Further Analysis of the Last Photo

by jd 22.09.11 11:37

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]....Last Photo allegedly taken May 3rd 2007
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]...Allegedly taken between May 4th - May 12th 2007
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]....Taken 5th May 2007 - McCanns 2nd media statement

A few things to observe baring in mind there are only a few days between all 3 pictures. The obvious that Amelie and Kate are wearing the same tops. However, Amelie looks different to me in the face ie younger or older in one of these pics. Then look at Kates face, in the 2nd picture she looks so much younger. Gerry looks a lot younger in the poolside pic compared to the 2nd media statement pic. To my eye, there is no continuity in their ages/faces that all 3 pics were taken with a few days of each other

The top 2 pics look to have been taken within a year previously and adds further weight to this scam being pre planned ie they planned what pics to release and to keep continuity wore the same clothes. Only Gerry forgot to bring the poolside pic and had to go back to the UK and get it, then it was released....thoughts?

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

by Guest 22.09.11 13:36

I certainly do feel that the "last photo" - if not a complete fake - could have been taken the previous year. I'm not sure yet about the other two photos which JD has posted here. Please could someone post side by side the middle photo (with Amelie being paraded with Cuddlecat - ugh!) and one of the Donegal photos supposedly taken in April 2007 but where the twins look older than they would have been then. I would be interested to see if the two photos together would solve that question.

by **tigger** 22.09.11 16:02

Amelie must have had a dress and a top of the same design. The way the top rucks up because Kate is carrying her doesn't compensate enough to make it into a dress, which is what it was at the pool.
But if the pool is up to a year earlier, then Amelie could not fill the dress out. A year later, it's become a longish top. By the way, she does have half her right arm missing. Just a sliver is seen, but the sleeve on that side shouldn't be that empty compared to the other one. Just checked, definite blur photoshop again! the arm below the elbow is clearly visible, above that, poor little mite, just a blur. Rest is sharp again.
She may have had both in the same style of course.
IMO Maddie is just around 3 there. Gerry just looks gormless, I think it's the light and awful sunglasses make him look weird. Seems to have the same top on as in the airport bus.

by joyce1938 22.09.11 16:27

People often buy siblings clothes to match, only a size larger it's not unusal, looks as if Amelie's one was smaller size than her sister's to me. joyce1938

by Guest 22.09.11 16:48

considering there was one toothbrush the children shared, they seem to have packed a lot of sunhats. Obviouxly sunhats are a good thing, but so is dental hygiene!

by jd 22.09.11 18:06

If you blow up the 2 pictures of Amelie and compare, I can only see a different younger face in the 2nd photo. This isn't 2 days later to my eyes, no way and more likely 6-12 months previous

To me Gerry looks quite a bit younger in the pool side photo regardless of light and sun

by jd 22.09.11 18:47

tigger wrote:Gerry ......... Seems to have the same top on as in the airport bus.

You are absolutely right, it is the same top (creases too!)

When I get a bit of time, it will be worth comparing pics of David & Fiona Payne, Diane Webster from the airport bus to the pics of them around May 3-4th 2007

by russiandoll 22.09.11 19:43

has anyone managed to find a photo of oc pool [ believe im right in thinking this was where the last photo afternoon 3 may was alegedly taken.] rather distinctive tiles maybe features in one of their brochures. I too think this is from an earlier holiday or madeleine has been added, cant believe its the same age child as tennis court photo

by **tigger** 22.09.11 20:13

russiandoll wrote:has anyone managed to find a photo of oc pool [ believe im right in thinking this was where the last photo afternoon 3 may was alegedly taken.] rather distinctive tiles maybe features in one of their brochures. I too think this is from an earlier holiday or madeleine has been added, cant believe its the same age child as tennis court photo

I think that one problem is that the flowers behind Gerry don't flower at the beginning of May but much later. I read this somewhere here, but some time ago. Another seems to be that the sun is directly overhead on some of the photograph which is also not possible at that time of year or indeed the alleged time of day.
Gerry made several trips (or at least one) to play golf. (in the bewk) so the photo could have been taken then and the children added. As I said, Amelie is missing her upper arm, why I do not know.
The someone once said the wall behind them isn't quite like that and in the tennis photo (also on this site) some clever person knows the surface the girl is standing on is not present in OC.

I'm rather hoping SY have some fantastic software to analyse this sort of thing!

by russiandoll 22.09.11 20:19

just blew up photo on pamalan website this is def an oc pool in pdl. do you think this was premeditated or frantic cover up of their negligence which led to accident? i am reading all kinds here about substitute children and god knows what i dont want to get carried away anything too far fetched wont we all be accused of being mad conspiracy theorists. thanks for pointer to zavai have read about burgau.
dont you feel whats happened is probably quite simple but the cover up is the labyrinth?

by frank zappa 22.09.11 20:43

Okay, I have said this in another post but I will repeate here.
The composition of the supposed last photo is all wrong, by that I mean why is Madeleine so far to the right of the picture, surely if this was a genuine photo then she would have been further left with Amelie in the centre?
Next thing, what is the object or black line between Amilies dress and left arm?
I downloaded the full size pic and used windows to zoom in on this black line, may I suggest others do the same and let me know your thoughts.

by Guest 22.09.11 21:05

frank zappa wrote:Okay, I have said this in another post but I will repeate here.
The composition of the supposed last photo is all wrong, by that I mean why is Madeleine so far to the right of the picture, surely if this was a genuine photo then she would have been further left with Amelie in the centre?
Next thing, what is the object or black line between Amilies dress and left arm?
I downloaded the full size pic and used windows to zoom in on this black line, may I suggest others do the same and let me know your thoughts.

I think on the tread here somewhere[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] an "expert in photshopping made an analyze of the pool picture, and he had analyzed that black line not to be fake I think...
I agree with the composition. I also just saw a vid on youtube, cant remember wich one it was. But there where a shot of the pool there, and the water was pretty high almost to the top of the pool line...

by **tigger** 22.09.11 21:26

russiandoll wrote:just blew up photo on pamalan website this is def an oc pool in pdl. do you think this was premeditated or frantic cover up of their negligence which led to accident? i am reading all kinds here about substitute children and god knows what i dont want to get carried away anything too far fetched wont we all be accused of being mad conspiracy theorists. thanks for pointer to zavai have read about burgau.
dont you feel whats happened is probably quite simple but the cover up is the labyrinth?

Like a lot of scams, it seems complicated, but is in fact very simple. But signing in another child into the creche I don't find very difficult. As you say, the labyrinth is still being added to as we write, that would have been post-event.

So: event resulting in Maddie's death. We can leave aside whether premeditated or not.
IMO the help came right from the top, the rest is collateral damage, people jumping on the bandwagon. The public in love with the girl and the story.
Gordon Brown said it was a matter of 'national security' - for once he may have spoken the truth but I doubt it was to protect a conspiracy. Although the member for Kirkcaldy is shown giving an overt Masonic master handshake - youtube. He may have been thinking of nr. 1.
Event - protection/manipulation - no solution.
Event - manipulation - solution, would have been the course of events if there hadn't been all the protection.

Blacksmith has called them a couple of chancers. I think it was a get-rich-quick scheme which they could square with their consciences.
Instead it's now a 'get out of jail free' game with a very uncertain future.
I think they will never go to jail(too much in the public domain by now) but the Fund will be shut down.
We must keep at it, for Maddie, I don't think that poor child had much of a life.

So you're right, that's what they're doing at SY as well I guess. Weeding out the chaff. The photographs are part of the labyrinth, there is a quote from Gerry to the effect how good it is that there is so much information because nobody knows what's true and what isn't. Not a litt. quote. It's on this site.

by Guest 22.09.11 22:06

jd wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]....Last Photo allegedly taken May 3rd 2007
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]...Allegedly taken between May 4th - May 12th 2007
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]....Taken 5th May 2007 - McCanns 2nd media statement

A few things to observe baring in mind there are only a few days between all 3 pictures. The obvious that Amelie and Kate are wearing the same tops. However, Amelie looks different to me in the face ie younger or older in one of these pics. Then look at Kates face, in the 2nd picture she looks so much younger. Gerry looks a lot younger in the poolside pic compared to the 2nd media statement pic. To my eye, there is no continuity in their ages/faces that all 3 pics were taken with a few days of each other

The top 2 pics look to have been taken within a year previously and adds further weight to this scam being pre planned ie they planned what pics to release and to keep continuity wore the same clothes. Only Gerry forgot to bring the poolside pic and had to go back to the UK and get it, then it was released....thoughts?

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

Is that sunburn on Amelie's face & neck in the pool photo? If so where is it gone in the next photo? If it's photoshop, the little drops of water around the 3 are interesting.

by Ollie 22.09.11 22:45

I don't think photo 4-12 May of Amelie was taken in 2007, she looks smaller than the pool photo. Also Amelies hair in photo 2 just doesn't look right, looks like it has been added. I also noticed the drops of water but don't know why they seem wrong.

by jd 23.09.11 0:14

The only released picture from the Mccanns that I believe is genuine is the pool picture. Yes this was anaylsed deeply before in another topic and posts from someone who claimed to be an expert, the conclusion was it was genuine (though we are always open to other conclusions). To my eye it looks genuine and I don't see anything in this picture that looks or could be photoshopped (expect maybe the bead added in). Which means it was taken at the Ocean Club in PDL....but when? and why did gerry have to go back to the UK to get it?

I think August 2006 from all the things I have learnt. They didn't know they were going to create a scam then but this was the latest family holiday and the picture (s) they had for May 2007 (without Maddie being there in 2007). You seriously have to question why there are no holiday pics of Kate and Maddie, Maddie and the 2 twins, a family snap. Any ones we have are with Gerry in them..is this normal for a family holiday? Gerry put the kids to bed, Gerry would go and check, Gerry was the last to see Maddie, the men bathed the kids...where were the mothers? We have a video on an airport bus, what about the rest of the holiday?

"I don't think photo 4-12 May of Amelie was taken in 2007, she looks smaller than the pool photo".....Yes exactly she does, her face looks about 8 months younger too

"there is a quote from Gerry to the effect how good it is that there is so much information because nobody knows what's true and what isn't."....This is exactly what they are trying to achieve....confusion! Keeps everyone talking about it, in the news and the story alive....equals money

The sunburn was always odd, in the tennis photo Maddie has sunburnt arms but white hands! This could only have happened if she wore gloves, which is ridiculous

"I think they will never go to jail(too much in the public domain by now) but the Fund will be shut down. "....sadly I think you are right but we need to continue to get justice done

One of the first things Murat said was that his daughter looked the same as Maddie....guilty conscience perhaps??

by **Tony Bennett** 23.09.11 7:13

jd wrote:The only released picture from the McCanns that I believe is genuine is the pool picture. Yes this was anaylsed deeply before in another topic and posts from someone who claimed to be an expert, the conclusion was it was genuine (though we are always open to other conclusions). To my eye it looks genuine and I don't see anything in this picture that looks or could be photoshopped (expect maybe the bead added in). Which means it was taken at the Ocean Club in PDL...but when? and why did Gerry have to go back to the UK to get it?

I think August 2006 from all the things I have learnt...

I follow your line of argument but disagree.

The main objection I think to your suggestion that this was taken in August 2006 is that Amelie and Sean would only be 18 months old then (born in February 2005). I am sure Amelie is not as young as that in that photo.

The sun was clearly very high in the sky when the three of them were photographed. I would suggest that the photo must have been taken around noon.

I am not persuaded that this is a genuine photo from that holiday, otherwise it would have been produced the moment the GNR arrived at around 10.50pm on 3 May 2007.

If the photo was NOT photoshopped, then the simple explanation for the delay in producing it woud have been to alter the date and time it was taken.

by **tigger** 23.09.11 7:31

I don't agree, JD.
Somebody or other has been put into the picture, I've blown up the photo you posted, it came up full screen and then I maxed the magnification.
That arm has been tampered with, it's the only area which was blurred in the entire picture. So my feeling is that it's Gerry who's been added. He is sitting more as if he is in a chair.

The other reason why this photo was suspect from the start, apart from the time gap in releasing it, is that a photo was published of Madeleine on her own, with Gerry's elbow removed and another background inserted. That can actually have an innocent explanation.

We have:
the delay in producing it
the flowers that aren't in bloom that time of year
Amelie and Maddie too young for 2007
Amelie's upper right arm almost deleted (in magnification that empty sleeve looks really weird)
The time of day - the sun is right overhead so can't be mid afternoon
The composition itself is strange and the attention of each person is on something else, only Gerry looks at the camera.
'Look at Mummy' would be the standard thing to say, surely?

Maddie's hair bead didn't figure in the ever evolving story until this photograph surfaced.

by Guest 23.09.11 8:06

Anyone able to axcess this pictures? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 23.09.11 8:14

jd wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]....Last Photo allegedly taken May 3rd 2007
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]...Allegedly taken between May 4th - May 12th 2007
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]....Taken 5th May 2007 - McCanns 2nd media statement

A few things to observe baring in mind there are only a few days between all 3 pictures. The obvious that Amelie and Kate are wearing the same tops. However, Amelie looks different to me in the face ie younger or older in one of these pics. Then look at Kates face, in the 2nd picture she looks so much younger. Gerry looks a lot younger in the poolside pic compared to the 2nd media statement pic. To my eye, there is no continuity in their ages/faces that all 3 pics were taken with a few days of each other

The top 2 pics look to have been taken within a year previously and adds further weight to this scam being pre planned ie they planned what pics to release and to keep continuity wore the same clothes. Only Gerry forgot to bring the poolside pic and had to go back to the UK and get it, then it was released....thoughts?

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

Picture number two is taken May 10...

by **PeterMac** 23.09.11 8:37

Moa wrote:Anyone able to axcess this pictures? [url=http://www.rexfeatures.com/search/?kw=amelie+mccann&search_newest.x=12&search_newest.y=12&search_newest=search_newest&iso=GBR&viah=Y&lkw=amelie+mccann&stk=N&sft=&search_oldest.x=-1]

Yes, just copy and paste into the bar. Worked perfectly for me.

by Guest 23.09.11 8:46

PeterMac wrote:
Moa wrote:Anyone able to axcess this pictures? [url=http://www.rexfeatures.com/search/?kw=amelie+mccann&search_newest.x=12&search_newest.y=12&search_newest=search_newest&iso=GBR&viah=Y&lkw=amelie+mccann&stk=N&sft=&search_oldest.x=-1]
Yes, just copy and paste into the bar. Worked perfectly for me.

lol, I think I didn't ask correctly .. laughat

I ment axcess them in big format, I also see them on the link, but to download or blow them up you need to register. And I cant get it to work :)

by russiandoll 23.09.11 10:20

Kate Mc states in her book she and Madeleine went swimming after arrival apr 28 and before welcome meeting.
Weather pleasant , cool breeze.

weather May 3 cool to extent she wondered if she should have brought a cardie for Madeleine, bare arms as wearing clothes in poolside photo, supposedly taken May 3. Maddie " oblivious of the temperature, happy and cafrefree".
weather on this photo seems v sunny and warm, given the clothes all 3 were wearing, not as described above
Gerry wears same t shirt as on airport bus in poolside photo
same shorts as playground photo.
maddie wears same outfit playground photo as airport bus.
seems as if Gerry was at the pool with Kate and Maddie on occasion she describes above for apr 28 , for a cooling dip of toes in water after arriving.... although I see no mention of him being with them at the pool apr 28 in her book....comes across as a special time between her and her daughter.
so bus photo, playground and poolside photos all taken 28 april it appears.
but they had only just arrived............so why the obvious effects of sun on all 3 skins?

by Tinkerbell81 02.10.11 17:05

I might be seeing things but this pic

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

compared to the last pic, Maddie has a gap between her front teeth, in this one she doesnt or its less noticeable. the gap between her other teeth matches however so I might just be seeing ghosts. also the hair length and fringe matches but the face doesnt match

by **tigger** 02.10.11 17:22

Tinkerbell81 wrote:I might be seeing things but this pic

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

compared to the last pic, Maddie has a gap between her front teeth, in this one she doesnt or its less noticeable. the gap between her other teeth matches however so I might just be seeing ghosts. also the hair length and fringe matches but the face doesnt match

Quite a few of the little girls have spaced out teeth. I agree with you, I have never thought this was Maddie, for the simple reason that the girl looks relaxed and confident. Compare to the scrunched face of the tennis ball girl. The pool side was about a year earlier, so doesn't count. Maddie was not a happy bunny, to me it's clear in many photographs. The Everton shirt, she looks insecure etc.
The photo of her with her hair permed I'm sure isn't her but is probably the same girl as the one with sunglasses on the top of her head. Might even be Kate at that age. Again, both those show a confident, happy 4 year old.
Forget it, poor little Maddie, sleepwalking, crying a lot and passed like a parcel to different people, was not a confident, happy girl.

by joyce1938 03.10.11 11:42

I still wonder how many eggs were taken fro said mother,and how many got to be fertilzedand did anyone elseuse them and do we have kids that look like sisters,2 of tapas girls i believe were born 1 month apart? i wonder if its all a bit more simple than we are making it? one day maybe we will get to know.joyce1938

by Guest 03.10.11 12:07

joyce1938 wrote:I still wonder how many eggs were taken fro said mother,and how many got to be fertilzedand did anyone elseuse them and do we have kids that look like sisters,2 of tapas girls i believe were born 1 month apart? i wonder if its all a bit more simple than we are making it? one day maybe we will get to know.joyce1938

In her book I think it was 9 or 12 eggs, then they inserted 3 of them that failed, the second time they inserted 2 or 3 and thats when Madeleine was made. So there was egg left, cant remember in the moment the exact number. It is posted earlier under some topic at this site, dont remember where at the moment :)

EDIT Found it :)

In her book it says: On the FIRST attempt on IVF (who failed according the book) " We had thirteen fertilized eggs. We decided to have some of them frozen and to have two blastocysts implanted." Then she writes a few sentence later " Two months later we were ready for a second shot, using two of the embryos we'd had frozen." ( and that second attempt produced Madeleine)

by 1soapy 09.05.14 19:49

I notice a lot of quite technical discussion about the last (poolside) pic spanning numerous threads.

Sorry if this has been raised and missed by me. Has anyone been there since 2007 and attempted to duplicate the pool edge seating and the sunglasses reflection at varying times/conditions or has something become an obstacle to this?

I mention this because there seems to be a way of establishing the legitimacy of this, whilst there are a lot of strange pictures of MBM/KM, and I agree that there are some very odd ones which seem photo-shopped for whatever reason (not to mention other oddities like some pics not being made available to police at the start and going to other people's/police houses in the UK), though looking through a family album recently, I found that if I went looking for strange phenomenon, I could find it quite often (like seeing shadows turn more into shapes at night in bed as you get more afraid or look into them). A foot seems to be backwards, where is her hand? He isn’t really that fat in real life. UFO/ghost/bigfoot pics are a similar example which, ‘often’ (I’m being generous here) turn out to have a very natural explanation.

If a case is brought to court against anyone, then as each and as many of the many threads of the case are brought together and solved or seen as implausible, the better it (the case) would present itself as a whole, especially if they are shown to be linked to a motive. I would imagine that cases have been presented and won, without crucial proof, where the multitude of inexplicable evidence/threads point, 'beyond reasonable doubt', to a verdict.

Adding any additional solutions to oddities (like photoshopping, wrong date of photo taken, lies etc.) to what the MET/PJ already have would add weight if the verdict is not a clear, 'guilty' in the eyes of the CPS/Portuguese equivalent.

by 1soapy 09.05.14 19:54

Just to add that I am aware of lots of stuff having been sent to the MET already. I'm referring to sending additional, less significant, solved or highly odd anomalies (ones often discussed on their threads here) that link to the motive/case which, in the light of a charge, would be useful now. It wouldn't hurt to send stuff again (or in the light of a specific charge) which they might have more time to look at. I'm sure they haven't followed every thread and thought here.

by worriedmum 09.05.14 22:19

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] This is reported as being taken before the pool photo. You can probably see the 'sunburn' on Madeleine's arm. Compare this arm with the one nearest the camera on the Last Photo. Aaah, you may say, but that is her left arm, and this picture shows her right arm. But does it? I have seen this image facing the other way. Could this be a flipped image? The thing that made me wonder is that there is a small brown mark on the calf nearest the camera.
DISTINGUISHING MARKS AND CHARACTERISTICS:
LEFT EYE: Blue and Green colour
RIGHT EYE: Green colour with a Brown spot in Retina,
LEFT LEG: Small brown mark on Left Leg Calf

Can anyone distinguish the type of tennis ball?The writing would confirm whether the image has been flipped.