UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Robittybob1 on December 01, 2016, 08:15:06 AM
-
Why did the McCanns choose a young looking Madeleine first poster?
Any ideas? There were plenty of more recent photos so why did the person chose a photo of Madeleine 1 year younger than she was when she went missing?
Who chose the image to publish on the 3rd?
(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSb1dy9ahNe2zm2m5hA15dVfA939qxLuBXH7ijdaYrUyCozd5c0kQ)
25
-
Why did the McCanns choose a young looking Madeleine first poster?
Any ideas? There were plenty of more recent photos so why did the person chose a photo of Madeleine 1 year younger than she was when she went missing?
Who chose the image to publish on the 3rd?
The eyes imo
-
As I understand it, it was Russell O'Brien (ROB) who chose the photo to use on the earliest poster for Madeleine.
Was it Russell who produced the poster?
if it was why was Russell chosen to do this task?
Well why did ROB chose this photo?
My chain of thought on this topic is quite revealing and I'm a bit unsure how to approach the matter but I do feel it is a breakthrough and I have explained my hypothesis to my friend and she thinks the same.
So everything I say must be truthful therefore it is not libelous, like I can assign functions to people provided it is true, i.e factual and therefore not libelous.
My work on developing the chain of evidence will commence in 8 hours for I'm off to bed now, but others are welcome to contribute what they know about the first poster and if anyone has a photo of it please upload it to the thread.
Thanks to the moderators for approving the topic.
-
Was this the one?
http://www.hoax-slayer.com/images/madeleine-1.jpg
(http://www.hoax-slayer.com/images/madeleine-1.jpg)
-
Unless you are into conspiracy, the first picture was chosen from what was available on camera cards at that time. Why that particular one, rather than the tennis ball one, or even the 'last' picture by the pool is anybody's guess. I imagine Gerry had input into the decision.
I think ROB because he understood the technology and wanted to do something positive.
-
Why did the McCanns choose a young looking Madeleine first poster?
Any ideas? There were plenty of more recent photos so why did the person chose a photo of Madeleine 1 year younger than she was when she went missing?
Who chose the image to publish on the 3rd?
IIRC the photo was around 3 months old. (from memory)
IMO the photo was chosen with 'ease of identification' uppermost in mind. It clearly shows every detail of Madeleine's features - it is full face with no shadows, or a hat or anything else to distract. It could not be more detailed.
In the circumstances it seems a perfect choice to me.
IMO
-
Was this the one?
http://www.hoax-slayer.com/images/madeleine-1.jpg
(http://www.hoax-slayer.com/images/madeleine-1.jpg)
That was a later poster produced by Gerry I'd imagine. I know what the first one looked like but I don't have the technique to put a full sized image up on the forum
-
The first picture - one of her in a pink spotty top is not showing a particularly young Madeleine - those came later.
Copies were produced on a colour photocopier and I think were A4 size.
-
IIRC the photo was around 3 months old. (from memory)
IMO the photo was chosen with 'ease of identification' uppermost in mind. It clearly shows every detail of Madeleine's features - it is full face with no shadows, or a hat or anything else to distract. It could not be more detailed.
In the circumstances it seems a perfect choice to me.
IMO
Was this the photo you were thinking of, for some people have claimed that it was about 1 year younger than Madeleine actually was?
-
The first picture - one of her in a pink spotty top is not showing a particularly young Madeleine - those came later.
Copies were produced on a colour photocopier and I think were A4 size.
The image of Madeleine in the photo looks like it was produced on the night as it has a hand written message on the side.
-
Here is another poster produced later that has a photo of Madeleine at PDL side by side with a younger image taken in England.
I'd have to agree there are quite a few months (age) between the two photos.
-
The image of Madeleine in the photo looks like it was produced on the night as it has a hand written message on the side.
That's the one.
-
That's the one.
How can we work out the age of Madeleine when that one was taken?
-
Was this the photo you were thinking of, for some people have claimed that it was about 1 year younger than Madeleine actually was?
No it was the 'iconic' photo - the one Sadie posted that I was thinking of.
However the other photo is also full faced with her looking directly at the camera - with no hat and no shadows. IMO that angle is preferable to a side-faced angle, with shadows, or one where a hat is being worn - when it comes to identification purposes.
IMO clarity of facial features was the thinking behind the choice of piccies at that time.
-
the picture was well over a year old ....also resembled one of the other tapas children ....
that could have caused ....a lot of confusion ...to the last sighting of maddie....
-
The image of Madeleine in the photo looks like it was produced on the night as it has a hand written message on the side.
So it has. Well spotted Rob.
From what is written, that image must have been one of the very first, if not the actual first
-
Why did the McCanns choose a young looking Madeleine first poster?
Any ideas? There were plenty of more recent photos so why did the person chose a photo of Madeleine 1 year younger than she was when she went missing?
Who chose the image to publish on the 3rd?
(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSb1dy9ahNe2zm2m5hA15dVfA939qxLuBXH7ijdaYrUyCozd5c0kQ)
No doubt in the panic to get something out there wouldn't have been much thought given to how old a particular photo was. Just a thought but this particular first photo showing her in pink clothing might have had more to do with the pink PJ's she was wearing the night she disappeared. I believe it was a short time later that her eye defect became a prominent feature in photos.
-
Is it too much to assume it was the first readily available photo to give a "reasonable facsimile" of Madeleine's appearance ?
Or are we having a contest to see how many potential conspiracy theories we can identify ?
It should be fun plaiting them [the conspiracy theories] all togther into a coherent master plan.
-
What medical evidence would there be for a coloboma defect to come and go? It is possible to Photoshop in and photoshop out. Apparently photoshop can not be applied to video images so a video clip image (stopped on the right frame and screen dumped) will have the correct size and location of the defect.
-
It seems anything can be photoshopped, but unless there is a high resolution version of the picture available, we will never know.
What seems to be available is a photo of the poster - not good material to work with.
-
Two different poster wording and design? The hand writing has been added on by different people as well. One in English one in Portuguese. Neither have a name on them.
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7811.0;attach=7462;image)
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7811.0;attach=7460;image)
-
I don't know why the heading is saying 'a young looking Madeleine' if you look at the well known photo of Madeleine in the red dress, that was taken the Christmas before, and looks identical to photo of Madeleine in pink which was the first photo given out, so four and a half months before Madeleine disappeared.
They couldn't use any of the other photo's taken on the holiday in Portugal as none of them showed a full facial photo of Madeleine and her eye. The Police always ask for a clear full facial view of a missing child.
-
I don't know why the heading is saying 'a young looking Madeleine' if you look at the well known photo of Madeleine in the red dress, that was taken the Christmas before, and looks identical to photo of Madeleine in pink which was the first photo given out, so four and a half months before Madeleine disappeared.
They couldn't use any of the other photo's taken on the holiday in Portugal as none of them showed a full facial photo of Madeleine and her eye. The Police always ask for a clear full facial view of a missing child.
You have a strange concept of 'identical'
-
You have a strange concept of 'identical'
Ok not identical, but her hair is short in it and if she wasn't pulling a face she would look like the photo of her in the red dress.
It's amazing how the length of hair makes a difference to the face, short hair I think makes the face look chubbier long hair slims the face out. IMO
-
To find a person you use a recent photo because the aim is to find her.
-
Two different poster wording and design? The hand writing has been added on by different people as well. One in English one in Portuguese. Neither have a name on them.
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7811.0;attach=7462;image)
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7811.0;attach=7487;image)
These must have been the very first versions.
-
To find a person you use a recent photo because the aim is to find her.
It was a recent photo.
What is the point of having a recent photo that doesn't show her whole face or doesn't show the fleck in her eye?
-
It was a recent photo.
What is the point of having a recent photo that doesn't show her whole face or doesn't show the fleck in her eye?
How recent? There are estimates that MM is under 3 in this photo.
The fleck in the eye is not particularly noticeable in the first poster photo.
-
These must have been the very first versions.
They are not displaying anymore. Two types one with English wording and the other in Portuguese.
-
To find a person you use a recent photo because the aim is to find her.
Seems logical.
-
I don't know why the heading is saying 'a young looking Madeleine' if you look at the well known photo of Madeleine in the red dress, that was taken the Christmas before, and looks identical to photo of Madeleine in pink which was the first photo given out, so four and a half months before Madeleine disappeared.
They couldn't use any of the other photo's taken on the holiday in Portugal as none of them showed a full facial photo of Madeleine and her eye. The Police always ask for a clear full facial view of a missing child.
Can you put the photo and its providence up on the forum please?
-
No doubt in the panic to get something out there wouldn't have been much thought given to how old a particular photo was. Just a thought but this particular first photo showing her in pink clothing might have had more to do with the pink PJ's she was wearing the night she disappeared. I believe it was a short time later that her eye defect became a prominent feature in photos.
Her pyjamas were more white than pink.
-
Can you put the photo and its providence up on the forum please?
Just look at the holiday photo's, the ones in the play area, collecting the tennis balls and the one by the pool, none of them show a full face of Madeleine with the fleck in her eye.
-
Just look at the holiday photo's, the ones in the play area, collecting the tennis balls and the one by the pool, none of them show a full face of Madeleine with the fleck in her eye.
There were 20 -30 photos on the memory card. We have not seen the full range of photos available so I'd say we can't be sure. The tennis ball photo and the pool photo were they on Kate's memory card? On that particular memory card?
-
I don't know why the heading is saying 'a young looking Madeleine' if you look at the well known photo of Madeleine in the red dress, that was taken the Christmas before, and looks identical to photo of Madeleine in pink which was the first photo given out, so four and a half months before Madeleine disappeared.
.....snip
Can you put the Christmas photo and its providence up on the forum please?
-
There were 20 -30 photos on the memory card. We have not seen the full range of photos available so I'd say we can't be sure. The tennis ball photo and the pool photo were they on Kate's memory card? On that particular memory card?
Allegedly
-
Can you put the Christmas photo and its providence up on the forum please?
I thought it was Christmas 2005, though I may be mistaken. ?{)(**
-
Allegedly
Are you thinking of Gerry's quote regarding the pool photo, about "having it on the digital camera 2:29 PM." Who's camera? Which card? We don't know.
-
I thought it was Christmas 2005, though I may be mistaken. ?{)(**
Christmas 2005?, then a year passes till Christmas 2006, then 4 months to May 2007. Are you suggesting that the poster photo of Madeleine is taken 16 months before she went missing?
-
I thought it was Christmas 2005, though I may be mistaken. ?{)(**
I think you might be right as the baby in the background is not yet walking i.e under 1 year old so it must be in 2005.
-
It was a recent photo.
What is the point of having a recent photo that doesn't show her whole face or doesn't show the fleck in her eye?
This is a recent photo - on the holiday.
(http://i4.loughboroughecho.net/news/article6183284.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/Madeleine-McCann.jpg)
Compared to this
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7811.0;attach=7501;image)
-
Hair length is definitely different. They look completely different agewise.
-
Hair length is definitely different. They look completely different agewise.
How can that be ? - Lace thinks they are identical @)(++(*
-
The first picture - one of her in a pink spotty top is not showing a particularly young Madeleine - those came later.
Copies were produced on a colour photocopier and I think were A4 size.
They were printed from the memory card by Amy T on her boyfriends printer. ROB selected one particular photo from the choice of 20 -30 photos. This photo was then placed on a sheet of A4 paper and the message was added, then placed on the photocopier and up to 200 posters were produced by John Hill and his wife.
-
No it was the 'iconic' photo - the one Sadie posted that I was thinking of.
However the other photo is also full faced with her looking directly at the camera - with no hat and no shadows. IMO that angle is preferable to a side-faced angle, with shadows, or one where a hat is being worn - when it comes to identification purposes.
IMO clarity of facial features was the thinking behind the choice of piccies at that time.
Speculation but OK.
-
I don't know why the heading is saying 'a young looking Madeleine' if you look at the well known photo of Madeleine in the red dress, that was taken the Christmas before, and looks identical to photo of Madeleine in pink which was the first photo given out, so four and a half months before Madeleine disappeared.
They couldn't use any of the other photo's taken on the holiday in Portugal as none of them showed a full facial photo of Madeleine and her eye. The Police always ask for a clear full facial view of a missing child.
It seems to be taken at Christmas 2005, a full year before the last Christmas.
-
It seems to be taken at Christmas 2005, a full year before the last Christmas.
So I propose that the following is a fact:
The contents of the memory card was printed off by Amy T on her boyfriend's printer on 10X15 format. ROB selected one particular photo, taken at Christmas 2005, from the choice of 20-30 photos. This photo was then stuck on a sheet of A4 paper and the handwritten message was added One in Portuguese the other in English using the same photo*, then placed on the top plate of a photocopier in the main reception and up to 200 posters were produced by John Hill and his wife.
* Whether he used the same photo will be checked. Question: is it the same photo used in both the English and Portuguese versions of the poster?
-
Looking at the two posters produced one photo has been cut shorter (and narrower as the right shoulder is closer to the edge of the photo) to be placed more central to the page and the sellotape (used to hold the photo in place) is visible in the image but not in the English version. So if the same photo is used twice the English version must have been printed off first.
-
Because the image of the poster has been cropped we can't tell if the photo was cut down to fit the poster in both cases, but the Portuguese version has definitely had part of the photo (above Madeleine's head) removed before the photocopying was done.
But there is no way anyone would start their handwriting so close to the edge of the page, all I can say part of the image has been cropped before it was published.
Very distinctive handwriting is displayed with the "i" dotted with a circle. IMO It would probably be a woman and not Russell who wrote the message.
This becomes more obvious when you look at the source article http://www.anorak.co.uk/173454/tabloids/madeleine-mccann-introducing-amelie-and-the-maddie-catty.html/
(http://www.anorak.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/missing-madeleine-mccann-poster.gif)
-
Here is a summary of events associated with the photos:http://fytton.blogspot.co.nz/2015_04_01_archive.html
I wonder how many of these are still available.?
Timeline PJ enquiry into printing of photographs:
25th June 2007 GNR hand over four photographs to GA, two of each pose.
26th July 2007 Silvia Batista gives a statement concerning photographs
27th July Photos are sent for scientific analyses
16th August 2007 - external diligence -the photo paper in question found to be unavailable in four local establishments.
2nd October 2007 external inquiry report, John Hill interviewed.
10th April 2008 Russell O’Brien rogatory
17th April 2008 Amy Tierney rogatory (in PdL)
I think we have looked at all these sources but I'll check out "2nd October 2007 external inquiry report, John Hill interviewed." Was John Hill's statement delayed till then?
No his statement was in June "1838 to 1840 Witness statement of John Eliot Hill 2007.06.20" Does anyone know about the re-interview of John Hill?
-
Goncalo seems to be accusing some of the T7 to be lying.... have I read that right? https://theukdatabase.com/uk-child-abusers-named-and-shamed/calls-for-change-in-law/corruption/48-questions-kate-mccann-wouldnt-answer/maddie-the-truth-of-the-lie-the-book-banned-in-the-uk/maddie-the-truth-of-the-lie-chapter-7/
As if the memory of the McCann family’s friends suddenly came back to them, all – Rachael Mampilly, wife of Matthew Oldfield, Fiona Payne, wife of David Payne, and Russell O’Brien Jane Tanner’s partner – recall having seen Murat on the night of May 3rd, shortly after the announcement of the disappearance, in the immediate vicinity of apartment 5A. Meanwhile, of course, Murat’s picture has been shown on television and in certain newspapers. They themselves were in direct contact with him during the previous days. However, it is only on May 16th that they deliver this information to us. As for the officers of the National Guard who were on the spot, they didn’t see him that night, only the next morning, when he came to offer his services as interpreter.
On July 11th at 10am, a confrontation is organised between the witnesses – Rachael Mampilly, Fiona Payne and Russell O’Brien – and Robert Murat. Nothing new comes out of it. The former persist in stating that the suspect was definitely in the area on the night of the disappearance. Murat denies the whole thing and even accuses them of lying. Each side stands its ground. The only positive aspect of this meeting: the McCanns’ friends undertake to return to Portugal for the purpose of the investigation. That will not happen.
An interesting view on the affair:
http://thepottingshedder.blogspot.co.nz/2012/04/dr-obrien-conspicuous-by-his-absence.html
-
I thought it was Christmas 2005, though I may be mistaken. ?{)(**
http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/20-dec8/N-O-T-W-21-12-08.htm
http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/20-dec8/N-O-T-W-21-12-08.htm
-
http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/20-dec8/N-O-T-W-21-12-08.htm
http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/20-dec8/N-O-T-W-21-12-08.htm
"Moving pictures of Maddie's last Christmas at home"
If we can see the video we will be able to see the twins whether they were walking or not.
It was mostly filmed at Christmas 2006'the last time the McCanns were all together as a family over the festive period. The video shows Maddie sitting on the stairs of their home in Rothley, Leics, flanked by younger twins Sean and Amelie.
Is there a YouTube video of this?
-
http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/20-dec8/N-O-T-W-21-12-08.htm
http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/20-dec8/N-O-T-W-21-12-08.htm
I don't see the red dress among those pictures.
-
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_KhZ4nHMJkUA/S2a-7u4l8AI/AAAAAAAABLs/LA2IxHTSE14/s320/Kate+and+Gerry+at+the+zoo.jpg)here is a picture of Sean and Amelie in PDL There seems to be a lot more than 4 months between these kids and the babies in the video of Christmas.
Maybe the host site has it wrong http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_KhZ4nHMJkUA/S2a-7u4l8AI/AAAAAAAABLs/LA2IxHTSE14/s1600-h/Kate+and+Gerry+at+the+zoo.jpg
-
Goncalo seems to be accusing some of the T7 to be lying.... have I read that right? https://theukdatabase.com/uk-child-abusers-named-and-shamed/calls-for-change-in-law/corruption/48-questions-kate-mccann-wouldnt-answer/maddie-the-truth-of-the-lie-the-book-banned-in-the-uk/maddie-the-truth-of-the-lie-chapter-7/An interesting view on the affair:
http://thepottingshedder.blogspot.co.nz/2012/04/dr-obrien-conspicuous-by-his-absence.html
No-one had forgotten seeing Murat on the 3rd, but until his face was shown on TV after he had been made an arguido - they had no idea that he was connected in any way to the case or that the police were investigating him. Once they did know that - they contacted the police to let them know they had seen him on the night of the 3rd.
All perfectly normal behaviour and nothing sinister whatsoever in that - but with sarcastic innuendo Amaral conveyed a completely different message to his readers.
AIMHO
-
this one is definitely PDL. Is it just 4 months since sean was wearing nappies?
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
No-one had forgotten seeing Murat on the 3rd, but until his face was shown on TV after he had been made an arguido - they had no idea that he was connected in any way to the case or that the police were investigating him. Once they did know that - they contacted the police to let them know they had seen him on the night of the 3rd.
All perfectly normal behaviour and nothing sinister whatsoever in that - but with sarcastic innuendo Amaral conveyed a completely different message to his readers.
AIMHO
When does the night of the 3rd finish? The PJ who arrive at OC after midnight say they arrive on the 4th, so if Murat went to Ocean Club at say 1:00 AM and says he wasn't there on the night of the 3rd is he right or wrong?
-
"Moving pictures of Maddie's last Christmas at home"
If we can see the video we will be able to see the twins whether they were walking or not.Is there a YouTube video of this?
Yes the twins were walking, and Madeleine is in the red dress.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube+madeleine+mccann+opening+christmas+present&view=detail&mid=2CD66763C43252FB30362CD66763C43252FB3036&FORM=VIRE
-
I'm not going to argue the toss on this, but that video is just a montage of all sorts, so the presence of the red dress could just be down to careful editing.
-
I'm not going to argue the toss on this, but that video is just a montage of all sorts, so the presence of the red dress could just be down to careful editing.
You can see the twins walking when Madeleine is opening her presents. Madeleine in the red dress is from the same Christmas.
Read this it talks about Madeleine in the red dress Christmas 2006 - http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/new-heart-rending-appeal-for-madeleine-mccann-437534
-
this one is definitely PDL. Is it just 4 months since sean was wearing nappies?
the picture they gave .was very much like one of the tapas children lilli or elle
this is what could have caused confusion.....when people think it was maddie that they saw...
like in the playground picture ....that is not amelia with sean maddie and g mcc.its one of the tapas children
-
Yes the twins were walking, and Madeleine is in the red dress.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube+madeleine+mccann+opening+christmas+present&view=detail&mid=2CD66763C43252FB30362CD66763C43252FB3036&FORM=VIRE
I agree after watching this PDL video the twins look 4-5 months older here: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7da_1189730094 than at the Christmas video, so that must be taken Christmas 2006 not 2005. If I was able to get the birthdate of the twins I could be a bit more certain.
Do you see this "and Madeleine is in the red dress"? The same dress as in her missing poster? How many seconds into the video is the best view?
-
Sorry, but you will have to sit through the whole thing. 8(8-))
-
I agree after watching this PDL video the twins look 4-5 months older here: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7da_1189730094 than at the Christmas video, so that must be taken Christmas 2006 not 2005. If I was able to get the birthdate of the twins I could be a bit more certain.
Do you see this "and Madeleine is in the red dress"? The same dress as in her missing poster? How many seconds into the video is the best view?
this is the video on link you gave
Madeleine McCann 'died of sleeping pill overdose'
FORENSIC tests show Madeleine McCann died of an overdose of sleeping pills, media reports said today.
Body fluids found in the boot of a car hired by the parents of the missing four-year-old British girl 25 days after she went missing in Portugal showed she had been sedated, according to a French newspaper which said it had seen the evidence.
France Soir said DNA results of the fluids showed Maddie had swallowed enough sleeping pills to cause an overdose.
Guilhem Buttut, an investigative reporter for the newspaper, said he had seen "hard evidence" about Madeleine's death in a report now in the hands of Portuguese prosecutors, the metro.co.uk news website reported.
Buttut said toxicological tests on the liquids "proved the little girl had ingested medicines, without doubt sleeping pills, in quantities large enough to cause an overdose".
Sources close to the investigation sa
Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7da_1189730094#3gPIbfZbaJ203XHm.99
-
this is the video on link you gave
Madeleine McCann 'died of sleeping pill overdose'
FORENSIC tests show Madeleine McCann died of an overdose of sleeping pills, media reports said today.
Body fluids found in the boot of a car hired by the parents of the missing four-year-old British girl 25 days after she went missing in Portugal showed she had been sedated, according to a French newspaper which said it had seen the evidence.
This sentence surprises me on reflection "France Soir said DNA results of the fluids showed Maddie had swallowed enough sleeping pills to cause an overdose." I don't DNA results show up toxicological results. Something wrong in the translation there.
"France Soir said DNA results of the fluids showed Maddie had swallowed enough sleeping pills to cause an overdose." Error bigtime!
Guilhem Buttut, an investigative reporter for the newspaper, said he had seen "hard evidence" about Madeleine's death in a report now in the hands of Portuguese prosecutors, the metro.co.uk news website reported.
Buttut said toxicological tests on the liquids "proved the little girl had ingested medicines, without doubt sleeping pills, in quantities large enough to cause an overdose".
Sources close to the investigation sa
Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7da_1189730094#3gPIbfZbaJ203XHm.99
The trouble with that report was that the body fluids were not confirmed to come from Madeleine. So if there really have been tests done on these fluids we might have a possible cause of death of someone but we don't know who. A lot of if and buts still to work through.
-
The trouble with that report was that the body fluids were not confirmed to come from Madeleine. So if there really have been tests done on these fluids we might have a possible cause of death of someone but we don't know who. A lot of if and buts still to work through.
Oh right..............were was maddie in her red dress then
-
this is the video on link you gave
Madeleine McCann 'died of sleeping pill overdose'
FORENSIC tests show Madeleine McCann died of an overdose of sleeping pills, media reports said today.
Body fluids found in the boot of a car hired by the parents of the missing four-year-old British girl 25 days after she went missing in Portugal showed she had been sedated, according to a French newspaper which said it had seen the evidence.
France Soir said DNA results of the fluids showed Maddie had swallowed enough sleeping pills to cause an overdose.
Guilhem Buttut, an investigative reporter for the newspaper, said he had seen "hard evidence" about Madeleine's death in a report now in the hands of Portuguese prosecutors, the metro.co.uk news website reported.
Buttut said toxicological tests on the liquids "proved the little girl had ingested medicines, without doubt sleeping pills, in quantities large enough to cause an overdose".
Sources close to the investigation sa
Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7da_1189730094#3gPIbfZbaJ203XHm.99
A complex LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the luggage compartment section 286C 2007 CRL10 (2) area 2. Within the DNA profile of Madeline McCann there are 20 DNA components represented by 19 peaks on a chart. At one of the areas of DNA we routinely examine Madeleine has inherited the same DNA component from both parents; this appears therefore as 1 peak rather than 2, hence 19 rather than 20. Of these 19 components 15 are present within the result from this item; there are 37 components in total. There are 37 components because there are at least 3 contributors; but there could be up to five contributors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex for meaningful interpretation/inclusion.
-
Sorry, but you will have to sit through the whole thing. 8(8-))
What thing? Which video shows it the best?
-
The video that Lace posted about Christmas 2006
-
You can see the twins walking when Madeleine is opening her presents. Madeleine in the red dress is from the same Christmas.
Read this it talks about Madeleine in the red dress Christmas 2006 - http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/new-heart-rending-appeal-for-madeleine-mccann-437534
OK A newly released festive photo shows Madeleine dressed in red, sitting on the floor by the fireplace feeding a chocolate lolly to her baby sister, Amelie.
It was taken at the family home in Rothley, Leics, at Christmas 2006 - five months before she was snatched from a resort in Praia da Luz, Portugal, when she was three.
In the missing photo is that a red dress? All I see is the top bit. It could be a nightie.
It has to be the red/pink top with white circles.
-
The video that Lace posted about Christmas 2006
This is the video Lace posted and there is a girl with pale pyjamas on, no red dress. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32POkpBO7sU
-
A complex LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the luggage compartment section 286C 2007 CRL10 (2) area 2. Within the DNA profile of Madeline McCann there are 20 DNA components represented by 19 peaks on a chart. At one of the areas of DNA we routinely examine Madeleine has inherited the same DNA component from both parents; this appears therefore as 1 peak rather than 2, hence 19 rather than 20. Of these 19 components 15 are present within the result from this item; there are 37 components in total. There are 37 components because there are at least 3 contributors; but there could be up to five contributors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex for meaningful interpretation/inclusion.
well so sorry to have wasted your time lace
i was only looking for maddie in a red dress on that link ...
just pointing out to R B what the link was he put up .had nothing to do with red dress
-
Yes the twins were walking, and Madeleine is in the red dress.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube+madeleine+mccann+opening+christmas+present&view=detail&mid=2CD66763C43252FB30362CD66763C43252FB3036&FORM=VIRE
The twins are walking they look about 10 -12 months of age so what is their birthday? When were the twins born? And I don't see any sign of a red dress in that video.
-
Finally got a lead on it. At 2:04 into the video is Madeleine blowing out her birthday cake and it has just two candles on it, so I'd say that is her at two years of age, so now we can compare the first poster photo to her image at two.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRc8PjpYZw4
(https://youtu.be/gRc8PjpYZw4?t=126) https://youtu.be/gRc8PjpYZw4?t=126 (https://youtu.be/gRc8PjpYZw4?t=126)
OK that is a confirmed 2 year old image and she has longish hair so the short haired first poster photo has to have been taken after that.
this video must have been taken on May 12th 2005.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
This is the video Lace posted and there is a girl with pale pyjamas on, no red dress. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32POkpBO7sU
how come on that video maddies hair is dark brown .....in fact it practically looks like a wig............
-
OK on page 53 of Madeleine Kate tells us her twins were born. 1st of February 2005, so those Christmas videos with the twins just walking and in nappies would more than likely be Christmas 2005 rather than Christmas 2006 when they would have been nearly two.
how come on that video maddies hair is dark brown .....in fact it practically looks like a wig............
It will depend on the amount of reflection of light. Low light situations her hair would look dark.
-
OK on page 53 of Madeleine Kate tells us her twins were born. 1st of February 2005, so those Christmas videos with the twins just walking and in nappies would more than likely be Christmas 2005 rather than Christmas 2006 when they would have been nearly two.
It will depend on the amount of reflection of light. Low light situations her hair would look dark.
thats what i thought but the twins doesn't
-
This is the comment I have put on the YT "The title of this video is wrong. The twins look just on a year old and not nearly 2 years old if it really was Christmas 2006. They were born 1 feb 2005. They must have been early walking children."
Reply
-
thats what i thought but the twins doesn't
Amelie looks blonder than Madeleine. OK.
But do you all agree it was Christmas 2005 rather than Christmas 2006?
-
Yes, I don't think Madeleine has ever been truly blonde, certainly not in the ways the twins were.
-
Yes, I don't think Madeleine has ever been truly blonde, certainly not in the ways the twins were.
I agree, But do you all agree it was Christmas 2005 rather than Christmas 2006?
-
I agree, But do you all agree it was Christmas 2005 rather than Christmas 2006?
That has always been my opinion.
-
Amelie looks blonder than Madeleine. OK.
But do you all agree it was Christmas 2005 rather than Christmas 2006?
yes you certainly have a point ......both.......... walking then at ten months &%+((£
-
yes you certainly have a point ......both.......... walking then at ten months &%+((£
It is really more like 11 months 1 feb till 25th Dec 2005. Either that or you have to think of those toddlers as being 23 month olds and they definitely don't look like that. You can see by the way they place their feet they have just learnt to balance themselves.
www.safeguardingchildren.org.nz/
Most babies take their first steps sometime between 9 and 12 months and are walking well by the time they're 14 or 15 months old
http://www.circleofmoms.com/january-2009-babies/is-any-one-elses-11-month-old-walking-438923
is any one elses 11 month old walking?????
Crystal - posted on 12/19/2009 ( 51 moms have responded )
200
i have an 11 month old named hailey and she has been walking for about 1 month now. when she walks around the grocery store everyone says she is too young to be walking. i thought 10 months was a good time to be walking. and its not just step step fall she will walk around the entire grocery store and maybe fall 2 10 times. lol its really cute though. ya so is she really early or are people just forgetting how small they are when they start to walk??????????
-
So the twins are 3 1/2 months old when Madeleine had her second birthday, that would explain why they are not in that photo.
Madeleine would be 2 years 7 months at the time of the Christmas photo. In the first poster photo she has shorter hair so it could be her 3rd birthday when the photo was taken. So it is a three year old being photographed in other words I estimate the photo showing her 1 year younger than she was when she went missing.
-
It has been pointed out that Richard D Hall covers the first poster photo in some detail but he has offered no explanation for it use.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFk1l_8lxq4 starting at about 6:00 minutes into the video.
He has some good points and I think our study has confirmed some of it.
1. The "first" photo RDH states is more than a year out of date (confirmed).
2. The second photo is taken at 2:29 PM on thursday. He does not accept this and neither do I. He reckons it was earlier in the week yet I tend to think it was just earlier in the day 12:29 PM rather than later as Madeleine is booked in at the creche at 2:30 PM so she can't be in two places at once.
3. Richard feels there is a reason they don't provide a more recent photo but never comes up with a proper answer other than there were no others (I think that is what it was).
I have provided an explanation but it has been rejected but I have searched the internet and the question keeps getting asked but never explained.
4. RDH does not explain why Amy T arrives at the McCanns apartment early enough to see that the window was open and the shutters up.
What I am thinking is if we go and look who the interpreter for AmyT was we will be given a vital clue.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/AMY-ELLEN-TIERNEY.htm
"Amy Tierney
Date: 2007-05-06
Place: P da L
Occupation: Head of the Baby Club and Mini Club
Place of Work: Ocean Club
She comes to the process as a witness.
As she does not understand Portuguese and is of English nationality she is assisted by the interpreter Robert Murat who accompanies her during the questioning."
Note Amy T interpreter this time was Robert Murat. Had he been allowed to continue as being the main interpreter he would have steered the investigation into finding out the truth, as was said in his conversation with Russell O'Brien. Why does RM become an arguido? Who reports him at a late stage? And haven't I pointed out this fact makes Goncalo doubt that the T9 are telling the truth at all?
-
OK on page 53 of Madeleine Kate tells us her twins were born. 1st of February 2005, so those Christmas videos with the twins just walking and in nappies would more than likely be Christmas 2005 rather than Christmas 2006 when they would have been nearly two.
It will depend on the amount of reflection of light. Low light situations her hair would look dark.
Can I ask you something? Do you have children?
They wouldn't have been one in December 2005, so I doubt they would have been walking. Plus, children don't usually come out of nappies until they are over two.
You and Jassi disputed what I said about the first photo that the Police were given. I said if she wasn't pulling a face the photo would look almost identical to the one of Madeleine in the red dress which was taken Christmas 2006.
You then asked if the twins were walking in the video Christmas 2006, I sent you a video of Madeleine opening her presents on her last Chrsitmas 2006, you can clearly see the twins walking.
Then you said the video didn't show Madeleine in the red dress. Well there is no video showing Madeleine feeding a chocolate lollipop to Amelie, the McCann's didn't release it. I sent you a newspaper story about Madeleine's last Christmas where it clearly says, Madeleine feeding Amelie a chocolate lollipop wearing a red dress, it shows a photo of her.
Now if that doesn't clear everything up for you, then sorry I can't help.
Madeleine was wearing the red dress Christmas 2006, the twins were walking, and if you compare the photo of Madeleine in the red dress to the first photo given to the police you will see it was taken around about the same time.
-
Can I ask you something? Do you have children?
They wouldn't have been one in December 2005, so I doubt they would have been walking. Plus, children don't usually come out of nappies until they are over two.
You and Jassi disputed what I said about the first photo that the Police were given. I said if she wasn't pulling a face the photo would look almost identical to the one of Madeleine in the red dress which was taken Christmas 2006.
You then asked if the twins were walking in the video Christmas 2006, I sent you a video of Madeleine opening her presents on her last Chrsitmas 2006, you can clearly see the twins walking.
Then you said the video didn't show Madeleine in the red dress. Well there is no video showing Madeleine feeding a chocolate lollipop to Amelie, the McCann's didn't release it. I sent you a newspaper story about Madeleine's last Christmas where it clearly says, Madeleine feeding Amelie a chocolate lollipop wearing a red dress, it shows a photo of her.
Now if that doesn't clear everything up for you, then sorry I can't help.
Madeleine was wearing the red dress Christmas 2006, the twins were walking, and if you compare the photo of Madeleine in the red dress to the first photo given to the police you will see it was taken around about the same time.
I see you have tried to clear this up but to follow your argument I'd need links so I can check it out for in the attempt to find what you are talking about I just get confused.
Yes I have had kids but many years ago. I have got a little rusty on it but my friend looked at the videos and agreed it was possible.
Put links to your facts so I can follow your argument please.
-
(http://www.anorak.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/madeleine-mccann-sister.jpg)
You are saying this is christmas 2006 therefore the kids wearing their other clothes was the year before.
So all we are disputing is how much before Christmas 2006 was the first poster photo taken? Was it on her 3rd birthday? There is no easy way to date it.
-
The caption on this photo is obviously wrong "Family ... Madeleine McCann, centre, aged four, sitting with her younger siblings, twins Sean and Amelie, five months. Picture: AFP
(http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/facecc7dc4c8cf53d0f202c6bd6ddbb5)
Madeleine was just over two when the twins were 5 months old.
-
Goes to show that one can't always rely on captions.
Interesting to note how the hair colour of the twins varies - no one could consider it blond in that picture.
-
This is the 2005 Christmas https://youtu.be/_rVPheczDfM?t=98
-
Goes to show that one can't always rely on captions.
Interesting to note how the hair colour of the twins varies - no one could consider it blond in that picture.
is it just me ....or on the link RB has just shown ..maddie's hair looks as if there is blond streaks been put in it ..
look at it 2mins in
https://youtu.be/_rVPheczDfM?t=98
on this one it seems like a wig .the colour....... the length ...just doesn't look right.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5nWogZxNUE
-
is it just me ....or on the link RB has just shown ..maddie's hair looks as if there is blond streaks been put in it ..
look at it 2mins in
https://youtu.be/_rVPheczDfM?t=98
on this one it seems like a wig .the colour....... the length ...just doesn't look right.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5nWogZxNUE
Streaks in the first one. But the second video it is just the effects of transferring the images to digital I think. Too hard to tell for sure.
-
Streaks in the first one. But the second video it is just the effects of transferring the images to digital I think. Too hard to tell for sure.
this is the one i meant the one you posted last night ...sorry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32POkpBO7sU
well transferring images....don't suddenly make it shorter ...and in a bob
if this was the 2006 christmas ...how could it have grown so quick in for months ...they arrived at P D L end of april
-
this is the one i meant the one you posted last night ...sorry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32POkpBO7sU
well transferring images....don't suddenly make it shorter ...and in a bob
if this was the 2006 christmas ...how could it have grown so quick in four months ...they arrived at P D L end of April
Well as I have proved, that video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32POkpBO7sU) was taken at Christmas 2005, so then there is plenty of time for the hair to grow back. It sounds like you agree do you?
-
It is time we visited the question why did someone choose a 12 month earlier photo of Madeleine for the first poster?
Was it Russell's decision. Was it a mistake?
-
It is time we visited the question why did someone choose a 12 month earlier photo of Madeleine for the first poster?
Was it Russell's decision. Was it a mistake?
Is it established that the 'first' picture is 12 months old?
I've never seen that spotted top in any other picture so cannot relate it to any particular time.
-
Is it established that the 'first' picture is 12 months old?
I've never seen that spotted top in any other picture so cannot relate it to any particular time.
Hair length seems to be the determining factor. I have looked for that top too, but the chubbiness makes her look younger than the Christmas 2006 photo, so I'm taking it back to the next milestone which would be her birthday 12th May 2006 as an estimate only.
-
Which of the GNR officers saw the photo that Amy Tierney says she printed?
Armando Augusto Morais - No
Antonio Henrique de Conceicao Duarte - Yes
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANTONIO_DUARTE.htm
As concerns the photos of the child, he says that he only saw what he calls the originals, poster type 10 x 15 cm on photographic paper. He did not see any other type of photos. Upon being shown a sample, he recognises it as being identical.
When asked he say he does not know the quantity of photos, but that there was more than one. He says that of these photos, at least five, he annexed one to the document he sent to the Tribunal and another four were handed to the officers carrying out searches, which were later returned and handed to the police, in due course.
He says he does not know who handed him the photos, different from each other, two by two.
He is sure that he is the person who received them.
He states that the photos came from inside the apartment, he still cannot say who had them. When he was inside the police car, gathering identification documents from the parents, he asked someone nearby for photos, he does not know if that person was Portuguese or British. This same person entered the apartment and came out with the photos.
He does not know whether it was Silvia Baptista who gave him the photos, as she was translating the conversations, neither whether it was someone from the family or friends.
He is sure that he received them in the early morning, at about 02.00, when the police arrived, after having carried out the first search.
He has the impression he saw the girl's father, however he cannot confirm whether he was the one to give him the photos.
He presumes he was given the photos directly, or in other words that they were not passed to him via someone else.
When questioned he says that the photos could not have been printed/revealed at the Ocean Club installations (they do not have this kind of paper). He adds that the photos produced the following day, which he observed, were printed on A4 paper, which was available at the resort.
He says no more.
Antonio Freitas Silva - No
Carlos Manuel Carvalho Lacão - No
Joao Vasco da Silva Casimiro - No
José Carlos Leal Pimental - No
Jose Maria Batista Roque - No
Nelson Filipe Pacheco da Costa - Yes http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NELSON-DA-COSTA.htm
He also notes that he saw various photographs on normal A4 paper of the girl, which had been printed at the reception, as well as other photos on photographic paper, poster type 10x15, that could not have been printed at the reception. This seemed unusual to him and he later confirmed that it was not possible for them to have been printed at the reception.
Pedro Miguel Esteves Fernandes - No
Paulo Jorge Carvaihosa da Costa - No
Paolo Jorge Fernandes Neto - Yes
At about 01.05-01.20 they arrived at the site. They went to Sergeant Duarte, Commander of the Lagos GNR division, who was on the corner pavement between Rua Agostinho da Silva and Rua Francisco Gentil Martins, where they were informed about the disappearance of a little girl from an apartment at the OC tourist complex.
Afterwards they received a photograph of Madeleine McCann and received orders to search the whole of the Rua da Ramalhete and the access points to Quinta da Bela Vista.
Rui Segio Lopes Silva - no
So 3 GNR officers saw photos (in plural) of the 10X15 format. This is consistent with Amy Tierney's statement.
-
Silvia Batista must have known the source of these 10X15 postcard sized photos, so when questioned about where they were printed why did she try and cut Amy Tierney out of the picture?
Is this another instance of SB trying to keep AT out of the line of questioning?
With Amy being one of the first to arrive at the apartment (evidenced by the fact that she was early enough for her to see the window open and the shutters up) you would think she would be one of the prime witnesses.
Why did Kate not have a reference to her visit in the first instance in her book? Especially with Amy questioning Kate about Madeleine's shoes since that being the nidus for coming to the conclusion "she had been taken", you would think Kate should have mentioned it. Was the book vetted by Gerry before being sent for publication?
On another forum it is noted Where does Amy enter the scene: did Kate inform Amy and others of Madeleine's disappearance and give them access to 5A before she went to Tapas to sound the alarm? That's the only way Amy could have been inside 5A and noticed the window and shutter open...as there is no mention by any of the Tapas 9 of Amy being part of the group that returned to 5A with Kate.
That is what I understand to be the case. Amy T arrives soon after Kate is aware Madeleine is missing but not before Kate informs the T9.
It would take a bit of explaining to know how the lady picking up the child from the creche was aware of Maddie or Maggie going missing so soon after Kate appears to know about it.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/AMY-ELLEN-TIERNEY.htm
In reply to the question asked, she said that the back door (porta das traseiras) that leads to the parking area was closed, but she doesn't know whether the front door (porta da frente) was locked as when she arrived both the parents and a female friend of theirs whose name she does not know, were there and that is why the door was open.
-
Interesting discussion http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t1179-amy-tierney-and-those-mysterious-6-x-4-photos-extracts-from-the-research-thread-on-3as
On his part, John Hill informed us that the printing of large quantities of Madeleine’s photo was carried out by himself with the help of his wife, at the request of Russell O’Brien, a member of the McCann’s group of friends, John Hill stated that the photograph the colour prints were made from a mobile data disk of the “memory stick” kind that Russell O’Brien gave him on the morning of 4th May.
They both stipulated that these were the only colour printers and photocopiers in existence at the Ocean Club and that there was no other place with the capacity for colour printing.
?????
-
I have just noticed an error. It states in this statement by Amy T there are previous statements yet in the file there is just one. Does that mean some previous statements by Amy have been withheld?
Date : 2008 ' 04 '17
Time. 10.00
Place: Praia da Luz
Name: Amy Tierney
Has made previous statements in May last year.
I have just opened up Amy Tierney's statement and it is taken in May! "Date: 2007-05-06" Sixth of May!
-
Gosh this poster issue has done my head in! What does ROB say about printing out the hundreds of posters that John Hill claimed ROB asked him to produce?
Russell O'Brien's rogatory statement seems to blame MW staff for the production of the hundreds of posters using the young faced MM photo.
erm there were other copies printed off which I don’t know where they got to but I know that Mark WARNER, somebody in Mark WARNER made a poster, or at least an A4 err saying that there’d been, you know, there’d been a, err an abduction and that Madeleine was missing and that was circulated around the next morning, so somebody had, had, had that photograph and used it for that poster but I took, I don’t know two or three copies maybe and gave them to the Police. I actually think ultimately there may have been more copies printed off and somebody else gave even more copies to them as well, err and I think some of the other copies were shown, were just shown to people around who were going on the searches but erm personally”.
1578 “The copies that you had, you only gave to the Police”'
Reply “I gave it to the Police, just to the Police”.
So that is in complete contradiction to what John Hill or Silvia Batista has said about the production of the posters.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm
We found a picture of Madeleine but we couldn’t print it off. Cat or one of the nannies said that they had a printer and took the camera away to get some photos copied. A copy of the photo was given directly to the Police, someone from the Mark Warner staff made a poster- but I do not know who that was. (page eight)
So Amy Tierney's role has been confirmed.
-
That is the most significant fact that I have identified so far. The posters were produced by Mark Warner staff and not Russell O'Brien. Why did MW staff produce a poster with the young looking girl without a name? These were produced after John Hill had visited Jez Wilkins' apartment at 1:00 - 1:30 AM on the 4th. Truly significant.
Also was the photo exchanged at this time? Extra significant.
-
I see you have tried to clear this up but to follow your argument I'd need links so I can check it out for in the attempt to find what you are talking about I just get confused.
Yes I have had kids but many years ago. I have got a little rusty on it but my friend looked at the videos and agreed it was possible.
Put links to your facts so I can follow your argument please.
You get confused, you do a very good job of confusing me too.
I give you the links, one where it shows the twins walking and the other where they talk about Madeleine in the red dress. Both were Christmas 2006.
Compare the first photo given to the police the one where Madeleine is wearing the pink spotty top to the one of Madeleine in the red dress, the faces are almost identical.
-
You get confused, you do a very good job of confusing me too.
I give you the links, one where it shows the twins walking and the other where they talk about Madeleine in the red dress. Both were Christmas 2006.
Compare the first photo given to the police the one where Madeleine is wearing the pink spotty top to the one of Madeleine in the red dress, the faces are almost identical.
I have enough understanding now to go back to the beginning of this thread and review it and see where we went wrong, where the confusion still exists etc. So I'll put up a few posts of things that still need clearing up. With links so we can follow each's arguments please.
-
Why did the McCanns choose a young looking Madeleine first poster?
Any ideas? There were plenty of more recent photos so why did the person chose a photo of Madeleine 1 year younger than she was when she went missing?
Who chose the image to publish on the 3rd?
(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSb1dy9ahNe2zm2m5hA15dVfA939qxLuBXH7ijdaYrUyCozd5c0kQ)
25
It seems evident now that the first posters were produced without direct approval of the McCanna or Russell O'Brien. Once Amy Tierney printed out the photos they seem to get distributed in various place and to various persons.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7811.msg368078#msg368078
"Who chose the image to publish on the 3rd?" John Hill gets the blame for this but I don't think he admits to it.
"There were plenty of more recent photos so why did the person chose a photo of Madeleine 1 year younger than she was when she went missing?" Ask the person who organised the first poster.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7811.msg368078#msg368078
"Why did the McCanns choose a young looking Madeleine first poster?" It appears now it wasn't the McCanns who did this.
-
It seems evident now that the first posters were produced without direct approval of the McCanna or Russell O'Brien. Once Amy Tierney printed out the photos they seem to get distributed in various place and to various persons.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7811.msg368078#msg368078
"Who chose the image to publish on the 3rd?" John Hill gets the blame for this but I don't think he admits to it.
"There were plenty of more recent photos so why did the person chose a photo of Madeleine 1 year younger than she was when she went missing?" Ask the person who organised the first poster.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7811.msg368078#msg368078
"Why did the McCanns choose a young looking Madeleine first poster?" It appears now it wasn't the McCanns who did this.
I can't see that you have strong evidence for any of this.
Only family/friends would know what Madeleine looked like. There could have been pictures of other children on the camera card, so surely a check was made to exclude them.
-
The eyes imo
If I'm correct that the McCanns didn't organise the poster but either John Hill or Silvia Batista did on their own initiative I have no reason to believe those two OC/MW employees knew anything about the coloboma eye defect.
I can't see that you have strong evidence for any of this.
We seem to have ROB denying he produced the posters and the observation he was over in the apartment organising the validity of the timeline at the same time. He can't do both jobs at the same time.
And we do know without a doubt he produced the two timelines, and he denies producing the posters.
-
I can't see that you have strong evidence for any of this.
Only family/friends would know what Madeleine looked like. There could have been pictures of other children on the camera card, so surely a check was made to exclude them.
Russell O'Brien (ROB) would have stayed or discussed this with Amy Tierney who herself knew the children her nannies were caring for. So that bit is essentially covered.
-
Unless you are into conspiracy, the first picture was chosen from what was available on camera cards at that time. Why that particular one, rather than the tennis ball one, or even the 'last' picture by the pool is anybody's guess. I imagine Gerry had input into the decision.
I think ROB because he understood the technology and wanted to do something positive.
The statements from Gerry and ROB don't confirm your hunch. Gerry and ROB don't have an input into this when we consider their own statements.
-
The first picture - one of her in a pink spotty top is not showing a particularly young Madeleine - those came later.
Copies were produced on a colour photocopier and I think were A4 size.
Can you define "not ...... a particularly young Madeleine"? How old is this NOT "particularly young Madeleine"?
-
Can you define "not ...... a particularly young Madeleine"? How old is this NOT "particularly young Madeleine"?
I thought that the spotty top picture was perhaps taken a few months before the holiday, whereas the red dress picture is of a much younger Madeleine - 2005
-
No doubt in the panic to get something out there wouldn't have been much thought given to how old a particular photo was. Just a thought but this particular first photo showing her in pink clothing might have had more to do with the pink PJ's she was wearing the night she disappeared. I believe it was a short time later that her eye defect became a prominent feature in photos.
This suggestion by John needs further analysis now that we have established the first poster was produced by the OC/MW staff.
1. Would they know of the Pyjamas worn by Madeleine
2. or would they know of the pyjamas worn by the girl picked up from the night creche (Crecheman's daughter)
3. or had they heard what Jane Tanner had described
4. or did they have their own knowledge to work from?
I thought that the spotty top picture was perhaps taken a few months before the holiday, whereas the red dress picture is of a much younger Madeleine - 2005
The bright red dress is definitely from Christmas 2006 and we are unsure at this stage when the spotty top photo was taken exactly. Christmas 2006 is four and a bit months before the holiday.
(http://www.anorak.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/madeleine-mccann-sister.jpg)
-
I don't know why the heading is saying 'a young looking Madeleine' if you look at the well known photo of Madeleine in the red dress, that was taken the Christmas before, and looks identical to photo of Madeleine in pink which was the first photo given out, so four and a half months before Madeleine disappeared.
They couldn't use any of the other photo's taken on the holiday in Portugal as none of them showed a full facial photo of Madeleine and her eye. The Police always ask for a clear full facial view of a missing child.
It was done as a result of a police request or was it? Maybe the GNR that arrived at 11:00 needed a photo of the person they were looking for. Russell and Gerry do provide them with many (different) photos as was seen in the study on the GNR officers.
-
To find a person you use a recent photo because the aim is to find her.
On the right path here; on the right track.
-
Just look at the holiday photo's, the ones in the play area, collecting the tennis balls and the one by the pool, none of them show a full face of Madeleine with the fleck in her eye.
The coloboma fleck (defect) would stay constant as the years passed so it is a help in identifying a Madeleine lookalike months or years later but was not important in the first night or week.
I think this is worth repeating "There were 20 -30 photos on the memory card. We have not seen the full range of photos available so I'd say we can't be sure. The tennis ball photo and the pool photo were they on Kate's memory card? On that particular memory card?"
-
They were printed from the memory card by Amy T on her boyfriends printer. ROB selected one particular photo from the choice of 20 -30 photos. This photo was then placed on a sheet of A4 paper and the message was added, then placed on the photocopier and up to 200 posters were produced by John Hill and his wife.
This was my analysis then but since then I find ROB denies producing the posters.
-
Russell O'Brien (ROB) would have stayed or discussed this with Amy Tierney who herself knew the children her nannies were caring for. So that bit is essentially covered.
From ROB rog interview
1578 “Did you have any photo of Madeleine in your possession”?
Reply “Erm we got a photo of Madeleine later on but this is two hours later, erm”.
1578 “So who gave it to you”?
Reply “Okay well certain, I’m not quite sure what the, the initial, the question made it sound like whoever had one in our possession anyway, I didn’t, erm we got a, we erm, after a portion of my searches, we got hold of erm Kate’s camera, err looked through the digital cam to try and find a picture of Madeleine reasonably recently, reasonably face on and, and with her being the main, the main character on the photograph, erm clearly that that was going through, there were quite a few pictures that were not ideal, so we, we went through those, err and then printed that off, erm all of this taking a reasonable amount of time to try and get hold of equipment and have offices opened and etc., etc”.
1578 “Okay. What kind of photo was it”?
Reply “The, it was a, it was a photo of err, it was the one that was being circulated in the, in the days immediately afterwards, I’ve seen so many photographs of her, of Madeleine since, I think it was a photograph that had been taken of her and a relatively number of weeks before and I think with a slightly different, slightly longer hair, erm but it was, it was a fa, it was a fa, it was a relatively full on sort of face on photograph, err and it was printed on a standard size erm four by six err inch, as you know, using the equipment that the people had and we ran off a number of copies of this, erm and several I think were given to the, the GNR”.
1578 “I was going to ask you the next question”.
Reply “Sorry”.
1578 “Was, who did you give the photo to”?
Reply “Yeah well I think the ones that I had, I took, you know cos obviously they were printing out, you know they were slow you know, we really wanted to get them to the Police fairly quickly, so I took the first couple of copies and took those round to, I think the GNR staff,
It seems to me that ROB selected the photo to be printed, was there when they were printed and gave copies to GNR
-
http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/20-dec8/N-O-T-W-21-12-08.htm
http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/20-dec8/N-O-T-W-21-12-08.htm
This page is not produced by Gerry McCann and it is wrong saying it was Madeleine's last Christmas. "Moving pictures of Maddie's last Christmas at home" is incorrect as those photos are from Christmas 2005.
[So I think but I'm open to correction.]
-
Yes the twins were walking, and Madeleine is in the red dress.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube+madeleine+mccann+opening+christmas+present&view=detail&mid=2CD66763C43252FB30362CD66763C43252FB3036&FORM=VIRE
The caption on the video is wrong. [So I think but I'm open to correction.] Can you put the link to the red dress you speak of?
-
You can see the twins walking when Madeleine is opening her presents. Madeleine in the red dress is from the same Christmas.
Read this it talks about Madeleine in the red dress Christmas 2006 - http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/new-heart-rending-appeal-for-madeleine-mccann-437534
from the article A newly released festive photo shows Madeleine dressed in red, sitting on the floor by the fireplace feeding a chocolate lolly to her baby sister, Amelie.
It was taken at the family home in Rothley, Leics, at Christmas 2006 - five months before she was snatched from a resort in Praia da Luz, Portugal, when she was three.
I agree with that. I don't accept your claim "Madeleine in the red dress is from the same Christmas".
-
From ROB rog interview
1578 “Did you have any photo of Madeleine in your possession”?
Reply “Erm we got a photo of Madeleine later on but this is two hours later, erm”.
1578 “So who gave it to you”?
Reply “Okay well certain, I’m not quite sure what the, the initial, the question made it sound like whoever had one in our possession anyway, I didn’t, erm we got a, we erm, after a portion of my searches, we got hold of erm Kate’s camera, err looked through the digital cam to try and find a picture of Madeleine reasonably recently, reasonably face on and, and with her being the main, the main character on the photograph, erm clearly that that was going through, there were quite a few pictures that were not ideal, so we, we went through those, err and then printed that off, erm all of this taking a reasonable amount of time to try and get hold of equipment and have offices opened and etc., etc”.
1578 “Okay. What kind of photo was it”?
Reply “The, it was a, it was a photo of err, it was the one that was being circulated in the, in the days immediately afterwards, I’ve seen so many photographs of her, of Madeleine since, I think it was a photograph that had been taken of her and a relatively number of weeks before and I think with a slightly different, slightly longer hair, erm but it was, it was a fa, it was a fa, it was a relatively full on sort of face on photograph, err and it was printed on a standard size erm four by six err inch, as you know, using the equipment that the people had and we ran off a number of copies of this, erm and several I think were given to the, the GNR”.
1578 “I was going to ask you the next question”.
Reply “Sorry”.
1578 “Was, who did you give the photo to”?
Reply “Yeah well I think the ones that I had, I took, you know cos obviously they were printing out, you know they were slow you know, we really wanted to get them to the Police fairly quickly, so I took the first couple of copies and took those round to, I think the GNR staff,
It seems to me that ROB selected the photo to be printed, was there when they were printed and gave copies to GNR
Interesting since the process was slow he took the first photos to the GNR and hence implies the others had access to the memory card and continued to print the 20 - 30 photos Amy talks of.
If you read the reports of the GNR there were several different photos given to them, not just the one single photo.
-
Interesting since the process was slow he took the first photos to the GNR and hence implies the others had access to the memory card and continued to print the 20 - 30 photos Amy talks of.
If you read the reports of the GNR there were several different photos given to them, not just the one single photo.
I don't know about that. He says that they ran off several copies of the same full-face photo.
I can't see why they should need or want to print other non-suitable (according to ROB) images at that time.
-
I agree after watching this PDL video the twins look 4-5 months older here: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7da_1189730094 than at the Christmas video, so that must be taken Christmas 2006 not 2005. If I was able to get the birthdate of the twins I could be a bit more certain.
Do you see this "and Madeleine is in the red dress"? The same dress as in her missing poster? How many seconds into the video is the best view?
The PDL video of the twins we know they are 2 years 3 months old. The Christmas video, so that must be taken Christmas 2005 not 2006 (Note I got the order incorrect before).
-
Finally got a lead on it. At 2:04 into the video is Madeleine blowing out her birthday cake and it has just two candles on it, so I'd say that is her at two years of age, so now we can compare the first poster photo to her image at two.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRc8PjpYZw4
(https://youtu.be/gRc8PjpYZw4?t=126) https://youtu.be/gRc8PjpYZw4?t=126 (https://youtu.be/gRc8PjpYZw4?t=126)
OK that is a confirmed 2 year old image and she has longish hair so the short haired first poster photo has to have been taken after that.
this video must have been taken on May 12th 2005.
A video where the date is not dependent on the caption.
-
So the twins are 3 1/2 months old when Madeleine had her second birthday, that would explain why they are not in that photo.
Madeleine would be 2 years 7 months at the time of the Christmas photo. In the first poster photo she has shorter hair so it could be her 3rd birthday when the photo was taken. So it is a three year old being photographed in other words I estimate the photo showing her 1 year younger than she was when she went missing.
I stand by what I said here.
-
If I've got the right video - Christmas 2006 - is largely a montage of still images which could come from anywhere
-
Hair length seems to be the determining factor. I have looked for that top too, but the chubbiness makes her look younger than the Christmas 2006 photo, so I'm taking it back to the next milestone which would be her birthday 12th May 2006 as an estimate only.
I still propose this as a possible date the spotty red top photo was taken. 12th May 2006
-
If I've got the right video - Christmas 2006 - is largely a montage of still images which could come from anywhere
Please Copy the URL from the top of the screen so we all know which video you are referring to, or the Title from under the video.
-
This one - I think
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube+madeleine+mccann+opening+christmas+present&&view=detail&mid=9C5C633B3E358589F47E9C5C633B3E358589F47E&rvsmid=2CD66763C43252FB30362CD66763C43252FB3036&fsscr=0&FORM=VDQVAP
-
This one - I think
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube+madeleine+mccann+opening+christmas+present&&view=detail&mid=9C5C633B3E358589F47E9C5C633B3E358589F47E&rvsmid=2CD66763C43252FB30362CD66763C43252FB3036&fsscr=0&FORM=VDQVAP
That was a montage of various photos and videos so doesn't help in this debate at all.
-
Exactly. No use at all
-
Exactly. No use at all
Find a video that is useful in sorting out Madeleine's age and look at the time. We have the second birthday and the two christmas videos/photos with differently aged twins in them. [So I think but I'm open to correction.]
-
Madeleine's second birthday
one Christmas with young twins
One christmas with an older looking Amelie
Video of 2nd birthday https://youtu.be/gRc8PjpYZw4?t=124
What I thought was the 2005 Christmas https://youtu.be/32POkpBO7sU
Video of Sean and Amelie walking around Praia da Luz
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7da_1189730094
Amelie hair is long enough to put into pigtails whereas in the Christmas photo there is not enough hair to put into pigtails and I don't think it would grow that much in 9 months to be like in this video.(Video taken some time before September 2007.
Video of the disputed christmas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhkHwY9NzpI
https://youtu.be/kpuK8ql-IPE?t=226 is another look at the disputed Christmas The twins are obviously younger than 1 year old as they are not yet talking. You can hear Madeleine talking and it is more like a two year old rather than a three year old.
Any ideas? Am I right?
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
video where the twins have turned 4 and they are talking and answering questions https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhACS6ck-Dw Start here if you want to save time. https://youtu.be/lhACS6ck-Dw?t=97
I would say if Peter Hyatt analysed this one he would have to change his mind about Kate's guilt.
-
My thoughts now are that both Christmas videos are from the same Christmas, either both 2005 0r both 2006 but not from both years.
-
http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/20-dec8/N-O-T-W-21-12-08.htm
http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/20-dec8/N-O-T-W-21-12-08.htm
Sorry, these links should have had a video attached to them, just noticed they don't. The video was the Christmas one 2006 where Madeleine is opening her presents and you can see the twins are walking.
There is no argument though, the Christmas video of Madeleine opening the backpack 2006 and the one of her in red dress also 2006. Madeleine in spotty pink top also around that time, so they didn't give the police a photo of Madeleine from 2005.
-
Sorry, these links should have had a video attached to them, just noticed they don't. The video was the Christmas one 2006 where Madeleine is opening her presents and you can see the twins are walking.
There is no argument though, the Christmas video of Madeleine opening the backpack 2006 and the one of her in red dress also 2006. Madeleine in spotty pink top also around that time, so they didn't give the police a photo of Madeleine from 2005.
This part is your opinion Madeleine in spotty pink top also around that time, so they didn't give the police a photo of Madeleine from 2005.
as you have not provided any proof. We don't know what the photos were that were given to the police (up to 10 seem to be mentioned by the GNR). Maybe you meant the poster photo was not from 2005 but from 2006. Which could still mean it was between 4 - 15 months out of date.
But you could well be right the hair length is similar.
Duarte is given 9 photos if I understand it correctly.http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7811.msg368051#msg368051
-
This part is your opinion as you have not provided any proof. We don't know what the photos were that were given to the police (up to 10 seem to be mentioned by the GNR). Maybe you meant the poster photo was not from 2005 but from 2006. Which could still mean it was between 4 - 15 months out of date.
But you could well be right the hair length is similar.
Duarte is given 9 photos if I understand it correctly.http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7811.msg368051#msg368051
Bob [can I call you Bob?] There is no proof, there was no date on the photo of Madeleine with the pink spotty top.
You have to look at the photo of Madeleine in the red dress and the photo of Madeleine in the pink spotty top and see the likeness there. Also it was found on Kate's phone, would Kate have photo's on her phone over a year old? Did someone actually scroll through a years worth of photo's to get to that one? I think not IMO
-
Bob [can I call you Bob?] There is no proof, there was no date on the photo of Madeleine with the pink spotty top.
You have to look at the photo of Madeleine in the red dress and the photo of Madeleine in the pink spotty top and see the likeness there. Also it was found on Kate's phone, would Kate have photo's on her phone over a year old? Did someone actually scroll through a years worth of photo's to get to that one? I think not IMO
Where does that information come from, please?
-
Bob [can I call you Bob?] There is no proof, there was no date on the photo of Madeleine with the pink spotty top.
You have to look at the photo of Madeleine in the red dress and the photo of Madeleine in the pink spotty top and see the likeness there. Also it was found on Kate's phone, would Kate have photo's on her phone over a year old? Did someone actually scroll through a years worth of photo's to get to that one? I think not IMO
Once Amy had printed the 20 -30 photos off the memory card it doesnt take long to chose the best one from that selection. Now did you notice my findings that it wasn't Russell O'Brien who produced the posters but that it was an OC/MW initiative according to ROB.
So the Management chose a photo. There is continual reference to the photos being in pairs (so the 20 -30 phots was actually 2 sets of 10-15 which makes the choice even narrower.
-
Where does that information come from, please?
Sorry Kate's camera I mean.
Reply “Yeah, she was certainly, yeah, she was, she was English, you know, clearly not a, not a local. Erm, next it says ‘We tried to find a picture of Madeleine’, I mean, it wasn’t so much struggling to get the picture, it was struggling to find the means of printing it. We had the cam, we had Kate’s camera, erm, the, what we were trying to do is find a picture that actually gave a good likeness, rather than just being any old shot it actually had, you know, a close-up of her, of her face. There were a lot of pictures on the camera but they were, you know, just at home and on, you know, in profile and things like that”.
From Russell O'Brian's statement.
-
Sorry Kate's camera I mean.
Reply “Yeah, she was certainly, yeah, she was, she was English, you know, clearly not a, not a local. Erm, next it says ‘We tried to find a picture of Madeleine’, I mean, it wasn’t so much struggling to get the picture, it was struggling to find the means of printing it. We had the cam, we had Kate’s camera, erm, the, what we were trying to do is find a picture that actually gave a good likeness, rather than just being any old shot it actually had, you know, a close-up of her, of her face. There were a lot of pictures on the camera but they were, you know, just at home and on, you know, in profile and things like that”.
From Russell O'Brian's statement.
You know that a smart girl like Amy Tierney would have no problems doing the task of selecting the 10-15 best photos of Madeleine and printing them out in duplicate.
Someone needs to acknowledge that this whole process is being done by Amy Tierney and John Hill and Donna Hill. That is the important part. Russell is not waiting around so the process is managed by John Hill.
-
Watch this video, 0.28 also 1.46 isn't Madeleine wearing the red dress under her pink cardigan? Plus you can see Amelie wearing her red dress. Video Christmas 2006
https://youtu.be/yqDabcN97eQ
-
Watch this video, 0.28 also 1.46 isn't Madeleine wearing the red dress under her pink cardigan? Plus you can see Amelie wearing her red dress. Video Christmas 2006
https://youtu.be/yqDabcN97eQ
Looks like it.
-
It is Christmas again. Who is buying presents for Madeleine this year?
-
It is Christmas again. Who is buying presents for Madeleine this year?
Please don't do this.
-
Please don't do this.
I saw that video where she was ecstatic about the presents that Santa had brought her. So cute.
There are videos available where Kate considers what Madeleine is up to for she feels that someone is looking after Madeleine. This would be the very best outcome of this whole affair. So I don't think it is being stupid or silly but being rather optimistic.
-
If you believe the line that she was taken by paedophiles, then it is totally ridiculous to think that she might be being well looked after.
-
If you believe the line that she was taken by paedophiles, then it is totally ridiculous to think that she might be being well looked after.
Each of us could believe that something different happened to her, so in the end it is more than a matter of belief. And now we are talking 10 years or so after the event, so much could have happened in between.
I find we are trying to work out what happened in the first 60 minutes after 9:30 and we struggle to make any sense of that, and that is only the first hour of the last 10 years.
It seems impossible but I have had a premonition that she is alive and she will be found, so as ridiculous as it might sound, I believe she is being well looked after.
-
Each of us could believe that something different happened to her, so in the end it is more than a matter of belief. And now we are talking 10 years or so after the event, so much could have happened in between.
I find we are trying to work out what happened in the first 60 minutes after 9:30 and we struggle to make any sense of that, and that is only the first hour of the last 10 years.
It seems impossible but I have had a premonition that she is alive and she will be found, so as ridiculous as it might sound, I believe she is being well looked after.
So all this guff you spout on about involvement of 2 American brothers is just that, then ?
-
So all this guff you spout on about involvement of 2 American brothers is just that, then ?
I know just about nothing about the brothers and it tests my imagination how they could be involved but if they are it will be something that happened more than an hour after 9:30. I don't believe they are "the true Smithman " even though SY has released the E-fits in 2013 that were produced by the McCann private detectives 5 years earlier. SY claiming they are of Smithman. How did the Smiths ever see the Podesta brothers in Praia da Luz? I have no idea, but I can not imagine them hanging around the McCann's apartment abducting kids.
-
Nor can I, which is why I have never considered them to be of any relevance.
-
Nor can I, which is why I have never considered them to be of any relevance.
Could "the true Smithman" have left Madeleine in the care of the people staying at Clement Freud's villa that night?
-
IMO, no. Freud is another irrelevance.
-
IMO, no. Freud is another irrelevance.
OK Freud wasn't there but I'm not saying Freud but " Clement Freud's villa". Just like apartment 5A was owned by someone else who has nothing to do with it other than leasing the apartment to OC, and it was OC who let it to the McCanns.
-
Why pick on Freud's villa, which was no longer his anyway? Any villa/house/apartment within PDL could be a candidate for what you are suggesting.
-
Why pick on Freud's villa, which was no longer his anyway? Any villa/house/apartment within PDL could be a candidate for what you are suggesting.
I'm only going on the reports on the websites in the US. They report the Podesta brothers were staying at Clement Freud's Villa at that time. They seem to have an email reference to "Clem". I'm not making anything up or changing the story. The e-fits match the brothers but there has been no suggestion on how this links back to the McCanns and the Tapas etc.
-
I'm only going on the reports on the websites in the US. They report the Podesta brothers were staying at Clement Freud's Villa at that time. They seem to have an email reference to "Clem". I'm not making anything up or changing the story. The e-fits match the brothers but there has been no suggestion on how this links back to the McCanns and the Tapas etc.
You know as well as I do that an awful lot of rubbish is posted on websites.
Why give this one any credence, other than it seems to suit your view of the moment ?
-
You know as well as I do that an awful lot of rubbish is posted on websites.
Why give this one any credence, other than it seems to suit your view of the moment ?
I'm looking at the connections
1. Clem
2. The e-fits matching their photos ( and how does one person get two E-fits
3. Emails showing the Podestas were in Portugal at that time.
4. The photo of a girl looking like the age progressed MM with the Podestas.
5. The political nature of the MM missing case.
-
How does this all fit in with your feeling that Madeleine is alive & well somewhere, living the life of luxury?
-
How does this all fit in with your feeling that Madeleine is alive & well somewhere, living the life of luxury?
The Podestas are enormously rich aren't they?
-
Isn't it being claimed they are paedophiles, or somesuch?
-
Isn't it being claimed they are paedophiles, or somesuch?
Whatever that means, they might still have wives and family, kids etc, I know nothing about them.
-
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/john-podesta-fbi-spoke-me-only-once-about-my-hacked-n697511
It will be resolved.
-
I posted these in the wrong thread and this was where they should have been.
"https://youtu.be/Zl0xlLYFqwg how old is Madeleine when she is opens up her Christmas presents in this clip?
from https://youtu.be/Zl0xlLYFqwg?t=117 to https://youtu.be/Zl0xlLYFqwg?t=128.
I can't convince myself she is a three year old.
How old is Sean in that clip?"
and :
"Surely someone can look at the boy in nappies and guess how old he is.
Is he nearly 1 year old or nearly 2?
He is placing the train on the track and pushing it along that is pretty clever for a 1 year old. I can't recall now."