'The Last Photo': The key questions

@ProfessorPPlum Somehow I don't think the McCanns need that photo to look "guilty as hell"....[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

It is the pink tinge to the skin of all 3 that make me raise an eyebrow, given Kate's statement in her account of the truth that she wished she had brought along an extra layer for Maddie as there was a chill in the air. Such a rapid change in the weather, so much so that Gerry is perspiring.
Why is Madeleine not wearing sunglasses ? I have read that those with coloboma are very light-sensitive. Gerry and Kate are both pictured in sunglasses on that holiday and afterwards, they are doctors, surely they would know they needed to keep Maddie comfortable in the sun. Perhaps there was no coloboma after all.

I can remember someone saying that it could be fine and sunny on the Algarve one minute and then pelting down with rain the next, at that time of the year. So it's possible that it was warm one lunchtime, when the photo was taken, but why not produce it there and then?

But we don't know who really took the photo - I think three of the party lay claim to doing so.

You may be thinking of the tennis ball girl photo, Miraflores. That has several claims of ownership. I don't think that I've ever heard anyone claim to have taken the poolside one but presumably it was Kate.

And what about Sean? why was he not incluced in the photo opportunity? he would not have been in the creche if Amelie wasnt... so must have been close by with Kate ? Bit unfair to take the shot with the others and not Sean?

You may be thinking of the tennis ball girl photo, Miraflores.

I probably was. Even more puzzling then! Still 'confusion is good' as someone said.

tigger wrote:
In short, I am sure that Amelie is pasted in for the reasons stated above and that the photograph was taken in 2006. With the date/time adjusted in the file- also quite simple to do.

You're wrong, tigger. I've studied Amelie and she has NOT been added to the picture. The problem here IMHO is that you have a growing pile of individual and interesting objections (the temperature, the childrens' apparent ages, the pink skin, the sunglasses, some people's views about the angle of shadows etc etc) mixed in with a belief that the McCann's are guilty of staging an abduction and you conclude that not only is the picture faked but that proving it to be a fake solves the mystery for you.

I start from the other end; I'm looking at this picture and I can tell you by the shadows, by the tones, by the quality of light that neither Amelie or anything else has been cut or pasted in that picture.

Like you all, I can't prove this picture was or wasn't take on May 3rd as claimed, nor can I explain positively why it took so long to produce it. It could be that it IS from an earlier holiday at the same location (yes, I do believe it is the same location). However, it's far more likely that it's from the same holiday and the same location, just a few days earlier. The primary objections to this are issues about the apparent warmth and the apparent age of Madeleine. Well it was 20 degrees and sunny according to the forecast back then - and I'd say Gerry looks like it's day 1 of a holiday and, like a good parent, he's got the hats on the kids from day 1. As to the pink skin, a day playing tennis in 20 degrees and sun will give you a good lash of reddening. I got brown from two days in my garden last week and it never went above 22 degrees. And as for judging her to look too young - which of us could judge Madeleine's age right in ANY of the top 20 pictures of her available online or in the press?

For those who persist in the 'but they said it was cold...' argument, look - those people are dressed and sitting with only their feet in the pool. They're not in swimming costumes IN the pool as you would if it was very hot. Sitting with your feet in the pool seems entirely consistent with the weather report for the time and it being just a bit too cold to go swimming but plenty nice enough to enjoy the sun and dip your feet.

For those complaining Madeleine was looking away from the alleged photographer (he mother) - this also isn't the case. I blew up the eyes section, raised the contrast and you can see quite clearly her face is turned away but her eyes are looking straight at the camera.

As for Amelie - the point at which her legs rest on the pool edge the light and tones are almost impossible to fabricate. The scale and depth of the conspiracy necessary to plan and execute a fabrication of this sophistication (whether before or after the fact) is just beyond credibility. The problem is that judging by some of the conspiracy theories that I've read here, some of you clearly don't bat an eyelid at what it would really involve logistically. Sorry, but it's WAY too far fetched for me.

To summarise, if you believe that Madeleine McCann was murdered by her parents in a premeditated act motivated by some tracking-chip inspired conspiracy, then faking a picture like this for an alibi is a small matter for the murky secret services and intelligence agencies likely to be involved.

If, on the other hand, you believe that MBM met her end accidentally and her hapless parents (for some as yet unknown reason) covered up her death with a staged abduction then the lengths they would have to go to (and the risks involved in faking this picture) are completely unrealistic. Think about it; if the T7 didn't fake this picture (and believe me they COULDN'T have) then some family expert was roped in to do it - hey, one more person you're now dependent on for your freedom. What's more, can you imagine ANYONE would take on that brief at the risk of also going to prison? Not a chance.

In the absence of tampering, I'd start by taking this picture for what it is - but I would treat the claim for this to be 'the last picture of Madeleine' as suspect, just as I treat the "Mummy, why didn't you come... " quote attributed to the 3rd as suspect - and for the same reason: both are likely to be conscious attempts to convince us that Madeleine was alive on 3rd. However, in both cases, the claims prove nothing: the Madeleine quote is purely on the McCann's say so and the date stamp on a picture is the simplest, easiest thing to alter.

I'm afraid that all this cut and paste stuff really is an unnecessary distraction that makes us look silly in the eyes of the pro-McCann lobby AND takes energy away from far more significant lines of investigation.

Finally, like I said - if none of you can do that shadow-alteration challenge I issued, there's a very good reason. It's because it's practically impossible. And if it's practically impossible for any of you (including Jd and any other wizzes) that should give you a good idea why I am so confident that this picture has NOT been altered the way you're claiming it has. Not by the intelligence services and certainly NOT by one of the T7 or a family friend.

Change the position of the sun and show me a convincing new version of the picture that shows NO sign of being tampered with (ie. it's as perfect as THIS picture is) and I promise I'll eat my words.

PPP - I agree entirely. The simple question is was it taken on the 3rd or not, but there is no conclusive data or reliable witness statement to prove one way or the other. TM are not stupid and are well advised.

Its quite poignant that doing the rounds at the moment is "Mo Farah Running Away From Things"...a compilation of the now legend Mo Farrah running away from different scenarios using mainly the same image of him of when he crossed the line in the 5,000 metres, different sizes etc. Not bad for internet amateur photoshoppers, some are quite funny. The whole selections are on the link, am sure there will be loads more added in the coming weeks!

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

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

PPP, my sentiments entirely. Thank you for putting is so succulently.

However, even taking "photoshopped" out of the discussion, these questions remain:

Why was that last photo not available on 3 May 2007?

Wasn't their camera in PDL all along?

Why did it take a visit by Gerry to England to produce it?

Who took it?

Was it really taken at 1.29pm/2.29pm on Thursday 3 May?

What proof do they have to substantiate that was the last photo?

My view is that the "last" photo was not taken on the 3rd (arrival day likely) but produced along side with the fabricated breakfast exchange of convo as alibis for a reason. Now what could the reason be? If the answer is obvious, then the next question is, when actually did Madeleine meet her fate?

@ProfessorPlum:

Needless to say I disagree with your arguments. This photograph was not ready on 4/5 and therefore was deemed to be necessary at a later date. Perhaps the PJ asked them for a very recent photograph. A few days later we have the wildly different (to the poster) tennis girl.
Don't forget that the great majority of the photographs on the camera were deleted. What we have left are a few hundred black/white very dark shadow pictures which had not yet been 'overwritten' by the camera.
They needed such a photograph as this one, 'the family holiday' , they have indeed brandished it in our faces as 'evidence' - their last memory of Maddie.


I am grateful for your extensive explanation, but the one point which is my main point has not been addressed: the blurring on Amelie's right arm and the complete lack of her arm above the elbow. This is the only blurring in the whole picture and that arm is clearly at rest.
It would be perfectly possible to paste a larger section including the pool edge etc into another one. I would guess Amelie's shot was taken at the pool anyway.

I already stated that all the rest, the shadows etc. don't interest me much. The flower bracts and the temperature are very relevant.
In one of the RIs (Jane or Rachel I seem to recall) said it was very cold 'we were wearing five layers' ...etc.
The weather at that time is an issue.
The pink dress is an issue.

It would also have been logical to provide this photograph to the PJ. Since it's not on the camera there are more questions.

tigger wrote:I am grateful for your extensive explanation, but the one point which is my main point has not been addressed: the blurring on Amelie's right arm and the complete lack of her arm above the elbow. This is the only blurring in the whole picture and that arm is clearly at rest.

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

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

I saw this photo of Peter Andre's daughter in the Daily Mail yesterday with her arm 'missing' like Amelie's.

Thanks Admin, but the complete uninterrupted line of her right arm can be seen and there is no difference in pixellation- no blurring.

aiyoyo wrote:

My view is that the "last" photo was not taken on the 3rd (arrival day likely) but produced along side with the fabricated breakfast exchange of convo as alibis for a reason. Now what could the reason be? If the answer is obvious, then the next question is, when actually did Madeleine meet her fate?

Yes, that is my take on this too. The only key issue here is whether the picture of Madeleine (forget Gerry and Amelie) was taken on that day, and circumstantial evidences suggest to me otherwise.

[quote="C.Edwards"]The best quality version of the pic I've seen is here: link to big pic

I don't think we'll ever all agree about whether this photo is genuine but I certainly enjoy reading the differing views on it.

I can clearly see that Amelie's right arm is there - admittedly you can't see much of it but it's definitely there - it's just the angle which gives the empty sleeve impression.

I agree with Aiyoyo and Ribis1 that it's the date when the photo was taken that is the crucial issue.

The clothes gerry mccann, Amelie and Maddie are wearing in this (in my opinion totally faked) picture, where are they in their apartment? Can't see a single item of clothing from any of them there. And they were all wearing them only just a few hours before

I can see Maddies pink tracksuit top, which she (if it is her) is wearing in pictures that are on the camera. But the poolside picture which is not on the camera, there is no sign of their clothes. Funny that!

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

None one single item of the clothes they were wearing by the pool are here either. But I do see clothes that they were wearing immediately after May 3rd that were in the media...e.g kates famous chequered trousers, gerry mccanns clothes when he was down by the rocks on his mobile etc, but again none from the poolside picture

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

Why has Maddie gone swimming/diving wearing what looks like to be pink dress? And why is gerry mccann not wearing white to play Tennis? Maddies hair does not have the look of a girl that had just come back from sailing out at sea all morning either

-----------
@ProfessorPlum: Are you saying that gerry mccann is a good father and the staged abduction is one of our conspiracy theories? or have I misread you?

"and I'd say Gerry looks like it's day 1 of a holiday and, like a good parent, he's got the hats on the kids from day 1"

"If, on the other hand, you believe that MBM met her end accidentally and her hapless parents (for some as yet unknown reason) covered up her death with a staged abduction then the lengths they would have to go to (and the risks involved in faking this picture) are completely unrealistic"

Gerry doesn't have to wear white to play tennis. He's not at Wimbledon!

Miraflores wrote:Gerry doesn't have to wear white to play tennis. He's not at Wimbledon!

Was just an observation!! My sincere apologies Miraflores. Just whenever I have played tennis at clubs and holiday public courts, I was always asked to wear white. I'd have thought an expensive MW resort would have rules and policies with the same

aiyoyo wrote:PPP, my sentiments entirely. Thank you for putting is so succulently.

However, even taking "photoshopped" out of the discussion, these questions remain:

Why was that last photo not available on 3 May 2007?

Wasn't their camera in PDL all along?

Why did it take a visit by Gerry to England to produce it?

Who took it?

Was it really taken at 1.29pm/2.29pm on Thursday 3 May?

What proof do they have to substantiate that was the last photo?

My view is that the "last" photo was not taken on the 3rd (arrival day likely) but produced along side with the fabricated breakfast exchange of convo as alibis for a reason. Now what could the reason be? If the answer is obvious, then the next question is, when actually did Madeleine meet her fate?

PJ and NSY will have asked and answered the same questions. They are home and dry. Why? We'll probably never know.

Spaniel wrote: PJ and NSY will have asked and answered the same questions. They are home and dry. Why? We'll probably never know.

I haven't seen anywhere to suggest the PJ and NSY have asked the same questions. I don't believe anyone has to date, only if the case didn't get shelved would they have done so, as the case was at this point of the mccanns being suspects

Does anyone know who took this? Did anyone claim to have taken it? Is it possible that Madeleine is laughing at Sean and Kate but Amelie can't see them because Madeleine is sitting in her eye line. Gerry seems to be looking at the person with the camera?

kate mccann took it.....

She described how, after taking the final photograph of Madeleine before she was snatched, she can no longer bear to use her camera.

"She looked lovely," said Mrs McCann, recalling the moment Madeleine was pictured with her father beside a swimming pool.

"She was wearing a new outfit, a pink smock. That picture sums up her week. Every minute of every day she was enjoying herself. She went to bed exhausted. I haven't been able to use the camera since I took that last photograph of her."

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

---------

In kate mccanns diary:

She was wearing an outfit I’d bought especially for her holiday: a peach-coloured smock top from Gap and some white broderie anglaise shorts from Monsoon.....I remember thinking I should have brought a cardigan for her, although she seemed oblivious of the temperature, just happy and carefree.

I was following her with my eyes admiring her........It chokes me remembering how my heart soared with pride in Madeleine that morning [Tennis].........She was so happy and obviously enjoying herself. Standing there listening intently to instructions, she looked so gorgeous in her little T-shirt and shorts, pink hat, ankle socks and new holiday sandals that I ran back to our apartment for my camera to record the occasion.

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

---------

New outfits, new sandals .......yet none of them appear in the photos of the apartment and forensics in the PJ files

Last post on this.

Below the bit where Amelie meets pool edge. This is NOT faked.

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

And the bit of her arm is vertical (therefore hidden). If tigger's argument is that the blurredness of the pink of her vertical arm against Gerry's shorts is the reason for believing this to be faked then we'll have to agree to disagree.

It's my experience that cameras can struggle where colours of a similar tone (albeit different colours like Gerry's shorts and Amelies arm) meet. Squint at the picture below and you'll see that your eye also struggles to distinguish between the two.

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

As I posted earlier, I certainly agree that Amelie's right arm is partly visible. Perhaps one of the experts on photo-shopping can change the colour of the outfit she's wearing and that would make the arm more noticeable.

The black line on the poolside edge still escapes me though!

Re this 'last' photo. Gerry has alwys looked to me as though he was floating on the pool edge. There is no darkening on the pool side behind his hand and leg.
But the main question mark for me, sorry to bring it up again, are the climbing plants. I have them all over my land and gardens and never have they been in such flower in early May. Never. That photo background screams to me late June earl july when the ground is dry and warm. Then and only then have I seen flowers.