Re: Maddie`s left arm

by joyce1938 15.09.14 11:35

Just in my opinion, a lot of the things we go on about ,would not see the light of day . It will take more proof i would think ,if to get it to court .cant see major issues decided on these photshopped pictures ,if ofcourse they are . yes I too think its very possible we could be muddying the waters just doesn't seem relevant enough to sway a case of dissapearence , we just don't have proof needed. The lady that has done the experiment to the cake and shiny surface does make sense ,but people don't seem to want to believe it . joyce1938

by juliet 15.09.14 12:08

Joyce1938, so many of the photographs produced by the McCanns are either bizarre or suspicious. If it can be shown they are fake or manipulated it shows the whole case is fake/ manipulated. This weird kitchen picture makes no sense - from the mystery of whose birthday it was supposed to be to the reflection anomalies, Kate's carving knife, the cake miles from poor Maddie "blowing out the candles", the huge pile of plates but no sign of guests or party preparations, the whole look of a staged and rather miserable event.

by inspirespirit 15.09.14 12:37

Juliet, there are no reflection anomolies. The birthday cake reflection has been cleared up if you look at previous posts where an experiment was done. The trousers would not reflect as it would be her top reflecting, which is black...... if you look next to her the books are reflecting from high up, not the cupboard so it is all to do with angles and shadows.
If the birthday cake is for the twins (most probably, pink and blue), then they probably took it out in the kitchen to cut up and then re-lit the candles to let Maddie blow them out. Something we have all done when you have more than one child.

by palm tree 15.09.14 12:47

Does anyone know the reason for the white tan marks on Madeleines arms? IMO, it's impossible to have them where they are.

by pennylane 15.09.14 12:59

inspirespirit wrote:Juliet, there are no reflection anomolies. The birthday cake reflection has been cleared up if you look at previous posts where an experiment was done. The trousers would not reflect as it would be her top reflecting, which is black...... if you look next to her the books are reflecting from high up, not the cupboard so it is all to do with angles and shadows.
If the birthday cake is for the twins (most probably, pink and blue), then they probably took it out in the kitchen to cut up and then re-lit the candles to let Maddie blow them out. Something we have all done when you have more than one child.

Spot on inspirespirit! A perfectly normal picture, and so sad to contemplate the tragedy that awaits Maddie in the not too distant future.

by Guest 17.09.14 21:33

Ladyinred wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Copied this photo from jeanmonroe's post on another thread. What's happened to MBM's left side?

If you look on Rex Features, a slightly bigger picture of the above accounts for why MBM's left side looks odd - she is just resting on her arms:-

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

All imo

by Masterblaster 18.09.14 7:58

Just been browsing through these photographs, they are reminding me of all the lies, smoke screens, half-truths and deceit we have listened to over the past 7 years, I hope I live long enough to see this pair, and all those who have assisted them brought to justice.

My personal opinion of course.

by joyce1938 18.09.14 10:10

Yes you have said that ,I think maybe she is layind down on tummy and then looking sideways a little ,that was good spotting of yours. joyce1938

by j.rob 19.09.14 10:46

BlackCatBoogie wrote:
Ladyinred wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Copied this photo from jeanmonroe's post on another thread. What's happened to MBM's left side?
If you look on Rex Features, a slightly bigger picture of the above accounts for why MBM's left side looks odd - she is just resting on her arms:-

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

All imo

I don't think the 'larger picture' makes the photo any more questionable. If anything, it is even more odd and peculiar. The context is very unclear. If she is in a swimming pool, which is suggested by the blue background and then ends of her hair being wet, plus unclothed upper torso, then why would she have her hands on the bottom of the pool? If it were a paddling pool, surely you would see the water more clearly?

If it is Madeleine in the bath - which again might be suggested by the wet ends of hair and the apparently bare upper torso, again that is very unclear from the photo. It does not look like a bath.

Why produce photos for publication where the context is so ambiguous and which are so heavily cropped? Why put into the public domain photos of a child who has gone missing in mysterious circumstances which are in any way ambiguous or questionable?

If the family, friends, acquaintances are entirely innocent of having anything at all to do with Madeleine's disappearance. And if they are the 'normal, happy, loving' family that they would have us believe, then why are there not hoards of photographs of their much longed-for first child? Normal photographs of all the usual milestones in a child's life. Babe in arms. Babe with parents. First birthday photos. Second birthday photos. Third birthday photos. Photos with friends. Photos with relatives. Photos from nursery. Photos from other children's birthday parties. Photos from holidays. Photos taken by relatives.

Don't point me towards the photos in Kate's book or the ones that the McCanns have released because imo none of them fall within the bounds of 'normality.'

I've dug out some photos of my own children at around that age and also of myself at around that age taken by my parents. There is not a single one in which the context is unclear. In each one, it is clear what is happening, where, and why.

Playing on the beach. In a school play. Playing with siblings. A portrait with siblings. And so on.

Every photo of Madeleine that has been made public should be above any kind of suspicion, confusion or awkward scrutiny. One would expect nothing less from the grieving family of a much-loved and much cared for child who was so cruelly snatched from the arms of a loving family.

by Angelique 19.09.14 11:11

Anon357

Snipped from your post: "I feel this discussion is going the way of previous threads regarding reflections etc and whilst fascinating in the different theories being put about, I feel it is straying from the original post where I asked about how often her left arm is shopped"

I am puzzled by the "odd" poses of many of the photo's - her legs in the play area photo which IMO is even more strange than the Last Photo by the pool. But I also find it strange that Madeleine has various "faces" as well depending on which location she is at the time. So I agree that her arm in the tennis ball photo which we now know has been flipped I think, has a strange red area. The arm in the ice cream photo is strange and now the cake photo seems to be full of anomalies as well.

What I think is that the cake photo was deliberate posing but then thats normal for family photos. I would not allow a child to blow out the candles on a Birthday cake while holding a knife up or even be holding a knife while the photo was taken. This is odd for me.

by Guest 19.09.14 11:44

j.rob wrote:
BlackCatBoogie wrote:
Ladyinred wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Copied this photo from jeanmonroe's post on another thread. What's happened to MBM's left side?
If you look on Rex Features, a slightly bigger picture of the above accounts for why MBM's left side looks odd - she is just resting on her arms:-

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

All imo

I don't think the 'larger picture' makes the photo any more questionable. If anything, it is even more odd and peculiar. The context is very unclear. If she is in a swimming pool, which is suggested by the blue background and then ends of her hair being wet, plus unclothed upper torso, then why would she have her hands on the bottom of the pool? If it were a paddling pool, surely you would see the water more clearly?

If it is Madeleine in the bath - which again might be suggested by the wet ends of hair and the apparently bare upper torso, again that is very unclear from the photo. It does not look like a bath.

Why produce photos for publication where the context is so ambiguous and which are so heavily cropped? Why put into the public domain photos of a child who has gone missing in mysterious circumstances which are in any way ambiguous or questionable?

If the family, friends, acquaintances are entirely innocent of having anything at all to do with Madeleine's disappearance. And if they are the 'normal, happy, loving' family that they would have us believe, then why are there not hoards of photographs of their much longed-for first child? Normal photographs of all the usual milestones in a child's life. Babe in arms. Babe with parents. First birthday photos. Second birthday photos. Third birthday photos. Photos with friends. Photos with relatives. Photos from nursery. Photos from other children's birthday parties. Photos from holidays. Photos taken by relatives.

Don't point me towards the photos in Kate's book or the ones that the McCanns have released because imo none of them fall within the bounds of 'normality.'

I've dug out some photos of my own children at around that age and also of myself at around that age taken by my parents. There is not a single one in which the context is unclear. In each one, it is clear what is happening, where, and why.

Playing on the beach. In a school play. Playing with siblings. A portrait with siblings. And so on.

Every photo of Madeleine that has been made public should be above any kind of suspicion, confusion or awkward scrutiny. One would expect nothing less from the grieving family of a much-loved and much cared for child who was so cruelly snatched from the arms of a loving family.

Looking at the bigger picture again j.rob (sorry I just don't feel right posting it here) I would say it is a shallow plastic paddling pool - I have one almost identical that has a white plastic bottom (you can I think see the wrinkles in it by her left hand) and blow up plastic sides. I'm sure that's what it is.

I totally agree with you j.rob most pictures of MBM are questionable with a lot of evidence of pshopping and other wierdness - but to me this one looks normal.

All in my own opinion

by juliet 26.09.14 10:04

Is it normal to put lipstick and eyeliner on a child prior to photographing her in the bath? As jrob says, just about every photo of Madeleine is weird in some way. Yet the apologists always pop up to say "My daughter also loved raiding my make up bag!", "My daughter also loved to relax by the skirting board", "Madeleine just has naturally sooty lashes and crimson lips."

by j.rob 26.09.14 16:41

juliet wrote:Is it normal to put lipstick and eyeliner on a child prior to photographing her in the bath? As jrob says, just about every photo of Madeleine is weird in some way. Yet the apologists always pop up to say "My daughter also loved raiding my make up bag!", "My daughter also loved to relax by the skirting board", "Madeleine just has naturally sooty lashes and crimson lips."

I agree it does look as though her lips have been coloured in some way - even if it by manipulation of the photo. She also has, in many of the especially questionable photos, a little 'tie' thing at the end of some strands of hair. I think there is some symbolism in this. In the creepy 'Madeleine was Here' series, where there is a scene where Gerry arrives back at the family home, and Kate lets him into the kitchen, Amelie is also wearing a similar type of hair tie. Somewhat strangely, as Gerry walks into the kitchen, Amelie becomes agitated and starts pulling at the hair tie, wanting it to be taken off. Kate then comes over to her and starts removing it.

A strange little scene that leaves you wondering: 'what was all that about?' GM also noticeably avoids eye-contact with Amelie.

Very odd how all these weird photos/footage were released into the public domain, imo.

by juliet 26.09.14 20:17

That first video - of the child in some sort of princess outfit - should have rung alarm bells. Madeleine is filmed for several minutes in complete silence. She pushes her mouth in and out looking as if she isn't sure what is expevted of her. Eventually she looks at the cameraman (Gerry? ) with what is close to contempt. What in the world were the McCanns up to? If they show this stuff, what have they hidden?

Log in for more topics