Re: Further Analysis of the Last Photo

by Guest 25.07.14 8:00

missbeetle wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Any ideas on what the black dot on Kate's right lower shin is?

Uncle Sandy's knee looks uncomfortable, too.

So what?

What are you playing at?

Why are you filling this thread with dross?

by missbeetle 25.07.14 8:02

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

Dated 13th May, 2007 - the day after Madeleine's birthday...

Is that the same stripy top from the Donegal holiday picture?

It doesn't seem to have a hood or oversized lapels.

by inspirespirit 25.07.14 8:27

Some of the technical expertise on here is amazing. Sonmi's observations are excellent. Which got me thinking.... as I do...... Photography is not my 'thing' so no idea if this is a mad idea, but is there a world renowned expert in this field, that the police would HAVE to listen to? Could we all chip in (I don't know how many members on here, but I know over on JFM there are over 30,000). If we all put a couple of quid each we could pay for that photograph to be 'proved' false and have it sent to Scotland Yard. If we actually did something concrete to get the SY ball rolling and make them think. Probably a nuts idea, but just 'putting it out there'.

by canada12 25.07.14 8:38

missbeetle wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Dated 13th May, 2007 - the day after Madeleine's birthday...

Is that the same stripy top from the Donegal holiday picture?

It doesn't seem to have a hood or oversized lapels.

I believe it is, missbeetle. Also to be seen hanging on a doorknob in the police photos of 5A. As you point out, no hood or oversized lapels. Therefore, Donegal photo of kids on the rock still questionable when it comes to what is visible on the left side of Madeleine's neck.

ETA. The only other explanation I can think of is that it's the neck edge of the pink top that Madeleine is wearing underneath her jacket. But that still doesn't explain her peculiar neck. Oh well. *shrug* Just another anomaly.

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

by Guest 25.07.14 8:53

canada12 wrote:
missbeetle wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Dated 13th May, 2007 - the day after Madeleine's birthday...

Is that the same stripy top from the Donegal holiday picture?

It doesn't seem to have a hood or oversized lapels.

I believe it is, missbeetle. Also to be seen hanging on a doorknob in the police photos of 5A. As you point out, no hood or oversized lapels. Therefore, Donegal photo of kids on the rock still questionable when it comes to what is visible on the left side of Madeleine's neck.

What is happening here?

I've looked at that photo and it could be anything. It could be Madeleine's collar, her hair, it could be JPEG compression (the actual camera AND later recopying/resizing over all kinds of media) taking shortcuts with colour (yes it does).

Why on earth would they mess with that picture anyway?

Why are people looking for angels dancing on the heads of pins when we already know what the major problem with the last photo is.

This thread is about the last photo and people seem determined to fill it with dross.

by canada12 25.07.14 9:01

BlueBag wrote:

What is happening here?

I've looked at that photo and it could be anything. It could be Madeleine's collar, her hair, it could be JPEG compression (the actual camera AND later recopying/resizing over all kinds of media) taking shortcuts with colour (yes it does).

Why on earth would they mess with that picture anyway?

Why are people looking for angels dancing on the heads of pins when we already know what the major problem with the last photo is.

This thread is about the last photo and people seem determined to fill it with dross.

I don't disagree with you that it could be her collar, but I doubt it's JPEG compression at that high a resolution. Right click on the photo above and view the whole picture at its highest resolution. As I've said before, I have problems with photos that include Madeleine. Her neck looks extremely peculiar in the photo. My thought is that a neck that thin can't support a head that size. Why would they mess with that picture? If you weren't happy with the way someone looked in a picture, would you be tempted to change the way that person looked if you had the ability? If you were intent on "confusion", would you take every opportunity to contribute to it?

by Nereid 25.07.14 9:04

inspirespirit wrote:Some of the technical expertise on here is amazing. Sonmi's observations are excellent. Which got me thinking.... as I do...... Photography is not my 'thing' so no idea if this is a mad idea, but is there a world renowned expert in this field, that the police would HAVE to listen to? Could we all chip in (I don't know how many members on here, but I know over on JFM there are over 30,000). If we all put a couple of quid each we could pay for that photograph to be 'proved' false and have it sent to Scotland Yard. If we actually did something concrete to get the SY ball rolling and make them think. Probably a nuts idea, but just 'putting it out there'

Nice idea, but if SY are serious about solving this crime, they would already have had the Last Photo analysed.
If it's a cover-up, well......

You could try something like this, but I don't know what the legal implications are as we don't own the photograph:

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

by Guest 25.07.14 9:05

A test for the "critical thinkers".

Why is this NOT part of the stripey jacket?

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

by tiny 25.07.14 9:07

Having looked at the photos on this thread the only thing I can see is that the children were poorly dressed by a pair of doctors on good money

by Guest 25.07.14 9:08

canada12 wrote:but I doubt it's JPEG compression at that high a resolution.

The size is irrelevant.

The compression algorithm and ratio is.

Cameras also ~~mess with~~ enhance colour as well.

by inspirespirit 25.07.14 9:24

The stripey jacket saga. It's an oversized stripey jacket that a littlie is wearing and it is all bunched up. (maybe a handme down from Madaleine). I don't see any mystery at all in that photograph. Whether it had a hood or not, she is sat at a funny angle and her jacket is sticking out a bit at the side.

by sar 25.07.14 9:29

tiny wrote:Having looked at the photos on this thread the only thing I can see is that the children were poorly dressed by a pair of doctors on good money

yeah for people who apparently holidayed / honeymooned in Maui / Tahoe, at that point these places were fairly "exclusive"??

by canada12 25.07.14 9:33

I agree that this thread is about The Last Photo, and that by contributing to other discussions about strange things in other photos we're detracting from the very excellent discussion of the fraud of The Last Photo. Plus there are already other threads which have endless discussions about the other photos.

So I'm going to withdraw from further discussions about those other photos on this thread. There do seem to be some interesting attempts to bury The Last Photo discussion here with "distractions" and I don't want to be a part of that.

by Guest 25.07.14 9:55

Agreed. I will remove any further posts that aren't about the "last" photo.

There's a topic called "Photos of Madeleine" which can be used for other oddities.

by Gaggzy 25.07.14 10:40

Some great posts and observation / calculations about the 'last photo,' especially by Sommi and PeterMac.

I applaud their input and work on the subject.

If a couple of blokes on a website can come up with these facts which virtually prove the photo was not taken on the 3rd May 2007, how much more should OG have reached the same conclusion with experts in photography that they can call on.

Redwood must KNOW that photo was not taken at that time.

The question is - what the hell is he doing about it?

by Guest 25.07.14 11:09

BlueBag wrote:
canada12 wrote:
missbeetle wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Dated 13th May, 2007 - the day after Madeleine's birthday...

Is that the same stripy top from the Donegal holiday picture?

It doesn't seem to have a hood or oversized lapels.

I believe it is, missbeetle. Also to be seen hanging on a doorknob in the police photos of 5A. As you point out, no hood or oversized lapels. Therefore, Donegal photo of kids on the rock still questionable when it comes to what is visible on the left side of Madeleine's neck.

What is happening here?

I've looked at that photo and it could be anything. It could be Madeleine's collar, her hair, it could be JPEG compression (the actual camera AND later recopying/resizing over all kinds of media) taking shortcuts with colour (yes it does).

Why on earth would they mess with that picture anyway?

Why are people looking for angels dancing on the heads of pins when we already know what the major problem with the last photo is.

This thread is about the last photo and people seem determined to fill it with dross.

Because they want to shoot the squirrel.

by **PeterMac** 25.07.14 11:44

Gaggzy wrote:
Redwood must KNOW that photo was not taken at that time.

He does.
And through this and other fora TM know know that he knows knows.

And some of the proof has been posted here, though not all of it.
When he asks the question it will not be to find the answer.
It will be to check whether what he is being told is the Truth - or just a "version" of the truth

by Guest 25.07.14 11:46

Peter, do you know he does for certain?

by NickE 06.08.14 8:28

BlueBag wrote:Peter, do you know he does for certain?

He know's now.
I know that the information about shadows,Weather and times has been sent to O.G.

by aiyoyo 06.08.14 9:12

It was mentioned here in this forum that research work, including the one on the last photo had been given to OG. So, yes, Redwood knows.

by HelenMeg 06.08.14 9:33

aiyoyo wrote:It was mentioned here in this forum that research work, including the one on the last photo had been given to OG. So, yes, Redwood knows.

I wonder what actually happens to information that is sent or passed on to OG ? Does AR get o see it or is it filed away. Do they sift through all the info or just ignore it preferring to concentrate on the focus of their own investigation.

One thing for sure is that whilst research is still being sent to OG, it makes it difficult for them to whitewash over things. I cant help feeling that they should have done this research themselves though - a long time ago - maybe they have.

To me, it appears that OG gets switched 'on ' and 'off' as the need arises. It ma well be lying dormant right now. With the Home Sec ordering the MET to do so many different reviews, I think that many officers will be assigned to a few cases at once. Many reviews are just for show anyway - to keep the public happy.

by Justformaddie 06.08.14 10:07

Seriously, does Amelie not have her own jacket that fits? Is there a point to her wearing this jacket? Have they read something from gm bedtime reading for a point to this?
IMO

by aiyoyo 06.08.14 10:23

HelenMeg wrote:
I wonder what actually happens to information that is sent or passed on to OG ? Does AR get o see it or is it filed away. Do they sift through all the info or just ignore it preferring to concentrate on the focus of their own investigation.
.

Low rank staff/officer scan read first, assessing value of contents to investigation before being filtered to Redwood?
Maybe the incoming mails have to go through a chain process to get to the top man ?
But they would be obliged to process the incoming info no matter what I should think.

If coming from a credible source, that would be given priority, one assumes.

by plebgate 06.08.14 11:01

aiyoyo wrote:
HelenMeg wrote:
I wonder what actually happens to information that is sent or passed on to OG ? Does AR get o see it or is it filed away. Do they sift through all the info or just ignore it preferring to concentrate on the focus of their own investigation.
.

Low rank staff/officer scan read first, assessing value of contents to investigation before being filtered to Redwood?
Maybe the incoming mails have to go through a chain process to get to the top man ?
But they would be obliged to process the incoming info no matter what I should think.

If coming from a credible source, that would be given priority, one assumes.

I think a former Superintendent would be viewed as a credible source. yes

by **PeterMac** 06.08.14 15:19

Automated Response‏

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Add to contacts 10/06/2014
To: pmac* * * * hotmail.com

Many thanks for taking the time to contact the Operation Grange mailbox.
Your email will be read by one of the officers on the enquiry team. You will appreciate that we receive a large volume of emails as part of this enquiry and as a result you may not necessarily receive any further contact from us. If, however we need to contact you further, an officer will be in touch in due course.

My guess is that it will then be logged into the HOLMES II system.