Photos of Madeleine

by GrizzleyBear 30.11.13 21:56

Like others, I have found the many differing photos very confusing. Age, length of hair, teeth formation, eyes...
Equally confusing that Gerry had to return to UK to get some more when many would have been taken while on holiday (one might think).
I wonder are some of the photos of the children of others and, moreover, perhaps some of Kate when she was a child.

by Guest 30.11.13 22:05

Now that's an interesting thought: the tennisball photo being Kate ... It would fit with the rather outdated, nowadays looking poor shorts and sandals. And maybe also with the "desperately-trying-to-please" look at Ma Healy ... IMO, of course, IMO.

by Guest 30.11.13 22:21

There is a photo of Amelie wearing the same shorts though.

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

to our new member Cuddle Cat who's also in the photo.

I don't think that's a photo of Kate with the tennis balls but, if it really was taken within a day or two of the pool photo, I'll eat my hat.

by Guest 30.11.13 22:28

NFWTD, I've been comparing both photos. The pink shorts on "Madeleine's" photo nearly reach her knees. On her much younger sister Amelie, the pink shorts are halfway up her thigh ...

by Guest 30.11.13 22:40

There must be as many pairs of pink shorts as there are Cuddle Cats........

by Guest 30.11.13 23:14

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:There must be as many pairs of pink shorts as there are Cuddle Cats........

***
I guess so. As I'm guessing many more things ... winkwink

by GrizzleyBear 01.12.13 18:37

How can one explain the discrepancies of length of hair etc (see thread on photos and memories) all in the short span of three years? Perhaps the make-up pix were Kate? Just hazarding a guess, of course...

by j.rob 17.06.14 14:14

In Kate's book there is a photo of Madeleine with Gerry in front of what looks to be her first birthday party cake. At first glance, it appears to be a normal family photo. But closer inspection reveals a few curiosities.

The usual suspects, really. A disconnect between Gerry's left arm and hand, hidden by Madeleine's left arm. Madeleine's right hand looking different to the left. The left hand not quite connecting with the body.

Looks like another photo-shop job. And those shadows appearing again. Oh well, at least it is getting quite predictable now!

What is also peculiar (or not, perhaps) is that there is a man behind Gerry, seemingly 'ducking down' as if to avoid being photographed.

Given that I have now reached the conclusion that all the photos in the book are tampered with in some way. And there are messages, warnings etc in them, imo, (honestly - how some people get their kicks Shocked

) who is the man whose identity is being (almost) concealed behind Gerry?

by Mirage 17.06.14 14:36

J Rob, you've got me at it now. I agree with your obs about that photo.

Then I looked at the one on the opposite page with a too young looking KH cuddling a child that doesn't (to me anyway) even look like MBM. Someone (it may have been you) mentioned elsewhere that the hand of the infant which looks to be twiddling top of her hair, is in an impossible position. But if you look again the right hand of the infant seems to be overlaying the left, which in itself looks weird. It leaves me with the impression that the hand twiddling the hair is a third hand and disembodied.

PS I have tried to imagine that the overlaid infant hand is in fact part of KH's hand, but that doesn't seem to work either.

by fossey 17.06.14 14:49

Mirage wrote:J Rob, you've got me at it now. I agree with your obs about that photo.

Then I looked at the one on the opposite page with a too young looking KH cuddling a child that doesn't (to me anyway) even look like MBM. Someone (it may have been you) mentioned elsewhere that the hand of the infant which looks to be twiddling top of her hair, is in an impossible position. But if you look again the right hand of the infant seems to be overlaying the left, which in itself looks weird. It leaves me with the impression that the hand twiddling the hair is a third hand and disembodied.

PS I have tried to imagine that the overlaid infant hand is in fact part of KH's hand, but that doesn't seem to work either.

Blimey - not noticed that before with that pic with the 3 hands. Weird and spooky.

They seemed to have got the 'fleck' in the eye wrong in that pic too. At a 6 O'clock position.

Yes Jrob - hard pushed to find any 'normal' pics I think.

by noddy100 17.06.14 15:30

is it possible to see thee pictures online anywhere?

by Guest 17.06.14 17:24

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

Thanks as ever to Pamalam.

by juliet 17.06.14 18:19

Maybe I am going batty but - in the Pamalam pics there is one of Maddie with a biscuit and the twins drinking from bottles. Then a single one of Maddie I assumed was a blow up from the group photo. In the group pic she is looking down and away but in the other is straight to camera. Is it another shot, or manipulation?

by Guest 17.06.14 19:00

They look both the same to me.

by Hicks 17.06.14 20:15

Oh gawd here we go again! Take a look at the photo of Madeleine with her Grandfather, Gerry's dad I believe.

Look at the hand on his leg, he doesn't have any fingertips. What is going on!!

by fossey 17.06.14 20:29

Hicks wrote:Oh gawd here we go again! Take a look at the photo of Madeleine with her Grandfather, Gerry's dad I believe.

Look at the hand on his leg, he doesn't have any fingertips. What is going on!!

Haha - The more you look at these pics, the more ridiculous they seem to get. Really weird stuff.

Also in that pic Hicks - the right hand doesn't look like it is naturally on M's shoulder. Also IMO the shadows (shadows again) seem to be slightly wrong on M.

Looks like it was taken in the eighties or something.

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

by Snifferdog 17.06.14 20:44

I can't seem to upload using my phone, but there looks to be a few photos that are not right. The one of aunty and Maddie for instance. It looks as though Maddie is growing out of her side.

The other strange one is where M is sitting in front of what looks like a coffee grinder. Her head looks to be very big at the back.
Another weird one is Kates mishappen looking forearm, where she is holding Maddie and a glass of white wine in the garden.

by Hicks 17.06.14 20:48

fossey wrote:
Hicks wrote:Oh gawd here we go again! Take a look at the photo of Madeleine with her Grandfather, Gerry's dad I believe.

Look at the hand on his leg, he doesn't have any fingertips. What is going on!!
Haha - The more you look at these pics, the more ridiculous they seem to get. Really weird stuff.

Also in that pic Hicks - the right hand doesn't look like it is naturally on M's shoulder. Also IMO the shadows (shadows again) seem to be slightly wrong on M.

Looks like it was taken in the eighties or something.

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

Yes fossey, this photo seems to have a very dated feel to it. There is only one explanation I can think of why these photos have been put together like this.......the McCann's are aliens for outer space, they have no family here on planet earth!!

by noddy100 17.06.14 20:51

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks as ever to Pamalam.

Thank you

by Snifferdog 17.06.14 21:21

There is something very wrong with everything as regards the disappearance of Madeleine. Its just too surreal. Some of the photos of Maddie look as though they are of different children, some photoshopped and or put together like a collage.
I am beginning to think the whole thing may be staged, like a huge psyops experiment, to gauge citizens reactions to a scenario such as this, and how many times can they be leg around the bush. The payoff for the McCanns, the money making hoax.
How can this all be actually happening? The crazy press reports. The strange Grange review. Empty CATS files. Gaspar statements. Dog alerts, No medical records for Madeleine. Involvement by powerful people, government interference, are some examples.
Having said that, if true, I do not believe Goncalo Amaral could be in on it. Just all iMo.
:whaat:makes me think of the Matrix. Aaaagh!

by missbeetle 17.06.14 21:51

I've still not seen The Matrix, but I am a subscriber to the 'Paul is dead' theory!

The birthday-cake picture and the one of Gerry in the playground both bring to mind a couple of The Beatles' album covers.

Specifically Abbey Road and Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band.

by Hicks 17.06.14 22:00

Snifferdog wrote:There is something very wrong with everything as regards the disappearance of Madeleine. Its just too surreal. Some of the photos of Maddie look as though they are of different children, some photoshopped and or put together like a collage.
I am beginning to think the whole thing may be staged, like a huge psyops experiment, to gauge citizens reactions to a scenario such as this, and how many times can they be leg around the bush. The payoff for the McCanns, the money making hoax.
How can this all be actually happening? The crazy press reports. The strange Grange review. Empty CATS files. Gaspar statements. Dog alerts, No medical records for Madeleine. Involvement by powerful people, government interference, are some examples.
Having said that, if true, I do not believe Goncalo Amaral could be in on it. Just all iMo.
:whaat:makes me think of the Matrix. Aaaagh!

At times it does seem like one giant hoax. GM seen laughing and joking on the balcony days after the event is hard to fathom. It was as if he was showing off.
I think the McCann's have received protection all these years, this imo has given them the confidence to strut around on the worlds stage with impunity. If only we knew the reason why.

by Guest 17.06.14 22:05

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

I do agree that the photo looks dated but perhaps Grandpa McCann didn't like modern fashions.

The fingers on his left hand are partly obscured by his Ieg, nothing strange there for me.

by Snifferdog 17.06.14 23:18

Also weird is the part I read tonight (posted on a thread here), about Gerry after the Spanish interview, tells Kate not to say anything until after the mikes are switched off, or something to that effect. Do they feel that they don't need to "pretend" in front of their interviewers?

missbeetle, I'm not a huge Hollywood movie fan, and I must admit I have not seen the Matrix either, but my children have, and they filled me in on it... affraid

Hicks, yes, the laughing on the balcony is very very weird. How could a person whose child has just disappeared be laughing and joking with his friends? What does it say about his buddies? Are they all narcissistic psychopaths too or is there something we are not seeing? The general relaxed attitude of the duo soon after Maddies disappearance is very strange. Smilingly walking hand in hand, posing in the rocks, seemingly without a care in the world. We are told that the case has elements that may not be made public as they will cause huge embarrassment to the UK government...I am not saying this is the case, merely that I am beginning to believe that there is even much much more than meets the eye.
Another thing, the way this case has been, and is a veritable rollercoaster ride. One minute it seems as though justice will finally be served, and everyone is buoyed up, the next all comes crashing down, like waves on the beach, sucking back all hope to an end of this saga. I wonder sometimes, if the whole thing was set up as a huge experiment. Perhaps it was staged so that people will be encouraged to chip their children, but it backfired spectacularly. Now operation Grange are scrambling to cover the mess.

by paradigm67 20.06.14 9:40

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks as ever to Pamalam.

Probably been covered already but why is there a photo of MBM just over half way down in the right column that clearly does not have the eye defect?

It could have been photoshopped out I suppose but would seem odd for that to be done.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Edit - looks possibly like a bit of a darkening where it is seen in other photos but nowhere near as prominent. Is this defect a progressive one that gets more prominent over time?