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

by **Tony Bennett** 01.12.16 22:04

Grande Finale wrote: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 beginning of the holiday.

@ Grande Finale Thank you. As far as I can see that is much more than likely on all the evidence that we have - and no-one IIRC has offered a serious alternative. And it is a sober conclusion which we all need to weigh up very carefully.

You rather toyed with us by the teasing way in which you removed both Madeleine's ears and the blue eyeshadow, certainly displaying your photoshopping skills - and in the process causing me some embarrassment at my initial gullibiity.

I have been considering what you have said about angles.

Madeleine's ears being so low down on her face is a combination of:

1. Her head being tipped back at a considerable angle, and
2. The photographer holding the camera well below her head.

It has been posed. Madeleine looks motionless - not animated in the slightest.

I wonder if any other photos of her were taken at the same time.

If YES, then surely there would be much more natural one to choose from?

If NO, why was this one picture composed in such a bizzarre, even horrible, manner?

by Guest 01.12.16 22:39

MayMuse wrote:Mmmmm too much "frivolity" in the search for truth for a missing little girl

I'm forever grateful that I was gifted with a sense of humour - it's good for the soul and helps you through the face of adversity, keeps you sane, lifts the spirit. It also a gift if you can laugh at yourself - never take life too seriously, it will take you down if you let it.

I don't believe anyone, at least not on this forum, is intending to be frivolous about the truth of a missing child. If however someone or something leaves itself wide open to ridicule (that includes me by the way) then so be it - ridicule it is!

'All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players; They have their exits and their entrances. One man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.....'

As You Like It -William Shakespeare

by Guest 02.12.16 23:59

Grande Finale wrote:Was it taken in Donegal or was it Praia da Luz ?

I'm at a total loss to understand why anyone would think the photograph may have been taken in Donegal. OK, according to press reports the McCanns said the picture was taken not long before their trip to Portugal but the McCanns said quite a lot didn't they? Even if there was an element of truth in what they said, why Donegal - why not Rothley or Liverpool or Glasgow or Skipton?

Or maybe Portugal - the ambiance of the photograph certainly has more of an Iberian flavour.

by Tony Cadogan 05.12.16 13:22

Tony Bennett wrote:
Tony Cadogan wrote:[PART SNIPPED]

Helpfully, Rex provide the resolution of the image in their possession as 2111 x 1583, and checking the specs of KM’s (“One of my photographs is known around the world…”) alleged camera, Canon PowerShot A620, at https://www.cnet.com/uk/products/canon-powershot-a620/specs/ , one finds that Cannon A620 does not offer such a resolution natively (credit is partly due to ‘Peg’ at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Wed Apr 27, 2016).

The Rex image has been manipulated therefore (KM’s camera, wrong resolution).

Whether the image of the child itself had been ‘Frankensteined’ is another matter.
@ Tony Cadogan Many thanks for the investigations you have done and presented here.

Can I clarify please what you mean by the bit in bold above.

Does it mean this: "This photo was definitely taken on a Canon A620 but has been edited in some way before being released to the public"?

If I have got this wrong, please correct what I've said.

Furthermore, how certain can we be (if at all), from the data you've provided, that this photo was definitely taken on a Canon A620?

Or do we not know what camera it was taken on?

Also, I take it there are no data available from the image on either:

(1) the date it was taken, or
(2) the date it was amended/edited.

I think I am also correct in saying that:

A. The three playground photos, clearly taken on the Saturday, are all in the PJ files, but

B. None of the three controversial photos of that week:
* Last Photo
* Make Up Photo (assuming it was that week)
* Tennis Balls Photo...
...are in the PJ files.

I am sorry for the delay in replying.

“Many thanks for the investigations you have done and presented here.”

You are too kind.

“Can I clarify please what you mean by the bit in bold above.

Does it mean this: "This photo was definitely taken on a Canon A620 but has been edited in some way before being released to the public"?

If I have got this wrong, please correct what I've said.”

At the time of writing, I had in mind the following Dr Martin Roberts’ conjecture in his ‘A Nightwear Job’ (I quote the whole paragraph to preserve the flavour of the context which is interesting enough to merit a separate discussion):

“In conclusion, the McCanns' 'official photograph', first exhibited on 7 May, appears to be that of a damp pair of pyjamas, too big to have been sensibly purchased for Madeleine's younger sister that Spring, and most certainly not the year before. The subject is set against dark blue upholstery of a type not present in any of the apartments occupied by the McCanns or their Tapas associates immediately after 3 May. Kate McCann has explained, over time, how she was alone in apartment 5A that morning, in the company of a damp pyjama top (having just washed it) and how, from that afternoon by all accounts, she 'couldn't bear to use the camera', an automatic device (Canon PowerShot A620) belonging to a product lineage with an unfortunate reputation for random focussing errors.”

When ‘A Nightwear Job’ was published, I checked the camera reference as well as I could and have been sufficiently satisfied ever since that Kate’s camera was A620. From what I recall, a photograph of a Canon PowerShot A620 on a table in 5A convinced me. With hindsight it could have been A610 in the photograph which is identical in appearance to A620. I do not have a link to the photograph but I should think I have a copy somewhere. For the purpose of my observations in the post you refer to, it matters not whether the camera on the table was A620 or A610 or a Canon at all.

“Furthermore, how certain can we be (if at all), from the data you've provided, that this photo was definitely taken on a Canon A620?”

I can not think of a reasonable argument against my presumption that, in 2007, anything but a compact 35mm digital camera could have been used by the McCanns. Therefore I say that the photograph under discussion was taken with such a camera.

The answer to the question as to what make and model the camera from which the make-up photograph originated would depend on whom one is inclined to believe (please see my reply to ’Doug D’ at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] )

“Or do we not know what camera it was taken on?”

We can not be certain unless we have access to the original image file, straight from the camera that is, or, better still, the camera itself and the image.

In view of the aforesaid, my answer is no, we don’t.

“Also, I take it there are no data available from the image on either:

(1) the date it was taken, or
(2) the date it was amended/edited.”

Such data could not be relied upon unless the image under examination came straight from the camera it had been captured with or its provenance/chain of custody was reliable.

“A. The three playground photos, clearly taken on the Saturday, are all in the PJ files,”

Yes.

“but

B. None of the three controversial photos of that week:
* Last Photo
* Make Up Photo (assuming it was that week)
* Tennis Balls Photo...
...are in the PJ files.”

Correct, as far as I know.

by Guest 11.12.16 20:43

Apologies for going of topic but I don't think this warrants a new thread nor resurrection of an old one. It's been niggling me for a long time but I'm sure somebody can appease me without too much disruption.

At the time of the 2007 trip to Portugal, the Paynes children I believe were 11 and 27 months old. I'm not much good at guessing ages - can someone confirm that the children in this image from the PJ files, said to be David Payne and his two daughters, could be the ages stated? They look older to me - not wishing to stir up yet another conspiracy theory, I'm just wondering if they are his children and not one of the other friends.

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

For some reason this image gives me the creeps, aside from the slightly Savile'esque look which is most likely the reflection of the palm tree sprouting from his head.

ETA: The image was there - then it wasn't!

by **Nina** 11.12.16 21:01

Verdi wrote:Apologies for going of topic but I don't think this warrants a new thread nor resurrection of an old one. It's been niggling me for a long time but I'm sure somebody can appease me without too much disruption.

At the time of the 2007 trip to Portugal, the Paynes children I believe were 11 and 27 months old. I'm not much good at guessing ages - can someone confirm that the children in this image from the PJ files, said to be David Payne and his two daughters, could be the ages stated? They look older to me - not wishing to stir up yet another conspiracy theory, I'm just wondering if they are his children and not one of the other friends.

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

For some reason this image gives me the creeps, aside from the slightly Savile'esque look which is most likely the reflection of the palm tree sprouting from his head.

ETA: The image was there - then it wasn't!

One is his own child and the other is the eldest of Jane Tanner.
I cringe at these photographs as he is gripping a child that doesn't belong to him in a cringe worthy way in my opinion. All this squeezing and tickling and nervous giggles doesn't sit right with me at all.

by Guest 11.12.16 23:17

Nina wrote:One is his own child and the other is the eldest of Jane Tanner.
I cringe at these photographs as he is gripping a child that doesn't belong to him in a cringe worthy way in my opinion. All this squeezing and tickling and nervous giggles doesn't sit right with me at all.

Hmmm - just as I thought. The idea of him being so 'hands on' (not so much what he's doing but how he's doing it) with his own children is to my mind a bit yucky but a child belonging to someone else, even a family member or close friend, sets off alarm bells. He appears to be leering, it makes me shudder.

bignono

Where did the communal child bathing come in - was it fact or fiction, I can't remember.

by **Nina** 11.12.16 23:30

Verdi wrote:
Nina wrote:One is his own child and the other is the eldest of Jane Tanner.
I cringe at these photographs as he is gripping a child that doesn't belong to him in a cringe worthy way in my opinion. All this squeezing and tickling and nervous giggles doesn't sit right with me at all.
Hmmm - just as I thought. The idea of him being so 'hands on' (not so much what he's doing but how he's doing it) with his own children is to my mind a bit yucky but a child belonging to someone else, even a family member or close friend, sets off alarm bells. He appears to be leering, it makes me shudder.

Where did the communal child bathing come in - was it fact or fiction, I can't remember.

According to the Gasper statements on the holiday they shared with the Paynes it was a fact. I remember him, David Payne, also saying that Madeline would plead 'play monsters' all giddy and chasing and what happens when the monster catches?
I am told by a friend who works in child protection that such games are a means of making children hyper and mixing games with abuse is common. As is dressing up.

by Guest 12.12.16 12:07

?

Nina wrote:
Verdi wrote:
Nina wrote:One is his own child and the other is the eldest of Jane Tanner.
I cringe at these photographs as he is gripping a child that doesn't belong to him in a cringe worthy way in my opinion. All this squeezing and tickling and nervous giggles doesn't sit right with me at all.
Hmmm - just as I thought. The idea of him being so 'hands on' (not so much what he's doing but how he's doing it) with his own children is to my mind a bit yucky but a child belonging to someone else, even a family member or close friend, sets off alarm bells. He appears to be leering, it makes me shudder.

Where did the communal child bathing come in - was it fact or fiction, I can't remember.
According to the Gasper statements on the holiday they shared with the Paynes it was a fact. I remember him, David Payne, also saying that Madeline would plead 'play monsters' all giddy and chasing and what happens when the monster catches?
I am told by a friend who works in child protection that such games are a means of making children hyper and mixing games with abuse is common. As is dressing up.

Ah yes of course - the Gaspar statements, thanks for the reminder.

Now you mention it, I too recall D. Payne talking of playing monster games - wasn't that the same occasion as when he was twizzling?

ETA: Uh-ho - just realised, the twizzing caper was mentioned by David Payne during his rogatory interview when speaking of his alleged visit to the McCann apartment on the night of 3rd May. I quote..

"Err oh yeah, you know I'm very sure that if you'd have asked them, you know that evening or the next day they'd all say ah yeah, I popped in.

You know I, you know I did know the children very well, we'd all you know, met up many times before err you know I, you know again I'd be playing with Madeleine you know in the, err the play area err you know during that week, you know lifting her up, twizzing her round and everything, I knew her that well, you know, to do that, and as I say err she'd definitely know who I was and certainly, as I say, just to reinforce that she looked very happy."

by **Tony Bennett** 12.12.16 16:53

Verdi wrote:DVID PATNE: "You know I, you know I did know the children very well, we'd all you know, met up many times before err you know I, you know again I'd be playing with Madeleine you know in the, err the play area err you know during that week, you know lifting her up, twizzing her round and everything, I knew her that well, you know, to do that, and as I say err she'd definitely know who I was and certainly, as I say, just to reinforce that she looked very happy."

OK, a short bit of statement analysis here:

1. Payne says "I'd [= I would] be playing with Madeleine...err in the play area that week...be lifting her up...be twizzing her round...and everything..."

2. He says: 'I would have, not 'I was...' or 'I did...' That is classic avoidance. If he was teling the truth, he would use those words, not 'I would have'.

3. Moreover he does not give ANY specifics about when he is supposed to have done all this playing around and twizzing. And of course there are no holiday snaps of Madeleine playing happily with Payne or the other adults or children, apart from the three on Saturday and the Last Photo (Sunday?).

4. Finally these is no mention of David Payne happily playing with Madeleine in Kate's book, 'madeleine'

by Guest 12.12.16 22:45

Tony Bennett wrote:
Verdi wrote:DVID PATNE: "You know I, you know I did know the children very well, we'd all you know, met up many times before err you know I, you know again I'd be playing with Madeleine you know in the, err the play area err you know during that week, you know lifting her up, twizzing her round and everything, I knew her that well, you know, to do that, and as I say err she'd definitely know who I was and certainly, as I say, just to reinforce that she looked very happy."
OK, a short bit of statement analysis here:

1. Payne says "I'd [= I would] be playing with Madeleine...err in the play area that week...be lifting her up...be twizzing her round...and everything..."

2. He says: 'I would have, not 'I was...' or 'I did...' That is classic avoidance. If he was teling the truth, he would use those words, not 'I would have'.

3. Moreover he does not give ANY specifics about when he is supposed to have done all this playing around and twizzing. And of course there are no holiday snaps of Madeleine playing happily with Payne or the other adults or children, apart from the three on Saturday and the Last Photo (Sunday?).

4. Finally these is no mention of David Payne happily playing with Madeleine in Kate's book, 'madeleine'

He also said "I knew her that well..." - not I know her that well + "she'd (she would) definitely know who I was..." - not she would definitely know who I am. One minute he's placing Madeleine as a thing of the past and next he's placing himself as a thing of the past. Strikes me he has a problem with literacy - perhaps he was feeling a bit tense big grin

.

The scarcity of holiday photographs is forever perplexing. The emphasis is always put on digital cameras but as I think I've suggested in the past - could it possible they used mobile phones to take photographs?

Snipped from David Payne's rogatory interview..

"....Lily you know and Madeleine you know had met many times before and you know they were happy to be together err I can remember you know them holding hands and you know getting on the plane and we've got the video footage on the, you know on the err phone of that you know when Madeleine, you know, slipped and banged her leg...."

Eight "you knows" in that short paragraph - not bad eh?

by Guest 14.12.16 20:51

Has there ever been any successful research into Dr. David Payne's background? Not necessarily professional but more a personal angle.

I've tried the forum search function but haven't found anything so far. There is a reason for my curiosity.

by **Nina** 14.12.16 21:28

Verdi wrote:Has there ever been any successful research into Dr. David Payne's background? Not necessarily professional but more a personal angle.

I've tried the forum search function but haven't found anything so far. There is a reason for my curiosity.

I know that a regular poster has had a lot of interaction with him in his professional capacity.
If she wishes to give more details I am sure she will.

by Pyrite 14.12.16 21:41

Nina wrote:
Verdi wrote:Has there ever been any successful research into Dr. David Payne's background? Not necessarily professional but more a personal angle.

I've tried the forum search function but haven't found anything so far. There is a reason for my curiosity.
I know that a regular poster has had a lot of interaction with him in his professional capacity.
If she wishes to give more details I am sure she will.

F.

by **Tony Bennett** 14.12.16 22:29

Verdi wrote:Has there ever been any successful research into Dr. David Payne's background? Not necessarily professional but more a personal angle.

I've tried the forum search function but haven't found anything so far. There is a reason for my curiosity.

There are some snippets in Kate's book.

On page 20 we read how, in 2000: "we had soon made friends, two of the closest being Fiona Webster and her partner David Pyne. I had first met Fiona in December 2000 in the staff coffee room at the Leicester General Intensive Care Unit, where we were both anaesthetic registrars...It didn't take me long to discover that she was my kind of person. We became such great mates that one of our consultant colleagues rather cheekily used to refer to us as Charlie's Angels.

On page 31 we read about the first four months of Madeleine's life:

"She cried for the best part of each day for the first four months of her life".

But then...

"We all went to Italy in September [2003] for David and Fiona's wedding and one night, for no obvious reason ,we put Madeleine down and she slept for a solid six hours..."

We get the third reference to the Paynes on page 42 where we read: "It was on New Year's Day 2007 that the idea of a spring holiday in Portugal was first raised. Fiona and David Payne, who had come over with their childen Lily and Scarlett to spend the day with us, were planning a week's break at a Mark Warner resort in the Algarve, probably with two other couples and their families, and they asked if we'd like to join them. We'd been away oith Fiona and David on several occasions and we'd always enjoyed ourselves. They favoured the same kind of holidays we did...preferring a reputable resort with good sports facilities...The other couples pencilled in for this trip were Russell O'Brien and Jane Tanner and Matt and Rachael Oldfied...in fact Gerry had worked in the past with both Russell and Matt and we knew them quite well, so we had no concerns about whether we'd all get along..."

by Guest 14.12.16 22:56

Nina wrote:
Verdi wrote:Has there ever been any successful research into Dr. David Payne's background? Not necessarily professional but more a personal angle.

I've tried the forum search function but haven't found anything so far. There is a reason for my curiosity.
I know that a regular poster has had a lot of interaction with him in his professional capacity.
If she wishes to give more details I am sure she will.

I remember Hobs saying she encountered Dr Payne in a hospital environment but I suppose her contact with him was confined to medical care of her relative.

Although I wouldn't put it past her to surreptitiously get him to reveal information about himself big grin

!

by MayMuse 14.12.16 23:09

It was on New Year's Day 2007 that the idea of a spring holiday in Portugal was first raised. Fiona and David Payne, who had come over with their childen Lily and Scarlett to spend the day with us, were planning a week's break at a Mark Warner resort in the Algarve, probably with two other couples and their families, and they asked if we'd like to join them...

Slightly off topic but wasn't it lucky that Santa preemted that Christmas when Madeleine was gifted the useful and lovely pink travel backpack case and pink fleece she used for her holiday to Portugal

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

Christmas unwrapping at home
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Add note ... Amelie and Madeleine beautiful white angels in white matching pyjamas?

by Guest 14.12.16 23:27

Tony Bennett wrote:
Verdi wrote:Has there ever been any successful research into Dr. David Payne's background? Not necessarily professional but more a personal angle.

I've tried the forum search function but haven't found anything so far. There is a reason for my curiosity.
There are some snippets in Kate's book.

On page 20 we read how, in 2000: "we had soon made friends, two of the closest being Fiona Webster and her partner David Pyne. I had first met Fiona in December 2000 in the staff coffee room at the Leicester General Intensive Care Unit, where we were both anaesthetic registrars...It didn't take me long to discover that she was my kind of person. We became such great mates that one of our consultant colleagues rather cheekily used to refer to us as Charlie's Angels.

On page 31 we read about the first four months of Madeleine's life:

"She cried for the best part of each day for the first four months of her life".

But then...

"We all went to Italy in September [2003] for David and Fiona's wedding and one night, for no obvious reason ,we put Madeleine down and she slept for a solid six hours..."

We get the third reference to the Paynes on page 42 where we read: "It was on New Year's Day 2007 that the idea of a spring holiday in Portugal was first raised. Fiona and David Payne, who had come over with their childen Lily and Scarlett to spend the day with us, were planning a week's break at a Mark Warner resort in the Algarve, probably with two other couples and their families, and they asked if we'd like to join them. We'd been away oith Fiona and David on several occasions and we'd always enjoyed ourselves. They favoured the same kind of holidays we did...preferring a reputable resort with good sports facilities...The other couples pencilled in for this trip were Russell O'Brien and Jane Tanner and Matt and Rachael Oldfied...in fact Gerry had worked in the past with both Russell and Matt and we knew them quite well, so we had no concerns about whether we'd all get along..."

Have to rush so just a quicky.

A while ago I mentioned the name of one Dr. Jason Payne-James, a specialist in forensic and legal medicine. Admittedly my initial interest was triggered by the name and the field of work with no other connection, so I'm hesitant to make too much of what is most likely insignificant.

About Dr. Jason Payne-James..

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

It can be seen he has worked with the Home Office and the Metropolitan Police. It was claimed at some stage that the private forensic examination of the Renault Scenic hired by the McCann's in Portugal was commissioned by the Home Office.

Dr. Payne-James qualified in medicine in 1980 at the London Hospital Medical College and undertook additional postgraduate education to higher degree level at Cardiff Law School, the Department of Forensic Medicine & Science at the University of Glasgow and with the University of Ulster, Northern Ireland. Gerry McCann studied at the university of Glasgow from the late 1980's into the year 2000. He also spent time in Amsterdam as did Prof McCann.

I'm too easily distracted to make a decent researcher so my attempts here are very flimsy - possibly even conspiratorial roll

so I quite understand if people think I'm off with the fairies.

I believe I mentioned before, the telephone call made by David Payne on the night of 3rd May 2007, which he later said had something to do with his sister.

ETA:

McCann team tests car for traces of Madeleine

By Fiona Govan in Praia da Luz -20 Nov 2007

Last night it emerged that lawyers working for the couple had hired independent forensic scientists to examine the car, which had been kept in a garage of an Algarve holiday villa after they returned to the UK.

Brian Kennedy, the wealthy business man who is funding the McCann's own efforts to investigate their daughter's disappearance, confirmed the tests had taken place.

"We did our own tests on the hire car and found no traces of Madeleine," he said.

He said that the tests had been carried out by a team of independent Home Office accredited pathologists and were completely reliable.

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

by Guest 15.12.16 0:20

David Payne's rogatory interview..

1485 "Do you recall me telling you about the London number, which you couldn't find in your phone''

Reply "Yes.'

1485 "That number actually transcribes back to the Crime Specialist Director in London.'

Reply "Mm.'

1485 "Did you contact them''

Reply "Err I did yes. My, err you know my sister err had been in contact with them and she was trying to do everything that she could knowing the, err, the difficulties that we were having out there so you know I did approach them just asking for advice but err I can't remember, I don't think I actually spoke to anyone there, but for some reason that wasn't carried forward.'

1485 "Yeah.'

Reply "But I mean, you know, just into the context of the conversation you know we're in a strange country, we've got no representeers we don't know what's going on, all hell's broken loose and you know to see whether you can do anything to help Madeleine come back, you know and that was the lines that we were taking.'

1485 "Do you remember who you spoke to''

Reply "I don't know.'

1485 "The call was made on the following day at twenty three thirteen, so that's late at night.'

Reply "Mm.'

1485 "You don't recollect anything else about the conversation that you had with that, was it you that made the call''

Reply "Err I, yeah I know that I got phone numbers from my sister which I did you know ring them but I can't remember making one late at night.'
----------

Sorry for going off topic.

by **Hobs** 15.12.16 0:55

"We all went to Italy in September [2003] for David and Fiona's wedding and one night, for no obvious reason ,we put Madeleine down and she slept for a solid six hours..."

Here we have sensitivity regarding Maddie sleeping.

The key phrase being "For no obvious reason"

Given her age and that they were on vacation,why was it a surprise she slept for a solid 6 hours?
Presumably she would have been excited and running around etc and like any toddler, tiring herself out to the extent that like any toddler she would sleep well.

Since, to the mccanns, her having a busy day at a wedding (presumably rather than being confined to a room/apartment/chair/buggy or other reason that prevented her from being active) was not an obvious reason for Maddie to have a good nights sleep, one has to wonder what obvious reasons were there that would cause Maddie to sleep solidly through the night, well 6 hours?

Since kate introduces the concept of reason as to Maddie sleeping one has to wonder if sedation was used to get Maddie to sleep.

It would be an obvious reason as to Maddie sleeping for a solid 6 hours.

There was no "obvious" reason which would provide for Maddie not being sedated that night since it was not required.

She was not sedated which would be the obvious reason for her to sleep so well, therefore it allows for there being "no obvious" reason.

On page 31 we read about the first four months of Madeleine's life:

"She cried for the best part of each day for the first four months of her life".

This would explain kate's obsession about the children sleeping.
It would also explain the sedation.

Kate could not cope with her children being normal, healthy children, doing what children do best.
Kate it seems needs to be in control at all times.
Everything has a time and a place and she could not cope if the order and routine was broken.

Children had to be asleep at a certain time to allow kate to have her me time, to feel in control again.
This would perhaps also explain why they had so much help from their families, even to them flying down for a couple of days.
it would also explain how the nursery girl ended up helping kate at home with the bathing, feeding etc.

Kate was overwhelmed, both physically and mentally.
Gerry was little to no help given his job and his personality.

I suspect it was getting to a stage where kate could not be trusted to be left alone to handle three toddlers.

If payne visited as claimed on the Thursday to check on kate, was it because gerry thought kate was coping badly, she was volatile towards Maddie as reported by several witnesses who claim they heard her shouting and screaming as if rowing with Maddie.
Gerry was doing his tennis and hanging with the men in the group, was she being left alone to handle the bedtime routine?

Was this when the children were moved to whichever apartment and then babysat by the missing adult from the group?

Was Maddie not with the rest of the children because of her behavior?
The adults allegedly checking always seem to check on Maddie and not the children?

Was Maddie sedated so as not to disturb the other children and to make sure she didn't wake and wander?
Clarence told us "If you put seven children together, you're going to have a far harder time getting them to sleep than three,"
There were eight children in the group so which one was missing?
I can only presume it was Maddie.

Personally, i believe Maddie died earlier in the week given that the apartment was almost forensically cleaned in that little evidence of Maddie was found in the apartment, let alone her and the twins.
Children are messy little buggers, especially toddlers.
The apartment should have been swarming with evidence of their presence, yet it wasn't.

The apartment was cleaned to remove evidence of what happened to Maddie, that she died there whether by accident or deliberately.
A cause of death that allowed blood evidence to be revealed in spots on the floor and wall behind the sofa.

This would suggest perhaps an accidental fall as a result of sedation, or perhaps suggestive of something more sinister, again involving sedation.

What tever the cause, Maddie could not be allowed to be autopsied.
The mccanns and the group as a whole would know that an autopsy would be performed as the death was not natural such as from a known prior medical condition.
Would the group accept such a cover up if only sedation was used, especially if their own children were not being sedated?
If they were being responsible adults, why would they acede to a coverup of manner of death, disposal and subsequent false police report?

Was something else going on that the group knew about and permitted to happen that would mean if they didn't help they would be implicated and the consequences severe?

by willowthewisp 15.12.16 12:44

Hi Hobs,are you sure Clarence claimed "Seven Children"and not Eight,"as you know all that has happened,can be explained in a reasoned manner",I'll bet it can eh,Clarence,"twitchy Sphincter time"?

by Guest 15.12.16 23:11

Hobs wrote:
If payne visited as claimed on the Thursday to check on kate, was it because gerry thought kate was coping badly, she was volatile towards Maddie as reported by several witnesses who claim they heard her shouting and screaming as if rowing with Maddie.

David Payne's rogatory interview - April 2008

"Err I, as I say I'm not sure you know what happened to Matt and Russell at that particular moment but I remember then you know I went over to see err Gerry at the err you know tennis courts, just to see you know what was happening, and err decided that we'd, you know I'd come, come back to play tennis and err Gerry had asked me just to pop in and check everything was alright err with Kate or you know again I can't remember the exact reason whether he was just making sure it was alright that he could stay there and you know more time but you know he'd asked me to pop in....."

Yes, why would Gerry ask Dave 'the artful dodger' Payne to just 'pop in' and check everything was err alright with Kate - why him who up until then, apart from organizing the holiday, played a very low profile during the weeks frolics?

Not that I believe for a second that the visit took place. In my opinion it was yet another story line to place a living Madeleine at apartment 5a on the night of 3rd May 2007 in preparation for the fabricated abduction alert.

by willowthewisp 16.12.16 13:11

Verdi wrote:
Hobs wrote:
If payne visited as claimed on the Thursday to check on kate, was it because gerry thought kate was coping badly, she was volatile towards Maddie as reported by several witnesses who claim they heard her shouting and screaming as if rowing with Maddie.
David Payne's rogatory interview - April 2008

"Err I, as I say I'm not sure you know what happened to Matt and Russell at that particular moment but I remember then you know I went over to see err Gerry at the err you know tennis courts, just to see you know what was happening, and err decided that we'd, you know I'd come, come back to play tennis and err Gerry had asked me just to pop in and check everything was alright err with Kate or you know again I can't remember the exact reason whether he was just making sure it was alright that he could stay there and you know more time but you know he'd asked me to pop in....."

Yes, why would Gerry ask Dave 'the artful dodger' Payne to just 'pop in' and check everything was err alright with Kate - why him who up until then, apart from organizing the holiday, played a very low profile during the weeks frolics?

Not that I believe for a second that the visit took place. In my opinion it was yet another story line to place a living Madeleine at apartment 5a on the night of 3rd May 2007 in preparation for the fabricated abduction alert.

Hi Verdi, Re;David Payne ,tie in his contact with the UK police Unit in London 4 May 2007,assisted by his sister,then tie in Police statement 1485 Mesniha of what he could tell the Leicestershire Police Force in April 2008,but now is not the pertinent time Format,now that is what you could call top flight Policing?

by Guest 16.12.16 15:59

willowthewisp wrote:Hi Verdi, Re;David Payne ,tie in his contact with the UK police Unit in London 4 May 2007,assisted by his sister,then tie in Police statement 1485 Mesniha of what he could tell the Leicestershire Police Force in April 2008,but now is not the pertinent time Format,now that is what you could call top flight Policing?

The Specialist Crime Directorate that he admits to telephoning, aided by his sister, has been merged with Central Operations to form a new Specialist Crime and Operations department. Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner, Mark Rowley, previously led the Directorate - now fronted by Cressida Dick (hmmm... no comment!).

Wikipedia entry describes the unit thus..

'The Directorate led national police agency with regard to specialist crime investigations such as e-crime, sex crimes (paedophile unit) or kidnappings, hostage taking and contract killings.'

Mark Rowley of course, has been involved with directing Operation Grange!

As an aside, the Specialist Crime and Operations department, in addition to it's many other areas of interest, happens to have responsibility for the Met. Police Dog Support Unit - ooops - bit of a conflict of interests there I think.

Ain't what you know it's who you know bignono

by Cmaryholmes 02.01.17 11:14

Does anyone else think that Madeleine is actually wearing mascara on the 'make up' photo? If she is then there is no way she put that on herself while playing with Mummy's cosmetics. Is she upright? Or lying down? If she is lying down, the photographer is virtually underneath her. Weird. Sorry if all this has already been addressed.

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

by **Tony Bennett** 02.01.17 11:42

Cmaryholmes wrote:Does anyone else think that Madeleine is actually wearing mascara on the 'make up' photo? If she is then there is no way she put that on herself while playing with Mummy's cosmetics. Is she upright? Or lying down? If she is lying down, the photographer is virtually underneath her. Weird. Sorry if all this has already been addressed.

@ Cmaryholmes

The point has been raised before, I am not sure that any conclusion was reached. Speaking personally, I can quite see from the image why someone might think that mascara has been applied. Maybe one of our resident photography experts will be along doon to advise.

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

Incidentally, even if the conclusion is that she HAS had mascara applied, we are still left with:

1 hair bead clearly applied by an adult
2 necklace clearly fixed in place by an adult
3 blue eye shadow unlikely to have been applied neatly by 3-year-old
4 lip stick unlikely to have been applied neatly by 3-year-old.

On the other matters you raise, I take the photo as I see it: Madeleine standing up, behind her on the right of picture, a yellow stucco wall, behind her on the left, what looks like the entrance to a doorway.

A SUMMARY OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THE MAKE-UP PHOTO:

A The original story from the McCanns about it being 'Maddie playing with Mummy's dressing-up box' is false

B There is every indication that the Make Up Photo was taken in Praia da Luz during the week the McCanns were there Apr/May 2007

C There are certain indications that it and the Last Photo may have been taken on the same day, namely Sunday 29 April 2007

D Unless you count the disputed and controversial Tennis Balls Photo, the Make Up Photo may be the true 'Last Photo' of Madeleine

E According to HideHo's research, the last credible and independent sighting of Madeleine - by Maria Seafim da Silva Espada - was also on Sunday 29 April 2007, at about 1.15pm that day.

by roz 02.01.17 13:57

I see, especially above the left eye, what looks like slight smudging possibly caused when you apply that super-liner type eye pencil.

by JRP 02.01.17 20:27

Tony Bennett wrote:
Cmaryholmes wrote:Does anyone else think that Madeleine is actually wearing mascara on the 'make up' photo? If she is then there is no way she put that on herself while playing with Mummy's cosmetics. Is she upright? Or lying down? If she is lying down, the photographer is virtually underneath her. Weird. Sorry if all this has already been addressed.
@ Cmaryholmes

The point has been raised before, I am not sure that any conclusion was reached. Speaking personally, I can quite see from the image why someone might think that mascara has been applied. Maybe one of our resident photography experts will be along doon to advise.

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

Incidentally, even if the conclusion is that she HAS had mascara applied, we are still left with:

1 hair bead clearly applied by an adult
2 necklace clearly fixed in place by an adult
3 blue eye shadow unlikely to have been applied neatly by 3-year-old
4 lip stick unlikely to have been applied neatly by 3-year-old.

On the other matters you raise, I take the photo as I see it: Madeleine standing up, behind her on the right of picture, a yellow stucco wall, behind her on the left, what looks like the entrance to a doorway.

A SUMMARY OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THE MAKE-UP PHOTO:

A The original story from the McCanns about it being 'Maddie playing with Mummy's dressing-up box' is false

B There is every indication that the Make Up Photo was taken in Praia da Luz during the week the McCanns were there Apr/May 2007

C There are certain indications that it and the Last Photo may have been taken on the same day, namely Sunday 29 April 2007

D Unless you count the disputed and controversial Tennis Balls Photo, the Make Up Photo may be the true 'Last Photo' of Madeleine

E According to HideHo's research, the last credible and independent sighting of Madeleine - by Maria Seafim da Silva Espada - was also on Sunday 29 April 2007, at about 1.15pm that day.

I believe it's possible that mascara has been applied along with eye shadow, (both by an adult) as the eye shape looks outlined by unnatural black.

I also think Madeleine is upright, more likely standing rather than sitting. If she was lying down her shoulders would be in a different position.

by MayMuse 02.01.17 21:29

I think she is standing and also think eyeliner and/or mascara has been applied... not sure about the shoulder position as that isn't clearly visible to me.

by joyce1938 02.01.17 22:35

It also appears the blueeyeshadow s also across topof her cheek ,strange placeto see it . She seems to be looking downslightly,with head in slight backward position . Did we discuss that it could be due to taking the photo from a video,or was that another picture? Joyce1938

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