and alleged child abusers. During one section, he interviewed freelance ‘journalist’ Sonia Poulton about the Esther Baker case. It was a train wreck. Attwood relied on Poulton’s expertise but from a journalistic perspective, her contribution was a disaster. Poulton told viewers that Esther Baker had made allegations of abuse against Hemming and that, “it is quite clear that Esther Baker, erm, feels that she has a case that needs to be examined, appropriately examined”. She neglected to mention however the simple fact that they had been investigated by Staffordshire Police and rejected. The CPS stated that there are, “no witnesses”, “no medical or forensic evidence” and “no one else has come forward with a similar complaint”.
In fact Baker’s allegations have now been found, “untrue” in the High Court and she has now been restrained for life from repeating them. Baker has also been found to have harassed a potential witness in the case, in racist fashion. The victim, who MHN has anonymised, is a real proven victim of child abuse.
None of this was told to viewers of the podcast, because Sonia did not bother to contact Hemming for a statement before giving the interview to Shaun. It was a basic journalistic error, shoddy and amateurish.
When all this was pointed out Shaun Attwood did the decent thing. He removed that section from the video, which he re-uploaded. He published a correction. That cannot have been nice but he did it. That is the kind of thing that separates the decent from the less decent.
Sonia Poulton has been far less pleasant. After being served with legal papers over the foul-up, she split from Attwood and made public tweets condemning him over what she admits was a, “prank” (archive). Some might suspect it was a case of jump before being pushed after putting Mr Attwood at legal risk.
Sonia Poulton attacks her former colleague over a ‘prank’ video he did but neglects to mention her libel bodge.
Poulton has also issued a statement supposedly talking tough over the legal threat. It is highly misleading to viewers. Poulton’s statement which you can watch here, refers to Hemming’s demand that a 2018 video called, “Paedophiles in Parliament” be taken down. A viewer would think that is what she is being sued for. It is not. She is being sued over a 2019 video already removed by Shaun – in effect admitted to be in error by her editor. She is talking tough as though she had made no mistakes when the videos have actually already gone. It is true that Hemming has sought removal of the 2018 video, but only as a quid-pro-quo for not seeking damages against her for the 2019 video.
This is important as Poulton has alluded to starting a crowdfunding campaign for her defence. If she does she must be completely candid with backers or risk having it removed, just as we had Baker’s crowdfunding pages removed. She also risks destroying her own reputation. Who would want to work with her now after her public attack on her collaborator?
Poulton has a history of accusing bloggers who criticise her of harassment. She had blogger Simon Just arrested but police later had to apologise and pay him compensation. He was innocent and his criticisms of Poulton up until his arrest were in fact legitimate. Just for the record, I am an LL.M LPC (Commendation) graduate with 10 years experience as a McKenzie Friend. I provided free support to John in all his successful libel claims, including against big-name solicitors like RPC media. So if she wants to try to object to this article, she is respectfully invited to bring it? She will be dealt with.
I can say that Mr Hemming has now forwarded the matter to a barrister for consideration in respect of Poulton. Shaun Attwood however is now free and clear. All Hemming wanted was an update and a correction. I suspect that Sonia need not wait long for the next steps.
To be blunt, Sam, this has been a long time coming. She has been a loose cannon for a very, very long time and dodging legal challenges. If I were Mr Hemming now I’d go for the jugular with her and no longer play Mr Nice Guy.
[Some redactions made to this comment by MHN for legal reasons]
Certainly I thought doorstepping Kate McCann was a low act.
At the time it was done it was certainly very low, and then all the sob story about Martin Brunt doorstepping a McCann troll from Poulton didn’t assist her image.
Talk about doing your washing in public. The harridans veil is slipping. Don’t forget the unused material. Evil as evil gets.
The “prank” referred to and the “split” is because it was exposed that Attwood had been taking explicit pornographic pictures of a woman who he had interviewed on his show claiming to be a victim of sex trafficking. The “prank” video was an effort to deflect from this but has nothing to do with the case involving Mr H.
Poulton is vicious and vindictive, who twists any criticism of herself into claims of trolling or threats. The “statement” she has made is totally misleading and typical of this vile grifter.
She also released a video in June which names the children in the Hampstead case, which is in contempt of court.
I hope that Mr H gets closure and proper recompense.
[Slight redactions by MHN for legal reasons]
Mr Atwood’s video appears to have been taken down? Was it supposed to be up for a finite length of time?
He is being threatened by Esther Baker now! 🙂
Would that be the same Esther Baker who is still bankrupt and has to run expenditure by her “trustee”?
Would that be the same Esther Baker who is bound by a specific set of injunctions which prevent her from repeating her allegations etc or indeed encouraging others to do so?
If so then she really does need a head wobble. Again.
Suing someone over telling the truth doesn’t work. Threatening to sue over telling the truth is intimidation. By that I don’t mean individual opinions but the truth based on facts and evidence. One would’ve hoped a supposed “law student” would’ve worked that out by now.
Must admit was slightly surprised how fast Attwood folded but given everything else he’s going through it’s perhaps not that surprising. At least he did the right thing in the statement and it’s preserved elsewhere.
Yeah writing articles and making videos about abuse and paedophilia is not for those without either legal training like me or deep pockets like big newspapers. To be fair, Shaun has been much more reasonable than Sonia. John is waiting on counsel’s opinion.
It’s long been expected that the Baker Poulton bubble would burst. Esther Baker was never given enough thanks for putting her neck on the line by making [allegations] against Darren Laverty, in a last ditch effort to lend weight to all the [allegations] Sonia Poulton was [making to] the London Met about him and his witnesses.
The police swallowed everything Esther Baker and Sonia Poulton told them, without question or evidence. In much the same way as they did with Carl Beech and the Exaro journalists.
Sonia Poulton did not get her desired result of seeing Darren Laverty sent to prison for ten years. Her documentaries about her [alleged] stalkers going to prison could not be made. There would not be any paid tv interviews about how her [alleged] stalkers had threatened to rape her and kill her etc.
She had been left with nothing to celebrate and would not be receiving compensation. She discarded Esther Baker like a used Ben and Jerry’s carton. Esther Baker had served her purpose for journalists again.
Mark Watts should be thankful he and Esther Baker are still on friendly terms. Any unfriending in their relationship could lead more swiftly to a thorough police investigation into how and why journalists have driven the csa bandwagon from 2012 to date.
The public should be made aware that a number of police officers not only failed to investigate all complaints made against those journalists with track records of endangering lives and livelihoods with their reckless, defamatory posts and documentaries, but also went on to assist each other and the false allegators at every step of the way. Weighty and damning evidence of which, was found in documents which the police had deliberately hidden throughout Darren Laverty’s case.
Esther Baker Part 2, introducing Sonia Poulton, could be the beginning of the end of a lot of misery for some of their victims, if it grows legs. Though it’s considered Munchausen may be written in fairly soon, to delay matters, and to prevent Sonia Poulton acting impulsively. Like she did when she interviewed Shaun Attwood. Which finally rammed home every last nail into the coffin regarding her own complete lack of understanding about how offended and sickened the genuine victims of csa were, when they found out Shaun Attwood was involved in making a father daughter video (with an alleged sex trafficking victim) where there was more than a suggestion oral sex was to take place.
It was quite evident Sonia Poulton could not grasp the enormity of what Shaun Attwood had done. Viewers who found the video sick and distasteful were told they were being “holier than thou”.
[Some redactions to this comment made by MHN for legal reasons]