More timelines.

by **tigger** 05.09.11 16:42

kikoraton wrote:Tigger - we should need to know when the "reclining" photo was taken, and when/by whom released to the public? Similarly the head-back-looking-down-her-nose photo and perhaps the Seven Dwarfs one (if I've got my fairy-tales correct).
LG78 - I suppose it draws the viewer's attention to KM's belt or trousers, which is where she wanted it to be!

Actually, getting a timeline on the photographs might be quite interesting. If there are photographs like this, I'm sure there will be more. I've only been posting for a few months, so not really up to speed.
But I would need a very large piece of paper and list all the timelines alongside each other. I'd love to do that!
I understand that you favour the 28th/29th for Maddie's demise. Even that is a short timescale for the planning. I favour Dr. Ludke's analysis, I'll post a link if you like.

Which one is the Seven Dwarfs one?

by Guest 05.09.11 18:09

kikoraton wrote:Steady on, Molly. Nudist beaches and campsites in themselves are normally OK. Is there something special about Zaival? I have never seen that statement.

Lol, I was having a bad day yesterday. In my defence I had been reading through the World Report Agency Intelligence report on the Madeleine case. It sort of put me over the edge. Not sure if anyone has read them or what anyone thinks, here is the link:

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

Here is the link for Zaival

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

by **tigger** 05.09.11 18:37

Molly wrote:
kikoraton wrote:Steady on, Molly. Nudist beaches and campsites in themselves are normally OK. Is there something special about Zaival? I have never seen that statement.

Lol, I was having a bad day yesterday. In my defence I had been reading through the World Report Agency Intelligence report on the Madeleine case. It sort of put me over the edge. Not sure if anyone has read them or what anyone thinks, here is the link:

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

Here is the link for Zaival

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

Molly, don't believe it! The whole Belgian paedophile ring thing abducting Maddie to order is rubbish. As I recall, it was to get a blond girl around 4 yrs. old? Belgium and Holland, Germany and Scandinavia for that matter are awash with blonde toddlers. Why on earth do something so risky?
the Dutroix case was about older girls for a start and they took children from the Eastern European countries, which is still, unfortunately, much easier.
All of that was and is part of the scam. Perhaps we need a timeline to see when the various paedo theories were fielded by the McCs.
Dutroix should have been hanged. It's a good example, because he had enormous protection as well, the whisper was that a judge was in on his escape. In that case the police didn't do very well either.

We're pretty well all agreed that there was no abduction, so Maddie didn't leave the flat alive. Poor girl.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if the Fund had to close down and the rest of the money could be used to help misused children?

And don't worry about nudist beaches, most peaceful places on earth, full of floppy people.

by Guest 05.09.11 19:02

Slightly off topic but the Zaival sighting is supposed to have occurred over the Easter holidays ( which were in early April) so the sighting appears to have been of another family rather than the Mccanns. This is stated on the original thread but thought it might be worth mentioning here too.

by kikoraton 05.09.11 19:17

I like the "floppy people" bit! Or rather, perhaps I'd rather not think about it!!
Yes, I'd like to see the Dr Ludke link, pse. I know he talked a lot of sense.
I wrote "perhaps the Seven Dwarfs" meaning it in two senses. One, I'm not sure about my memory of the fairy tale, being rather old, and Two - more importantly - I remain to be convinced that the much-used photo of Madeleine looking apprehensive in a pale-blue party dress was unpleasant or just normal.
In other words, on the subject of photos of Maddie, are there any other really dubious ones, or was the lying-back-by-the-skirting-board by Paul Grover (a respected professional photographer) a one-off?

ETA: a poster on another forum did a very complete bringing-together of all photos of Maddie, but I'm sorry, I can't recall who or where. Anyone else?

by Tinkerbell81 05.09.11 19:55

DId a search but cant find them, what is/are the "donegal" photos? Just the one Kate put in her book of Maddie with the ice cream?

by **tigger** 05.09.11 20:37

Tinkerbell81 wrote:DId a search but cant find them, what is/are the "donegal" photos? Just the one Kate put in her book of Maddie with the ice cream?

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

If you enlarge the photo you'll get a better look. Maddie seems awfully tall, even sitting down.

by **tigger** 05.09.11 20:56

kikoraton wrote:I like the "floppy people" bit! Or rather, perhaps I'd rather not think about it!!
Yes, I'd like to see the Dr Ludke link, pse. I know he talked a lot of sense.
I wrote "perhaps the Seven Dwarfs" meaning it in two senses. One, I'm not sure about my memory of the fairy tale, being rather old, and Two - more importantly - I remain to be convinced that the much-used photo of Madeleine looking apprehensive in a pale-blue party dress was unpleasant or just normal.
In other words, on the subject of photos of Maddie, are there any other really dubious ones, or was the lying-back-by-the-skirting-board by Paul Grover (a respected professional photographer) a one-off?

ETA: a poster on another forum did a very complete bringing-together of all photos of Maddie, but I'm sorry, I can't recall who or where. Anyone else?

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

This is the link to Ludke.

Re the photos, yes, certainly the blue eyeshadow. Doubly suspicious since the original explanation from Kate was that Maddie had raided her make up box. That didn't wash with the public, in her book she's got it again but this time it was the result of a visiting professional beautician.
Why Kate? One or both of those statements are untrue? I think that one was published jan 2010.
Quite a lot of photos show eye liner certainly. The iconic poster is nothing but paedo candy, the parted lips, the enhanced eyes or possibly real mascara, the completely bleached-out skin, Maddie had thick walls under her eyes in a lot of 'normal' photos.
The girl in blue is a still from a video. She doesn't look too apprehensive to me. Compare that to the pink fairy one, could be two different girls. The girl in blue is shot in very flattering light, the pink fairy not.
One of the worst, heavily photoshopped ones is the ice cream one. I think we discussed it on this thread. Fake and suggestive.
Then the one with ice cream around her mouth I'm not too happy about either.

by **tigger** 06.09.11 7:51

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

A never before seen photo from the book.
Whenever I see Gerry doing 'the smile', I have to wonder if he's been to the same charm academy as Gordon Brown.

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

by **PeterMac** 06.09.11 9:11

tigger wrote:
Re the photos, yes, certainly the blue eyeshadow. Doubly suspicious since the original explanation from Kate was that Maddie had raided her make up box. That didn't wash with the public, in her book she's got it again but this time it was the result of a visiting professional beautician.

before this becomes a forum myth
The book does not contain the photo of Madeleine wearing the blue eye make-up.
And...I can find no reference to it, either in the hard copy or though searching the Kindle version. If it is there can someone give a page number.

by LG78 06.09.11 9:39

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

A never before seen photo from the book.
Whenever I see Gerry doing 'the smile', I have to wonder if he's been to the same charm academy as Gordon Brown.

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

If Gerry is Photshopped into the picture, then I guess the walls had to be photshopped into it as well. Because if the picture was original only with Kate and the Baby she would have been more centered on the original one.
cant see any blu lines on the wall "proving" it was cloned into the picture as it had to be if its fake.
I dont think his head is to much in front to be a unrealistic position, and you also see a bit of his jacket on the right side of the baby. And in that position his shoulder would go further back and therfor be less visible on the picture behinde the baby. ( someone said the babyhead couldnt cover it because his shoulder has to be larger and not possible to hide behind babyhead)

To me it just seem that the darker parts on the picture turns blue using their program.And for me is no evidence of a fake photo.

by **tigger** 06.09.11 13:52

PeterMac wrote:
tigger wrote:
Re the photos, yes, certainly the blue eyeshadow. Doubly suspicious since the original explanation from Kate was that Maddie had raided her make up box. That didn't wash with the public, in her book she's got it again but this time it was the result of a visiting professional beautician.

before this becomes a forum myth
The book does not contain the photo of Madeleine wearing the blue eye make-up.
And...I can find no reference to it, either in the hard copy or though searching the Kindle version. If it is there can someone give a page number.

Well, I'll have to hie ? myself to the library again. I have a visual memory of the photo on a right page, bottom left. Plus that I got the beautician story from it. It will take a day, but I'll try. Is this payback for the big brown eyes? I am joking of course!

by LG78 06.09.11 13:53

tigger wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
tigger wrote:
Re the photos, yes, certainly the blue eyeshadow. Doubly suspicious since the original explanation from Kate was that Maddie had raided her make up box. That didn't wash with the public, in her book she's got it again but this time it was the result of a visiting professional beautician.

before this becomes a forum myth
The book does not contain the photo of Madeleine wearing the blue eye make-up.
And...I can find no reference to it, either in the hard copy or though searching the Kindle version. If it is there can someone give a page number.

Well, I'll have to hie ? myself to the library again. I have a visual memory of the photo on a right page, bottom left. Plus that I got the beautician story from it. It will take a day, but I'll try. Is this payback for the big brown eyes? I am joking of course!

by **tigger** 06.09.11 14:01

LG78 wrote:
tigger wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A never before seen photo from the book.
Whenever I see Gerry doing 'the smile', I have to wonder if he's been to the same charm academy as Gordon Brown.

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

If Gerry is Photshopped into the picture, then I guess the walls had to be photshopped into it as well. Because if the picture was original only with Kate and the Baby she would have been more centered on the original one.
cant see any blu lines on the wall "proving" it was cloned into the picture as it had to be if its fake.
I dont think his head is to much in front to be a unrealistic position, and you also see a bit of his jacket on the right side of the baby. And in that position his shoulder would go further back and therfor be less visible on the picture behinde the baby. ( someone said the babyhead couldnt cover it because his shoulder has to be larger and not possible to hide behind babyhead)

To me it just seem that the darker parts on the picture turns blue using their program.And for me is no evidence of a fake photo.

It's the same sort of programme you kindly posted earlier re photoshopping and detecting this on jpeg images.
The colour means its been saved more often than the surrounding pixels. It was of course easier to take the picture along with Gerry's head as it's easier to paste straight lines in and blend these. Less attention on the features.
Most difficult of all is with the photos is that ALL their ages and hairstyles are all over the place. Good part of that is due to photoshop. Some perhaps really kind lighting. E.g. Kate with the baby, where Kate barely looks 25.

by LG78 06.09.11 14:29

tigger wrote:
LG78 wrote:
tigger wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A never before seen photo from the book.
Whenever I see Gerry doing 'the smile', I have to wonder if he's been to the same charm academy as Gordon Brown.

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

If Gerry is Photshopped into the picture, then I guess the walls had to be photshopped into it as well. Because if the picture was original only with Kate and the Baby she would have been more centered on the original one.
cant see any blu lines on the wall "proving" it was cloned into the picture as it had to be if its fake.
I dont think his head is to much in front to be a unrealistic position, and you also see a bit of his jacket on the right side of the baby. And in that position his shoulder would go further back and therfor be less visible on the picture behinde the baby. ( someone said the babyhead couldnt cover it because his shoulder has to be larger and not possible to hide behind babyhead)

To me it just seem that the darker parts on the picture turns blue using their program.And for me is no evidence of a fake photo.

It's the same sort of programme you kindly posted earlier re photoshopping and detecting this on jpeg images.
The colour means its been saved more often than the surrounding pixels. It was of course easier to take the picture along with Gerry's head as it's easier to paste straight lines in and blend these. Less attention on the features.
Most difficult of all is with the photos is that ALL their ages and hairstyles are all over the place. Good part of that is due to photoshop. Some perhaps really kind lighting. E.g. Kate with the baby, where Kate barely looks 25.

I understand that it was the same sort of program, I just think we sholuld have seen more of this blue lights on the walls? I agree she has really grown OLD in just a periode of 3 years.. After all Maddie was only nearly 4 years.. And picture of her with baby cant be more than 3 years old even less. And she looks that much younger. And very many different haircuts not only for Kate but even for Maddie I think...Gerry looks the same age on all of them...

by LG78 06.09.11 14:32

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

Can someone have a look at the black top or Braha she is wearing, seems like a wire or something ? like a microfone you have on during an interview or so? CAn anyone figure out what that is ? On the black under her jacket right where the arm starts.

by happychick 06.09.11 14:43

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

This is what happens when you cover up the death of your daughter.

Karma. Ugly on the inside and now ugly on the outside. Ugly is as ugly does.

by kikoraton 06.09.11 14:48

Is that last photo for real? If so, stop it! You're making me feel sorry for KM.

by LG78 06.09.11 14:53

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

This is what happens when you cover up the death of your daughter.

Karma. Ugly on the inside and now ugly on the outside. Ugly is as ugly does.

Or just a pain of losing a child could also make you age in short time..So when seeing this we can just speculate if it is the lie or the true sorrow that makes her look like this...

by Gillyspot 06.09.11 14:57

If you think Kate looks bad take a look at Rachel Mamphilly after the Regent Park Charity Run (grey hair & wrinkles). Sign of a guilty conscience?

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

by happychick 06.09.11 15:04

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

by Guest 06.09.11 15:10

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

That reminds me of an episode of Lie To Me, where they demonstrate what a guilty man who has been busted looks like. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by **tigger** 06.09.11 15:40

LG78 wrote:
happychick wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

This is what happens when you cover up the death of your daughter.

Karma. Ugly on the inside and now ugly on the outside. Ugly is as ugly does.

Or just a pain of losing a child could also make you age in short time..So when seeing this we can just speculate if it is the lie or the true sorrow that makes her look like this...

Don't forget that things didn't work out the way they wanted. I'm sure they saw years of sunshine ahead. I think it was the plan to stay in Portugal and get official/unofficial jobs as roving ambassadors for lost children.
I also think Kate may have an alcohol problem, she certainly looks like she does. It may have gotten worse over the years.

What they've got is their old life back. Admittedly, money has been rolling in, but they can't be seen to go on expensive holidays, leaving the twins behind. They can't be photographed having a good time, not too often anyway and they can't be 100% certain that their protectors will continue to shield them. I'd probably hit the bottle myself.

The whole sorry saga, I think, was a case of 'letting it happen on purpose', with extensive forward planning in place in case it did. So Maddie was difficult, a big disappointment and in my view, not completely 'normal'. In some photographs she almost looks like Downs' Syndrome. Those heavy bags under her eyes are strange and in many photos the right eyes droops or perhaps the whole side of the face does. There was something wrong with her from the start. So, if she needed medication and on some previous occasions it was nearly too much, or she fell whilst sleepwalking? Wouldn't it be a release and not their fault?
No way can I see Kate or Gerry strangling their child.' Letting it happen on purpose', isn't as bad as 'making it happen on purpose'. In a lot of interviews it is clear they had no strong connection to the child, she is described in ready formulae, not so that you'd know Maddie through them.
Plan A went wrong because the PJ wouldn't swallow their story. This effectively robbed them of the lifestyle they wanted and thought they nearly had.

It's not just us who are sick of hearing them whine the same tune time and time again, surely they're heartily sick of it themselves. Gerry'd much rather be on the golf course and Kate would rather shine in the company of celebrities.
Until SY gets on track, we're at a stalemate.

by Newintown 06.09.11 16:56

"Plan A went wrong because the PJ wouldn't swallow their story. This effectively robbed them of the lifestyle they wanted and thought they nearly had.

It's not just us who are sick of hearing them whine the same tune time and time again, surely they're heartily sick of it themselves. Gerry'd much rather be on the golf course and Kate would rather shine in the company of celebrities.
Until SY gets on track, we're at a stalemate."

I think it's pretty obvious that the McCanns thought they were home and dry with their elaborate "abduction" story due to the high level of government contacts/arse licking backers they had - it's unbelievable for 2 ordinary doctors to have a spider's web of such high level contacts which is being revealed day by day - but they didn't reckon on the "Inspector Clouseau/Colombo" detectives on the internet trawling through every tiny detail of the demise of Madeleine whether she died on 3rd May, 2nd May or even in April or didn't even arrive in Portugal at all.

K & G MCann must dread getting up every day incase something has been unearthed that they hadn't even thought that the "justice for Madeleine" brigade would find out about.

I wouldn't be surprised if newspapers journalists, MET police officers and other officials scan the internet every day to find the latest "revelations" on the McCann's scam, at least it saves them hours of having to do it themselves.

No wonder Kate looks old and haggard, she never knows when the doorbell may ring with a police officer standing on the doorstep to say those scary words - "You are being ...................

by LG78 06.09.11 17:50

I just fint it hard to believe so many people beeing involved in this? What does the Tapas9 have to gain, or the PM , police and so on?
Not saying something is right about this case because it isnt, Just finding it hard to believe that soooo many people where in it for nothing...

I read somewhere ( maybe on this forum) a theroy that they made Jane Tanner believe she was the cause of Maddies death and thats why she lied for them about the abducter out of fear of beein doomed her self, that I can find more believeble.

Also I read a The sun article today from November last year, about the K and G waining about the fund getting empty, and that money would only last until autum , said nothing about the upcoming book in that article. Could that be a way to get sympathi and more people buying the book? They also said they where begging celeberties for money and support...