Re: Another look at the Last photo

by Hesinsenburg 08.01.17 16:01

Tony Bennett wrote:
Hesinsenburg wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:

Unless you stop avoiding and ducking this and other evidence, you are doomed never to gain a true understanding of what really happened that week.
I doubt I'll be able to remain long but in answer to this, Tony let's just say for argument's sake, once you have gained a true understanding of what happened under your terms just where will this knowledge get you, go look in the mirror and ask yourself this, I/we on CMOMM have a complete understanding of the event's surrounding the mystery of the disappearence of Madeleine McCann, who is going to answer...?

No-one on here, certainly not me, is insisting we have anything like a 'complete' understanding of what happened to Madeleine.

It's not a competition to the race to the bottom but believing that the knowledge gained on here will in any way influence any one of any standing is sadly misplaced.

That is an argument for doing nothing and researching nothing - and I comprehensively reject it. Let me give you just one example. PeterMac has sent literally dozens of analyses of evidence to DCIs Redwood and Wall at Operation Grange over the years. They are meticulously compiled and exhaustively referenced. To my mind they each contain valuable and irrefutable evidence. Has he been wasting his time? He argues that inevitably, there will come a day - no-one knows when and how - when the whole house of cards comes crashing down. Then, but only then, will it become plain how those entrusted by the state with searching for the truth have done everything in their power to bury it. There will then be a day of reckning for anyone who has knowingly covered anything up.

Thanks for the reply I'm far from advocating doing nothing,its the percieved cmmom is the elite forum.This being an example, one is tempted to say DCI Redwood who is he? he's long gone,these dozens of of analyses advanced his thoughts on the investigation how?
Can it be confirmed that Wall is still part of OG?
There is no doubt any way that OG have investigated an abduction as per their remit are you saying that is what PeterMac has been analysing which would be the complete antithesis of what cmomm was about.
Will there come a day when the house of cards come tumbling down? its taken 25 yrs for a supposed resolution in the Ben Needham case,don't hold your breath waiting on this one.

by **Jill Havern** 08.01.17 16:52

Hesinsenburg wrote:Thanks for the reply I'm far from advocating doing nothing,its the percieved cmmom is the elite forum.This being an example, one is tempted to say DCI Redwood who is he? he's long gone,these dozens of of analyses advanced his thoughts on the investigation how?
Can it be confirmed that Wall is still part of OG?
There is no doubt any way that OG have investigated an abduction as per their remit are you saying that is what PeterMac has been analysing which would be the complete antithesis of what cmomm was about.
Will there come a day when the house of cards come tumbling down? its taken 25 yrs for a supposed resolution in the Ben Needham case,don't hold your breath waiting on this one.

PeterMac is in communication with DCI Wall.

Have you read PeterMac's e-book? Another new chapter has been added today.

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

Does it look like Peter's research is based on the remit?

Tony is not saying PeterMac's research is based on the remit.

Peter told me that any evidence sent to Grange must be recorded in their Policy's Book and that any evidence discarded must be given a reason why.

Just in case further action is taken.

Please note, that after PeterMac retired from the Police after twenty eight years, do you really think he would waste his time on this case researching for FREE if he didn't think it was worth it?

So while you're still researching flowery artifacts on the Last Photo please be advised that CMOMM moved on from that ages ago. If you perceive this forum as being the 'elite' then that's fine, thank you, compliment taken.

thumbsup

by Guest 08.01.17 16:56

HiDeHo wrote:

I would like to make something clear, TO EVERYONE and that is I do not claim that Maddie died on Sunday or Monday.

I believe something happened Sunday or Monday which explains what I have found in the files.

I absolutely agree, that is my opinion also.

Something happened which eventually ended in demise later.

They thought they had it covered.

They didn't.

by Hesinsenburg 08.01.17 17:03

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Hesinsenburg wrote:Thanks for the reply I'm far from advocating doing nothing,its the percieved cmmom is the elite forum.This being an example, one is tempted to say DCI Redwood who is he? he's long gone,these dozens of of analyses advanced his thoughts on the investigation how?
Can it be confirmed that Wall is still part of OG?
There is no doubt any way that OG have investigated an abduction as per their remit are you saying that is what PeterMac has been analysing which would be the complete antithesis of what cmomm was about.
Will there come a day when the house of cards come tumbling down? its taken 25 yrs for a supposed resolution in the Ben Needham case,don't hold your breath waiting on this one.
PeterMac is in communication with DCI Wall.

Have you read PeterMac's e-book? Another new chapter has been added today.

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

Does it look like Peter's research is based on the remit?

Tony is not saying PeterMac's research is based on the remit.

Peter told me that any evidence sent to Grange must be recorded in their Policy's Book and that any evidence discarded must be given a reason why.

Just in case further action is taken.

Please note, that after PeterMac retired from the Police after twenty eight years, do you really think he would waste his time on this case researching for FREE if he didn't think it was worth it?

So while you're still researching flowery artifacts on the Last Photo please be advised that CMOMM moved on from that ages ago. If you perceive this forum as being the 'elite' then that's fine, thank you, compliment taken.

Care to show where I am researching flowery artifacts,cmomm may well have moved on,what is clear is that OG haven't unless you can show otherwise a verifiable cite would be useful,I don't perceive this forum is in anyway elite,its your own showing that does that well enough with out any out side influence.
In the very likely case where it will fail to reach court can you explain if or why any evidence will be discarded and recorded where?

by **Tony Bennett** 08.01.17 17:08

Hesinsenburg wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Hesinsenburg wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:Unless you stop avoiding and ducking this and other evidence, you are doomed never to gain a true understanding of what really happened that week.
I doubt I'll be able to remain long but in answer to this, Tony let's just say for argument's sake, once you have gained a true understanding of what happened under your terms just where will this knowledge get you, go look in the mirror and ask yourself this, I/we on CMOMM have a complete understanding of the event's surrounding the mystery of the disappearence of Madeleine McCann, who is going to answer...?

No-one on here, certainly not me, is insisting we have anything like a 'complete' understanding of what happened to Madeleine.

It's not a competition to the race to the bottom but believing that the knowledge gained on here will in any way influence any one of any standing is sadly misplaced.

That is an argument for doing nothing and researching nothing - and I comprehensively reject it. Let me give you just one example. PeterMac has sent literally dozens of analyses of evidence to DCIs Redwood and Wall at Operation Grange over the years. They are meticulously compiled and exhaustively referenced. To my mind they each contain valuable and irrefutable evidence. Has he been wasting his time? He argues that inevitably, there will come a day - no-one knows when and how - when the whole house of cards comes crashing down. Then, but only then, will it become plain how those entrusted by the state with searching for the truth have done everything in their power to bury it. There will then be a day of reckning for anyone who has knowingly covered anything up.
Thanks for the reply I'm far from advocating doing nothing, it's the percieved CMOMM is the elite forum.

Where, pray, does his perception come from? It's not something we say about oursleves at all. From time to time I point out that CMOMM is by far the most popular and widely-read forum. That is all. And those are hard facts. It is candyfloss's forum that bigs itself up: 'The friendly forum, no bullying here, no 'party line' here' etc. Live and let live would be a good principle all round, but tell me why there are now 280 pages and 6,000-plus posts over there bashing CMOMM?

There is no doubt any way that OG have investigated an abduction as per their remit...

The remit was corrupt. Is that not blindingly obvious by now?

Will there come a day when the house of cards come tumbling down? it's taken 25 yrs for a supposed resolution in the Ben Needham case...

Longer in other cases. But hey, on with the research. Here on CMOMM, anyways...

by Hesinsenburg 08.01.17 17:26

Tony Bennett wrote:
Hesinsenburg wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Hesinsenburg wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:Unless you stop avoiding and ducking this and other evidence, you are doomed never to gain a true understanding of what really happened that week.
I doubt I'll be able to remain long but in answer to this, Tony let's just say for argument's sake, once you have gained a true understanding of what happened under your terms just where will this knowledge get you, go look in the mirror and ask yourself this, I/we on CMOMM have a complete understanding of the event's surrounding the mystery of the disappearence of Madeleine McCann, who is going to answer...?

No-one on here, certainly not me, is insisting we have anything like a 'complete' understanding of what happened to Madeleine.

It's not a competition to the race to the bottom but believing that the knowledge gained on here will in any way influence any one of any standing is sadly misplaced.

That is an argument for doing nothing and researching nothing - and I comprehensively reject it. Let me give you just one example. PeterMac has sent literally dozens of analyses of evidence to DCIs Redwood and Wall at Operation Grange over the years. They are meticulously compiled and exhaustively referenced. To my mind they each contain valuable and irrefutable evidence. Has he been wasting his time? He argues that inevitably, there will come a day - no-one knows when and how - when the whole house of cards comes crashing down. Then, but only then, will it become plain how those entrusted by the state with searching for the truth have done everything in their power to bury it. There will then be a day of reckning for anyone who has knowingly covered anything up.
Thanks for the reply I'm far from advocating doing nothing, it's the percieved CMOMM is the elite forum.

Where, pray, does his perception come from? It's not something we say about oursleves at all. From time to time I point out that CMOMM is by far the most popular and widely-read forum. That is all. And those are hard facts. It is candyfloss's forum that bigs itself up: 'The friendly forum, no bullying here, no 'party line' here' etc. Live and let live would be a good principle all round, but tell me why there are now 280 pages and 6,000-plus posts over there bashing CMOMM?
If has an esteemed researcher you claim to be,can't you rise above it if it grates so much.
There is no doubt any way that OG have investigated an abduction as per their remit...

The remit was corrupt. Is that not blindingly obvious by now?
Then you had better inform admin who thinks PM is not wasting his time.
Will there come a day when the house of cards come tumbling down? it's taken 25 yrs for a supposed resolution in the Ben Needham case...

Longer in other cases. But hey, on with the research. Here on CMOMM, anyways...

by Hesinsenburg 08.01.17 17:27

Just to point out Tony its only 28 pages not 280.

by **Jill Havern** 08.01.17 17:32

Hesinsenburg wrote:Just to point out Tony its only 28 pages not 280.

That's the newest topic, what about all the others? This thread has only had 30 pages and it's a very important topic.

And the one where you're all taking the piss out of Tony?

And you wonder why MMM hasn't moved on from discussing flowery artifacts?

Take a break from the CMOMM bashing and you might just be up to speed with where PeterMac is. yes

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

by Hesinsenburg 08.01.17 17:38

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Hesinsenburg wrote:Just to point out Tony its only 28 pages not 280.
That's the newest topic, what about all the others? This thread has only had 30 pages and it's a very important topic.

And the one where you're all taking the piss out of Tony?

And you wonder why MMM hasn't moved on from discussing flowery artifacts?

Take a break from the CMOMM bashing and you might just be up to speed with where PeterMac is.

Peter may well be up to speed,this time next year the same will still be said.
I thank you for the opportunity to post.

by **Jill Havern** 08.01.17 17:40

Hesinsenburg wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Hesinsenburg wrote:Just to point out Tony its only 28 pages not 280.
That's the newest topic, what about all the others? This thread has only had 30 pages and it's a very important topic.

And the one where you're all taking the piss out of Tony?

And you wonder why MMM hasn't moved on from discussing flowery artifacts?

Take a break from the CMOMM bashing and you might just be up to speed with where PeterMac is.
Peter may well be up to speed,this time next year the same will still be said.
I thank you for the opportunity to post.

As I said, PeterMac isn't doing this for the fun of it.

You're welcome.

by Guest 08.01.17 17:51

This is a good topic...

Rant deleted - Mod

If you're going to delete my 'rant' please delete it all and not leave a part which the 'Mod' likes

HKP

by **HiDeHo** 08.01.17 18:03

BlueBag wrote:
HiDeHo wrote:

I would like to make something clear, TO EVERYONE and that is I do not claim that Maddie died on Sunday or Monday.

I believe something happened Sunday or Monday which explains what I have found in the files.
I absolutely agree, that is my opinion also.

Something happened which eventually ended in demise later.

They thought they had it covered.

They didn't.

Thanks Blue Bag. I explained why I claim something happened during that time frame and it MAY be that she died.

I have yet to see anything to suggest she died at any particular time, Hence I make no presumptions except for Thursday.

What I would like to ask of anyone that suggests nothing happened until Thursday night is HOW the discrepancies can be explained.

I have not included 'failed memory' they are more specific and most suggest there was something being hidden.

Days changed etc is classic for those that dont want to be caught out in a lie. I have not included Jane's claim of mini tennis etc on Wednesday. We know that was not possible as it was raining that morning, but I have allowed her to have the day wrong without classifying it as a discrepancy.

The fact that 6 intelligent people fail to be able to make statements that are straighforward and understandable leads me to believe they did their best not to lie but to avoid the truth. I have never believed, or considered them stupid. I did not consider this as a discrepancy, just an observation.

The other 50 or so cannot be explained away as easily from Tuesday morning on, and I would ask ANYONE to explain why they exist if nothing happened until Thursday evening.

I am saddened when it is questioned that my thoughts are different to those of Goncalo Amaral and the investigation who believed she may have fallen off the sofa on the evening of May 3rd. It has been suggested that this means I do not support him. A ridiculous claim considering at the very least the more than 20 videos of support I have compiled with his name.

Those were the thoughts until his removal in October 2007. There has been a lot of new information since then.

He knew it wasn't a completed investigation and considering the translated rogatory statements were not available to the PJ until just a couple of weeks before the Final Report we can be reasonably sure that these discrepancies were not included in the investigation

Hernani Carvalho who appears on TV interviews with Goncalo Amaral made this comment in TV Mais (paper edition) in 2009

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

That suggests to me that it may have changed but we would not know as nothing has been released since then.

I follow what the information from the files tell me, and so far I have seen nothing to indicate a time when she could have died. Only that according to the police files, she DID die.

by **HiDeHo** 08.01.17 18:31

While I am here I am going to take advantage of the topic of the thread...

The Last Photo...

Not many realise that Jane Tanner and Rachael Oldfield were 'supposedly' playing tennis in the courts next to the rec area and pool at the time that the last photo was taken.

Jane claims that Maddie was there as she was shouting at them through the fence. Rachael, however, apparently DIDN'T see her during the time she was 'supposedly' next to the pool.

WHY?

Do you think that its possible for ALL the family to be there for the time stated and regardless of Maddie shouting through the fence, Rachael didnt see her?

How do we know that?

Rachael claims the last time she saw Maddie was at her mini tennis...

If she wasnt there to see the last picture being taken by the pool, then why does Jane claim she was playing tennis with her? Was she lying?

Was Jane really there?

Was Rachael there?

Were the McCanns and family there?

Was the picture taken that day? Doubtful as we can see the likelihood of it being taken on Sunday.

Did Jane try to support the photo being taken but Rachel was too busy trying to put Maddie into the mini tennis in the SHARKS group on Thursday morning...

Did she see mini tennis and thought she was being helpful claiming Maddie was there?

Again, trying to place Maddie alive and well on Thursday morning.

Rachael got it all wrong once again.... She has a habit of creating problems in her statements....

THIS is what tells me that the McCanns were NOT AT THE POOL at the time the last photo was taken.

Whether Jane and Rachael were there is another story.....

by **Tony Bennett** 08.01.17 19:16

HiDeHo wrote:
BlueBag wrote:
HiDeHo wrote:

I would like to make something clear, TO EVERYONE and that is I do not claim that Maddie died on Sunday or Monday.

I believe something happened Sunday or Monday which explains what I have found in the files.
I absolutely agree, that is my opinion also.

Something happened which eventually ended in demise later.

They thought they had it covered.

They didn't.

Thanks Blue Bag. I explained why I claim something happened during that time frame and it MAY be that she died.

I have yet to see anything to suggest she died at any particular time, Hence I make no presumptions except for Thursday.

@ HideHo

Verdi, in asking us to look at Sunday as the day something serious happened to Madeleine, made these relevant observaions on anoher thead:

This very simple outstanding clue will not go away.

Why the absence of photographs, not just Madeleine but the twins and the parents themselves - or even the rest of the group and their children. This is just not normal, on holiday families take scores of photographs, particularly of their children. Even if the group were 'so into each other', still they had their family time together in the apartment; at the playground; around the pool; having lunch; having tea at the Tapas with the other kids; at the beach - apparently!

Why no photographs? This I know is not definitive proof of absence but it sure is a strong indication worthy of investigation.

The PJ under the watchful eye of Goncalo Amaral (a very Happy New Year to you sir [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] ), wanted access to the groups photographs but all they got was what can been seen in the PJ files. Initially is wasn't necessarily because the McCanns or any of their friends were under suspicion so if they were all guilt free what was the problem? Could it be that there weren't any photographs to produce apart from Madeleine in the playground, Madeleine at the pool side and what would appear to be a makeshift solitary Madeleine on a barren tennis court? I'm inclined to think that is the reason.

In preference to asking fellow holidaymakers to send their photographs to the PJ or the UK police, why did Jim Gamble, ex of the CEOP, make a public appeal for photographs to be sent to him? What did Madeleine's disappearance have to do with the remit of the CEOP at that early stage? Could it be that snaps taken by other tourists might have shown a family minus one of their children? I'm inclined to think that is the reason.

Family and friends coming and going; mobile phones coming and going; laptops coming and going; cameras coming and going?

Anyone who has experienced personal trauma will know how it affects customary daily life. Little things you would normally do as a matter of course (like taking photographs) go right out of the window - you don't function normally, you forget what you have and haven't done. Could this be why the absence of friends photographs during the week? I'm inclined to think that is the reason.

Any one contending that something serious happened to Madeleine later in the week has to explain the complete absence of holiday photographs from the McCanns and their Tapas 7 friends after Sunday.

Citing the controversial Tennis Balls Photo doesn't really count.

And then there is the issue of PREPARATION AND PLANNING that I mentioned upthread as something that anyone still stuck on 'death after 6pm Thursday must seriously consider:

* Planning to change the date of the Last Photo from 29 April to 3 May
* Washing and photographing Madeleine's pyjamas in order to give a photo of them to Leicestershire Police
* Planning the Nuno Lourenco fabrication, making sure he had a photo of Krokowski's car, briefing him on when to call the PJ
* Briefing Jane Tanner to describe Krokowski as well, to divert the PJ Iwhich succeeded, see Amaral's book
* Getting Robert Murat over to Portugal, in place as the interpreter the morning after the alarm was raised.

These are only some examples of advance preparation. None of them can be ignored in the search for the truth.

And not one of them is consistent with Goncalo Amaral's theory of 'death after 6pm Thursday'

by **Nina** 08.01.17 19:45

Tony Bennett wrote:
HiDeHo wrote:
BlueBag wrote:
HiDeHo wrote:

I would like to make something clear, TO EVERYONE and that is I do not claim that Maddie died on Sunday or Monday.

I believe something happened Sunday or Monday which explains what I have found in the files.
I absolutely agree, that is my opinion also.

Something happened which eventually ended in demise later.

They thought they had it covered.

They didn't.

Thanks Blue Bag. I explained why I claim something happened during that time frame and it MAY be that she died.

I have yet to see anything to suggest she died at any particular time, Hence I make no presumptions except for Thursday.
@ HideHo

Verdi, in asking us to look at Sunday as the day something serious happened to Madeleine, made these relevant observaions on anoher thead:

This very simple outstanding clue will not go away.

Why the absence of photographs, not just Madeleine but the twins and the parents themselves - or even the rest of the group and their children. This is just not normal, on holiday families take scores of photographs, particularly of their children. Even if the group were 'so into each other', still they had their family time together in the apartment; at the playground; around the pool; having lunch; having tea at the Tapas with the other kids; at the beach - apparently!

Why no photographs? This I know is not definitive proof of absence but it sure is a strong indication worthy of investigation.

The PJ under the watchful eye of Goncalo Amaral (a very Happy New Year to you sir [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] ), wanted access to the groups photographs but all they got was what can been seen in the PJ files. Initially is wasn't necessarily because the McCanns or any of their friends were under suspicion so if they were all guilt free what was the problem? Could it be that there weren't any photographs to produce apart from Madeleine in the playground, Madeleine at the pool side and what would appear to be a makeshift solitary Madeleine on a barren tennis court? I'm inclined to think that is the reason.

In preference to asking fellow holidaymakers to send their photographs to the PJ or the UK police, why did Jim Gamble, ex of the CEOP, make a public appeal for photographs to be sent to him? What did Madeleine's disappearance have to do with the remit of the CEOP at that early stage? Could it be that snaps taken by other tourists might have shown a family minus one of their children? I'm inclined to think that is the reason.

Family and friends coming and going; mobile phones coming and going; laptops coming and going; cameras coming and going?

Anyone who has experienced personal trauma will know how it affects customary daily life. Little things you would normally do as a matter of course (like taking photographs) go right out of the window - you don't function normally, you forget what you have and haven't done. Could this be why the absence of friends photographs during the week? I'm inclined to think that is the reason.

Any one contending that something serious happened to Madeleine later in the week has to explain the complete absence of holiday photographs from the McCanns and their Tapas 7 friends after Sunday.

Citing the controversial Tennis Balls Photo doesn't really count.

And then there is the issue of PREPARATION AND PLANNING that I mentioned upthread as something that anyone still stuck on 'death after 6pm Thursday must seriously consider:

* Planning to change the date of the Last Photo from 29 April to 3 May
* Washing and photographing Madeleine's pyjamas in order to give a photo of them to Leicestershire Police
* Planning the Nuno Lourenco fabrication, making sure he had a photo of Krokowski's car, briefing him on when to call the PJ
* Briefing Jane Tanner to describe Krokowski as well, to divert the PJ Iwhich succeeded, see Amaral's book
* Getting Robert Murat over to Portugal, in place as the interpreter the morning after the alarm was raised.

These are only some examples of advance preparation. None of them can be ignored in the search for the truth.

And not one of them is consistent with Goncalo Amaral's theory of 'death after 6pm Thursday'

There were some photographs Tony, the 'greyscale' ones.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by **Nina** 08.01.17 19:59

Some more here, the ones from above post included in them and are clearer, these are terrible to decipher but there a lot of them, wish they could be made lighter ..............

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

by Guest 08.01.17 20:09

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Hesinsenburg wrote:Thanks for the reply I'm far from advocating doing nothing,its the percieved cmmom is the elite forum.This being an example, one is tempted to say DCI Redwood who is he? he's long gone,these dozens of of analyses advanced his thoughts on the investigation how?
Can it be confirmed that Wall is still part of OG?
There is no doubt any way that OG have investigated an abduction as per their remit are you saying that is what PeterMac has been analysing which would be the complete antithesis of what cmomm was about.
Will there come a day when the house of cards come tumbling down? its taken 25 yrs for a supposed resolution in the Ben Needham case,don't hold your breath waiting on this one.
PeterMac is in communication with DCI Wall.

Have you read PeterMac's e-book? Another new chapter has been added today.

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

Does it look like Peter's research is based on the remit?

Tony is not saying PeterMac's research is based on the remit.

Peter told me that any evidence sent to Grange must be recorded in their Policy's Book and that any evidence discarded must be given a reason why.

Just in case further action is taken.

Please note, that after PeterMac retired from the Police after twenty eight years, do you really think he would waste his time on this case researching for FREE if he didn't think it was worth it?

So while you're still researching flowery artifacts on the Last Photo please be advised that CMOMM moved on from that ages ago. If you perceive this forum as being the 'elite' then that's fine, thank you, compliment taken.

PeterMac's diligence is an aspect I cling onto with some positive expectation of a fruitful end to this interminable saga.

If anyone is to be respected and taken seriously - who better than an ex-senior police officer. Hence my recent whinge about every tom dick and harry sending worthless information to Operation Grange and/or the PJ; even if the intention is honourable all it will do is detract from the good standing of PeterMac and other valuable researchers and thus weaken the overall strive for justice.

The last thing to be encouraged is a negative reaction from the authorities just because they've been swamped with wild unevidenced conspiracy theories like images of a flowery skin or a satanic ritual sacrifice on the top of Roche Negra. Can you imagine the reaction when they open yet another missive from a public? It's embarrassing.

by **HiDeHo** 08.01.17 20:12

Nina wrote:Some more here, the ones from above post included in them and are clearer, these are terrible to decipher but there a lot of them, wish they could be made lighter ..............

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

Thanks Nina you got there before I did.

Lots of pics showing the tapas children and some at the beach (Thursday)

Madeleine not being seen during the holiday does not mean she died. She could have been in the (or another) apartment.

I cannot claim dead until I see indication that 'tells' me she died at a specific time.

I cannot claim a theory based on lack of information.

I HAVE to have a specific basis for thinking something.

I came to my thoughts based on the files and because of what they 'told' me.

I try to DISPROVE my thoughts in any way I can.

I will never claim a theory because it fits unless there is something based on the files, that 'tells' me why it may be a possibility.

by LiamO 08.01.17 20:30

Are you saying that Mr Bennett, Mr Petermac and others are saying MBM died earlier in the week to fit their theory HiDeHo?

by Guest 08.01.17 20:43

Nina wrote:Some more here, the ones from above post included in them and are clearer, these are terrible to decipher but there a lot of them, wish they could be made lighter ..............

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

My understanding is the photos were provided to the PJ by someone at the McCann end in this sorry state on a CD(DVD?)

Can someone confirm?

How many of these can you say that Madeleine is in?

It's nearly impossible to tell anything from them or the order they were taken, perhaps that was the intention?

by **Nina** 08.01.17 20:45

LiamO wrote:Are you saying that Mr Bennett, Mr Petermac and others are saying MBM died earlier in the week to fit their theory HiDeHo?

I cannot speak for HiDeHo but can say as have worked very closely with her as one of her admin for a long time that her research is extremely detailed and lengthy, as in years and she never ever ever makes anything fit. She, Lizzy, just offers the results of her research.

by **Nina** 08.01.17 20:48

BlueBag wrote:
Nina wrote:Some more here, the ones from above post included in them and are clearer, these are terrible to decipher but there a lot of them, wish they could be made lighter ..............

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
My understanding is the photos were provided to the PJ by someone at the McCann end in this sorry state on a CD(DVD?)

Can someone confirm?

How many of these can you say that Madeleine is in?

It's nearly impossible to tell anything from them or the order they were taken, perhaps that was the intention?

They were taken though as normal photos. My memory fails me but I seem to recollect they were changed into this format to protect the children as they would still have been recognisable or maybe I am yet again having a very seniormoment.

by **HiDeHo** 08.01.17 20:52

Nina wrote:
LiamO wrote:Are you saying that Mr Bennett, Mr Petermac and others are saying MBM died earlier in the week to fit their theory HiDeHo?
I cannot speak for HiDeHo but can say as have worked very closely with her as one of her admin for a long time that her research is extremely detailed and lengthy, as in years and she never ever ever makes anything fit. She, Lizzy, just offers the results of her research.

Nina is correct. I know that all of the above have done a tremendous amount of research and have their theories which may be spot on.

I am saying that I cannot claim Maddie died on Sunday because I have nothing shown to me in the files to indicate which day she died.

We dont all have the same method to our research but one thing is for sure, if we all come to similar conclusions based on different research that is something not to be taken lightly.

by Guest 08.01.17 20:53

I'm not oblivious to the obscure photographs included in the PJ files but they don't signify. For the most part, although nigh on impossible to distinguish, they would appear to be taken at the playground - the same time as the photographs of Madeleine but there is no realistic indication as to when and where most of the images were taken, aside from David Payne on what would appear to be his balcony.

The beach and beach restaurant images are in my opinion a red herring. There was a reason the entire group took that trip to the beach on Thursday 3rd May without the McCann family - I don't think there was ever a coherent explanation as to why the McCann family were not invited.

My thoughts on the absence of photographs remains intact.

by Guest 08.01.17 20:57

Nina wrote:
BlueBag wrote:
Nina wrote:Some more here, the ones from above post included in them and are clearer, these are terrible to decipher but there a lot of them, wish they could be made lighter ..............

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
My understanding is the photos were provided to the PJ by someone at the McCann end in this sorry state on a CD(DVD?)

Can someone confirm?

How many of these can you say that Madeleine is in?

It's nearly impossible to tell anything from them or the order they were taken, perhaps that was the intention?
They were taken though as normal photos. My memory fails me but I seem to recollect they were changed into this format to protect the children as they would still have been recognisable or maybe I am yet again having a very seniormoment.

There are grey scale pictures in which nearly everything is visible.

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

Then harsh black and white ones which are inexcusable as they are useless.

What is needed is detail and chronology.

I understood the PJ received them in this state but I see other pictures in the files (The Boats) that are also useless black and white, so maybe someone who released the files did it (though heaven knows why).

There are colour photos as well in the files.

Mad.

by Guest 08.01.17 23:28

BlueBag wrote:My understanding is the photos were provided to the PJ by someone at the McCann end in this sorry state on a CD(DVD?)

Can someone confirm?

They were provided to the PJ by Gerry McCann and Michael Wright.

File notes - 9 May:
PDF Apenso Desc.

12 549 Analysis of CD delivered by GM
13 550 Analysis of CD delivered by M Wright

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

by Guest 09.01.17 6:38

is there any attempt at analysis in the PJ files?

Who and when?

Vital piece of work.

by **HiDeHo** 09.01.17 14:23

BlueBag wrote:is there any attempt at analysis in the PJ files?

Who and when?

Vital piece of work.

I dont recall seeing Gerry and Michael Wright photos. Does this refer to them?

Examination of Video tape & Memory Cards
by DC Martin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I have never studied the photos too much.

I have always believed the black and white pics were just photocopies of the originals, probably to protect the children faces.

Greyscale and black and white seem to come from Paynes camera showing mostly their family and Dianne on the beach wearing the hat similar in appearance to the CCTV footage from Paraiso. (see 150 in black white pics)

PAYNE & TANNER GREYSCALE HOLIDAY SNAPS
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Title: Black/White Greyscale Photos from the holiday
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

ETA: I originally separated all the b/w pics from the files and gave them numbers.

I have often wanted to attempt to identify then (as did Pamalam). If it is worthwhile I will try to take time to do so according to each number.

by **Tony Bennett** 09.01.17 15:08

Verdi wrote:
BlueBag wrote:My understanding is the photos were provided to the PJ by someone at the McCann end in this sorry state on a CD(DVD?)

Can someone confirm?

They were provided to the PJ by Gerry McCann and Michael Wright.

File notes - 9 May:
PDF Apenso Desc.

12 549 Analysis of CD delivered by GM
13 550 Analysis of CD delivered by M Wright

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

YES.

On and after 4 May, the McCanns, Michael Wight and Alex Woofall all collaborated to work through the SD cards on probably the McCanns and Paynes cameras.

They basically set about deleting them, editing them or cropping them.

They ended up handing two CDs to the PJ on Wednesday 9 May, and I THINK they used the 'greyscale' option (as opposed to the 'colour' option) on the computer program they used to download the pics onto a CD.

Thus the PJ never got to see the original SD cards - and what the PJ got was utterly useless, of no evidential value whatsoever.

by Guest 09.01.17 15:35

An example. Is this David Payne twizzing Madeleine - Gerry McCann twizzing Amelie/Sean - Russell O'Brien twizzing Jane?

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