Further Analysis of the Last Photo

Justformaddie wrote:There's no way that I can see that these pics were taken days apart, I could actually say its wee maddie and big maddie! IMO

canada12 wrote:

Justformaddie wrote:There's no way that I can see that these pics were taken days apart, I could actually say its wee maddie and big maddie! IMO

I can't actually believe that the top two photos are of the same girl who is in the bottom two photos. Her smile / grin and mouth shape are completely different.

canada12 wrote:

Justformaddie wrote:There's no way that I can see that these pics were taken days apart, I could actually say its wee maddie and big maddie! IMO

I can't actually believe that the top two photos are of the same girl who is in the bottom two photos. Her smile / grin and mouth shape are completely different.

View-from-Ireland wrote:

canada12 wrote:

Justformaddie wrote:There's no way that I can see that these pics were taken days apart, I could actually say its wee maddie and big maddie! IMO

I can't actually believe that the top two photos are of the same girl who is in the bottom two photos. Her smile / grin and mouth shape are completely different.

I find it so odd that the three most famous photos of Madeleine, the one highlighting the Coloboma up close, the pool photo and the tennis ball pic all look so different. It's almost like three different girls, or pics of Madeleine a year apart. What was the point of releasing photos that displayed such variations? How could that help identify a missing person? 

IMO, the pic of Madeleine in the Everton top looks quite like how she appeared in the tennis ball photo.

AndyB wrote:

Not during the day... say 10am to 7pm.. that looks like 100% to me... multiple layers as well.

Are you looking at the lines at the very bottom of the chart? I thought those were indicating the height of the clouds with the bar chart at the top showing the amount of cloud cover. I got the 50% from the bar chart at the top and with 50% you're always going to get some clouds, which is why the line at the bottom covers almost the full width of the day. (I'm not an expert in any of this so I could well be wrong)

Thursday, 3 May 2007   Weather continues cool and cloudy with sunny intervals, but not pool dipping weather.
Noticed first evidence of weather change, as by 7.15 pm cloud was clearing from the North. Just after 11pm night sky clear with full moon
I arrived at my apartment about 1145pm. It was a clear dry moonlit night and no sound of human or vehicular activity, and it was good to reflect that better weather had now set in.
In fact, the rains did not return until 14 June.

Friday 4 May, 2007  I was awakened at c.0750 on a fine clear morning,

Saturday 5 May, 2007. Weather continues fine and sunny.
_ _ _ _ _

Having viewed the sequence of photos above, this Commentator added the following
_ _ _ _ _ _ _

The Met sequence and the photo sequence coupled with the evidence of conditions given by the Tapas 9 confirms a typical Algarve weather pattern; thereby casting serious doubt on the McCann's date for the last photo.  Wind speed is still the overriding factor in eliminating 3 May as the date of photo in my opinion. It is difficult to judge the wind conditions from the pictures on either date, but the evidence of all (on the ground at the time) consulted indicate that the photo as posed would not have been possible on 3 May.  

However of much greater import - is the wind speed and cloud factor.
At 1400 on 3 May, wind speed is recorded as force 4 with a still air temperature of 17 C. Although the pool area is to some extent sheltered, with the westerly direction component the wind would be markedly chilly with a chill factor pulling the temp down to as low as 15C - definitely not suitable for scantily clad pool activity.

Of far greater importance; however, on the photo there is no sign of any disturbance of Madeleine's hair which hangs lankly below her hat.   A hat which; moreover, is perched loosely on top of her head and would not remain unsupported in a Force 4 wind.  Clearly, the cloud factor on 3 May would rule out such a photo.

Justformaddie wrote: I should know this, but was the pool or the tennis pic the very first to be released?

PeterMac wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Not during the day... say 10am to 7pm.. that looks like 100% to me... multiple layers as well.

Are you looking at the lines at the very bottom of the chart? I thought those were indicating the height of the clouds with the bar chart at the top showing the amount of cloud cover. I got the 50% from the bar chart at the top and with 50% you're always going to get some clouds, which is why the line at the bottom covers almost the full width of the day. (I'm not an expert in any of this so I could well be wrong)

This is just the day in question
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]" />
The thick black line is the temperature.  (The other lines and filled in things are max / mins, and averages over many years,)
The grey blocks at the top are the cloud cover, 25% 50% 100%.  
BUT since there is no 60/70/80. we may extrapolate and believe that at 2pm it was between 50% and 100 % which it achieves a little time later.
Certainly other photos taken on the Algarve that day bear this out.
(And yes there are millions on line if you care to look.)

This is a first hand account from a resident of PdL, whose previous profession required him to know everything there was to know about weather
It has been sent to the PJ, to Dr Amaral, and to Grange

Thursday, 3 May 2007   Weather continues cool and cloudy with sunny intervals, but not pool dipping weather.
Noticed first evidence of weather change, as by 7.15 pm cloud was clearing from the North. Just after 11pm night sky clear with full moon
I arrived at my apartment about 1145pm. It was a clear dry moonlit night and no sound of human or vehicular activity, and it was good to reflect that better weather had now set in.
In fact, the rains did not return until 14 June.

Friday 4 May, 2007  I was awakened at c.0750 on a fine clear morning,

Saturday 5 May, 2007. Weather continues fine and sunny.
_ _ _ _ _

Having viewed the sequence of photos above, this Commentator added the following
_ _ _ _ _ _ _

The Met sequence and the photo sequence coupled with the evidence of conditions given by the Tapas 9 confirms a typical Algarve weather pattern; thereby casting serious doubt on the McCann's date for the last photo.  Wind speed is still the overriding factor in eliminating 3 May as the date of photo in my opinion. It is difficult to judge the wind conditions from the pictures on either date, but the evidence of all (on the ground at the time) consulted indicate that the photo as posed would not have been possible on 3 May.  

However of much greater import - is the wind speed and cloud factor.
At 1400 on 3 May, wind speed is recorded as force 4 with a still air temperature of 17 C. Although the pool area is to some extent sheltered, with the westerly direction component the wind would be markedly chilly with a chill factor pulling the temp down to as low as 15C - definitely not suitable for scantily clad pool activity.

Of far greater importance; however, on the photo there is no sign of any disturbance of Madeleine's hair which hangs lankly below her hat.   A hat which; moreover, is perched loosely on top of her head and would not remain unsupported in a Force 4 wind.  Clearly, the cloud factor on 3 May would rule out such a photo.

We also see the known pattern of temperature, where the ambient air temp reaches a peak some hours AFTER solar zenith.
It on the basis of such first hand evidence that one is permitted to Purport the theory - that the Last Photo is a forgery - in that it tells a lie about itself, i.e. the date and time allocated to it.

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:

Justformaddie wrote: I should know this, but was the pool or the tennis pic the very first to be released?

From memory, the tennis ball one was published within a week and the poolside one about three weeks after 3rd May.

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Not just your opinion!

If this is the same girl a couple of days apart, I'll eat my hat!

canada12 wrote:Does this work for you, worriedmum? I can't put them side by side as the images are too large. But one on top of the other might work?

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

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:

Justformaddie wrote: I should know this, but was the pool or the tennis pic the very first to be released?

From memory, the tennis ball one was published within a week and the poolside one about three weeks after 3rd May.

Miraflores wrote:I am straying slightly from the topic here, but it does relate to the tennis ball photo.

I notice that they are proper tennis balls. Would small children playing tennis really use those? Isn't it more likely that they would use those bigger spongy balls? This makes me think that this isn't Madeleine at mini-tennis, but is her collecting up balls after an adult session, which could explain the inappropriate footwear. It would also throw the date into doubt, because at least some of the adults seemed to play tennis most days.

There is also confusion as to who took the photo, with Kate and I think two others claiming to have done so.

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

On the right I see the face of a brown dog, which looks to be carrying something in it's mouth.

My interpretations, anyhow...

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

To the left - above the bright white thing, I see a white dog, mournful-looking thing, black ears with a black patch on it's rump.

On the right I see the face of a brown dog, which looks to be carrying something in it's mouth.

My interpretations, anyhow...

canada12 wrote:Does this work for you, worriedmum? I can't put them side by side as the images are too large. But one on top of the other might work?

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

missbeetle wrote:Well spotted, Hicks.

I think one of the reasons the Madeleines pictured seem to have such messy hair is to cover up 'joins'.

Probably accounts for some of the other hairstyles of characters in other photographs, too.

I have wondered to what extent the photoshopped on eyeliner etc is to disguise poorly pasted on eyes.

Close-up, the neck of the Last Photo Madeleine looks to me to be again grafted, and covered with locks of hair to the left.

Her head is too big for her body.

I wonder if she is a composite image of Sean and M.R., the purported crèche substitute?

Oh, and Dee Coy -

If you thought you were sad with your trainer research (you never know...!), I found myself counting freckles on Gerry's arms...

Trying to match them with other pictures of his freckled arms...

It's just that his body hair seemed lighter and more gingery than otherwise pictured.

I wondered if perhaps Gerry's head was grafted on to another's body?

Seeing that whoever it is, they are sitting politely.

Nina wrote:

tigger wrote:

missbeetle wrote:Well spotted, Hicks.

I think one of the reasons the Madeleines pictured seem to have such messy hair is to cover up 'joins'.

Probably accounts for some of the other hairstyles of characters in other photographs, too.

I have wondered to what extent the photoshopped on eyeliner etc is to disguise poorly pasted on eyes.

Close-up, the neck of the Last Photo Madeleine looks to me to be again grafted, and covered with locks of hair to the left.

Her head is too big for her body.

I wonder if she is a composite image of Sean and M.R., the purported crèche substitute?

Oh, and Dee Coy -

If you thought you were sad with your trainer research (you never know...!), I found myself counting freckles on Gerry's arms...

Trying to match them with other pictures of his freckled arms...

It's just that his body hair seemed lighter and more gingery than otherwise pictured.

I wondered if perhaps Gerry's head was grafted on to another's body?

Seeing that whoever it is, they are sitting politely.

The bolded bits are spot on imo. However, I think it's just Maddie's head pasted on, nothing to do with Sean.
There is an abruptchange of colour on her neck.
Other points: Kate even gets the colour of the dress wrong in KH1.
The dress, presumably in 5a on the night was not given to the dogs for scent reference. (Dogs arrived 0200 4/5) .
The pose is very unnatural and hard to maintain. Imo you'd not get that diagonal line in the neck either.
Best thing is to try it out. i think the owner of that body was looking straight ahead, the pose and shoulders are in the right position in that case.
There is non- participation of both girls, neither is looking at the camera which would be normal.
The only one looking at the camera is Gerry, which leads me to believe that he was the only one available for this construct. Amelie is also pasted in, losing her right  upper arm in the process - and no, that sleeve is too empty. Amelie's presence at the right age 'proves' that it was taken during that holiday.
I've posted enlarged details of her arm at least ayear ago - partly transparent over Gerry's shorts.

In the Donegal photo on the rocks, Maddie's head is pasted in too large as well, maybe on the same body as that in the last photo. Imo a compact 3yr old, not an almost four year old. This explains why Sean is almost the same size in the Donegal photo.

Snipped from Tigger's post,


Amelie is also pasted in, losing her right  upper arm in the process - and no, that sleeve is too empty. Amelie's presence at the right age 'proves' that it was taken during that holiday.

I have never noticed this before and you are quite correct. Amelie's left arm almost fills the sleeve. Yet the sleeve where her right arm should be is empty, apart from a very grainy hint of a pink upper arm. I have always looked at this photograph and thought that her right arm was well back, supporting her hence the empty sleeve, but the sleeve opening just isn't loose enough to do that.
There is a picture on page one of this thread showing Kate holding Amelie. Amelie is wearing the same little tee shirt and you can see well from there that the sleeve is just not loose at all.

Justformaddie wrote:Does anyone think her back looks hmm, kinda shaped more like an adults than a nearly 4yr old?

Hicks wrote:Just a thought about the tennis photo. Why did Madeleine have scandals on, and not her pink trainers?
Madeleine had trainers, she was wearing them in the airport clip.

BlackCatBoogie wrote:

Justformaddie wrote:Does anyone think her back looks hmm, kinda shaped more like an adults than a nearly 4yr old?

Yes I do Justformaddie - and her right arm and hand also look like adults.  I have a nearly four year old and she just doesn't have arms/hands/back shape like that.  Small children don't have knuckles like that either even if they are clutching something. 

And her arm and shoulder don't seem to sit right either, nor is her head sitting properly on her body.  I think it has been cobbled together from a composite of adult parts or children's parts that are out of perspective.  

As somebody just said, why cobble these pictures together so badly?

All in my own opinion, nothing stated as fact.