The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!


The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Page 3 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by Guest on 02.12.14 0:46

@canada12 wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:Absolutely,  Canada. But not a small point. The fact that this child clearly has no coloboma whatsoever is massive, imo. Who is she? And who is Madeleine?

Hmm. Well, if Madeleine never had a coloboma...then all of the photos we've seen that purport to be her with a coloboma have been photoshopped. ALL of them. A not insignificant number of pictures.
Quite. Or this one is, of course. And if that is the case, that is as as important as the consequences of the 'Last Photo' being forged. And those are very major consequences indeed.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by jack dexter on 02.12.14 1:32

Dee Coy wrote:
@jack dexter wrote:
@JohnyT wrote:
@jack dexter wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:Have you, Jack? I haven't, ever.

Of course, that is one explanation amidst dozens of others to explain that mark. A very unlikely one indeed, imo.
I have seen this at least 4 times. Has anyone else?
I've seen it......so can't understand anyone saying it's unlikely.
       IMHO I think some people are looking for things that aren't there!
JohnyT

What is is with this forum Johny ? As soon as you raise something all the regulars gang together and try to discredit you or just ignore the obvious or your comments. Comment deleted in original post - Moderator  This site is full of pro's . Children biting there own arm is common if you google it, but not on here. they try to make you look stupid or just ignore you.That is a clear bite mark on her arm but only one person even bothers to recognise my point. Comment deleted in original post - Moderator  Says a lot to me about the people on here.
No one has 'ganged up' on you. I have no particular friends on here with whom to 'gang up'.

It was merely your ludicrous suggestion that Madeleine may have created her own mark - the mark which so concerned Goncalo - the one which you consider 'isn't there', Johny - that prompted my scorn.

And still does. Can you provide evidence of the numerous children of your acquaintance who self-harm when in temper? I repeat, I have never once seen children bite themselves to cause such marks. But I await your contra-evidence with open mind and interest.

Ludicrous suggestion ? look at the picture and do your own research, just google child bites own arm in temper. It is not rare. why do you go so over the top to defend your position?

http://www.netmums.com/coffeehouse/baby-794/babies-birth-12-months-58/296766-biting-own-arms-unusual-all.html

jack dexter

Posts : 48
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2014-05-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by canada12 on 02.12.14 1:45

@jack dexter wrote:
Ludicrous suggestion ? look at the picture and do your own research, just google child bites own arm in temper. It is not rare. why do you go so over the top to defend your position?

http://www.netmums.com/coffeehouse/baby-794/babies-birth-12-months-58/296766-biting-own-arms-unusual-all.html

Hello Jack. It seems it is indeed very common! I'm glad you've acknowledged it's there, and it's not our imaginations or the result of some aspect of photoshopping or an artifact.

However Kate did actually mention it in her witness statement, so is it possible you're mistaken...?

Concerning Madeleine, she is Caucasian, with quite white skin, aged four (12/05/2003) about 90cm tall. Of slim build, dark blond hair, straight and of shoulder length. Left eye blue-green, right eye also green with a brown spot on the pupil. She had a small brown spot on the skin of her left leg, as well as a small sunburn on her right forearm.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id192.html


canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 201
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by canada12 on 02.12.14 3:01

Another of the more interesting details about this large photo is that it has absolutely no EXIF data attached to it. So, I'm afraid I must agree with those further up the thread who've stated that in terms of usefulness, this photo is at the bottom of the list. We still don't have the original photo fresh from the McCann camera. And without that, we have no way of telling how truthful this representation is at all.

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 201
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by tiny on 02.12.14 7:21

I agree with Jack dexter re bite mark as my son used bite his arm when he was in a temper .
avatar
tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by canada12 on 02.12.14 7:26

@tiny wrote:I agree with Jack dexter re bite mark as my son used bite his arm when he was in a temper .

Excellent. I think Kate would probably have said it was a bite mark rather than a burn, though, if it was, in fact, a bite mark. Unless we're going to discount Kate's claim. It wouldn't be the first time, I suppose, that Kate was caught telling porkies. Not a sunburn then. A bite mark. She's lied on her statement to the police, then.... oh dear.

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 201
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by tiny on 02.12.14 8:06

@canada12 wrote:
@tiny wrote:I agree with Jack dexter re bite mark as my son used bite his arm when he was in a temper .

Excellent. I think Kate would probably have said it was a bite mark rather than a burn, though, if it was, in fact, a bite mark. Unless we're going to discount Kate's claim. It wouldn't be the first time, I suppose, that Kate was caught telling porkies. Not a sunburn then. A bite mark. She's lied on her statement to the police, then.... oh dear.
kate McCann lie,your kidding me,saying my child has sunburn is a lot better than saying my child bits herself
avatar
tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by Guest on 02.12.14 8:14

Someone else could have bitten her.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by tiny on 02.12.14 8:18

@Ladyinred wrote:Someone else could have bitten her.

Yes true,the only thing I would say about this the tennis pic is that Madeleine looks a poor little mite.
avatar
tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by Guest on 02.12.14 8:27

@tiny wrote:
@Ladyinred wrote:Someone else could have bitten her.

Yes true,the only thing I would say about this the tennis pic is that Madeleine looks a poor little mite.

I'm very suspicious of this photograph.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by tiny on 02.12.14 8:49

@Ladyinred wrote:
@tiny wrote:
@Ladyinred wrote:Someone else could have bitten her.

Yes true,the only thing I would say about this the tennis pic is that Madeleine looks a poor little mite.

I'm very suspicious of this photograph.

In what way Ladyinred,photo shopped,or not Madeleine or the real Madeleine or not taken on that holiday?.
avatar
tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by Tony Bennett on 02.12.14 9:35

@canada12 wrote:
However Kate did actually mention it [the sunburn] in her witness statement...

Concerning Madeleine, she is Caucasian, with quite white skin, aged four (12/05/2003) about 90cm tall. Of slim build, dark blond hair, straight and of shoulder length. Left eye blue-green, right eye also green with a brown spot on the pupil. She had a small brown spot on the skin of her left leg, as well as a small sunburn on her right forearm.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id192.html
@ canada12

The bolded quote above from Dr Kate McCann's statement is very interesting.

However, consider this for a moment.

Suppose that, as some suggest, this is a photo in which Madeleine's head has been photoshopped onto the body of another girl. And suppose again that that girl had a noticeable sunburn on her right arm. Suppose again that the McCanns had planned (say during 4 May) to release the Tennis Balls Photo worldwide via the Press Associaiton, Associated Press etc.

What would Kate say about Madeleine/

ANSWER: She would say: 'Oh, Madeleine had a sunburn on her right arm'.

As a matter of fact, I very much doubt if, that week, Madeleine could possibly have acquired a localised sunburn like that.

That in itself might suggest that the body of the girl in the Tennis Balls Photo is NOT Madeleine.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RECAP:

It seems to me that the most important three contributions on this thread so far are these three (especial thanks to rustyjames for your detailed observations:

+++++++++++++++++++++

canada12 


Another of the more interesting details about this large photo [I think you mean the one produced by BlueBag]  is that it has absolutely no EXIF data attached to it. So, I'm afraid I must agree with those further up the thread who've stated that in terms of usefulness, this photo is at the bottom of the list. We still don't have the original photo fresh from the McCann camera. And without that, we have no way of telling how truthful this representation is at all.

+++++++

rusty james


I'd taken a couple of snapshots of the data in that video earlier as I still can't find anything vaguely high resolution or containing exif data. I was going to post them at lunch but ran out of time, and also really want to get the time to go through all the previous posts, however in the meantime a few comments from me:

* The resolution at the top is listed as 300dpi - I'm not certain but that suggests to me something that has been scanned or at least created with a view to publishing

* That's further reinforced by the references to a handout as the source, although there is also the term 'HO' used in the last photo

* This (and the last photo) have a significant amount of XMP and IPTC data. XMP is metadata stored by Adobe and IPTC is metadata stored by the photo agencies to record the captions, headlines and any other information. Adobe will have been used to edit and manage this information.

* In the case of this version of the photo it is set for "Progressive Scans" probably also using Adobe - that's where it is saved in such as way that the photo can be progressively loaded on a webpage - you initially see a poor version that gets better as it loads, but it has the advantage you don't have to wait for it to completely load to see something.

* If it was a scan then it looks as if AP or someone did it on the 5th - note just a date and no time (I'm not sure where references to 9:50am have come from). I don't know why this version has references in the Document History to events on the 10th and then a modify date of the 11th. Possibly picked up from AP and repurposed for wherever it was being published?

* I can't find a proper version of this photo on the AFP ImageForum site - the first one I can see is a cutting tied to railings in Rothley on the 9th

It's also not clear why there is the comment in the special instructions that "UNITED KINGDOM OUT NO SALES NO ARCHIVE - PHOTOGRAPH CAN NOT BE STORED OR USED FOR MORE THAN 14 DAYS AFTER THE DAY OF TRANSMISSION"


+++++++

aquila

The point is, there needs to be provenance of the photograph. It needs to be established when it was taken, who it was taken by, on what camera and importantly on what date and at what time. That's the only thing that matters. Only this will explain why this photograph is so important. I sincerely hope OG have done their job in this respect.

+++++++
  
The point is that there is always going to be real doubt about this photograph because the Mcanns and their friends can't agree on who took it, amd when it was taken - and the time it is said to have been taken doesn't match the schedule of events for the children that week

@ rustyjames   You asked: "...note just a date and no time (I'm not sure where references to 9:50am have come from)".

REPLY: This was an error of mine in misinterpreting the date shown on the screenshot that BlueBag provided on page 2 of this thread. Those data seem to suggest that the photo was...

CREATED on 5 May 2007

and

AMENDED at 9.50am and 25 secs on 11th (not 5th) May - presumably by the Press Association 




+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Finally with my Moderator's hat on:

Please keep this robust debate polite. Do not attack others, do not denigrate them, do not goad them, and remember that no argument is enhanced by abusing the contributions of others

- T.B. Moderator

____________________

The amazing symbiosis between bees and flowers:

https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/god-created-plant-pollinator-partners/  

avatar
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 14899
Reputation : 2991
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by Doug D on 02.12.14 9:51

I agree with Canada12 & others that from what we have available, we will never get to the bottom of when the photo was taken from the photograph itself. It will only be the PJ or SY, if anyone, that will be able to get to that information.
 
The bits that we should be able to pull together however are:
 
When was the mini-tennis held that week?
 
Where was the mini-tennis at the OC held for M’s age group? Was it on grass, if so where, or on the hard courts, if so which ones?
 
Where were Gerry’s tennis lessons held? (‘adjoining court’ KH1 p. 57)
 
M’s crèche was ‘the Mini Club for three-to-fives, was based in a light, airy room above the twenty-four-hour reception.’ (KH1 p. 51, with map opposite) which is the 24 hour reception just over the way from the Tapas complex, but looking at the resort map below it shows the Junior & Kidz Club as being right next to the ‘Millenium’ and the three other courts, or is this the facility for the 5 year olds and above?

Is the word ‘based’ just poetic licence to give the impression that the club was actually held there? Logically, would you set up a kids facility locked away in an upstairs room at a holiday resort? Did they use both facilities for her age group or is the map below incorrect?
It shows the 'Mini & Toddler 2's' as being behind the Tapas (6), which is where we are told S & A attended, and 'Baby & Toddler 1's' behind the tennis courts (7).
 

 
Did they use sponge or ‘proper’ tennis balls?
 
What brand of tennis balls is M. holding? Were they freely available in UK &/or Portugal at that time?
 
I believe the answers to these questions would go a long way to validating (or not) the photo.

Doug D

Posts : 2575
Reputation : 911
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by canada12 on 02.12.14 9:53

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@canada12 wrote:
However Kate did actually mention it [the sunburn] in her witness statement...

Concerning Madeleine, she is Caucasian, with quite white skin, aged four (12/05/2003) about 90cm tall. Of slim build, dark blond hair, straight and of shoulder length. Left eye blue-green, right eye also green with a brown spot on the pupil. She had a small brown spot on the skin of her left leg, as well as a small sunburn on her right forearm.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id192.html
@ canada12

The bolded quote above from Dr Kate McCann's statement is very interesting.

However, consider this for a moment.

Suppose that, as some suggest, this is a photo in which Madeleine's head has been photoshopped onto the body of another girl. And suppose again that that girl had a noticeable sunburn on her right arm. Suppose again that the McCanns had planned (say during 4 May) to release the Tennis Balls Photo worldwide via the Press Associaiton, Associated Press etc.

What would Kate say about Madeleine/

ANSWER: She would say: 'Oh, Madeleine had a sunburn on her right arm'.

As a matter of fact, I very much doubt if, that week, Madeleine could possibly have acquired a localised sunburn like that.

That in itself might suggest that the body of the girl in the Tennis Balls Photo is NOT Madeleine.

Completely agree with you, TB, and that's solid logic.
Especially since none of the nannies recall a mark like that on the Madeleine they were familiar with - if their statements can be believed to any extent.
Kate also says Madeleine has "slim build". Even with hunched shoulders, a child with "slim build" would not look like the child in this photo (IMO).

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 201
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by BlueBag on 02.12.14 10:09

@Tony Bennett wrote:REPLY: This was an error of mine in misinterpreting the date shown on the screenshot that BlueBag provided on page 2 of this thread. Those data seem to suggest that the photo was...

CREATED on 5 May 2007

and

AMENDED at 9.50am and 25 secs on 11th (not 5th) May - presumably by the Press Association 

The 5th May is related to the "AP" "FAMILY HANDOUT" source credit.

It is not necessarily when the photo was created.

And more specifically it is not necessarily camera EXIF data.

The photo was embedded in a Family Handout document, how it got there and what processes were involved along the way is anyone's guess.

It appears the photo was in a handout on the 5th of May.

If that is the case and it's photoshopped that's pretty impressive fast work.

Balance of probablities say's it isn't.

There is nothing in the photo that suggests phtoshopping either.

But hey... were're all jumping through hoops again.

Fun for some.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4578
Reputation : 2376
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by BlueBag on 02.12.14 10:12

Did anyone think to ask the makers of the video what they used as the source of their photo analysis?

Do they have the handout?
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4578
Reputation : 2376
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by aquila on 02.12.14 10:15

@BlueBag wrote:
@Tony Bennett wrote:REPLY: This was an error of mine in misinterpreting the date shown on the screenshot that BlueBag provided on page 2 of this thread. Those data seem to suggest that the photo was...

CREATED on 5 May 2007

and

AMENDED at 9.50am and 25 secs on 11th (not 5th) May - presumably by the Press Association 

The 5th May is related to the "AP" "FAMILY HANDOUT" source credit.

It is not necessarily when the photo was created.

And more specifically it is not necessarily camera EXIF data.

The photo was embedded in a Family Handout document, how it got there and what processes were involved along the way is anyone's guess.

It appears the photo was in a handout on the 5th of May.

If that is the case and it's photoshopped that's pretty impressive fast work.

Balance of probablities say's it isn't.

There is nothing in the photo that suggests phtoshopping either.

But hey... were're all jumping through hoops again.

Fun for some.
I agree with you BB.

If you remove the photo-shopping distraction you're left with claims about the photograph that don't corroborate with statements given to the police and a book.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8792
Reputation : 1760
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by canada12 on 02.12.14 10:15

@BlueBag wrote:
The photo was embedded in a Family Handout document, how it got there and what processes were involved along the way is anyone's guess.

It appears the photo was in a handout on the 5th of May.

If that is the case and it's photoshopped that's pretty impressive fast work.


Email the photo(s) off to someone who has Photoshop on their computer (instant).
An hour, maybe two hours at the most, to do some quick alterations - it doesn't take much time if you know what you're doing, BB.
Email the altered photo back (instant).

Not much time at all, really.
Could be done in half a day.

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 201
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by BlueBag on 02.12.14 10:32

@canada12 wrote:
@BlueBag wrote:
The photo was embedded in a Family Handout document, how it got there and what processes were involved along the way is anyone's guess.

It appears the photo was in a handout on the 5th of May.

If that is the case and it's photoshopped that's pretty impressive fast work.


Email the photo(s) off to someone who has Photoshop on their computer (instant).
An hour, maybe two hours at the most, to do some quick alterations - it doesn't take much time if you know what you're doing, BB.
Email the altered photo back (instant).

Not much time at all, really.
Could be done in half a day.
Why would they do this as early as May 5th?

Weren't they busy with the Police and a million other press and people?

Seriously, some of you need to take a step back.

Why don't you go and find out where the video maker got their source data from (why do you believe everything you are told?), then we might have something real to discuss.

Until then I don't see anything anomalous here.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4578
Reputation : 2376
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by aquila on 02.12.14 10:35

@BlueBag wrote:
@canada12 wrote:
@BlueBag wrote:
The photo was embedded in a Family Handout document, how it got there and what processes were involved along the way is anyone's guess.

It appears the photo was in a handout on the 5th of May.

If that is the case and it's photoshopped that's pretty impressive fast work.


Email the photo(s) off to someone who has Photoshop on their computer (instant).
An hour, maybe two hours at the most, to do some quick alterations - it doesn't take much time if you know what you're doing, BB.
Email the altered photo back (instant).

Not much time at all, really.
Could be done in half a day.
Why would they do this as early as May 5th?

Weren't they busy with the Police and a million other press and people?

Seriously, some of you need to take a step back.

Why don't you go and find out where the video maker got their source data from (why do you believe everything you are told?), then we might have something real to discuss.

Until then I don't see anything anomalous here.
clapping  Common sense prevails BB.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8792
Reputation : 1760
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by Guest on 02.12.14 10:38

[quote="Ladyinred"]Someone else could have bitten her.[/quote]


LIR, you beat me to it.

Now, who would do such a vile thing to such a small child?

Maybe one of the purported burglars on the purported trial run was a cannibal as well?

Shedding a completely new light on the remark: 'find the body & prove we killed her'!

No, seriously. Didn't she have a similar mark on her left knee (visible on the mirrored picture in the Duth newspapers at the time), which mark was mentioned in het passport?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by canada12 on 02.12.14 10:38

@BlueBag wrote:
Why would they do this as early as May 5th?

Weren't they busy with the Police and a million other press and people?

If Madeleine was gone, as many suspect, before May 3, then they had a number of days in which to plan this part of the exercise, BB. They were indeed busy with the Police and a million other press and people... but they (Kate and Gerry) didn't do the Photoshopping, did they? They would have passed it on to someone else. So... a few minutes to find the photos they needed... a few more minutes to email them off... then back to the Police and the million other press and people... (one might even be so bold as to suggest that the emailing and the photoshopping were done before May 3, so no police and no press people in sight - yet) - a few hours later, the revised photo is back in their hands... and then sent off and delivered to whoever put together the handout.

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 201
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by jeanmonroe on 02.12.14 11:20

The tennis 'photo', imo, is all BALLSHIT!

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5818
Reputation : 1665
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by j.rob on 02.12.14 14:02

@jeanmonroe wrote:The tennis 'photo', imo, is all BALLSHIT!


Yes indeed. The child on the court does not look like the child in the alleged 'last photo'. Different body shape. And as others have pointed out, where is the coloboma? First she had one and then she didn't, according to her parents. I mean, that's just nuts. She either had one or she didn't.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 233
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video

Post by MissesWillYa on 02.12.14 16:58

Re: the "bite mark," I wanted to say that I was a teacher before I had my children and I worked extensively with special-needs students, ranging in age from preschool to high school (so about 3-18 years old). Self-injury is very common among special needs children, especially those on the autism spectrum. The most glaring example I can recall was a boy about 17 years old, profoundly mentally disabled, who bit his right wrist every time he became frustrated. He had a permanent "dent" in the skin there, from having bitten down on it so hard for so long, and the skin was very discolored there as well. He had pale skin otherwise, and this bitten area was dark reddish-purple, with the skin sort of hardened as well.

I only offer this example because there has been speculation in some threads that Madeleine may have had behavioral or developmental issues. In my own experience, both as a parent and as a teacher, some of her behavior does sound a bit concerning, such as the constant screaming and tantrums that her family members have described. But then again, I'm also the older sibling of twins born soon after I was, and I know how difficult it can be for a child in that situation to get the care and attention she needs. Without access to medical records or, IMO, honest witness statements about her personality or behavioral history, it's impossible to know whether she had special needs or not.

I also wanted to offer an idea about the "body" in the tennis photo; I've noticed that cousin Fiona, John's daughter, looked like a fairly sturdy girl when she was young. I wonder if her body could have been the one substituted in this photo. Maybe the older style of shorts and shoes could play into this as well. I've also wondered about Fiona being the baby in that photo of Kate in a blue hoodie holding a baby advertised as Madeleine, given how young Kate looks. Photos of a niece would be a handy resource for people trying to convey invented situations for their missing daughter.

All IMO.
avatar
MissesWillYa

Posts : 180
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2013-04-25
Location : On a mountaintop

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum