Mark Souster and the complete mystery of the DM's and the now deleted twitter account

There is masses and masses of material readily available to journalists online: police investigation transcripts; Gerry's blogs; opinion pieces; a translation of G Amaral's book; plus a record of almost every article ever printed on the case barring the very earliest and most recent on mccannfiles. The difficulty is not gathering information but - as Sonia Poulton has discovered - finding an outlet through which to release it.

Popcorn wrote:There is masses and masses of material readily available to journalists online: police investigation transcripts; Gerry's blogs; opinion pieces; a translation of G Amaral's book; plus a record of almost every article ever printed on the case barring the very earliest and most recent on mccannfiles. The difficulty is not gathering information but - as Sonia Poulton has discovered - finding an outlet through which to release it.

Of course,  they're all waiting. Absolutely guaranteed. Green light and all that and a bonus in the pay too.

They're stuck now. No movement.

But convinced they're all playing a a game with the Mc's though.

Sadly, that's what Madeleine has been about all this time.......

Money, and where can make some more money, off Madeleine.

Joke. Sad and disgraceful.

Andrew wrote:I quote Tony.

And that's what there goal is..

"Can't comment on Portuguese law per se but I'm convinced this case will never go to trial"

I think you may be right.

Sorry my lovelies.

No, genuinely didn't think I said much out of turn.

Just some honest stuff, that at times gets buried.

All good


Off to the casino to turn a grand into 5.

Be good folks.

Let's hope that you mean five grand rather than a fiver.

Good luck and good night.

Cristobell wrote:

Andrew wrote:I quote Tony.

And that's what there goal is..

"Can't comment on Portuguese law per se but I'm convinced this case will never go to trial"

 



I think you may be right.

Now, come on, Cristobell! Don't forget you're my pessimistic antidote .

Dee Coy wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

Andrew wrote:I quote Tony.

And that's what there goal is..

"Can't comment on Portuguese law per se but I'm convinced this case will never go to trial"

 



I think you may be right.

Now, come on, Cristobell! Don't forget you're my pessimistic antidote .

I mean't in the sense that some don't want it to come trial and may even being working towards that end DeeCoy!

I actually think Operation Grange are closing in

Andrew wrote:Save your money for the casino, please, Andrew. I thought you'd already gone!

Sorry, was just warming myself up.

Nevermind.

You can read it for yourself.

A quick scroll back and.sorry. Xx

Twitter account is back
Maddie stuff still there
https://mobile.twitter.com/SousterRugby/status/651396411091755008

Cristobell wrote:

Dee Coy wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

Andrew wrote:I quote Tony.

And that's what there goal is..

"Can't comment on Portuguese law per se but I'm convinced this case will never go to trial"

 



I think you may be right.

Now, come on, Cristobell! Don't forget you're my pessimistic antidote .

 




I mean't in the sense that some don't want it to come trial and may even being working towards that end DeeCoy!  

I actually think Operation Grange are closing in  

The only thing lacking is evidence,or that should be concrete evidence,it wasn't there in 2007 why should it be there now?

SY to the Pj,we want to look at the forensics again.
PJ to SY we want who ever is being protected.
SY no
PJ F off then.
Never the twain shall meet.

Walt wrote:
The only thing lacking is evidence,or that should be concrete evidence,it wasn't there in 2007 why should it be there now?

***
New forensic techniques?

ETA just saw that you added a paragraph to your post.
I was thinking about the fact, that recently it's possible to extract DNA from hair WITHOUT roots ...

I don't think it's necessarily true to suggest that Souser has only just acquired an interest in the case. He may have been following the forums for a long time and (who knows) may even be a member.
I suspect most of us thought the Maddie stuff would all have been removed if his Twitter account returned but no it's still there.

Châtelaine wrote:

Walt wrote:
The only thing lacking is evidence,or that should be concrete evidence,it wasn't there in 2007 why should it be there now?

***
New forensic techniques?

ETA just saw that you added a paragraph to your post.
I was thinking about the fact, that recently it's possible to extract DNA from hair WITHOUT roots ...

Could the mobile phone data now be used as evidence?

Could the McCanns turn this into a human rights issue is with the intense media,public and other scrutiny could they claim on behalf of the right to privacy and or family life?
What also would the role of MBM ward of court status?
Does this help OG or hinder it ?
If this journalist believes somethings about to happen is it here about the fund an easier prosecution I imagine or in Portugal ?

Honeyblade wrote:Could the McCanns turn this into a human rights issue is with the intense media,public and other scrutiny could they claim on behalf of the right to privacy and or family life?
What also would the role of MBM ward of court status?
Does this help OG or hinder it ?
If this journalist believes somethings about to happen is it here about the fund an easier prosecution I imagine or in Portugal ?

The media haven't published any negative articles,or I should say,if they have they have either been whoosed or legally acted upon as false,the McCann's can't then play that card.The furore on the court steps in Portugal was of their own making also.

Hellsbells wrote:I don't think it's necessarily true to suggest that Souser has only just acquired an interest in the case. He may have been following the forums for a long time and (who knows) may even be a member.
I suspect most of us thought the Maddie stuff would all have been removed if his Twitter account returned but no it's still there.

I would have thought the fact that Mr Souster wrote the article you linked to on the first page of this thread in October 2008 would indicate exactly this, HB.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/rugbyunion/article2357696.ece

I think the key to whether this journalist is genuine with regards to his approach to Jill is Brian Kennedy and his current frame of mind. Is BK still supportive of the Mcs or not? Mark Souster will be in regular contact with BK due to rugby. If BK now has doubts and has updated MS saying his views no longer fit those of the original article this would've piqued his interest as a journalist, surely?

Has Brian Kennedy commented publicly on this case at all in recent years? If not, could it be a possibility he has changed his views and no longer believes the Mcs? If they still have his support surely he would've made some sort of positive comment over the years?

Walt wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

Dee Coy wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

Andrew wrote:I quote Tony.

And that's what there goal is..

"Can't comment on Portuguese law per se but I'm convinced this case will never go to trial"

 



I think you may be right.

Now, come on, Cristobell! Don't forget you're my pessimistic antidote .

 
 




I mean't in the sense that some don't want it to come trial and may even being working towards that end DeeCoy!  

I actually think Operation Grange are closing in  

The only thing lacking is evidence,or that should be concrete evidence,it wasn't there in 2007 why should it be there now?

SY to the Pj,we want to look at the forensics again.
PJ to SY we want who ever is being protected.
SY no
PJ F off then.
Never the twain shall meet.

 



Fair point, but that 'stalemate' situation has existed since the Scotland Yard Review/Investigation began.  And if that were the current status, why invest another £2million?  

Should also add, lets not forget that officers from the British CPS flew out for a meeting with the Portuguese Attorney General a couple of years ago.  That's pretty significant.  I doubt they were discussing the prosecution of Portuguese citizens.

Just been reading tweets on #McCann does anyone know anything about this?

Bugsy@SuppDoc -4hr.

@zampos Why have you altered the date badly on these screenshots Bennett.#McCann

Anthony Bennett@zampos - 46min

@SuppDoc I can only repeat I have not taken, altered or published any screenshots, so withdraw your false and malicious claims now #McCann

Zora@ real-zm-  38m
@zampos @SuppDoc  someone has. Date format aside " hellohunnybunch" removed. Begs question how (in) complete are Scouster screenshots? #mccann

I have to say, I am absolutely gutted to see the abuse Mark Souster is receiving, especially on twitter, where the trolls seem determined to wreck his life and career. It feels like Brenda Leyland all over again. What the hell is wrong with these people!

Cristobel - hear hear.

Sick people/ nothing better to do.

Antonia wrote:Cristobel - hear hear.

Sick people/ nothing better to do.

I agree with you Antonia and Cristobell - He has been bombarded with 'tweets' from one person all through the night and previously too before he took down his account ....

Well said cristobell ...
Worse than a fox hunt ...
Poor man

costello wrote:Just been reading tweets on #McCann does anyone know anything about this?

Bugsy@SuppDoc -4hr.

@zampos Why have you altered the date badly on these screenshots Bennett.#McCann

Anthony Bennett@zampos - 46min

@SuppDoc I can only repeat I have not taken, altered or published any screenshots, so withdraw your false and malicious claims now #McCann

Zora@ real-zm-  38m
@zampos @SuppDoc  someone has. Date format aside " hellohunnybunch" removed. Begs question how (in) complete are Scouster screenshots? #mccann

Take a look at the @SuppDoc Twitter timeline.