October 13th, 2008 at 5:17 am

Well see, now we have the statements of various witnesses, plus Kidz Club records, etc., all indicating that Madeleine WAS there on the day she disappeared.

Refresh my memory Pamela with the witnesses names please. Independant witnesses that is.

All Amaral said was that Gerry and his friends were being surveilled while in PDL.

It was in the Final Report given to journos on disc where we read about the two men seen by a witness. All named, staying at the OC and the request by the playground man.

At my home forum we had a poster associated with LE in Portugal who had told us quite a bit about this man and it just seemed to be a piece that fit into the puzzle.

I don’t think I can bring quotes from that Report. I’ll see if I can find a link for you. :}

IMO

Sure. All this hocus-pocus and voodoo Photoshop was to “insert” the child into photographic evidence and show her “alive” when she wasn’t. C’mon, you remember that, don’t you???

Well see, now we have the statements of various witnesses, plus Kidz Club records, etc., all indicating that Madeleine WAS there on the day she disappeared. Even you have, I believe, narrowed your “window of opportunity” to the period just before her parents left for dinner, right?

So then, what would have been the benefit of doctoring the photographs?

D’uh.

October 13th, 2008 at 12:39 am
the real stig, i just cannot see anything ‘wrong ‘ with that photo. it looks like a photo made just after arrival at a holiday resort after hours of travelling showing adults taking their bearings and kids given a chance to play and relax.
**********************
Is that Maddie in that photo Sam ? how would we know ?

It was taken from the (Alledged) last photograph because I have seen the actual rocks in the wall behind, the rocks in the photo without the elbow don’t actually exist. Again proof of pretty well expert photo manipulation tools being routinely used!

The Park/Playground photo does look strange in a few places.

The thing that interests me most though is the lack of proof when any of these photos were taken, especially the Alledged last photo…………..I don’t mean the time I mean the actual day !

I see a palm tree and two people walking. On the right I see a shadow I take to be that of Kate.

That photo is heavily cropped. Here is one that isn’t:
LINK
*******************
Precisely, hardly any versions of that photograph show the full framing, proof of photo manipulation. It was also stated that this photograph showed GM playing with his children. The Girl in the front clearly is not Amelie is it ?

“What is on the far left in your photograph of the park ?”

Not my photo, that is on the Brians Dreams website.

I see a palm tree and two people walking. On the right I see a shadow I take to be that of Kate.

That photo is heavily cropped. Here is one that isn’t:

http://tinyurl.com/4p52mb

October 12th, 2008 at 10:49 pm

I have spent many, many hours looking at and adjusting photos on computers to try and make them look their best. I have also done a limited amount of innocent manipulation, so I think I know what is hard and what is easy and what to look for. I see nothing in the park photo that looks wrong or manipulated.
************************
What is on the far left in your photograph of the park ?

October 12th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
thatpoorpriest

bah…stiggy sticks to his belief of abduction and naturally anything you say is wrong
Did you read the last article on Joanas site?
food for thoughts

———————————————————————————————————–

Jo, I did read the article, but found it hard to plough through, as the English was extremely convoluted. Noone else has commented I see. All I really got out of it was that there now is a strange silence, not commensurate with leaving no stone unturned, and I have thought that too. I liked the bit about Clearance knowing when to be silent.

However, I did find the other links interesting, about the photofits that weren’t far removed from women’s faces. especially familiar ones. But on my computer I can’t get videos to play unfortunately.

Good Night. Thanks for the laughs.

“The man in the background of the playground photo is not a GNR man.”

Have you seen this page?: http://tinyurl.com/5dkfno

I have no comment to make about the text, but the images are interesting.

Do you have a link for that section of the final report - thanks.

Have seen that excellent page with the collected GNR man photos? Want a link?

I could have sworn that I saw somewhere that Amaral had said (in his book?) that the McCanns had been under observation by the PJ since they first arrived in PDL - or something like that. Unfortunately, I have been unable to locate the original reference.

If he did say such a thing, that would be most curious.

Perhaps I am mistaken, wish I had bookmarked it.

Am I ever around young children? yes, almost daily in my work as it happens! I’ve also seen a few abused kids, and generally they are the most generous ones, very anxious to please, very humbling.

and yes, I do take the point that You can see nothing wrong with the playground photo. For Myself, it’s like a game of spot the deliberate mistakes, many more have been pointed out BTW. We’re abviously never going to agree on this one.

The man in the background of the playground photo is not a GNR man. He is mentioned in the Final Report with his name given, and was staying at the OC with his SO and child. He is mentioned together with another man, also staying there with his wife and child, who were both witnessed by a 3rd party whose name is also given.

It has been said he was in some capacity of LE and we don’t know how, but when he put in his reservation at the OC he requested something special - access to the outside from the main floor I believe.

IMO this would have been excellent cover if he/they were involved in the surveillance of Gerry and friends, as told to us by Amaral in his book.

I do find it a bit odd that you are prepared to say that the church picture has been doctored and also the missing colomba photo (well done for finding the pic) has been altered, by copying and pasting, but you are not prepared to say that the playground pic has been altered in any way.

That is because I can think of very good reasons to carry out the posited alterations, and in tha case of the coloboma, can actually SEE some signs that might indicate an alteration.

“All you are doing is proving that they have the capability to alter photos. so, a lot of people will thank you for that.”

They did not have a computer with them. Gerry hired one later. I would be very surprised if it came with Photoshop as it is not cheap.

I have spent many, many hours looking at and adjusting photos on computers to try and make them look their best. I have also done a limited amount of innocent manipulation, so I think I know what is hard and what is easy and what to look for. I see nothing in the park photo that looks wrong or manipulated.

Same goes for the pool photo. What was Madeline looking and laughing at? Shaun, who was out of shot to the right.