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

Yes, but the documentaries have involved the McCanns themselves, and mostly the press articles are written by Clarence Mitchell, so are in no way discussing any evidence against the McCanns (apart from a short time after the EVRD dogs went in) so as it's all been positive it cannot affect a trial the same way as a probing documentary about the parents and their possible involvement.

Also OG is now actively investigating the case, along with the PJ, that wasn't always the case, between the shelving of the original investigation and the subsequent re-opening along with the beginning of Grange, fair enough, and if these investigations conclude with no arrests, then yes, go for it, but not while there is a real possibility that the guilty parties could be brought to justice

costello wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

Resistor wrote:

costello wrote:I just want to say I am useless at judging people, to be honest I don't believe in it. I trust too much and then learn my lessons later. For what it is worth I still think this guy is genuine and has a legitimate interest in this case. As I have said before, only time will tell. The only down side in my opinion is the fact he did not foresee his interest would be discussed on said forum.

Then he's not much of an investigative journalist, because any Google search of "Madeleine McCann" will take you to 1001 different Forums, of highly variable merit and quality.

 


He is actually an award winning journalist who writes for the Sunday Times, so I am not really sure that is a fair assessment!

Cheers Cristobell, so am I now assuming because he is a Rugby critic he has to be in some way connected to a said Brian Kennedy. Give me strength, as ever I remain more optimistic.

LOL, yes, just as being on nodding terms with someone in your local pub means you are involved with the disposal of a child's body, having a love of rugby implicates you in a global conspiracy And if you don't get that, you will be their next target!

susible wrote:Yes, but the documentaries have involved the McCanns themselves, and mostly the press articles are written by Clarence Mitchell, so are in no way discussing any evidence against the McCanns (apart from a short time after the EVRD dogs went in) so as it's all been positive it cannot affect a trial the same way as a probing documentary about the parents and their possible involvement.

Also OG is now actively investigating the case, along with the PJ, that wasn't always the case, between the shelving of the original investigation and the subsequent re-opening along with the beginning of Grange, fair enough, and if these investigations conclude with no arrests, then yes, go for it, but not while there is a real possibility that the guilty parties could be brought to justice

You are of course entitled to your opinion. However, with this case, there has always been a very real danger that the truth behind Madeleine's disappearance was going to be successfully covered up. In fact, that is the reason that I, and indeed many, are here discussing this case and trying to get the 'truth' into the public arena. It could be argued that ANY comment made by any one of us, yourself included, could jeopardise any future criminal trial. Does that mean we should no longer discuss the case?

I will reserve any judgment on a possible cover up until after Grange and the Portuguese investigation have concluded, if it fails to deliver anything of substance, then I will be forced to agree it was a waste of time and money, but until then I am prepared to be optimistic.

As for us writing on forums, that is a bit different to printing a story in a newspaper or screening a documentary.  All manner of ongoing cases have discussion forums etc but often the general public are unaware of them, so there is no harm done.  On saying that though, I totally disagree with the naming of random people who just happened to be in PdL and putting all of their private information online and scrutinising every aspect of their lives, when the chances are remote to non existent that they had any involvement in  Madeleine's disappearance.  Fortunately this forum does not do that, but it used to a constant source of concern for me at the other place.

ETA and Candyfloss and Freedom make sure that people are not posting libelous information, it is all said as our opinion only..not stating anything as fact

Cristobell wrote:

costello wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

Resistor wrote:

costello wrote:I just want to say I am useless at judging people, to be honest I don't believe in it. I trust too much and then learn my lessons later. For what it is worth I still think this guy is genuine and has a legitimate interest in this case. As I have said before, only time will tell. The only down side in my opinion is the fact he did not foresee his interest would be discussed on said forum.

Then he's not much of an investigative journalist, because any Google search of "Madeleine McCann" will take you to 1001 different Forums, of highly variable merit and quality.

 


He is actually an award winning journalist who writes for the Sunday Times, so I am not really sure that is a fair assessment!

Cheers Cristobell, so am I now assuming because he is a Rugby critic he has to be in some way connected to a said Brian Kennedy. Give me strength, as ever I remain more optimistic.

 


LOL, yes, just as being on nodding terms with someone in your local pub means you are involved with the disposal of a child's body, having a love of rugby implicates you in a global conspiracy  And if  you don't get that, you will be their next target!  

You're being ridiculous now and taking things out of context.

If is what has been posted is true, this "journalist" has a long line of friendship with Brian Kennedy and others. Is that to be ignored or is it all made up rubbish? What is your opinion?

This topic has been split from the other one on Sonia's documentary, please continue here re Mark Souster and the DM's.

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

costello wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

Resistor wrote:

costello wrote:I just want to say I am useless at judging people, to be honest I don't believe in it. I trust too much and then learn my lessons later. For what it is worth I still think this guy is genuine and has a legitimate interest in this case. As I have said before, only time will tell. The only down side in my opinion is the fact he did not foresee his interest would be discussed on said forum.

Then he's not much of an investigative journalist, because any Google search of "Madeleine McCann" will take you to 1001 different Forums, of highly variable merit and quality.

 


He is actually an award winning journalist who writes for the Sunday Times, so I am not really sure that is a fair assessment!

Cheers Cristobell, so am I now assuming because he is a Rugby critic he has to be in some way connected to a said Brian Kennedy. Give me strength, as ever I remain more optimistic.

 


LOL, yes, just as being on nodding terms with someone in your local pub means you are involved with the disposal of a child's body, having a love of rugby implicates you in a global conspiracy  And if  you don't get that, you will be their next target!  

You're being ridiculous now and taking things out of context.

If is what has been posted is true, this "journalist" has a long line of friendship with Brian Kennedy and others.  Is that to be ignored or is it all made up rubbish?  What is your opinion?

I am merely pointing out that associating with someone does not mean you hold the same values and beliefs. I personally have friends who are catholics and friends who are tories, but it doesn't make me one of them! Mark Souster knows Brian Kennedy, they share of a love of rugby, so what? I actually just read an anorak article by MS from 2008 (on Isabelle's twitter timeline) in which Mark is questioning BK's involvement!

As none of us know MS, it is a bit presumptuous to write him off as being in the pockets of Brian Kennedy, Rupert Murdoch and the McCanns. We can't just make things up, lets leave that to the other place!

Cristobell wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

costello wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

Resistor wrote:

costello wrote:I just want to say I am useless at judging people, to be honest I don't believe in it. I trust too much and then learn my lessons later. For what it is worth I still think this guy is genuine and has a legitimate interest in this case. As I have said before, only time will tell. The only down side in my opinion is the fact he did not foresee his interest would be discussed on said forum.

Then he's not much of an investigative journalist, because any Google search of "Madeleine McCann" will take you to 1001 different Forums, of highly variable merit and quality.

 


He is actually an award winning journalist who writes for the Sunday Times, so I am not really sure that is a fair assessment!

Cheers Cristobell, so am I now assuming because he is a Rugby critic he has to be in some way connected to a said Brian Kennedy. Give me strength, as ever I remain more optimistic.

 


LOL, yes, just as being on nodding terms with someone in your local pub means you are involved with the disposal of a child's body, having a love of rugby implicates you in a global conspiracy  And if  you don't get that, you will be their next target!  

You're being ridiculous now and taking things out of context.

If is what has been posted is true, this "journalist" has a long line of friendship with Brian Kennedy and others.  Is that to be ignored or is it all made up rubbish?  What is your opinion?

 



I am merely pointing out that associating with someone does not mean you hold the same values and beliefs.  I personally have friends who are catholics and friends who are tories, but it doesn't make me one of them!  Mark Souster knows Brian Kennedy, they share of a love of rugby, so what?  I actually just read an anorak article by MS from 2008 (on Isabelle's twitter timeline) in which Mark is questioning BK's involvement!  

As none of us know MS, it is a bit presumptuous to write him off as being in the pockets of Brian Kennedy, Rupert Murdoch and the McCanns.  We can't just make things up, lets leave that to the other place!

Well seeing they may be all connected in some form, as with others with Sky etc. if is what is being said is true, it's not easy to shove everything under the carpet, as seems to be the case at the moment as it's not convenient for some to carry on with this discussion.

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

costello wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

Resistor wrote:

costello wrote:I just want to say I am useless at judging people, to be honest I don't believe in it. I trust too much and then learn my lessons later. For what it is worth I still think this guy is genuine and has a legitimate interest in this case. As I have said before, only time will tell. The only down side in my opinion is the fact he did not foresee his interest would be discussed on said forum.

Then he's not much of an investigative journalist, because any Google search of "Madeleine McCann" will take you to 1001 different Forums, of highly variable merit and quality.

 


He is actually an award winning journalist who writes for the Sunday Times, so I am not really sure that is a fair assessment!

Cheers Cristobell, so am I now assuming because he is a Rugby critic he has to be in some way connected to a said Brian Kennedy. Give me strength, as ever I remain more optimistic.

 


LOL, yes, just as being on nodding terms with someone in your local pub means you are involved with the disposal of a child's body, having a love of rugby implicates you in a global conspiracy  And if  you don't get that, you will be their next target!  

You're being ridiculous now and taking things out of context.

If is what has been posted is true, this "journalist" has a long line of friendship with Brian Kennedy and others.  Is that to be ignored or is it all made up rubbish?  What is your opinion?

 



I am merely pointing out that associating with someone does not mean you hold the same values and beliefs.  I personally have friends who are catholics and friends who are tories, but it doesn't make me one of them!  Mark Souster knows Brian Kennedy, they share of a love of rugby, so what?  I actually just read an anorak article by MS from 2008 (on Isabelle's twitter timeline) in which Mark is questioning BK's involvement!  

As none of us know MS, it is a bit presumptuous to write him off as being in the pockets of Brian Kennedy, Rupert Murdoch and the McCanns.  We can't just make things up, lets leave that to the other place!

Well seeing they may be all connected in some form, as with others with Sky etc. if is what is being said is true, it's not easy to shove everything under the carpet, as seems to be the case at the moment as it's not convenient for some to carry on with this discussion.

I for one am prepared to wait and see the outcome, as ever I remain optimistic.

Resistor wrote:

Hellsbells wrote:there are a couple of other Maddie related tweets on his account.

https://mobile.twitter.com/sousterrugby

can't believe he's doing this without permission from above so something is going on.

Of course he isn't.  Journalists who are employed by papers]b] get told[/b] what to write, they don't get to put their own pet projects in the paper.  This is bullcrap.  I can't believe that people are being taken in by this nonsense yet again.

Err, actually no they don't. Journalists write their own articles, as they wish to write them. No newspaper (not even the massive ones) has the time and resources to 'tell' their journalists what to write, word for word. Every feature, article, column etc, has to be written and ready for publication within a very limited time frame. The idea that every single one of them has to be dictated and prepped personally by the proprietor of a newspaper is ludicrous.

I suppose it would depend on what type of article/documentary was to be printed/aired. If it was simply re-telling the story, even if included mention of the arguido status, FSS results, the shelving of the case and subsequent release of (most) of the police files, then as all of that is already in the public domain..warts and all, then obviously there is no issue albeit a bit pointless for many of us, as we all know that information anyway. However, even an article/documentary like that would have to tread carefully to ensure that there was no inference of guilt to the McCanns, with the result that these types of things, as we all know too well, tend to suggest that there is no clear evidence of complicity by the parents and as such tend to infer the opposite, which is no help either.

My greatest hope is with the Portuguese investigation in tandem with Operation Grange to finally solve the case and bring those we suspect to justice, then we can have documentaries, articles etc coming out of our ears about how these 2 nobodies managed to fool the whole world, rake in a fortune and become feted celebs on the fate of their poor daughter

I don't know what is going on with all this,............



Anthony Bennett ‏@zampos · 1h1 hour ago
For how long @JillyCL have you been plotting with @QUEENdePORTUAL, #MarkSouster & #BrianKennedy? - Tell #McCann followers what your game is



Anthony Bennett ‏@zampos · 57m57 minutes ago
@JillyCL Why do you defend #RobertMurat who lied to PJ re what he did 1-4 May '07 & sneakily looked at police docs while translating #McCann


Anthony Bennett ‏@zampos · 54m54 minutes ago
So @JillyCL you've unfollowed @QUEENdePORTUGAL today. It would be wise for others to follow suit and avoid her cunning little #McCann games

Deleted. Personal comment

Deleted as original deleted.

It boggles my mind that so many people that claim they want truth and justice in this case have allowed themselves to catch some mind bending Twitter disease.

I can't even tell if they're knowingly engaging in a game or if they've allowed themselves to be tricked into it?

candyfloss wrote:I don't know what is going on with all this,............



Anthony Bennett ‏@zampos  · 1h1 hour ago  
For how long @JillyCL have you been plotting with @QUEENdePORTUAL, #MarkSouster & #BrianKennedy? - Tell #McCann followers what your game is



Anthony Bennett ‏@zampos  · 57m57 minutes ago  
@JillyCL Why do you defend #RobertMurat who lied to PJ re what he did 1-4 May '07 & sneakily looked at police docs while translating #McCann


Anthony Bennett ‏@zampos  · 54m54 minutes ago  
So @JillyCL you've unfollowed @QUEENdePORTUGAL today. It would be wise for others to follow suit and avoid her cunning little #McCann games

I`m speechless.

I'm not speechless. I've just promised myself long ago not to react. Biting my tongue, though.

Does anyone think that anyone will be able to get anything out without being turned inside out first by a certain person? That journalist just may have been genuine, but look what's happened. Anyone serious enough would have to keep it away from forums, Twitter and FB IMO.

TheTruthWillOut wrote:It boggles my mind that so many people that claim they want truth and justice in this case have allowed themselves to catch some mind bending Twitter disease.

I can't even tell if they're knowingly engaging in a game or if they've allowed themselves to be tricked into it?  

There's been a game going on for a long time.

Don't know diddly squat about Jilly although I believe she's very dedicated in finding the truth for Madeleine.

More than can be said of her nemesis.

Quick skim read earlier over there and noticed a couple of posters (socks?) reckoned all this Souster stuff was a deliberate attempt to entrap TB and get him sent back to jail... Or some equally utter nonsense.

All a big game for some and very sad.

dogs don't lie wrote:Does anyone think that anyone will be able to get anything out without being turned inside out first by a certain person? That journalist just may have been genuine, but look what's happened. Anyone serious enough would have to keep it away from forums, Twitter and FB IMO.

It's called the art of discrediting, ddl.

Anything or anyone who might be telling the truth or looking into the truth, gets attacked.

Obvious agenda, imo.

Couldn't be more obvious and that's what's really sad and pathetic.

Imo etc.

One obvious possibility is that a certain someone with strong views and beliefs is worried about being wrong and/or being outed as playing the 'game' as much as anyone?

Absolutely playing a game, ttwo.

Very worried about truth for some reason.

No comment.

Anyone with multiple id's is clearly and obviously playing a game.

And that's a fact.

Andrew wrote:

dogs don't lie wrote:Does anyone think that anyone will be able to get anything out without being turned inside out first by a certain person? That journalist just may have been genuine, but look what's happened. Anyone serious enough would have to keep it away from forums, Twitter and FB IMO.

It's called the art of discrediting, ddl.

Anything or anyone who might be telling the truth or looking into the truth, gets attacked.

Obvious agenda, imo.

Couldn't be more obvious and that's what's really sad and pathetic.

Imo etc.

As I posted today at 3.31 p.m. who do any of us know who this person is. Where has he has been for the past 8 years. Why has he suddenly come out of the woodwork asking questions, why hasn't he been doing his own research for the past 3/4/8 years?

Does he want others to do his work for him and he gets paid an enormous fee from ST, Kennedy or whoever he may be working for.

I'm with PeterMac, I'm afraid. Why have these people suddenly decided to look into the "disappearance" of Madeleine when GA's case is coming up and the PJ & SY may be at the end of their investigations (another £2million for the next 6 months, does that mean they will have cracked the case in 6 months and people are getting very jittery????)

No idea, yes there's always the coincidence thing (G.A) and that was all pre-planned with the twitter nonsense and dragging the poor Needhams into it. Imo.

This chap could be a complete fake. Although imo, I don't think he is.

A lot of journalists are going to make a lot of money out of this very soon.

If I was a journalist then I would be sniffing about too. And by all accounts, that's all he's done.

But gets shafted, exposed, or whatever you want to call it by wotsit, so goes into hiding... And who can blame him.

TB constantly harps on about how great CMoMM is and the best M forum in the world etc...

Just maybe, said journo wanted to speak in confidence to the forum owner of that. Which it looked like he attempted...

Yes, agreed certain people are getting very jittery which is very obvious.

Imo etc