[Update 22 May 2022 – My Media World Limited and Director Muhammad Butt sued over this article in the High Court in a counterclaim in case QB-2020-003936. They dropped the libel case by discontinuance, after MHN editor Samuel Collingwood Smith entered a robust defence. The effect of discontinuance is they are automatically liable for Smith’s whole costs.]
Last year I wrote an article explaining that I had filed a High Court claim for £100,000 against Sonia Poulton of BrandNewTube.com, founder Muhammad Butt and the company itself (My Media World Limited). The claim was filed on 09 November 2020 and was deemed to be served on 22 December 2020. Three months on, they still have not entered a Defence. Today at a public telephone hearing in the Queen’s Bench, their latest antics (a further extension application) led to a modest costs Order against them and Master Thornett also made what is called an Unless Order. Unless they get on and enter their Defence by 4pm 25 March 2021 judgement will be automatically entered in my favour. The Order also means that they never get back their costs of paying their lawyer to apply for an extension of time.
Sonia Poulton issued an inflammatory and misleading ‘official statement’ on her dispute with John Hemming. Even stranger, she is now clinging onto my claim despite the fact that I have effectively dropped her as a Defendant. Extracted still used for the purpose of criticism and review.
Even weirder, is why Sonia Poulton was there at all. Last year to the extent I could understand their weird legal correspondence, Poulton was insisting I am a criminal blackmailer. After proceedings were issued she changed that view claiming she totally did not mean that and so I filed a partial discontinuance, dropping that claim against her. The claim against Butt and My Media World Limited continues unaffected. Because the partial discontinuance was filed and served before a defence I can make the claim again if she repeats the libel or tries to claim she has justified her original allegation. So … she can go.
All that is left, at most, is an argument about the costs of her third of their joint response to the letter of claim. But nope – she was there and ignores my attempts to unjoin her as a party. What parties would normally do is agree a consent Order but as Sonia does not wish to do so I may have to make an application, which the court has the power to order costs of.
The Order made today says as follows –
“1. Unless by 4.00pm 25 March 2021 the Defendants file and serve a Defence (whether individually or collectively), then judgment on liability for damages to be assessed shall automatically be entered.”
I was very grateful to Master Thornett for his professional and efficient conduct of the hearing. I have actually helped litigants, charitably, in cases involving him before, although we have not interacted directly, and he is known for sensible, assertive case management. As the hearing was public, so is the Order and a copy may be downloaded here. The judge actually gave them less time than I was willing to accept. I suggested an Unless Order for 30 March 2021, but he gave them only until 25 March – a clear court signal to stop messing about!
The judge kindly made a number of complimentary remarks about the clarity and crafting of my legal documents. Win or lose, this claim is not trivial to defend. Until now, Sonia and Muhammad only had lawyers’ view of the case. Now a judge has given them a reality check that this is not something that can be laughed off, perhaps it will be easier to reach a resolution.
The costs Order made in my favour today is tiny (£99.75). The costs were ordered in my favour essentially because it was reasonable for me to engage the court’s case management powers due to the Defendants’ repeated delays. An effect of my getting costs on the application means that the Defendants do not get their costs. That is, they never get back what they paid their solicitor to make their application(s) for extensions of time, even if they win the whole case.
Most of the work on the Defendants’ application for an extension was done by solicitor Blake O’Donnell, a Partner at Spencer West whose hourly rate is likely to be substantial due to his seniority, so that is a significant sum of money lost to them forever, hundreds or thousands of pounds. Mr O’Donnell has now, incidentally, filed notice that he has ceased to act. Sonia and Muhammad were there unrepresented, attempting to act in person.
The Defendants even appeared to contradict their lawyer in their oral submissions and skeleton argument. In the claim, I filed the paperwork on 9 November 2020. Then whilst waiting for the court to issue (stamp) the forms, I discussed the filed pleadings with their lawyers without formally serving. I formally served amended pleadings by posting on 18 December 2020, which were deemed served on 22 December. I am entitled to amend before service, without permission. This was clearly set out, to be fair, by the other side’s (former) lawyer in their application form for an extension. The Defendants attempted to claim confusion as to which particulars were valid and that I needed permission to amend. Attempting to contradict their own application notice was somewhat surreal.
The Defendants’ case was mostly presented by Muhammad Butt, Senior Founder of Brand New Tube. It was totally bizarre. Muhammad filed a skeleton argument, acting in person, with the wrong title and unnumbered paragraphs. Even Esther Baker, who recently agreed to a lifelong restraining agreement after her defence to my claim in libel and harassment against her was largely struck out, managed the right title and numbered paragraphs.
The Defendants had obtained a hearing in the Urgent and Short Applications List (USAL) with time of 30 minutes. Sonia and Muhammad sought to argue my conduct of the litigation was unreasonable but failed to actually file a bundle, any evidence (or a schedule) to support this allegation. Again, even Esther Baker (a mentally ill woman who admits to hearing voices) occasionally managed to file a witness statement of sorts and to be fair to her, always uses more-or-less the right title and numbered paragraphs.
Poulton is of course being sued also by John Hemming in Hemming v Poulton. She faces numerous court deadlines, some of which are created by her (to my mind) ill-considered attempt to file a counter-claim against Hemming, myself and a third man. Poulton has no lawyer to help her with the mountain of work she has created.
In the meantime, Shaun Attwood, who made an amicable settlement with my friend John Hemming, is free and clear. No lawsuits hanging over his head from us. Not a penny to pay – just took down his video and published a clarification. Sonia and Muhammad must dearly rue the day they turned down Hemming’s kind and reasonable offer.
Pingback: Court Roundup – 11th March 2021 – Spin vs Truth
“Poulton is of course being sued also by John Hemming in Hemming v Poulton. She faces numerous court deadlines, some of which are created by her (to my mind) ill-considered attempt to file a counter-claim against Hemming, myself and a third man. Poulton has no lawyer to help her with the mountain of work she has created.”
“Mr O’Donnell has now, incidentally, filed notice that he has ceased to act.”
Wise decision made by Mr O’Donnell. Perhaps, like Sonia Poulton, he also “grew up around a seance table”, and is able to see what lies ahead for her future.
One assumes the split with Mr O’Donnell must have been relatively amicable. As he is the first person to have rejected Sonia Poulton, and not found himself immediately at the centre of a social media pile-on by her and her minions. Nor has he been accused of paedophilia or being part of a dark establishment sent to ruin her research and investigations.
Though there is time yet…
Like David Icke and numerous others, Mr O’Donnell could wake up one morning, and find he is the sole subject matter in one of Sonia Poulton’s thoroughly unpleasant early morning rant-to-camera films.
Thank you for the update.
When that tweet about being brought up around the voodoo table was viewed a thought arose. She’s previously claimed her mission (whatever that may be) isn’t one she chose because she chose to be on it. She claimed “it’s a calling”. Maybe Derek “Mary loves Dick” Acorah is doing the calling.
Lets hope she isn’t going to claim that it’s a calling from the big man above because this is what he had to say on the matter.
“Let no one be found among you who … practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD, and because of these same detestable practices the Lord your God will drive out those nations before you. You must be blameless before the LORD your God.” (Deuteronomy 18:10-13, NIV)
@ Isthereakevinintheroom on March 12, 2021 at 2:03 pm
Sonia Poulton has said that people who believe in God, are delusional. However, she thinks having a two way conversation with someone who has died, is quite normal.
It may be a fantasist thing, as Esther Baker has also allegedly heard voices.
Before becoming overly concerned and demanding more medication, Ms Baker should perhaps have asked her landlord to lag the loft of her house, and have them provide sound-proofing along the dividing walls.
This is not to say I disbelieve Ms Baker saying she hears voices. Although it is noted she only alludes to such when she is desperate for people to be sympathetic or show her mercy.
As a Christian, I find Ms Poulton’s statements deeply offensive. I also find her admitted practice of necromancy, as she sets out in her articles, to be deeply troubling.
https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20070419/282514359091267
19 April 2007 – Sonia Poulton in the Daily Mail
Headline – “Flying tables, moving glasses and messages from evil spirits. I know it sounds barmy— but I’ve seen proof of the afterlife”
“SINCE I was a young child, I have been confident there is another life after this one. How do I know? I have regular contact with it, and have done for as long as I can remember. I accept the cynics will label me as deranged, but they’ve never seen tables tip over of their own volition, glass tumblers move around untouched and a CD holder lift off the floor and hang in the air for several seconds. […]”
Not sure wots bin going on but im guna have my say God or No God its a each 2 there own if you beleve or dont its not a fashion statement or status or make you gain followers ! Its personal private to most people i no i dont want to read about anybodys beleifs or not beleifs ,The comment about her minions do you get how dumb even saying it outloud “minions wot dos it mean even ? If alot or even a few share a view bout anything dos that mean there minions its afensive 2me as not all the time but a few times iv agreed with her & DISAGREED im me im not anybodys minion
Samuel Collingwood Smith
on March 12, 2021 at 4:41 pm said:
“I find Ms Poulton’s statements deeply offensive”
Me too. Most people who know anything about her history feel the same way.
Sonia Poulton is one of the most offensive and dangerous people on the internet. Evidence of which is held by police, lawyers, and her victims. (Should this ever be disputed.)
Some of her victims note she never appears to be protected by the NUJ or have insurance against the harm she and her associates cause…
Weres the comment i dont cum online daily so not sin wots bin going on but wudt mind a peek
The most recent veiled and direct threats alongside mention of karma and who deserves it, are nothing new to those who have watched Sonia Poulton’s prolific output of threats and intimidation over time.
It is a reminder of the first times she was threatened with the police and being sued. For which she created a pantomime around having a “friendly insider in Whitehall”, who was warning her to be careful about how many paedophiles she was exposing in Parliament. Leading her to live in fear of being murdered. Please note, this is before she feared being murdered by rapists and gang rapists. This fear was to come along much later. When making documentaries about being murdered by stalkers was seen as fresh and lucrative.
[Redacted – MHN]
The manner in which all of her victims and targets have been treated by the police, supports this beyond measure.
(Old post below. Same drama.)
Holmeysaid: August 19, 2013 at 5:47 am
Just posted by Sonia Poulton on her Facebook….
“E-mail just now from ‘friendly insider in Whitehall’: ‘You are too outspoken and should be careful with your words. You make some people uncomfortable’.
Sadly, could not respond as e-mail just bounced back, but I wrote: ‘Good. I’m not here to provide room service for elitists. By the way, I always make sure to let people know that if anything happens to me then it shouldn’t automatically be assumed it’s an accident.”
https://tompride.wordpress.com/2013/05/07/daily-mail-hack-boasts-about-being-able-to-trace-personal-phone-numbers-of-twitter-users/#comments
When bars and restaurants open again, and people begin to get their lives and families and friends back, viewing figures are expected to drop for people who hold alternative views on life-saving vaccines, and who invite people to public protests during a pandemic.
People considering hiring a Shaman to go and collect rays from the sun or rocks from outer planets to make them feel whole and complete as an individual. are the most likely people to continue watching such shows after lockdown.
Hat tip to Chancer for his neat round up of Samuel Collingwood Smith’s original post. Rare to see someone break Sonia Poulton’s own law that her name must not be mentioned on social media regarding any of her legal matters. (Or indeed any other matters concerning herself and her associates which she does not want the public to know about.)
Chancer and his youtube friends and subscribers have done some great detective work around Sonia Poulton and her friend and ex BNT colleague, Shaun Attwood.
Which led to Shaun Attwood leaving BNT, despite Sonia Poulton’s best efforts to keep him there by downplaying his shocking role play video with an allegedly recently trafficked woman, who had allegedly been abused as a minor.
People abused as children, are still offended BNT continue to employ Sonia Poulton after watching her try to sweep Shaun Attwood’s behaviour under the carpet during their last interview together. They were not expecting her to give him such an easy time and tell him she loved him, after the video had been seen by thousands…
“A Bad Day In Court” below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OykgYasp_pE&t=29s
The supplementary statement today on Poulton’s twitter feed is likely to be manna for the various claimants as it is clearly [in my opinion] an attempt at intimidation AND to plead victim. The statement alone could also be seen, in a way, as another act of defamation by further attacking the reputations of the claimants against her.
There is obvious misinformation in her tweet too in that she didn’t initiate proceedings she issued a counterclaim [ridiculously in my opinion too] to an existing claim.
There is a clear difference that she obviously doesn’t really understand.
In any case, making such a statement during ongoing civil case is likely to be seen by the court as utter stupidity anyway, especially as she has already apparently received legal advice from various [who don’t seem to hang around long before getting cold feet] and is likely ignoring such advice by acting irresponsibly again. She should replay her own statements on the Shaun Attwood interview and on BNT’s various “statement” videos before even thinking about pleading “victim” – that would however require a conscience.
To claim that she has respected the court processes and then issues such a dumb statement is utter hypocrisy too. Then switches off comments because of respecting such but she has made a comment likely in violation of such processes.
A quite remarkably dumb move. Unsurprising in many ways but dumb in any case.
Ministry of Justice: “The new #VictimsCode comes into force today.
It outlines the support that victims & witnesses have the right to receive from police, courts & other criminal justice agencies.
Know your rights.
Enhanced Rights and Additional Enhanced Rights for persistently targeted victims:
You are eligible for Enhanced Rights under this Code as a PERSISTENTLY TARGETED VICTIM if you have been targeted repeatedly as a direct victim of crime over a period of time, particularly if you have been DELIBERATELY TARGETED or if you are a victim of a campaign of HARASSMENT or STALKING.”
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-code-of-practice-for-victims-of-crime
Though having always claimed to have police officers in high places and media lawyers at her disposal, Sonia Poulton now says she is voluntarily giving up work, and wants the working public to give her money so she can stay at home to concentrate on her court cases.
However, the public gave her little enough towards her Patreon account. [Redacted by MHN] asking why they should pay money out to her for content they could read elsewhere for free.
Therefore, they may be reluctant to give her their hard earned money this time. Knowing she will be sitting around at home all day trying to rewrite her history, whilst they have to work to support themselves and their families.
[Redacted by MHN]
It should be noted Sonia Poulton will need hundreds of thousands of pounds to defend some of her cases.
[Redacted by MHN]
Sonia Poulton bleating about her fears of bankruptcy and imprisonment, when this is all she has ever wanted for her victims, is a bit rich.
Perhaps she should accept current events as absolute validation of her strong belief in karma.
Just saying, I wouldn’t mind sitting on my arse all day at home, and watching people pour money into my bank accounts. Is this all I would have to do? Write up an Esther Baker style back story about people coming to get me, and then the money will start rolling in?
Might try jerking a few extra tears by using the dog crate and dentist’s chair scenarios in my appeal for funds.
Could be wrong, but it seems donors to the fighting fund are entering into a contract to currently maintain and/or enable the resumption of a vocation which will provide similar services at a future date. Therefore, a considerable amount of the total donations is likely to end up with the tax man.
The choice of wording and modes of expression in the fund raising letter have possibly made it the strongest contender for the title of ‘Exhibit 1’ for some cases.
It says it all…
The state of that video on youtube 😃
The money might not be rolling in fast enough for her.
Ffs. Totally disregards the court. No restraint whatsoever. This should have been saved as a secret diary entry, not made available to the public during such serious proceedings.
Insinuating ‘corruption and abuse’ in context with the ‘ex MP’ and the next General Election opens another can of worms.
For almost a decade, Sonia Poulton has misled the public into believing that she holds hard proof for all the accusations she makes.
Allegedly gaining her alleged ‘proof’ first hand, from alleged victims; the entertainment industry; the police; and old newspaper cuttings found in libraries by @craftymuvva.
Thus reassuring her followers that they may retweet, discuss and attack people, because they could not be sued for libel and slander.
However, yesterday’s volte-face and rewrite of history with regard to what Sonia Poulton allegedly knows and does not know about Esther Baker’s court cases, and her heinous allegations against John Hemming, should be of concern to the followers who stopped believing in Esther Baker herself, but who still believe there is ‘proof’ beyond Esther Baker.
Because there isn’t any proof. If there was, Sonia Poulton would already have made a documentary about it, to piss Mark Watts off, and put him back in his place, after he named her on twitter during a Crown court case at a point where she had realised she had no hope of winning.
She had warned Mark Watts he must not name her, but he went ahead.
Irony…
@ Sue Themall on May 1, 2021 at 7:26 am
Didn’t see Mark Watts mention her by name on twitter yesterday. He referred to her as “a separate court hearing”. 😁