Re: The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo - was it taken on the same day as the Last Photo?

by **Jill Havern** 30.11.16 12:29

Verdi wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:Question 41: Is it true that in England you considered giving up Madeleine's guardianship

It makes you wonder what this Police question was all about.

I've always been of the opinion that this whole thing was pre-planned.

I've always considered the question to be relating to Kate McCann's inability to cope with Madeleine - or at least cope with three very demanding young children. There are numerous indications that Madeleine was a bit of a handful, not the least being Gerry McCann's comment, I recall reading, about always having someone at hand to help his wife cope with the children. If various reports are to be believed, Kate McCann would appear to be a trifle volatile.

I don't think there can be any doubt that Madeleine did travel with her parents to Praia da Luz, evidenced by the few photographs of her at the Ocean Club. If the plan was to make her disappear - why choose a holiday situation that would draw more attention to her disappearance? Wouldn't it be simpler to ship her off to Aunt Nora in Canada, for example?

It might be frowned upon in some circles but there is no crime in giving up a child because you can't cope.

Would they have become mortgage-less celebrity millionaires though by shipping her off to Auntie Nora?

by Guest 30.11.16 12:31

JRP wrote:
Well, I guess it shows how easy it is to manipulate eye shadow... if nothing else.

Whether or not the photograph has been photo-shopped doesn't alter the FACT that close friend Jon Corner used the image, with eye shadow, as a prominent feature in his anniversary video.

Why did he do that I ask myself bignono

.

by MayMuse 30.11.16 12:34

Verdi wrote:
JRP wrote:
Well, I guess it shows how easy it is to manipulate eye shadow... if nothing else.
Whether or not the photograph has been photo-shopped doesn't alter the FACT that close friend Jon Corner used the image, with eye shadow, as a prominent feature in his anniversary video.

Why did he do that I ask myself .

To show she had that "special quality"?

by JRP 30.11.16 12:35

One question which is asked, is why did they choose the photo of a younger Madeleline, when there were other more recent ones on the McCann's camera?

Is it because, when this photo was printed numerous times, the holiday photos hadn't yet been taken?
In other words, the photos were printed in the UK prior to the holiday, and went with them in a bag.?
Ready made for distribution?

Madeleine obviously went on the holiday, but it's always been a question of accident v abduction... thoughts of pre-planning take us to a very dark place.

by Guest 30.11.16 12:39

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Would they have become mortgage-less celebrity millionaires though by shipping her off to Auntie Nora?

Point taken! Though a high price to pay for celebrity status and a few quid in the bank.

by JRP 30.11.16 12:41

MayMuse wrote:
Verdi wrote:
JRP wrote:
Well, I guess it shows how easy it is to manipulate eye shadow... if nothing else.
Whether or not the photograph has been photo-shopped doesn't alter the FACT that close friend Jon Corner used the image, with eye shadow, as a prominent feature in his anniversary video.

Why did he do that I ask myself .
To show she had that "special quality"?

Oh absolutely totally agree with that fact... in fact I pointed that out earlier in the thread. It may even be worse if this is a straight photo and the make up was added later... why do that?
The image was used in Jon Corners video with blue eyeshadow, so the effect was on before it was included. It's in the youtube video so there's no denying that fact.

by **Jill Havern** 30.11.16 12:42

Verdi wrote:
JRP wrote:
Well, I guess it shows how easy it is to manipulate eye shadow... if nothing else.
Whether or not the photograph has been photo-shopped doesn't alter the FACT that close friend Jon Corner used the image, with eye shadow, as a prominent feature in his anniversary video.

Why did he do that I ask myself .

Because he could then say she had "that special quality that some b*st*rd probably picked up on".

He obviously thought she had a special quality, so does that make him a b*st*ard too?

Together with David Payne's description of Maddie, and also his comments to Gerry in earshot of Dr Gaspar, it makes you wonder what sort of people the poor child had around her.

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

by Guest 30.11.16 12:44

MayMuse wrote:
Verdi wrote:
JRP wrote:
Well, I guess it shows how easy it is to manipulate eye shadow... if nothing else.
Whether or not the photograph has been photo-shopped doesn't alter the FACT that close friend Jon Corner used the image, with eye shadow, as a prominent feature in his anniversary video.

Why did he do that I ask myself .
To show she had that "special quality"?

"So beautiful, astonishingly bright, and I’d have to say very charismatic. She would shine out of a crowd. So—God forgive me—maybe that’s part of the problem. That special quality. Some ******* picked up on that."

by MayMuse 30.11.16 12:55

Verdi wrote:
MayMuse wrote:
Verdi wrote:
JRP wrote:
Well, I guess it shows how easy it is to manipulate eye shadow... if nothing else.
Whether or not the photograph has been photo-shopped doesn't alter the FACT that close friend Jon Corner used the image, with eye shadow, as a prominent feature in his anniversary video.

Why did he do that I ask myself .
To show she had that "special quality"?

"So beautiful, astonishingly bright, and I’d have to say very charismatic. She would shine out of a crowd. So—God forgive me—maybe that’s part of the problem. That special quality. Some ******* picked up on that."

Exactly, that quote from Mr Corner always stuck in my mind , thanks for posting the fullness of it.
The video presented and collated by him struck me as some form of message? not sure exactly why but left an uncomfortable feeling since first watched. nah

by **Jill Havern** 30.11.16 13:11

Verdi wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Would they have become mortgage-less celebrity millionaires though by shipping her off to Auntie Nora?
Point taken! Though a high price to pay for celebrity status and a few quid in the bank.

What 'high price' though?

She was supposed to have been a difficult child with sleeping problems and tantrums, as are most toddlers.

No sooner had Madeleine been 'abducted', her own grandmother said "That girl could throw a tantrum".
How many toddlers don't throw tantrums?
If your child/grandchild had just been abducted by paedophiles would you really think to say something like that?

I still think her 'disappearance' was pre-planned because of sexual abuse. She was due to start school soon and would possibly start talking about it.
Maybe she'd already started talking about it back in the UK and something had to be done.
You can't shut up a three year old just by asking them not to mention something.
Careers would have been in tatters and the twins taken away.
And they'd still have a mortgage when they got out of jail.
Gerry wasn't going to Portugal to "enjoy himself".

Maddie's corpse was concealed so as not to have an autopsy.

The begging bowl came out mega quick after her death, everyone jumped on the money-making bandwagon, and they were visibly happy within days, and still are except when they have to go to Portugal for the Libel Trial.
As Peter Hyatt quickly observed they never mention any concern for Maddie, only themselves.

It's always been about them and I believe Madeleine was a problem to them that they solved after calling in favours.

In my opinion.

by **Nina** 30.11.16 14:03

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Verdi wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Would they have become mortgage-less celebrity millionaires though by shipping her off to Auntie Nora?
Point taken! Though a high price to pay for celebrity status and a few quid in the bank.
What 'high price' though?

She was supposed to have been a difficult child with sleeping problems and tantrums, as are most toddlers.

No sooner had Madeleine been 'abducted', her own grandmother said "That girl could throw a tantrum".
How many toddlers don't throw tantrums?
If your child/grandchild had just been abducted by paedophiles would you really think to say something like that?

I still think her 'disappearance' was pre-planned because of sexual abuse. She was due to start school soon and would possibly start talking about it.
Maybe she'd already started talking about it back in the UK and something had to be done.
You can't shut up a three year old just by asking them not to mention something.
Careers would have been in tatters and the twins taken away.
And they'd still have a mortgage when they got out of jail.
Gerry wasn't going to Portugal to "enjoy himself".

Maddie's corpse was concealed so as not to have an autopsy.

The begging bowl came out mega quick after her death, everyone jumped on the money-making bandwagon, and they were visibly happy within days, and still are except when they have to go to Portugal for the Libel Trial.
As Peter Hyatt quickly observed they never mention any concern for Maddie, only themselves.

It's always been about them and I believe Madeleine was a problem to them that they solved after calling in favours.

In my opinion.

And mine too.

by **Tony Bennett** 30.11.16 16:16

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Verdi wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:She was supposed to have been a difficult child with sleeping problems and tantrums, as are most toddlers.

No sooner had Madeleine been 'abducted', her own grandmother said "That girl could throw a tantrum". How many toddlers don't throw tantrums? If your child/grandchild had just been abducted by paedophiles would you really think to say something like that?...It's always been about them and I believe Madeleine was a problem to them that they solved after calling in favours. In my opinion.

REPLY: Against that, we have plenty of evidence both from still and video images of Madeleine that she was basically a contented, well-fed, nicely-clothed, lively and happy child; even the three pics of her exploring the Ocean Club playground on Saturday 2 April 2007 are evidence of this. I will concede that on one or two she looks a bit more uncertain. But only one or two.


Also, @ skyrocket wrote:

Why would a father who worries about his daughter saying 'uh huh daddy' instead of 'yes daddy' have no qualms about sitting infront of 5 impressionable infants, including 3 of his own, and saying, 'f*** o** (d'ya think I'm here to enjoy myself)'?

REPLY: Do you have a link for this comment (i.e. the 'uh huh daddy' one) please? I've never seen it before.

If infact the airport bus video is what it claims to be, GM's language and general demeanour suggest something is very wrong. He appears angry and resigned. There is a big disconnect between him and the rest of his family and little Lily Payne even seems to be leaning away from him. KM makes a light hearted quip to David Payne about Madeleine. Why wasn't the video edited before release?

REPLY: Another very strange issue. I think the video was supposed to be released by the McCanns, for what reason is unclear. Kate is cuddling the twins, Daddy is clearly at odds with her in a bad mood, and Madeleine is apart from either of them, just swinging her legs. I can't see there was much point in them releasing it, so did someone else release it for some strange reason. David Payne took the video, didn't he?

Where was Jon Corner and his multimedia studio set up?

REPLY: At or near his home in Liverpool?

Move forward (if again we accept the 'Last Photo' as being genuine, except for the date/time),

REPLY: Almost everyone, I think, except Textusa, now accepts the Last Photo as genuine.

...and we have GM in the same frame of mind and disconnect as in the bus video...Drooping shoulders add to the complete lack of enjoyment coming across.

REPLY: Agreed. He is not looking cheerful.

Compare these images to every other family photo/video of GM released - I can't find a single one where he is not grinning broadly.

REPLY: There are certainly quite a few of him looking very happy soon after 3rd May. But also quite a few of him looking unhappy or 'concerned' in the month after they reported Madeleine missing.

=================

If we suggest that the Last Photo was taken shortly beforehte Make Up Photo, is it possible that Gerry was fretting, worried, brooding about something that was planned for Madeleine that afternoon?

Who might have dressed Madeleine up that afternoon - eyeshadow, pink hair bead, lipstick and necklace?

For what purpose?

And who actually took the photo? - there is some doubt whether it was taken on the McCanns' Canon.

It looked like she was half dressed for an occasion already in the Last Photo; smart pink smock with narrow straps and a pink bead/bow. It wasn't suitable clothing for playing in the playground.

It is one thing to suggest that some kind of 'occasion' was planned for Madeleine that afternoon which later went badly wrong.

It is quite another thing, however, to suggest that the McCanns actively planned to kill her on that holiday in their own apartment.

by Roxyroo 30.11.16 16:55

Did anyone else notice that in that Australian interview they have edited out Gerry's swearing on the airport bus?
Also looking at Madeleine on the bus she looks to me like she's been photo shopped in, I.e. her trousers are TOO pink, compared to the rest of the bus etc
thinking

by tinkier 30.11.16 17:59

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Verdi wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Would they have become mortgage-less celebrity millionaires though by shipping her off to Auntie Nora?
Point taken! Though a high price to pay for celebrity status and a few quid in the bank.
What 'high price' though?

She was supposed to have been a difficult child with sleeping problems and tantrums, as are most toddlers.

No sooner had Madeleine been 'abducted', her own grandmother said "That girl could throw a tantrum".
How many toddlers don't throw tantrums?
If your child/grandchild had just been abducted by paedophiles would you really think to say something like that?

I still think her 'disappearance' was pre-planned because of sexual abuse. She was due to start school soon and would possibly start talking about it.
Maybe she'd already started talking about it back in the UK and something had to be done.
You can't shut up a three year old just by asking them not to mention something.
Careers would have been in tatters and the twins taken away.
And they'd still have a mortgage when they got out of jail.
Gerry wasn't going to Portugal to "enjoy himself".

Maddie's corpse was concealed so as not to have an autopsy.

The begging bowl came out mega quick after her death, everyone jumped on the money-making bandwagon, and they were visibly happy within days, and still are except when they have to go to Portugal for the Libel Trial.
As Peter Hyatt quickly observed they never mention any concern for Maddie, only themselves.

It's always been about them and I believe Madeleine was a problem to them that they solved after calling in favours.

In my opinion.

Accident versus abduction? A planned abduction which had to be swiftly cancelled because of an accidental death? I think the M'çs were going to be paid handsomely for something, all their money worries were going to be taken care of, money was the number 1 priority! IMO

by JohnyT 30.11.16 18:41

Gerry on the bus.......maybe his wife said he had to do more with kids.....less sport etc......Result :- sarcastic comment about not here to enjoy himself. Sometimes people do swear in front of kids believing they won't pick up on it (that's not an excuse btw)

Before the pool photo......maybe he had just had a row with Kate and was sulking.....Result:- pissed off look.

Smiling after a few days.....the press sometimes look for specific shots...how many shots have you seen of celebrities that look awful......it's just a fraction of a second in time.

I think certain things can be explained away, although I think there's far more that can't be!

JohnyT

by Guest 30.11.16 19:20

JohnyT wrote:Gerry on the bus.......maybe his wife said he had to do more with kids.....less sport etc......Result :- sarcastic comment about not here to enjoy himself. Sometimes people do swear in front of kids believing they won't pick up on it (that's not an excuse btw)

I've watched and listened to that video clip quite a few times and can genuinly say I can't understand what he said. I do however think too much emphasis has been placed on a chance comment - if indeed he did say.. 'eff off I'm not here to enjoy myself'.

A few of the gang said that Gerry McCann is gregarious and a bit of a lad, I can imagine he would say something like that for effect, a sort of 'in' joke. As for swearing in front of kids, it's not something I condone but I'm aware it's nothing unusual. Just look at the diabolical language used by some on the television and internet, all there for kids to see and read.

Anyway, taking three small children on a foreign holiday is no picnic - unless one gets immense enjoyment out of 24/7 kid time and everything that goes with it, fat chance of an enjoyable adult friendly holiday!

by skyrocket 30.11.16 19:46

@TB

Re: you're inquiry about the quote 'uh huh'/'yes.daddy'.

It comes from a collection of video clips, courtesy of Fannie312 on Youtube. The specific clip starts at 51 seconds on the link below.

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

The xmas clip at 3.35 mins is heart wrenching.

by Guest 01.12.16 0:41

MayMuse wrote:Exactly, that quote from Mr Corner always stuck in my mind , thanks for posting the fullness of it.

There for all to see, indelibly printed for eternity and so important as it would appear to be at the very soul of this whole sorry
affair.

How sad to know a three year old little girl was seen thus through the eyes and mind of a man, a close friend of the family - Uncle Jon.

by Guest 01.12.16 0:56

skyrocket wrote:@TB

Re: you're inquiry about the quote 'uh huh'/'yes.daddy'.

It comes from a collection of video clips, courtesy of Fannie312 on Youtube. The specific clip starts at 51 seconds on the link below.

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

The xmas clip at 3.35 mins is heart wrenching.

A clearer version of the same clip is contained in Richard D. Hall's 'Embedded Confessions' video interview with Peter Hyatt..

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

@ 38:09 minutes.

I do however think it only baby talk for the benefit of the video rather than Gerry McCann's notion of politesse.

by Guest 01.12.16 1:09

Get'emGonçalo wrote:What 'high price' though?

I really meant living under a cloud of suspicion for the rest of their lives and the effect if will have on their families - above all else their remaining two children, the twins.

Frankly I'm astonished they didn't separate and/or emigrate years ago - but maybe they just don't care about public opinion.

by Grande Finale 01.12.16 3:26

Tony Bennett wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Grande Finale wrote:Just a little photoshopping, mainly to remove the large pink plastic earings.
Doesn't look as weird now !

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Goodness me, yes! I had never ever spotted this.

And in all the time I'd been looking at and thinking about this weirdest of weird photos, I had never thought that these were plastic ears...
Having looked at this morning's comments - yes, I cannot see now why Grande Finale should have suggested Madeleine's ears were 'plastic earrings'.

Perhaps s/he wiil come along and explain the comment

Human head inclined 45degrees is VERY uncomfortable and you wouldn't see the eyes at all, so I chose approx half of that 22deg and constructed the following diagram. You will notice that the ear lobes are well above the jaw line (Green line).
The space between the ear lobe and jaw line would seem to be the correct distance to accomodate a large earing ! then the lowest part of the earing would be on the jawline.

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

by Equity 01.12.16 11:36

I managed to find a similar image of a girl wearing the same large pink plastic earrings in the shape of real ears!!!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I will try to track down where these are sold... could be on to something.

by Guest 01.12.16 12:09

Equity wrote:I managed to find a similar image of a girl wearing the same large pink plastic earrings in the shape of real ears!!!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I will try to track down where these are sold... could be on to something.

An excellent find if I may say! No more need be said on the subject thumbup

.

by **Nina** 01.12.16 12:15

Surely Madeleine does have large lobes to her ears.

Browse through all these photographs and there a number which show large lobes.............

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

In particular one where she has her hair pulled back, she is smiling love her, and wearing a red dress. Actuakky she has quite large ears.

by MayMuse 01.12.16 12:17

Verdi wrote:
Equity wrote:I managed to find a similar image of a girl wearing the same large pink plastic earrings in the shape of real ears!!!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I will try to track down where these are sold... could be on to something.
An excellent find if I may say! No more need be said on the subject .

Really, sorry they look like real ears to me, what makes you think they are otherwise?

by Guest 01.12.16 12:54

quite

MayMuse wrote:
Verdi wrote:
Equity wrote:I managed to find a similar image of a girl wearing the same large pink plastic earrings in the shape of real ears!!!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I will try to track down where these are sold... could be on to something.
An excellent find if I may say! No more need be said on the subject .
Really, sorry they look like real ears to me, what makes you think they are otherwise?

That's because they are real ears! I don't think otherwise - I was agreeing with Equity who I think (hope) was being frivolous, or even down right sarcastic.

by Guest 01.12.16 12:57

Nina wrote:Surely Madeleine does have large lobes to her ears.

Browse through all these photographs and there a number which show large lobes.............

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

In particular one where she has her hair pulled back, she is smiling love her, and wearing a red dress. Actuakky she has quite large ears.

This one with the cheesy grin is an excellent show of one ear..

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

by MayMuse 01.12.16 12:58

Verdi wrote:quite
MayMuse wrote:
Verdi wrote:
Equity wrote:I managed to find a similar image of a girl wearing the same large pink plastic earrings in the shape of real ears!!!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I will try to track down where these are sold... could be on to something.
An excellent find if I may say! No more need be said on the subject .
Really, sorry they look like real ears to me, what makes you think they are otherwise?
That's because they are real ears! I don't think otherwise - I was agreeing with Equity who I think (hope) was being frivolous, or even down right sarcastic.

Mmmmm too much "frivolity" in the search for truth for a missing little girl nod

by Equity 01.12.16 13:25

No frivolity MayM - just pointing out the ridiculousness of the suggestion made by @GF that Madeleine's perfectly normal ears are really large pink plastic earrings - that (guess what) look like real ears.

Unfortunately this type of post is picked up on by McCann supporters to portray sceptics as a bunch of swivel eyed loons - and those not bothered to look any further - believe it.

.

by Grande Finale 01.12.16 20:48

OK although I have put up a diagram, which would apply in the majority of people
on looking at a photograph of GM's brother, it looks like it is a genetic inheritance.

Add that to the fact that you would never expect to see a 3 year old wearing full make-up
applied by an adult, plus the awkward pose, just increases my disgust that this group of
photographs was published in the first place !

Was it taken in Donegal or was it Praia da Luz ? I now think Tony B was right and it is the latter and could only have been taken at the begining of the holiday.

The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo - was it taken on the same day as the Last Photo?