Re: Photographs Revisited - general

by **Silentscope** 21.07.21 7:29

If I was a distraught Father, I would have just given the PJ the camera.

Allowing them to view the Original Photos.

All of them, not just the ones I THINK are helpful!

by **Jill Havern** 21.07.21 7:44

Gerry McCann was a distraught father (albeit not for the reason he gave the PJ)

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

- well, briefly anyway, until Tony Blair's government PR team arrived and this happened

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

by **Silentscope** 21.07.21 7:47

The ‘praying like an Arab’ routine did not last long did it?

by **Jill Havern** 21.07.21 7:50

Silentscope wrote:The ‘praying like an Arab’ routine did not last long did it?

Nah

by **PeterMac** 21.07.21 11:07

Silentscope wrote:In the PJ Files there is the Photo of Madeleine in the door of a Playhouse. It is not revealed how the PJ knew the Date and Time?

Page 588- MBM taken in Portugal at 17:15 on Wednesday May 2, 2007

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

It is interesting, because those two photos were very clearly taken on Saturday 28th after they had checked in and sorted out the apartment

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

by **Silentscope** 21.07.21 11:21

Same clothing as the Flight video it seems?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
(Unable to post here)

by **Jill Havern** 21.07.21 11:40

Silentscope wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
(Unable to post here)

Why can't you post here?
Once you've got the video open, right click, select embed code then paste the code here. thumbsup

If you can copy/paste the url, you can copy/paste the embed code.

by **Silentscope** 21.07.21 13:09

YouTube first picture shows Video unavailable , watch on YouTube. It blocks it from playing, you have to view it on YouTube apparently. That seems to be happening a lot lately…sorry!

by Guest 21.07.21 17:28

Silentscope wrote:Same clothing as the Flight video it seems?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
(Unable to post here)

No, the clothing worn by Madeleine when travelling from the UK to Portugal, is not the same as she was wearing in the playground photograph.

You can see clearly the leggings worn whilst travelling are three quarter length, the tracksuit style leggings shown in the playground photograph are much longer, indeed below the ankle. The top is debatable as the travel video is too fuzzy to see clearly. Gerry McCann is also wearing different clothes than shown in the playground photograph.

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

by **Silentscope** 21.07.21 19:26

Thanks for the Reuters clip Verdi, much clearer. Reuters shows the Date however as being 29.05.07 not the 28.04.07? I take it this was probably the ‘release Date?’

I agree that not only are Madeleines trousers different lengths, the longer ones have embroidered Motifs on the knees. Gerry undoubtedly has Shorts on in the Playground. It certainly appears more like Saturday weather than a Wednesday of that week.

The shadows in the Playground photo according to Suncalc reveal a time frame of 18:15 UTC+1 but as PeterMac has pointed out, Wednesday would have been overcast and colder.

Less shadows.

by Khaleesi 30.10.21 17:50

Scrolling through the photos from an event in Glasgow, marking 100 days of Maddie being missing I've encountered [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. Now, the woman in the middle, next to the piper, is Eileen McCann (Maddie's grandma), behind the piper is Philomena McCann, but who is the lady on the left? I am asking, because she bears great resemblance to the woman from [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. It's not Sue Healey, because Healeys were not attending the event in Glasgow, they were in Liverpool. So who she is?

by **Jill Havern** 30.10.21 18:04

Isn't it Aunt Nora?

by Khaleesi 30.10.21 20:21

Jill Havern wrote:Isn't it Aunt Nora?

The Cake Pic Lady, or the 100 Days Pic lady? Well, the Cake Pic Lady looks nothing like aunt Nora, in my opinion.

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

Two different women, IMO (all the pics from gerrymccannsblogs by Pamalam) and I haven't seen any pic of Nora Paul with long, light blonde hair, like these of the Cake Pic Lady.

by Guest 30.10.21 20:39

Has either of them handled a small child before??? Saints preserve us - they look as dexterous as a camel loading a flintlock musket.

by **Ladyinred** 30.10.21 21:03

Any particular reason why you started a new thread to discuss this photo?

The photo wasn't taken during the holiday, and it has been discussed previously.

by Khaleesi 30.10.21 21:33

Ladyinred wrote:Any particular reason why you started a new thread to discuss this photo?

The photo wasn't taken during the holiday, and it has been discussed previously.

I am trying to find out when it was taken, in order to be able to put Maddie's pictures in a chronological order. Pinpointing the woman present in the picture can help with it.

by Guest 31.10.21 0:55

Does it even matter?

Topic merged.

by Khaleesi 31.10.21 7:55

Dear Verdi

On this very board is a sticky thread that has a sole purpose of putting Maddie's pictures in a chronological order. Do you routinely make stickies out of the topics that do not matter at all?

I am not surprised anymore this board is dying, with such a welcoming stance even from admins...

by Guest 31.10.21 13:08

Dear Khaleesi,

As you've taken the time and effort to locate a defunct thread, you will know the thread was created by forum member Lance de Boils, the thread died a natural in 2016. You will also note the same member rekindled the thread, 4 years later which again didn't lead anywhere - the thread is a mess but it's allowed open should the initiator, Lance de Boils, wish to continue his project - although it's not looking likely as can be seen from the concluding posts..

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

Frankly, it's no skin off my rosy nosy if you want to spend time and energy dating McCann photographs - so fill yer boots, although from a personal angle I see no purpose whatsoever or whomsoever. Others will no doubt disagree with me.

So .... we have this thread created for general discussion about photographs and we have the photograph dating thread initiated by member Lance de Boils, yet you saw fit to start yet another thread about one isolated photograph.

The creation of yet another thread was not necessary, hence I moved the topic here.

Sorry to hear after 7 years of membership and only a moderate posting history, you now decide that CMOMM is not to you liking. Can't win 'em all.

Rest assured, the forum is not losing status, if at times there is a lull it's because we all have lives to live outside the forum, sometimes outside events and world affairs take priority - particularly over the past 2 years.

We are here for the long haul. Until such times (if ever) Madeleine McCann is afforded the justice she so richly deserves, we ain't going nowhere!

The forum vision is to eventually become a comprehensive reference source for future generations study, you can't deny it's the only successful ongoing platform dedicated to the memory of Madeleine McCann and a whole host of other topics of general interest, there is no other.

There is no other like it, it's important we get it right and keep things in order and above all else - professional.

Carry on ....

by Khaleesi 31.10.21 15:02

Dear Verdi

Treating posters like a nuisance is as far from professional as it can be. And that's what I have a problem with. Not merging the thread, you are the mod here, if you decide it fits better as a part of an already existing thread, I have nothing to oppose to.

Your attitude towards my thread and towards myself personally is a problem here. You don't see a purpose for dating the McCann photos or anything else on here? Then do not participate in the discussion. It's how places like this work. No need to be all condescending, no need to treat me like, pardon my French, a pain in the ass.

Last but not least, this board have been in a lull for years, with occasional outburst of activity when a new suspect was pulled out the hat by the media. Your attitude towards the posters might be a part of a problem. Quite huge part of it, IMO.

by **Jill Havern** 31.10.21 15:57

I beg to differ...this forum hasn't been in a lull for years (the case has) as can be proven by all the research that goes on behind the scenes and ends up on PeterMac's FREE e-book.

Have you read it?

by Guest 31.10.21 23:39

Dear Khaleesi,

You are not obliged to stay around, if the forum doesn't suit then you are at liberty to move on but don't let me force your arm. You are at liberty to stay around.

So, as I said previously .... carry-on! Preferably back on topic.

by Guest 31.10.21 23:40

Jill Havern wrote:I beg to differ...this forum hasn't been in a lull for years (the case has) as can be proven by all the research that goes on behind the scenes and ends up on PeterMac's FREE e-book.

Have you read it?

And a whole lot more yes

!

by Khaleesi 01.11.21 7:02

I'd delete my account gladly if I knew how to do it. I don't like to be a pain in the ass for anyone.

by Milo 07.11.21 16:47

Silentscope referred to a photo of Madeleine in the playhouse that is described as taken on Wednesday ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]) but she is wearing the same clothes as in the set of photos taken on Sunday. I looked at all the photos ages ago (noting the ridiculous black & white series). I didn't notice that [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] matched the Sunday series content but not the same date. The description of one of those photos included the words "Madeleine's backside". Did Kate label the photos? Sounds like something she would say. Was the camera the same one that was used by the pool and dated Thursday (the so-called last photo) but later proven by our research group to have been earlier (like Sunday, the data and time having been rigged, either by Kate or Gerry's techno friends). Is this just another example of the McCanns leading us to believe that Madeleine was still alive on the Wednesday? I remember (but am not going back to check as it is after midnight) that Kate told us in her book about how she sat around and organised her photos while waiting for Gerry in his interrogation (?). Please do not yell at me for being stupid.

by Guest 17.03.22 14:40

Verdi wrote:Meanwhile, to add to that evidence - these are the only known photographs taken of Madeleine at the Ocean Club. Praia da Luz after the family's arrival on Saturday 28th April 2007. The authenticity of the tennis ball image is debatable..

Are we sure that that is MBM in the playground pictures ? I am havimg difficulty reconciling her appearance with that in the poolside picture.

I don't think those playground pictures are fake in the sense they've been pshopped, but I do think that's a substitute child.

Who is the child at the bottom of the ladder ? Her hair is.much darker than Amélie's

Do we have any verifiable.pictures of what she looked like prior to April/May 2007 ? All the pictures I've seen seem to come from K+G themselves.

by Guest 17.03.22 14:54

PeterMac wrote:The issue is whether it was taken on Thursday 3rd May 2007.
It wasn't.
It CANNOT have been taken on 3/5/7, nor yet on 2/5/7, 1/5/7, or even 30/4/7

It can ONLY have been taken on Sunday 29th April 2007.

Ok, I get that it can't have been taken on 2007-05-03 because.of the weather.

But why does that automatically mean it must have been.taken on 2007-04-29? There have been sunny days before and after that week, suerely ? If we're going with the idea that it's a false alibi for MBM's continued presence, we have to accept.the possibility that a aubstirure child couild have been involved, which would have allowed the picture to be taken a week or.more.later.

by Guest 17.03.22 15:19

chickenman wrote:we have to accept.the possibility that a aubstirure child couild have been involved, which would have allowed the picture to be taken a week or.more.later.

Not without evidence we don't!

I don't think there can be any doubt that Madeleine McCann did arrive at the Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 28th April 2007.

Before proceeding with unevidenced theory, you need to carefully consider why when where and who! Your theory totally lacks anything resembling grounded hypothesis, let alone fact or even plausibility

I believe the case to be relatively straightforward if you follow the evidence - the problem is the extent of protection afforded to the McCanns by the British authorities, which seriously reflected on the Portuguese police investigation.

Baseless what ifs are not helpful.

chickenman wrote:Do we have any verifiable.pictures of what she looked like prior to April/May 2007 ? All the pictures I've seen seem to come from K+G themselves

I've already provided this link for your reference, which can be seen has been abandoned although initiated by particular request..

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

.. but I'm sure this will fill the gaps for you..

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

by Guest 17.03.22 18:25

I've looked briefly through that 'filling in the gaps' post and I'm more confused than ever!
There seem to be several images that are just asserted to be her, which I've always assumed were 'sightings'.

Theae playground pictures look very suspicious to me. The playhouse picture would have been ideal for the initial piblicity but they went with that bizarre TBP picture jnstead. The late issuing of these playground pictures leads me to believe they were.taken after her reported disappearance and if so, it can't be the real.her.

I know that this is a bit out there, but then so is the whole neglect/sedate/died/fake-abduction thing, for normsl parents. If they can perpretate this immense abduction hoax on the world, they wouldn't balk at substituting another child.

I have seen MBM.played by at least three people, who are visually distinct. I am trying to establish which, if.any,, is the real one.

by Guest 17.03.22 18:49

PeterMac wrote:It can ONLY have been taken on Sunday 29th April 2007.
That is the only possible day a genuine photo of that scene could have been taken.

But the McCanns have to insist it was, because it is the only evidence they can adduce that Madeleine was alive and well at

But that makes no sense either. If they just came out and said it was taken on the 29th, it wouldn't harm the McCann's case. It would show that she was alive on the 29th but that wouldn't imply that that was the *last* day she was alive. The McCanns coild easily claim that they'd -I don't-know- dropped the camera in the water, thus ruining it and explaining the lack.of pictures.

It seems to be a leitmotif of this case that the McCanns take rhe most difficult path to prove their innoncence when a simpler explanation would have been believable and wouldn't have drawn any attention.