Re: Recap on the Tennis Balls photo

by **Hobs** 27.10.14 16:39

Even KM says at the end of the paragraph "How can I go on knowing that her life could have ended like this?".

This is close, that is distancing.

Kate places herself close to maddie's life ending like this.

Kate tells us she knows Maddie's life could have ended like this

What is the THIS that Maddies life could have ended like?

Kate tells us Maddie had a fear of pain.

Why would she tell us this?

She considers it important enough for us to know this, it is also at the forefront of her mind during the process of free editing.
What pain does she refer to since Maddie should not have been exposed to anything painful apart from routine vaccinations.
Note she doesn't tell us scared or frightened rather a fear of pain.
What painful things was Maddie exposed to that would cause her fear of pain?

Frequent medical procedures which could involve needles, operations or simialr can cause a child a fear of pain, seeing someine in a labcoat or nurses uniform or scrubs can be enough to scare the child since they know what is coming.
Also seeing an item such as a belt or slipper or ruler or other item used to inflict physical punishment can cause the child to fear pain.
seeing a particular person can cause a child to fear pain( sexual or physical abuse)

Kate tells us Maddie's life is ended, that she is dead.
She didn't know it could have ended like this, so i would ask, how did she think it could have ended?
Was Maddie sick (coloboma and related health issues) and she thought perhaps that would have caused her death?

This leads me to wonder if they knew Maddie had a short life span and thus abuse of her would not have been revealed since her death was expected?

Was her death perhaps due to altruistic reasons?
To put an end to her suffering?
Once last holiday and then a quick death?

Was caring for a sick Maddie too much for the mccanns , especially kate?
Looking after young twins plus a sick older sibling pretty much on her own just too much for kate?
Was this why she had so much help from family, friends, nursery workers?
Looking at what we know, it seems kate was rarely left alone with the children for any length of time, why was this?

Was this fear of what kate could or would do?
Was this why the children were dumped in the creche each day?
The creche was the safest place for them and allowed the adults some me time?

Strange that on the thursday, routines changed and it seems this was the only day that kate was left alone with the children for any length of time whilst gerry did his thing, allegedly sending payne to go check on her.
Why send another adult to check on kate?
She is a grown woman, a mom to three toddlers, why would he feel the need to send someone to check on her unless he had good reason to?

by Guest 27.10.14 18:31

I've been scouring some of Goncalo Amaral's thoughts today in a sort of "back to basics" exercise.

I was shocked to see his thoughts or the "sunburn" mark on Maddie's forearm, I'd never read this before:

"Madeleine's Right Arm and the Strange Mark

The issue was raised by Mr. Hernâni Carvalho. Madeleine's right arm has a strange mark, a mark which, according to what Mr. Carvalho has learned with Doctor Natália Vara, a forensic psychologist is not a sun burn - in that case more parts of her body would show signs of sun burnings and it has the signs of a hard slap or similar. The point here, is that interviews were conducted with the baby sitters at the Ocean Club crèche and none of them remembers this very visible mark on Madeleine's arm. There wasn't any statement from the parents regarding this fact. Therefore, the conclusion is that this was made after 17:30, after the parents picked Maddie up from the crèche on the 3rd of May 2007"

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

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

by j.rob 27.10.14 19:51

dantezebu wrote:
tigger wrote:
russiandoll wrote:have never read the words FEAR OF PAIN but have read fear and pain

Iirc it.s mentioned twice in the diary and changed in the book to fear and pain.it being too late to change the already published diary.

In itself very revealing imo. I'm copying this post to the health topic.

I remembered it twice too. Found it in the following day's offering. However now I will be spending the rest of the morning in a darkened room with whale songs and aromatherapy candles after going back into the most bizzare piece of writing I have ever seen attempting to portray normal human emotions by someone who appears quite devoid of them. IMO.

SATURDAY, JUNE 2: I can't remember today (which is now yesterday!). The morning was spent doing paperwork. I wrote a letter to JK Rowling, asking for her help in keeping M in the public eye. She has a new Harry Potter book which will come out in July. I asked if it would be possible to do something like a bookmark with M on.

An enjoyable afternoon—I never felt so relaxed. I felt it was wrong. S and A had fun and that was important. I also worried about what people might think, like "How can they manage to...?"

It seems that Sean is liking the beach more these days. We had tea in a nearby restaurant—good, despite still thinking that I had to do normal things without feeling guilty. We left around 7.30pm and the kids were completely exhausted.

Fed up again —poor M. Once again it took a long time before S and A were sorted. Finally went to church for 10 minutes.

Private worship (despairing!).

Cried again in bed—I can't avoid it. I need her close to me. Thinking about her fear of pain breaks my heart. Thinking about paedophiles makes me want to tear at my own skin. Of course these people, like psychopaths, aren't "normal" human beings. I was never in favour of the death penalty, but these people should be kept in a secure place. I wouldn't even complain if it was in nice surroundings, but, certainly in the case of paedophiles always distanced from any type of contact with children.

Whose human rights are more important? Those of a paedophile or of a vulnerable, defenceless child?"

Just for completeness this was written about the same time:

Undated, at the Hilton in Berlin

Scared wants to return
Fears for her fear
Reality suddenly binds
Never loved anyone this much (Note: this is written in the third person, as in 'he/she never loved anyone this much')
Never again able to be completely happy / enjoy something. I'm sorry to be asking some of these questions, but I am sure you will understand that our despair, particularly given the lack of information and resulting helplessness, may be somewhat mitigated if it gains some trust.

Mamma Mia! I think Kate has told us exactly what happened, unfortunately. The bruises on Kate's hands, wrists and forearms suggest a certain scenario. Kate's rhetorical question is suggesting, imo, that (in this case) the rights of a paedophile are taking precedence over those of a vulnerable child?

Surely Kate is telling us what is going on here?? Right from the horse's mouth, as always.

What an extraordinary comment about how paedophiles should be kept in a secure place - "I wouldn't even complain if it was in nice surroundings." Is this what she thinks should have happened to the paedophiles that she believes may have violated Madeleine? She doesn't think they should be subject to the death penalty, but they should be kept in a secure place - even in nice surroundings - and always distanced from any type of contact with children.

Hmmmmm. I wonder who she is talking about?

Thinking about her fear of pain breaks my heart. Thinking about paedophiles makes me want to tear at my own skin. Of course these people, like psychopaths, aren't "normal" human beings. I was never in favour of the death penalty, but these people should be kept in a secure place. I wouldn't even complain if it was in nice surroundings, but, certainly in the case of paedophiles always distanced from any type of contact with children.

Whose human rights are more important? Those of a paedophile or of a vulnerable, defenceless child?"

by j.rob 27.10.14 20:18

Snipped from above:

June 2nd:

An enjoyable afternoon—I never felt so relaxed.

eek

Have I understood this right??? At the beginning of June Kate had an afternoon when she had never (before) felt so relaxed? Less than a month after her daughter had allegedly been kidnapped?

Ye Gods!

by worriedmum 27.10.14 21:14

What does 'reality suddenly binds' mean?

by Angelique 28.10.14 2:34

worriedmum wrote:What does 'reality suddenly binds' mean?

I think it's probably something like:

Reality (event) suddenly (now) binds (hurts).

by Nina 28.10.14 9:27

Angelique wrote:
worriedmum wrote:What does 'reality suddenly binds' mean?

I think it's probably something like:

Reality (event) suddenly (now) binds (hurts).

I took it to mean that the reality of what has happenned, is happening, has suddenly bound people together, who before weren't.

by canada12 28.10.14 9:35

worriedmum wrote:What does 'reality suddenly binds' mean?

I took it to mean that suddenly, reality was restricting her in some way - as in, preventing her from doing or possibly saying something she might otherwise have said or done.

by bobbin 28.10.14 9:56

Dee Coy wrote:I've been scouring some of Goncalo Amaral's thoughts today in a sort of "back to basics" exercise.

I was shocked to see his thoughts or the "sunburn" mark on Maddie's forearm, I'd never read this before:

"Madeleine's Right Arm and the Strange Mark

The issue was raised by Mr. Hernâni Carvalho. Madeleine's right arm has a strange mark, a mark which, according to what Mr. Carvalho has learned with Doctor Natália Vara, a forensic psychologist is not a sun burn - in that case more parts of her body would show signs of sun burnings and it has the signs of a hard slap or similar. The point here, is that interviews were conducted with the baby sitters at the Ocean Club crèche and none of them remembers this very visible mark on Madeleine's arm. There wasn't any statement from the parents regarding this fact. Therefore, the conclusion is that this was made after 17:30, after the parents picked Maddie up from the crèche on the 3rd of May 2007"

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

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

If it was a mark made after 17.30 on 3rd May, then the photo must have been taken also AFTER 17.30.
According to Kate, Maddie was very tired after tea at the Tapas and needed carrying home.
When was the time to go to the tennis courts, pick the balls up, take a photo and then carry her home ? No mention at all has been made of the photo being taken so late in the day/week.

So, two questions.
1. Since the nannies recall no marks, was the Madeleine at Creche in fact the Madeleine McCann. If the Madeleine at creche had no marks, was she perhaps the Madalene, the substitute, that was at creche.
2. What are those wide strip marks also on the legs. Given Kate's reference to paedophiles and all of their proclivities and Maddie's fear of pain, to me they look similar to those on the arm, possibly to hold a person in position?

Kate can't accuse someone of asking the above questions since she has clearly indicated that she has expressed fears of such as the above, herself.

by Guest 28.10.14 10:25

worriedmum wrote:What does 'reality suddenly binds' mean?

It has suddenly struck that the reality of what they have done has taken away their freedom? Life has changed and has become a chain within which they must now always live by the new rules they have carved for themselves?

Just a speculative interpretation.

by Guest 28.10.14 10:36

bobbin wrote:
If it was a mark made after 17.30 on 3rd May, then the photo must have been taken also AFTER 17.30.
According to Kate, Maddie was very tired after tea at the Tapas and needed carrying home.
When was the time to go to the tennis courts, pick the balls up, take a photo and then carry her home ? No mention at all has been made of the photo being taken so late in the day/week.

So, two questions.
1. Since the nannies recall no marks, was the Madeleine at Creche in fact the Madeleine McCann. If the Madeleine at creche had no marks, was she perhaps the Madalene, the substitute, that was at creche.
2. What are those wide strip marks also on the legs. Given Kate's reference to paedophiles and all of their proclivities and Maddie's fear of pain, to me they look similar to those on the arm, possibly to hold a person in position?

Kate can't accuse someone of asking the above questions since she has clearly indicated that she has expressed fears of such as the above, herself.

Certainly it seems impossible the photo was taken after 5.30 on 3rd.

And, indeed, some while later if Maddie is smiling after recovering from the impact of what 'had the signs of a hard slap or similar' (quote from Dr Amaral) and the marks had had time to manifest. We're looking at 6.30, 7.00, at least?

So what alternatives are we left with?

Are the nannies simply unreliable in their observations?

The other thing is, of course, is that if the photo was taken on the evening of 3rd, it would be the last photo, proof that she was alive and around then, and lauded as such. Wouldn't it? huh

by Snifferdog 28.10.14 10:51

Yes it also looks as though M. has bruising on her shin just above her socks.

by spirals 28.10.14 12:41

bobbin wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:I've been scouring some of Goncalo Amaral's thoughts today in a sort of "back to basics" exercise.

I was shocked to see his thoughts or the "sunburn" mark on Maddie's forearm, I'd never read this before:

"Madeleine's Right Arm and the Strange Mark

The issue was raised by Mr. Hernâni Carvalho. Madeleine's right arm has a strange mark, a mark which, according to what Mr. Carvalho has learned with Doctor Natália Vara, a forensic psychologist is not a sun burn - in that case more parts of her body would show signs of sun burnings and it has the signs of a hard slap or similar. The point here, is that interviews were conducted with the baby sitters at the Ocean Club crèche and none of them remembers this very visible mark on Madeleine's arm. There wasn't any statement from the parents regarding this fact. Therefore, the conclusion is that this was made after 17:30, after the parents picked Maddie up from the crèche on the 3rd of May 2007"

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

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
If it was a mark made after 17.30 on 3rd May, then the photo must have been taken also AFTER 17.30.
According to Kate, Maddie was very tired after tea at the Tapas and needed carrying home.
When was the time to go to the tennis courts, pick the balls up, take a photo and then carry her home ? No mention at all has been made of the photo being taken so late in the day/week.

So, two questions.
1. Since the nannies recall no marks, was the Madeleine at Creche in fact the Madeleine McCann. If the Madeleine at creche had no marks, was she perhaps the Madalene, the substitute, that was at creche.
2. What are those wide strip marks also on the legs. Given Kate's reference to paedophiles and all of their proclivities and Maddie's fear of pain, to me they look similar to those on the arm, possibly to hold a person in position?

Kate can't accuse someone of asking the above questions since she has clearly indicated that she has expressed fears of such as the above, herself.

This picture has always creeped me out, mainly because I can't understand why the Madeleine in this picture simply doesn't look like the girl in any of the other pictures.

Reading this thread, I'm wondering whether part of this is how puffy her face looks. And whether that could be from crying and/or being awake all night for some kind of horrible reasons. I know when I've cried hard for long periods of time, my face looks swollen and puffy for ages.

It would make sense to me (assuming all photos are actually real) if the pool photo was taken on the first day when she was still happy and excited and this awful picture was taken after the slaps or restraining or whatever caused the bruising. sad1

But if those are obvious injuries on her arms and legs why on earth release the picture?

by tiny 28.10.14 12:51

Could this be the real Madeleine,also the mark by her wrist reminds me of a childs bite mark(did Madeleine bite herself when in a temper)

by palm tree 28.10.14 13:06

Madeleine's eyes always look swollen to me. I don't know whether it's the quality of the photo, but when magnified, the poor child looks as though she has bruises on both arms, and if the sun was strong enough, her hands would be darker than maybe covered up arms. White hands are very strange, along with the fingertips.
IMO

by Snifferdog 28.10.14 13:20

I just have to ask this:

Does anybody know what is that creamy white, semi transparent gloopy looking stuff hanging in a ropey viscous string from Maddies left lower cheek?

I noticed a similar phenomena on another photo of Maddie. Its the one where she is featured in a huge display behind the Mcs during some interview or other. Its in the mccannfiles about a third of the way down the page, the title underneath being: The Mccanns feel threatened by Anthony Bennet. Sorry I am unable to post the pic, it is in the latest news section.

This photo has the same looking stuff plastered over her face and dripping down her chin.
It doesn't look like ice cream to me affraid

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

by palm tree 28.10.14 13:44

The one in the mccanfiles is the pic from Donegal where she's holding an ice cream, but the tennis pic? Should that not be green?
IMO

by Snifferdog 28.10.14 14:05

Its not the ice cream pic from Donegal.
I don't think it should be green there palm tree, because that would mean the side of her face would be green too, as it extends down the side of her face.

by NickE 28.10.14 15:06

spirals wrote:
bobbin wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:I've been scouring some of Goncalo Amaral's thoughts today in a sort of "back to basics" exercise.

I was shocked to see his thoughts or the "sunburn" mark on Maddie's forearm, I'd never read this before:

"Madeleine's Right Arm and the Strange Mark

The issue was raised by Mr. Hernâni Carvalho. Madeleine's right arm has a strange mark, a mark which, according to what Mr. Carvalho has learned with Doctor Natália Vara, a forensic psychologist is not a sun burn - in that case more parts of her body would show signs of sun burnings and it has the signs of a hard slap or similar. The point here, is that interviews were conducted with the baby sitters at the Ocean Club crèche and none of them remembers this very visible mark on Madeleine's arm. There wasn't any statement from the parents regarding this fact. Therefore, the conclusion is that this was made after 17:30, after the parents picked Maddie up from the crèche on the 3rd of May 2007"

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

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
If it was a mark made after 17.30 on 3rd May, then the photo must have been taken also AFTER 17.30.
According to Kate, Maddie was very tired after tea at the Tapas and needed carrying home.
When was the time to go to the tennis courts, pick the balls up, take a photo and then carry her home ? No mention at all has been made of the photo being taken so late in the day/week.

So, two questions.
1. Since the nannies recall no marks, was the Madeleine at Creche in fact the Madeleine McCann. If the Madeleine at creche had no marks, was she perhaps the Madalene, the substitute, that was at creche.
2. What are those wide strip marks also on the legs. Given Kate's reference to paedophiles and all of their proclivities and Maddie's fear of pain, to me they look similar to those on the arm, possibly to hold a person in position?

Kate can't accuse someone of asking the above questions since she has clearly indicated that she has expressed fears of such as the above, herself.

This picture has always creeped me out, mainly because I can't understand why the Madeleine in this picture simply doesn't look like the girl in any of the other pictures.

Reading this thread, I'm wondering whether part of this is how puffy her face looks. And whether that could be from crying and/or being awake all night for some kind of horrible reasons. I know when I've cried hard for long periods of time, my face looks swollen and puffy for ages.

It would make sense to me (assuming all photos are actually real) if the pool photo was taken on the first day when she was still happy and excited and this awful picture was taken after the slaps or restraining or whatever caused the bruising.

But if those are obvious injuries on her arms and legs why on earth release the picture?

I really hope I'm wrong here, but can the injuries to her arms and legs been caused by someone tied her up?
sad1

by joyce1938 28.10.14 15:27

Just looking and thinking ,the mark on her arm could just be good old fasion dust or a dirt mark scrabbling around and holding onto balls ,that size I believe would not be child size ,I think she had been running around picking up the balls from the match of the adults ,I think I have read just that would be an evening game ? that adults had played ? Do I recall that there were 2 accounts about that ?joyce1938

by Guest 28.10.14 15:44

joyce1938 wrote:Just looking and thinking ,the mark on her arm could just be good old fasion dust or a dirt mark scrabbling around and holding onto balls ,that size I believe would not be child size ,I think she had been running around picking up the balls from the match of the adults ,I think I have read just that would be an evening game ? that adults had played ? Do I recall that there were 2 accounts about that ?joyce1938

That could be true, but as KM made a reference to sunburn on the arm it is more likely to be inflammation of some kind. Possibly traumatic.

by palm tree 28.10.14 17:34

Snifferdog wrote:Its not the ice cream pic from Donegal.
I don't think it should be green there palm tree, because that would mean the side of her face would be green too, as it extends down the side of her face.

Sorry Snifferdog, I'd always thought that pic was when they were in Donegal. In the tennis pic I must be looking at the wrong thing. I'm the the brightest at times, so I'll have to study it again lol.

by Julie 13.05.16 9:47

sharonl wrote:This is from 2011, it is the first time that I have seen it but I don't know if it has been posted here before.

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

Two Entirely Different Tennis Courts!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
What's this then Gerry... two entirely different tennis courts!

Who do the McCann's think they're kidding with all those photos of several different children lookalikes of Madeleine, which is plainly obvious to anyone with an ounce of Common Sense, but not only is there more than one Madeleine, there's also more than one tennis court too!

See the photos and judge for yourself, as the court that Gerry is standing next to in the Ocean Club hotel complex the surface is green tarmac with a pink gravel border, the type used in public parks and hotels because it's pretty cheap, whereas the photo inlay of Madeleine standing on the said same tennis court in the Ocean Club hotel complex, the surface is Leisuretex green court and pink border, the type used in professional matchplay leasure centers in the UK.

There's also a watermark on the Madeleine tennis court photo on the green Leasuretex edge, which indicates that just priro to the photo being taken there was a shower of rain, you can just see the rain watermark just along the white line on the green Leasuretex, which prove's this photo of Madeleine was taken in the UK around April and not Portugal, as indicated by the time the McCann's say this photo was taken at the Ocean Club, it was the brightest time of the day in Portugal. But the photo of Madeleine is not that bright and sunny as compared with the photo of Gerry taken a year later at the same time of day as the Madeleine photo, the difference in brightness of the sun is a hell of a lot different between the two photos, and could not possibly be the same global location between both photos.

So not only are these two tennis courts two entirely different tennis courts, the locations of each tennis court are entirely different globally also, which proves that Madeleine could not possibly have had her photo taken on the Ocean Club tennis courts with Gerry, Jez Wilkins and his girl friend Bridget O'Donnell, on or prior to the 3rd May 2007 as stated by the McCann's!

Are the McCann's playing a game of 'Much ado about nothing', because I say the McCann's Madeleine never existed, and Charity out of Sympathy is the game the McCann's are playing is just to generate profit out of the public!

Could it be this tennis court? This is the tennis court at Cliff Richard's villa not far from praia de lux...

Could it be this tennis court? [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by BarryTheHatchet 13.05.16 15:29

Why is the bottom one labelled "generic grass court" when it's quite clearly green Leisuretex Macadam?

by whodunit 13.05.16 21:43

Snifferdog wrote:I just have to ask this:

Does anybody know what is that creamy white, semi transparent gloopy looking stuff hanging in a ropey viscous string from Maddies left lower cheek?

I noticed a similar phenomena on another photo of Maddie. Its the one where she is featured in a huge display behind the Mcs during some interview or other. Its in the mccannfiles about a third of the way down the page, the title underneath being: The Mccanns feel threatened by Anthony Bennet. Sorry I am unable to post the pic, it is in the latest news section.

This photo has the same looking stuff plastered over her face and dripping down her chin.
It doesn't look like ice cream to me

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

It's not a liquid, but it is 2 things: 1. The string tie to the sun hat and 2. Proof this photo is a phoney.

An effort was made to recreate the string on the right side, the side facing the camera, but it's vague and unsuccessful and it's in the wrong place--around her neck. The strings on a child's hat are attached to the crown, hang down across the cheek and tie under the chin. The strings should never be attached in the neck/knape area, which would be a choking hazard for children. Whoever 'shopped the photo had no confidence in their ability to re-create the string across her right cheek without it being too obvious.

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

Log in for more topics