Playground

The weirded out Priest, Chaplin's Restaurant next to the church, Ocean Club, and how and where did they conceal a body if that is what happened?

Playground

Postby May » Thu Dec 20, 2007 12:42 pm

The child who is not Amelie could possibly be Jane Tanner's daughter or even belong to the Oldfields. Not unreasonable to assume their children might be together on the odd occasion they were allowed out of the creche or nursery. Another thought, could she belong to the black man who is so freqwuently seen looking on? I realise this doesn't explain why Amelie is not in the picture. Gerry's expression in this 'doctored' photo is the most human I have seen.
May
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 7:25 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Postby Stevo » Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:59 pm

Hi May

I think Madeleine's right leg is very strange in the playground photo. Look at it closely - the foot looks like a left foot and the angle is weird. Also, Madeleine's right knee is heavily blurred compared to the contrast levels in the rest of her trouser.

The shadows look wrong as well. The tree to the far right has its shadow facing up the wall and in a completely different direction to other shadows in the picture.

Why have the McCanns only released 5 photos from their week in PDL and there's not a single photo of all 3 children together on that holiday.
Stevo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: USA

Postby Sad Git » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:28 pm

I've always thought virtually every Madeleine picture I've seen looks . . . just not quite right, as if they've been doctored in some way. Not necessarily to hide a crime, but perhaps to make up for a lack of happy family photos in the McCanns' possession.
Sad Git
 
Posts: 423
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:00 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Postby Stevo » Wed Dec 26, 2007 10:38 pm

A lot of people have mentioned how Madeleine looks different in so many photos. I often wonder if it's a smoke screen to confuse people about what she actually looks like. Surely the most recent photos would be the best ones to release. But, there's only 5 known photographs from the week in Portugal. Why?
Stevo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: USA

Postby Daisy » Sat Dec 29, 2007 5:00 am

Hi everybody,

I believe the photos taken in PDL are actually with the PJ. I don't think they would release all photos to the public, because there could be someone in the background, which could be of interest to the PJ in those last photos. If I was a cop, I would not release all photos.

I persoanlly believe the girl is Maddie in all pictures. Much has been said about the Christmas 05 or 06 photos, but, in my opinion it is her and also at the correct age for December 06 (including the twins age).

All has been made more complicated by the huge amount of speculation going on everywhere. I personally, am not convinced at this point in time, that the mother accidentally killed her or otherwise. If I had to suspect one, I would probably point the finger at the father. I see more pain in the mother's face than the father's. I personally find him more "calculating" and more the "leader" type. Alledgedly, the mother suffered from some depression at the time. It would be easy for the trusted partner to manipulate her while being in a state that might also have involved her being under the influence of prescription drugs for the depression. If she appeared to most as being "cold" in the first few days, I see her more as someone who is permanently sedated with something. After all, the partner is a doctor!

I'm still inclined to think in the abductor possibility, and yes, I have read the "19 Reasons". My scenario would be something like this: I believe the abductor knew the movements of all T9. He had a week to establish this. Also, I believe he accessed the apartment through the sliding door, after hiding behind the bushes near the stairs that lead to the balcony (there is a wide gap in the left side wall next to the first few steps). He waited for Gerry to do his regular check (if he actually did check on Maddie at the time he says he did), went up the stairs after he left, accessed the apartment (sliding doors are very quiet), took Maddie (while GM talks to his friend some 15 m away, it's very dark, he is probably somewhat drunk, he probably has his back to the apartment), she was probably sedated with something, he went out through the same sliding door (remember, it was very dark!), he crossed the road and this is when Jane Tanner allegedly saw someone. (He didn't expect JT to have been there at that particular time, nor for GM to have stopped to chat to someone). In my opinion, JT saw someone, but the description and colour of pyjamas, etc. was made up later to give the McCanns a stronger case. The above is all speculation and my personal opinion only.
Daisy
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 3:49 am
Location: Australia

Postby Stevo » Sat Dec 29, 2007 5:05 pm

Hey guys...thanks for contributing but please try and put topics where they belong. This topic "playground" was posted in a forum discussing the money. There was already a forum called "mistaken identity". Thanks [:)]
Stevo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: USA

Postby RENATA » Thu Jan 03, 2008 1:41 pm

Though <b><u><i>no</i></u></b> expert, I do dabble in digital photography and I have seen no credible evidence of <b><i>"Doctored "</i></b> photos (PARDON A PUN )

Of course it makes the whole mystery more interesting/appealing - don't it?? [;)] Yes the MccCanns are certainly culpable in allowing Madeleine to come to harm - no question about that, but they aint no master criminals as their recent PR decisions show. They are probably guilty of two things - severe child neglect and arrogance (as were their holiday companions who (imo )all look apon reproduction as the trendy, latest must have ................. but when the novelty of the C section wears off - the kids have to fend for themselves ,when we are in holiday mode. But Ill take the Child Benefit lol
RENATA
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:14 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Postby bugalugs1970 » Thu Jan 03, 2008 3:44 pm

renata
i agree fully with you, that the mccanns have not doctored any photos. As you stated its too far fetched these crimes are rarely as complex as many seem to think. To doctor photos would include the involvement of others unless of course any of the tapa 9 have sufficient skills in this field.
Daisy
i enjoyed your post a good theory that has me thinking, but a few loop holes when i apply my own knowledge:That said nothing is impossible.
bugalugs1970
 
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 5:36 pm
Location:

Postby Sad Git » Thu Jan 03, 2008 7:50 pm

Any bozo can doctor a photo with Photoshop these days, just ask Stevo and Bulldump. And the McCanns' entourage presumably includes the whizzo who set up their site for them. Renata don't you think the original pool photo on the front page of this site looks a bit fake?
Sad Git
 
Posts: 423
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:00 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Postby RENATA » Thu Jan 03, 2008 7:58 pm

Hi SG
Nope I don't see it but as stated I aint no expert. I tend to agree with Buglugs i.e the solution to this case is probably more simplistic. [;)]
RENATA
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:14 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Postby bugalugs1970 » Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:52 am

to all
i would like to take back my bold state of " i believe no photos have been doctored"
bugalugs1970
 
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 5:36 pm
Location:

Postby Tim » Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:20 pm

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Sad Git</i>
<br />Any bozo can doctor a photo with Photoshop these days, just ask Stevo and Bulldump. And the McCanns' entourage presumably includes the whizzo who set up their site for them. Renata don't you think the original pool photo on the front page of this site looks a bit fake?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Eeerrr... is that Any Doctor can Bozo a Photo...... ?
Tim
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Postby purrfect_catlover » Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:18 pm

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Daisy</i>
<br />Hi everybody,

I believe the photos taken in PDL are actually with the PJ. I don't think they would release all photos to the public, because there could be someone in the background, which could be of interest to the PJ in those last photos. If I was a cop, I would not release all photos.

I persoanlly believe the girl is Maddie in all pictures. Much has been said about the Christmas 05 or 06 photos, but, in my opinion it is her and also at the correct age for December 06 (including the twins age).

All has been made more complicated by the huge amount of speculation going on everywhere. I personally, am not convinced at this point in time, that the mother accidentally killed her or otherwise. If I had to suspect one, I would probably point the finger at the father. I see more pain in the mother's face than the father's. I personally find him more "calculating" and more the "leader" type. Alledgedly, the mother suffered from some depression at the time. It would be easy for the trusted partner to manipulate her while being in a state that might also have involved her being under the influence of prescription drugs for the depression. If she appeared to most as being "cold" in the first few days, I see her more as someone who is permanently sedated with something. After all, the partner is a doctor!

I'm still inclined to think in the abductor possibility, and yes, I have read the "19 Reasons". My scenario would be something like this: I believe the abductor knew the movements of all T9. He had a week to establish this. Also, I believe he accessed the apartment through the sliding door, after hiding behind the bushes near the stairs that lead to the balcony (there is a wide gap in the left side wall next to the first few steps). He waited for Gerry to do his regular check (if he actually did check on Maddie at the time he says he did), went up the stairs after he left, accessed the apartment (sliding doors are very quiet), took Maddie (while GM talks to his friend some 15 m away, it's very dark, he is probably somewhat drunk, he probably has his back to the apartment), she was probably sedated with something, he went out through the same sliding door (remember, it was very dark!), he crossed the road and this is when Jane Tanner allegedly saw someone. (He didn't expect JT to have been there at that particular time, nor for GM to have stopped to chat to someone). In my opinion, JT saw someone, but the description and colour of pyjamas, etc. was made up later to give the McCanns a stronger case. The above is all speculation and my personal opinion only.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Hi daisy like your theory, BUT Jane Tanner saw bundleman coming from the area of the car park which is at the FRONT of the building, where the bedroom window and front door is and the access to Apartment 5 where JT lives, so why would bundleman be on this road, if he had sneaked out of the patio door, a BIT RISKY DONT YOU THINK?
purrfect_catlover
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 3:57 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Postby Stevo » Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:27 pm

New member - purrfect_catlover posted this in a new topic with almost the same name as this topic. I can't move it but I'm repeating his/her post in here because there was already a topic called "Playground". Here it is:

purrfect_catlover

United Kingdom
15 Posts

Posted - 06 Jan 2008 : 11:21:20

I think the child on the floor is Jane Tanners daughter who is virtually the same age as maddie and i believe her friend. They are sat together in the bus, and were holding each others hand going up the plane steps.

I think that they were sleeping together, as why would you leave one child sleeping on her own? Perhaps one died, and one was sick? Just a thought.

But i dont see any mysteries to this photo to be honest.
Stevo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: USA

Postby Stevo » Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:30 pm

purrfect_catlover

The children on the bus are NOT Tanner/O'Brien kids. The McCanns are on the bus in a party of 10:

Gerry & Kate + 3 kids = 5
David & Fiona Payne + Dianne Webster + 2 kids = 5

The girl on the grass is NOT the girl sat by Madeleine on the bus as she is smaller than Madeleine.

The girl on the grass could be Tanner's daughter and is the most likely candidate.
Stevo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: USA


Return to Praia da Luz & Ocean Club Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron