Re: Another look at the Last photo

by **PeterMac** 06.01.19 14:13

Bougainvillaea
on my balcony,
two minutes ago,
1511 Spanish time
Sunday 6th JANUARY 2019

Another look at the Last photo - Page 37 Dsc06110

Another look at the Last photo - Page 37 Dsc06111

by Liz Eagles 06.01.19 16:50

Pesky stuff, a rat run onto your balcony, blooms its bracts whenever the sun takes a fancy to shine on your walls.

Has nothing to do with the last photo and quite frankly I am annoyed that NE who claims to be an ex police officer offers up this nonsense.

by Verdi 06.01.19 20:30

I can't resist the temptation to plug this at every given opportunity big grin

.

Whoever took this photograph winkwink

I thank you .... sarcastic

.

Another look at the Last photo - Page 37 Sct3zm10

by NickE 06.01.19 21:29

As I said, it has been discussed many times before but I had never seen that May 4 clip before.
I just thought it was s little bit strange because there's no flowers in full colour on the sunny wall in the clip but it just happened to be a couple of meters to the left in the more shadow in the background in TLP.
I thought they bloom better and faster in direct sunlight, maybe I've got wrong informatio and maybe it's completley normal but it was a relevant question so keep calm folks.

by **PeterMac** 07.01.19 7:14

Short answer - pruning.

by Equity 07.01.19 16:14

My only problem with the last photo is hindsight.

We are all looking at this from the point of view of an observer, who also has the cruelest and most astute adviser - hindsight.

If you were GM however how could you possibly know that after you released the ‘’last photo’, which you say was taken at a very specific time and date, there didn’t exist some overwhelming evidence that you were in fact lying. How did GM know with absolute certainty, other holidaymakers were not in the vicinity of the pool around the same time and had video or photographic evidence that the McCann’s were not present?

Are we suggesting the McCann’s staked out the pool around that time to ensure nobody else was there who could subsequently tell the PJ they were alone and saw no sign of the McCann family?

They were restricted as to the time the pool would have to be deserted on the Thursday as it would have to be very close to the time the actual photo was taken on the Sunday. Did they check no one just happened to be taking a photo of the pool from a balcony around that time - a photo from another holidaymaker that could subsequently prove their ‘last photo’ wasn’t taken on that day?

How were they 100% certain that they were not observed on the Sunday when the photo was actually taken - at this time MBM would still have been alive so would they even be thinking about who may or may not have passed them by the pool. How were they 100% certain that someone didn’t note they were wearing exactly the same clothes and sitting in exactly the same position as in the ‘last photo’ and could approach the PJ to say this photo must have been taken on the Sunday not Thursday?

If you put yourself in GMs position wouldn’t this be an incredible risk to take?

Were the PJ and the media pressurising them in the days leading up to them releasing the ‘last photo’ to prove MBM was actually still alive around Thursday lunchtime? Did GM feel he had no alternative but to take this risk? If the ‘last photo’ had not been released the risk would have been zero - by releasing the ‘last photo’ there was undoubtedly a risk, no matter how small, that some holidaymakers or a member of staff could have come forward and proved they were lying.

When he released the ‘last photo’ he knew that the publicity was unprecedented so would have been aware that if they had been observed, without their knowledge, that information would be highly likely to be divulged to the PJ - yet he still released the ‘last photo’?

“So long as we trace the development from its final outcome backwards, the chain of events appears continuous, and we feel we have gained an insight which is completely satisfactory or even exhaustive. But if we proceed in the reverse way, if we start from the premise inferred from the analysis and try to follow these up to the final results, then we no longer get the impression of an inevitable sequence of events which could not have otherwise been determined.”
Sigmund Freud

by **PeterMac** 07.01.19 16:46

It is an interesting point.

There does, in fact, "exist some overwhelming evidence that [they] were in fact lying. "
The Meteorological reports,
dozens of timed and dated photos on Flickr
contemporaneously recorded diary entries about the weather by a person whose profession was watching and recording weather
weather reports from airports
statements from various persons including the Tapas 7
meteorological satellite images

I think that although we are seeing the situation with hindsight, the McCanns lacked foresight.
Had they thought it through properly they would have never come up with broken shutters, whooshing curtains, sedation - (which as we remember they suspected, then denied, then suspected again, then denied vehemently and with threats, only finally to admit that it MUST have happened), Tanner-person, Spotty-person, Harrison-person, Gypsies, Moroccans, and all the rest of the nonsense
They would have had a far more coherent story, with a more credible time-line.

As you observe, the entire thing was a risk. For a considerable time they got away with it, and through sheer force of finance and the use of agrumentum ad baculam managed to shut down observations tending to suggest there were lacunae in the fabula.

More recently even this strategy seems to have deserted them, and they have reverted to the silence which would have served them better from the start.

by ferrotty 07.01.19 16:59

Did not the UK police ask for all holiday makers to send their photo's in, could this be a way to get rid of the evidence although with digital photo's you can always keep copies.

by **Jill Havern** 07.01.19 17:29

ferrotty wrote:Did not the UK police ask for all holiday makers to send their photo's in, could this be a way to get rid of the evidence although with digital photo's you can always keep copies.

I believe that was McCann-supporter Jim 'waybackmachine' Gamble of CEOPS fame wasn't it?

by Liz Eagles 07.01.19 17:55

Jill Havern wrote:
ferrotty wrote:Did not the UK police ask for all holiday makers to send their photo's in, could this be a way to get rid of the evidence although with digital photo's you can always keep copies.
I believe that was McCann-supporter Jim 'waybackmachine' Gamble of CEOPS fame wasn't it?

Send photos to Jessops (gone bust now as a High Sreet retailer and massive job loss).

by **Tony Bennett** 25.02.19 15:15

Equity wrote:My only problem with the last photo is hindsight.

We are all looking at this from the point of view of an observer, who also has the cruelest and most astute adviser - hindsight.

If you were GM however how could you possibly know that after you released the ‘’last photo’, which you say was taken at a very specific time and date, there didn’t exist some overwhelming evidence that you were in fact lying. How did GM know with absolute certainty, other holidaymakers were not in the vicinity of the pool around the same time and had video or photographic evidence that the McCann’s were not present?

Are we suggesting the McCanns staked out the pool around that time to ensure nobody else was there who could subsequently tell the PJ they were alone and saw no sign of the McCann family?

They were restricted as to the time the pool would have to be deserted on the Thursday as it would have to be very close to the time the actual photo was taken on the Sunday. Did they check no one just happened to be taking a photo of the pool from a balcony around that time - a photo from another holidaymaker that could subsequently prove their ‘last photo’ wasn’t taken on that day?

How were they 100% certain that they were not observed on the Sunday when the photo was actually taken - at this time MBM would still have been alive so would they even be thinking about who may or may not have passed them by the pool. How were they 100% certain that someone didn’t note they were wearing exactly the same clothes and sitting in exactly the same position as in the ‘last photo’ and could approach the PJ to say this photo must have been taken on the Sunday not Thursday?

If you put yourself in GMs position wouldn’t this be an incredible risk to take?

Were the PJ and the media pressurising them in the days leading up to them releasing the ‘last photo’ to prove MBM was actually still alive around Thursday lunchtime? Did GM feel he had no alternative but to take this risk? If the ‘last photo’ had not been released the risk would have been zero - by releasing the ‘last photo’ there was undoubtedly a risk, no matter how small, that some holidaymakers or a member of staff could have come forward and proved they were lying.

When he released the ‘last photo’ he knew that the publicity was unprecedented so would have been aware that if they had been observed, without their knowledge, that information would be highly likely to be divulged to the PJ - yet he still released the ‘last photo’?

People have not reached the conclusions they have done about the Last Photo being taken on Sunday as a result of 'hindsight' They have done so as a result of meticulous, exhaustive research which, to most on here, overwhelmingly suggest it was taken around 12.30pm to 2.30pm on Sunday 29 April.

@Equity invites us to "put ourselves in GM's position".

Well, let us do just that - and begin with the following scenario:

1. The Last Photo WAS taken between 12.30pm and 2.30pm Sunday
2. Madeleine died Sunday afternoon evening in circumstances which would lead them (for whatever reason) to want to avoid an autopsy at all costs.

What might someone in those circumstances do?

They might:

A. Call on outside help. Especially if they had high-up connections who could, invoke the security services. If the issue was sufficiently important and could affect many others, the security services would provide immediate help.

B. Need to hide or destroy the body. A friend or contact with property interests in Praia da Luz would be near-essential. Someone like Robert Murat.

C. Plan an abduction. In which case one of their friends could be briefed beforehand to spot an abductor just before the child went missing

D. Think a second fake sighting could be useful. In which case someone like Wojcek Krokowski would be very useful. He was staying in property maintained by the company started by Robert Murat's father. He ate his meals at a tavern owned by Robert Murat's uncle. A contact like Nuno Lourenco, who just happened to be over from Germany for three weeks to see his dear old Mum, could be prevailed on to take a photo of Krokowski's car and set him up as the fake abductor

E. Conspire with others to ensure that Madeleine's nanny did not divulge the secret that Madeleine was not in the crèche after Sunday

F. Collude with their cousin Michael Wright and Alex Woolfall, Head of Risk at disgraced PR firm Bell Pottinger, to go through all the digital photos of that week and delete, crop or edit them before showing them to the Portuguese Police

G. Invent a credible story to go with the Tennis Balls Photo

H. Stage an abduction hoax four days later, having, through their helpers, primed key media to make it the top story the following day.

And so on.

In such a scenario, it is more than possible that a group of advisers hit on the strategy of holding up the winsome Last Photo of Madeleine for three weeks in order to weave a convincing story about it. They might also develop the very cunning strategy of claiming that Gerry McCann left England without sunglasses and ended up buying them on a rainy day later that week.

The existence of other photos from Thursday wouldn't matter very much.

After all, there have been those, even on CMOMM, who have argued that the Last Photo really was taken on Thursday in a momentary burst of sunlight on an otherwise cool, cloudy and rain-affected day.

Some people will go to extraordinary lengths to avoid the obvious

by Verdi 27.02.19 21:11

Tony wrote:In such a scenario, it is more than possible that a group of advisers hit on the strategy of holding up the winsome Last Photo of Madeleine for three weeks in order to weave a convincing story about it. They might also develop the very cunning strategy of claiming that Gerry McCann left England without sunglasses and ended up buying them on a rainy day later that week.

The existence of other photos from Thursday wouldn't matter very much.

.... enter Jim Gamble ex-Chief Executive of the CEOP who made a public appeal for all holiday makers to upload their holiday photographs on a specific internet domain he set-up for the purpose. Ostensibly to identify anything suspicious or out of the ordinary - think about it!

The same Jim Gamble who became very close to the McCanns, so sure was he of their innocence.

The same Jim Gamble who specialised in tracking down internet paedophile activity. The rationale for this extraordinary move has never been explained - the PJ investigation concluded that Madeleine McCann was not abducted, so where exactly does the paedophile element fit it?

Answers on the back of a plain brown envelope - it'll get there!

NB: There is still the issue of the time the poolside photograph was taken. There has to be a reason why the McCanns claim the image was taken at a specific time when indeed the data shows otherwise.

by **PeterMac** 28.02.19 11:37

Tony Bennet wrote:
In such a scenario, it is more than possible that a group of advisers hit on the strategy of holding up the winsome Last Photo of Madeleine for three weeks in order to weave a convincing story about it. They might also develop the very cunning strategy of claiming that Gerry McCann left England without sunglasses and ended up buying them on a rainy day later that week.

The existence of other photos from Thursday wouldn't matter very much.

After all, there have been those, even on CMOMM, who have argued that the Last Photo really was taken on Thursday in a momentary burst of sunlight on an otherwise cool, cloudy and rain-affected day.
Some people will go to extraordinary lengths to avoid the obvious

You make several points which should be emphasised.

It is clear that the Last/Pool photo clearly was held back for three weeks. It was not tendered to the PJ, nor apparently to anyone else. Somehow it was kept secret, was then - we believe - manipulated into a form which supported Madeline's having been alive and well on Thursday 3/5/7.

The sunglasses story appears in the book, but I am not aware of its having been mentioned before that. In the event the story in the book is ludicrous. It involves Gerry NOT having sunglasses for Saturday and Sunday, the two bright, cloudless, warm and sunny days, but deciding only on Wednesday, when on Kate's own admission it was cold and raining, to buy a cheap pair from a street trader . .
Even Kate realises that this story is ridiculous, and includes a sentence trying to explain why she has put it in . . .

I quote from the book,
p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica} span.Apple-tab-span {white-space:pre}
In the afternoon Gerry and I decided to take the children down to the beach. . . .The weather wasn’t great: in fact, on the beach it started to rain.
Our trip to the beach wasn’t exactly a roaring success and the kids certainly weren’t thanking us for it. . . . Before heading up the road, we stopped at a shop on the corner of Rua da Praia and Avenida dos Pescadores, one of several open-air, market-style stalls, as Gerry needed a pair of sunglasses.. . .
You may be wondering not only what relevance all these minute details might have to anything, but also how I can recall them so distinctly and how accurate my recollections can possibly be.

You say - The existence of other photos from Thursday wouldn't matter very much - EXCEPT that they would show the weather conditions. I believe it is significant that we have been given NO other photos from that day, and have had to trawl through the internet to find them
A single ONE, showing clear skies, sunshine, people in the pool, and ideally the McCann family of FIVE in the background would have stopped this speculation. But there is nothing.
Even after all this time the apologists and supporters have been unable to unearth even one.

In that scenario the existence of other photos from Thursday now do matter hugely, insofar as they prove to a high degree of certainly that the Last/Pool photo was not, and cannot possible have been, taken at lunchtime that day.

by Guest 28.02.19 13:09

Another top post from @PeterMac.

If you take his point that bit further, you're on holiday (with kids) the weather has not been great, a day arrives where the weather breaks and it's warm enough for GM to be sweating. Most families with kids would want to take the opportunity to have fun time by the pool. So where are anybody else's photos of their 'fun time' by the pool on what was only a one time sunny day (or at least a break in the weather that allowed for a dip in the pool) which according to the McCanns was Thursday afternoon (weather charts say somewhat differently). What's the chances of you being the only family by the pool in such circumstances?
Or where is the photos from others who were around the complex that afternoon/lunchtime, which may show entirely different weather

by Liz Eagles 28.02.19 13:42

Add on the Operation Grange Crime Watch production of a reconstruction and you have a soap opera of incredible deceit.

by Phoebe 28.02.19 16:29

Just on a point of clarification, I believe the beach trip by the McCann family allegedly took place on Tuesday afternoon not Wednesday afternoon. In Gerry's statement of May 10th '07 he recounts buying 5 ices and 2 drinks - no mention of his having purchased sunglasses. Kate fails to make any mention whatsoever of this alleged beach trip in any of her P.J. statements!! Hmmm...

by Verdi 28.02.19 20:44

Phoebe wrote:Just on a point of clarification, I believe the beach trip by the McCann family allegedly took place on Tuesday afternoon not Wednesday afternoon. In Gerry's statement of May 10th '07 he recounts buying 5 ices and 2 drinks - no mention of his having purchased sunglasses. Kate fails to make any mention whatsoever of this alleged beach trip in any of her P.J. statements!! Hmmm...

Kate McCann's witness statement - 4th May 2007

Apart from the Kids Club and the apartment, they only went once to the beach with Madeleine and the other children and only for a very short period of time, since the weather was changeable. They could only go to the beach between 1.30 and 3pm, the time when they went back to the club. At the beach, they only ate an ice cream then they went back to the apartment.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/

by Phoebe 01.03.19 0:03

Yes Kate did mention that on May 4th, I stand corrected, thank you Verdi. However, the alleged beach trip took place on Tuesdsay not Wednesday I believe, unless you can confirm to the contrary.

by Verdi 01.03.19 1:15

Phoebe wrote:Yes Kate did mention that on May 4th, I stand corrected, thank you Verdi. However, the alleged beach trip took place on Tuesdsay not Wednesday I believe, unless you can confirm to the contrary.

I can only quote Kate McCann's version of the truth as recorded in her autobiographical novel 'madeleine' published in May 2011 - yes, the beach trip was said to be on Tuesday 1st May. I'm not aware of any independent verification of this alleged excursion.

Interestingly, the beach trip coincides with the sudden change of 'routine' recorded in the sequence of events during the holiday week - the day I believe everything changed and why the account of events were mentioned - even stressed, to conceal the absence of a family member. Again, according the Kate McCann's book, on Tuesday 1st May 2007 Kate McCann claims to have rushed back to the apartment to get her camera to capture charming Madeleine in her shorts and new holiday sandals as she stood on the tennis court clutching a few tennis balls.

Then factor in the creche record for the 1st May..

Lobsters Madeleine

Another look at the Last photo - Page 37 ProcessoVolumeIpage108x.JPG.w560h398

Another look at the Last photo - Page 37 ProcessoVolumeIpage108x.JPG.w560h398

Jellyfish Sean and Amelie

Another look at the Last photo - Page 37 ProcessoVolumeIpage114x.JPG.w560h398

All three signed in at 2:30pm. Taking lunch into consideration, that must have been a very swift trip to the beach.

Having said that, this is moving way off topic.

by Phoebe 01.03.19 1:22

From Gerry McCann's statement May 19th 2007

"Pertaining to the routine, on Tuesday there was a slight change given that after lunch, at 13h30, he and KATE decided to take the three children to Paris da Luz, having gone on foot, taking only the twins in baby carriages. They all left by the main door due to the carriages, went around to the right, down the street of the supermarket and went to the beach along a road directly ahead....."

by Verdi 01.03.19 15:20

Gerry McCann's witness statement - 10th May 2007

..after lunch, at 13h30

Precision timing again. Seven days later and McCann is giving an exact time.

'... after we'd eaten' or '.... after lunch' or ' .... later' or '.... around 13h30' would be the expected response.

Reverting to the subject matter, why was it so necessary for the McCanns to emphasize the time the poolside photograph was taken? The photograph didn't feature in the official investigation, it appeared after Gerry McCann's return to the UK three weeks after Madeleine's alleged disappearance.

I went out yesterday afternoon, I know it was after 16h00 because the news had just finished. I took a shower, dressed, looked for my mobile, locked checked and double checked the front door. What time did I eventually leave the house? I haven't got a clue, it was sometime between 16h00 and 17h00 ....

Time is of the essence as they say!

by **HiDeHo** 24.04.19 5:09

by worriedmum 24.04.19 9:13

HiDeHo wrote:

Is there also the possibility that someone would remember seeing that group , wearing the same clothes, on the Sunday? Wasn't Sunday the first full day of the holiday and the weather, being sunny, more memorable as it deteriorated after that day?

by worriedmum 01.06.19 23:52

I've just watched the clip of Darren Ware/Richard D.Hall. As that thread is locked, I would like to put a question to forum members here, following thoughts provoked by that video. As 'someone' famously said, 'hindsight is a wonderful thing'..

Is it possible that we have been viewing this from the' wrong end of the telescope'.? What reason could there be that this photograph wasn't produced immediately?

Was it because it had someone else on it , with Sean, whom the McCanns did not want to be identified? I have always found it difficult to believe that Kate took a photo while a two year old was unsupervised next to a swimming pool...Has someone been CROPPED OUT?

by Verdi 02.06.19 0:59

Then you need ask again - why the need to publicize the photograph in the first place?

That aside, I believe this particular photograph has been dissected to the ninth degree leaving little doubt that is was indeed a genuine photograph but only the time and date adjusted to complete the picture - the desired effect.

Sometimes the simplest interpretation and/or explanation is the best..

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-pool-photo-refuses-to-go-away.html