Madeleine etc .: Chapitres 20-23 (6)

A challenge for those who believe the abduction myth

and those who put out stories supporting that nonsense

OK. I apologise. There is nothing remotely amusing about the death of Madeleine, nor about the efforts which have been made to pretend that she was abducted. The only people who have smiled and joked and grinned and laughed are the McCanns.

But I do now have your attention. Did Madeleine die on Thursday 3rd May or during the night of Sunday 29th / Monday 30th ? Étrangement il n'y a pas de mort intermédiaire, pourtant beaucoup plus vraisemblable.

This is merely one example of a story clearly meant to persuade you. I have ripped much it from Rich Hall’s recent film, but feel it deserves to stand alone, as a classic example of how lies were fed into the media, and acquired lives of their own.

It is known as Media Manipulation, or SPIN, or as normal people would call it - LYING. Recent research by a respected seeker for the truth, has reinforced the observation that there is little if any evidence of Madeleine’s continued existence on or after Monday 30th April 2007. Pas plus pas moins que les autres enfants.

What scant evidence there is is largely unconvincing, and in some cases simply factually inaccurate. Even the members of the Tapas 7, for example, contradict themselves and seek to correct errors made in statements by others.

It is fairly obvious that some of the so-called evidence was deliberately planted into the public domain to ensure that the “abduction on Thursday 3rd May “ story could remain the focus of the world’s attention, and would gradually begin to be believed.

Conspiration, conspiration !

This is a clearly fabricated account which seeks to provide evidence of this type, alleged to be from one Vicky Boyd, and reported by a journalist, one Danielle Gusmaroli. This article appeared some two weeks after Madeleine was reported missing, in a magazine called First Magazine, which seems to have had a fairly short existence.

It is worth repeating, so that the egregious nature of this can be fully understood.

“The day before she disappeared, Maddie spent an idyllic afternoon playing in the sun with three year old Louie Boyd. Here Louie’s mum Vicky, shares her story . . .

Vicky, who works in a bank, was sitting by the pool as Maddie’s mum Kate, 38, relaxed on a sun-lounger and watched her daughter whizzing down the waterslide.

“Maddie was wearing a sunhat, a little pink top and blue skirt, occasionally stopping to pull faces at her mum as Kate looked on adoringly,” Vicky recalled. And so on in the same vein.

There is no mention of this incident in the police records, nor in Kate’s autobiography. So far as is known Vicky Boyd did not make a statement to the PJ, and it is difficult to find her name on the official Ocean Club/Mark Warners Guest list. A number of observations

• Would a small child dressed in a skirt and sunhat whizz on a water slide?

• The day BEFORE she disappeared should refer to Wednesday 2nd May. But on Wednesday 2nd May - from Kate’s autobiography...

“Today it rained. The children went to their clubs, but our tennis lessons were postponed.”

Weather reports confirm that on this occasion Kate’s reporting of the weather is correct. There was 100% cloud cover for most of the day. The highest temperature peaked briefly at 19º C, at around 5pm, but most of the day was only 16º or 17º, and there was a fairly brisk wind from the WSW, recorded at Force 4 to 5. Other witnesses refer to rain during part of the day.

So it is plain that Vicky Boyd could not have been speaking about Wednesday 2 May.

• But let us assume that the said Vicky Boyd is speaking of the day after she, Vicky, became personally aware of the report, and that she is therefore speaking about Thursday 3rd May. Thursday was cold and windy, Kate says she ‘hung around’ during the morning. Madeleine, she said, had gone to the beach for their ‘mini-sail’ activity, and that at lunchtime “The weather was a little on the cool side and I remember thinking I should have brought a cardigan for her, we then sat round the toddler pool for a while, dipping our feet in”

We must always remember that this is the day of the McCanns claim for the very well known Last Photo, showing Gerry and two children, Madeleine and Amelie, dipping their feet in the Ocean Club swimming pool, with Gerry’s sweaty forehead, thin T shirt, children’s light clothing, floppy sun hats, sunglasses, and clear evidence of bright sun and a clear sky.

KMC: Fiona and Dave had been windsurfing that morning and had seen Madeleine’s group, who had gone down to the beach for their ‘mini-sail’ activity. We heard later that they’d been on a speedboat as well as a dinghy. Fiona told me she’d spotted Ella there but not Madeleine.

As an aside, the mini-sail is shown as 10.30 to 11am. [We note that in that half hour the group have to walk down to the beach, organise the boats, don lifejackets, sail, then go on a speedboat, return, put the boats away, remove life jackets, and walk back, change out of wet clothing, to resume other activities at 11. If the story is to be believed.] Surtout qu'il y a eu deux tournées.

The wind was force 4 from the North West - an offshore wind - very dangerous for inexperienced sailors. The temperature was a chilly 16-17º C (61º - 63ºF).

KMC continues: After preparing some lunch, I went with Fiona to pick up Madeleine and Scarlett, who was in the adjoining Baby Club, taking her on the quicker route through the grounds of the Ocean Club, which she hadn’t yet discovered. "Her" est Fiona.

Observation. This route snakes through the paths at the back of houses on the neighbouring urbanisation, and so avoids the likelihood of being witnessed by anyone else. Or of not being.

Madeleine, that lunchtime, is one of them. She was wearing an outfit I’d bought especially for her holiday: a peach-coloured smock top from Gap and some white broderie-anglaise shorts from Monsoon.

This directly contradicts Vicky Boyd who maintains Madeleine was wearing a blue skirt. But in Kate’s book there is no mention of anyone else, no mention of sitting on sun-loungers, nothing about waterslides . . which is just as well, because there IS NO WATERSLIDE, as a glance at any of the contemporaneous photos of the resort will show even the most determined McCann abduction believer.

Kate speaks of white shorts, as usual with too much detail added, NOT a blue dress, and there is no mention of any ‘football session’, let alone one lasting a whole hour.

[Pro footballers play for 45 minutes and then rest. Rugby 40 minutes]

ADDENDUM: A sharp eyed observer has spotted yet another clue that this entire thing is a mendacious invention. There is a brief mention of Gerry playing tennis, but there is no mention of Amelie and Sean. None at all. So where were they ?

Kate’s book claims she took them back to the Toddlers club, but where were they when Boyd and Kate were lying on the sun loungers for the hour ? Surely not in the unlocked apartment on their own !

KMC: Together we took Sean and Amelie back to the Toddler Club at around 2.40pm and dropped Madeleine off with the Minis ten minutes later. Ella was already there. (p. 66)

There are many questions that arise from the publication of this story, which appears to have been published solely to promote the hypothesis that Madeleine was abducted. Who approached First Magazine? Was it Vicky Boyd? If so, was she prompted to do so by a member of the McCann Team? Was she paid for her article ? If so, how much ? Or was First Magazine approached directly by Clarence Mitchell or one of his PR team ? Why did Vicky Boyd allow her name to be attached to a story that she must have known was wholly false ? And why would she reveal so many personal details, her own and her husband’s name and occupation, her children’s names and their photographs, including details of where they all live. Why did the publishers of this story do so ?Were they paid? If so, how much, and by whom ? If Danielle Gusmaroli was indeed in Praia da Luz, as is stated in the article, why did she not visit the pool and see for herself that there was no water slide? Or if she did, why did she then lie in the article ? The author credit on the article is explicit and clear “By Danielle Gusmaroli, in Praia da Luz” [my emphasis] And if Gusmaroli was in PdL, was the interview conducted in person, or over the telephone. Had Boyd remained for two further weeks ? (We believe not, incidentally, but are open to proof that they were both still there). That is not so clear. “Here, Louie’s mum Vicky shares her story with first” Did the publishers check out their story directly with the McCanns or their agents? Or did they simply reproduce whatever they were given by Vicky Boyd or the McCann Team? And so on…

We can obviously dismiss this account as a total fabrication, and may believe that it was probably fed by government media director Clarence Mitchell (or a colleague) and / or PR company Bell Pottinger (who were retained by holiday company Mark Warner) to a gullible press, and of no value to any investigation. But - it is not neutral. It must not be simply ignored. It has significant value to researchers of the truth of this dreadful story. In particular

(a) the very fact of its presence,

(b) the fact that the details were clearly supposed to match those given by Kate, and

(c) the fact that it was planted in an obscure women’s magazine, and then cross referenced some time later in The Sun, again with family photos of the Boyds, which is designed to give it a spurious credibility, whilst allowing The Sun - if challenged - to claim that they were merely reporting it as second-hand …

d) The article clearly says “Little Madeleine McCann was snatched from her bed TWO WEEKS AGO . . .” [my emphasis] which means that the article was published and placed on the Tabloid women’s magazine stands the same weekend that the Last Photo was released to AFP. Is this pure coincidence or rather evidence of a Machiavellian strategy?

… all this is clear positive evidence of the egregious lengths to which the McCanns’ spokesman - who once said his job was to “control what came out in the media” - and the forces of Bell Pottinger - who despite what Gerry McCann said under Oath at the Leveson enquiry, were paid £500,000 to keep the story in the papers every day for a year - were prepared to go to in order to keep the abduction version of Madeleine’s mysterious disappearance in the public’s mind.

It may, in fact, for those and other reasons be treated as fairly strong evidence that Madeleine was NOT there.

Like the Last Photo -

it has been invented, and planted purely to perpetuate the myth of Madeleine’s continued existence after 29/30 April.

There is nothing else that does this, and much tends to indicate that Madeleine may have died during that night.

Kate and Gerry's 2016 Christmas message

as you so generously said . . .

"Thank you so much to everyone who hasn't forgotten about Madeleine . . ."

Let us all assure you, Kate and Gerry, that we have not, and we never will.

We do not think it is funny, and we do not make millions of pounds out of it.

We do not abuse and sue, nor pursue to their deaths those who hold different opinions.

We do not travel the world in private jets owned by 'questionable' business people, funded by other’s pensions, and we do not accept hospitality from proven paedo***s.

We do not accept sponsorship from people who run hotels which host 'questionable' adult weekends, and we do not travel the world, nor attempt to meet the Pope.

We do not carry on a pretence and a 'pact of silence' with our friends, and we are not Ambassadors for Charities which pretend to look for people, but in fact do little more than run a website, whilst spending over £2m on staff salaries.

We are just normal concerned people.

Chapter 21- Is the T balls photo the new last photo ?

Close friend, confidante, and uncritical McCann supporter, journalist Tracey Kim Kandohla seems to suggest this may be about to happen. In a Mail Online article recently, à propos the McCanns’ blog site, she said:

“Pictures include the iconic last known image of Maddie in pink sunhat and clutching tennis balls while on holiday “

There are at least two possibilities here:

1) That TK is simply very stupid, and has not read Kate's autobiography, where it clearly says that the Pool Photo was the Last Photo,

“We then sat round the toddler pool for a while, dipping our feet in, and I took what has turned out to be my last photograph to date of Madeleine.” p. 66

2) That TK was under orders to put that in.

If so, then more questions pose themselves. Who told her to word it like that ?

Has Team McCann been watching Richard D. Hall’s excellent films, been reading the fora and e-books and blogs, and have they now begun to realise that the Pool Photo is indefensible, forensically toxic, and as much a liability - or more - as the smashed and jemmied shutters, the whooshing curtains, slamming doors, the waterslide, Tannerman, Smithman, and all the other nonsense ?

IF - and only if - the Pool Photo has been altered then at least four and probably five people, whose names are very obvious, would be involved in a serious Criminal conspiracy to pervert the course of Justice - both in English Law and its Portuguese equivalent, as was pointed out a long time ago.

So are we now going to see an attempt to dismiss the Pool Photo as having been taken on the Sunday after all, and the Tennis Balls photo being promoted to “official Last Photo”? It is variously described as having been taken by Kate on Tuesday 1st May,

I ran back to our apartment for my camera to record the occasion. One of my photographs is known around the world now: a smiling Madeleine clutching armfuls of tennis balls. p. 57

or by Jane Tanner on Thursday 3rd May

Rachael Oldfield (Rog):

1578 "The third of May, are you able to summarise the days activities"?

Reply "Yeah, ... . . . Madeleine and Ella and their sort of group came to have a tennis lesson as part of their crèche activities, erm and Kate didn't have her camera and Jane was there then as well and Jane took some photos of both Madeleine and Ella, that's one, that poster of Madeleine with the tennis balls, that sort of pictures".

1578 "That was taken on the"?

Reply "Yeah that was that morning."

1578 "Thursday"?

Or perhaps not by Jane Tanner (rog), even on Wednesday 2nd May - she doesn’t say.

Reply "No. Err the Wednesday, err again I think it would have just been a, Evie would have had a sleep and just round the pool or in the, each other apartments, until, until high tea but I think Ella, and Ella would have, Ella went to err, Ella went to the err the kids club.

Actually that morning was the morning Ella and Madeleine had the tennis lesson I think on the Wednesday. You've got the picture of..."

Many years ago a commentator and researcher posted this on a blog :

In short, Rachael describes how Jane took the photograph on Thursday, Jane describes the event taking place on Wednesday and Kate describes how she (Kate) took it on Tuesday.

And yet the photograph cannot have been taken during a mini-tennis session on the Tuesday either, because there wasn't one. Mini-tennis took place, according to the 'kids' club' schedule, on the Monday morning. If this photograph is construed as representing Madeleine McCann's 'last hours' therefore (as a recent Sunday Telegraph report would suggest), then these will have been spent on the morning of Monday April 30th, not the early evening of May 3." There was only one mini-tennis session scheduled for Madeleine's play group – on the Monday morning (10.00 – 11.00 a.m.). But what if they do try to run with this one, and to change everything they have said over the last ten years?

Let us go back to Prosecution Exhibit 1 - Kate’s autobiography ‘madeleine’. On 10th May, they both went to Portimão police station, where Gerry was interviewed at length. Kate continues

I made use of the long wait I anticipated by sitting down with a notebook, pen and my camera, containing dated photographs of the holiday, and trying to write a detailed account of everything that happened the week before. p. 123

So the Pool photo must have had its real date - 29 April 2007 - or we would have been told that she tried, but the internal dating system had apparently gone wrong and could not be relied upon, but that she remembered the dates of the photos... But we were not. She sat and made a list of however many photos were on the camera for that week with dates and times.

Meanwhile Gerry was making his second statement in which he says

Asked, he clarifies that, apart from the personal photos already delivered by him to the police authorities after the disappearance of his daughter MADELEINE, he has no others in his possession.

He says he has no others. His wife says she is sitting in the corridor with a camera-full ! Was he trying to be clever ? Not in my possession, officer, you will have to ask my wife whether she has any in her possession. That is more tricky since in common with many romance languages, in Portuguese na sua posse can mean in his -, in her -, in their -, and in your - singular or plural - possession.

But they have only one camera. The Canon PowerShot A 620. So that argument, frankly, will not wash. Or was Kate trying to be clever when she said “my last photograph “ ? Not THE last photograph, but MY last photograph ? Doubtful. And since she insists the Pool Photo was taken at lunchtime on Thursday 3rd there is simply no window of opportunity after that for the Tennis Balls photo. She is very clear what they did after the Pool Photo - dumped the children back in their crèches, played tennis, and then she went for the run among the beach, before returning to find Gerry having high tea with the children - her version, from the book. p. 66

I had finished my run by five-thirty at the Tapas area, where I found Madeleine and the twins already having their tea with Gerry. The others had decided to feed their kids at the beachside restaurant, the Paraíso. Madeleine was sitting on the Tapas terrace, eating.

There are of course several possible versions. From the book:

Having arranged for Gerry to meet the children, I opted to go for a run along the beach, where I spotted the rest of our holiday group. They saw me . . .” p. 66

(Banishing the entire Tapas group to the Paraiso for the first and only time is interesting as it ensured that there could be no witnesses to this alleged family high tea.)

But then we look again and find that another version involves Kate herself signing Madeleine out of the crèche at 5:30 pm (It is a strange and compelling characteristic of this case that so many witnesses give stories which simply do not match, and often totally contradict everyone else’s, and in several cases individual witnesses themselves give several ‘versions’ which are totally incompatible one with the other.) In any event Mitchell told the world to look at the time of the Pool Photo, and clearly intended the date to be noted. The agency rubric for the photo says clearly: Picture released by the McCann family 24 May 2007 and was taken 03 May 2007 the same day Madeleine McCann (R) went missing from the family’s holiday apartment in the southern Algarve region. So that is what they were told.

The question is therefore, is this simple Tabloid invented nonsense, not intended to be read closely, nor to be questioned and certainly not believed by anyone ? Or is it the start of something else entirely ? Only time will tell.

As another researcher has observed - It’s surely something you’d think Tracey Kandohla would have known by now, what with her weekly cup of tea and cakes with Clarence Mitchell in the early days, and trading on recycling Clarence’s notes into the press for the past 10 years?

Further information. Tracey Kim Kandohla lives in Rothley and is a friend of the McCanns, belonging to the same Gym Club as Kate. She is frequently described as “a source close to the McCanns”.

Chapter 22: Tennis Balls Photo

My interest in this particular image was rekindled after the recent newspaper article by Tracey Kandohla, a vehement and uncritical McCann supporter and personal friend of Kate, who referred to the Tennis Balls Photo (TBP) where she says:

“Pictures include the iconic last known image of Maddie in pink sunhat and clutching tennis balls while on holiday “ [1]

Having researched it further, some are now tending towards the conclusion that it could indeed be the ‘last photo’ of Madeleine Beth McCann, taken some hours after the Pool photo.

Is there anything we can deduce from what we observe when we examine this image?

There are two versions in circulation. [2]

This one, which has clearly been cropped from this one

The larger one shows up with an aspect ratio of 800 x 1067 which gives 1.33, or 0.75

depending which way we calculate it.

This is normal for most cameras.

The Canon PowerShot A620 for example uses 3072 x 2304 = 0.75 / 1.33

and the Olympus C-50 similarly uses 2560 x 1920 = 0.75 / 1.33

But immediately we note that most cameras take images in ‘landscape’ format, that is to say the photo is wider than it is high. 4 units wide by 3 units high.

We sometimes observe keen photographers physically turning the camera through 90º, to achieve the ‘Portrait’ format, but in the days of high resolution digital images it is more common simply to crop the middle out and save it separately.

So has the larger of these images itself been cropped from a landscape format image?

If so the original must have looked like this:

This is on any test a very poor photo. Modern cameras have a Zoom button, usually very close to the shutter release, and it would have been easy and far more normal to create this. It also lacks contrast, and overall is too dark.

What else do we observe?

1 Almost total lack of shadow - indicating a lack of bright sun

2 Madeleine is wearing a bright pink sun hat, and sandals

3 She is clutching three full sized yellow tennis balls, possibly even a fourth

We also observe other things, which may be relevant at a future date.

The quality of the photo available is poor so we need to be careful with this - but

4 There appear to be bruises or scratches on Madeleine’s arm and leg,

5 The colour of her legs and arms are significantly different from the Pool photo

6 The position of the head seems unusual, though it may be to steady the balls

and then

7 She is wearing different shoes from the playground photos

8 She is wearing the pink hat worn by Amelie in the Pool photo

9 There is no one else in shot. No Adults, no children, no nanny, no tennis coach.

The McCanns’ Camera, the Canon PowerShot A620 takes photos at 7 mega pixels, giving an extremely clear, crisp, and bright image, as we see in the Pool photo. [3]

The TBP is dark, grainy, and dull - lacking contrast. It is also badly ‘framed’.

Mark Warner specialise in Tennis at many of their summer resorts. [4]

Mini and junior LTA tennis courses for younger players are designed to be fun with the opportunity to learn new skills and offer encouragement to all children. These courses can be pre-booked in the UK. Private lessons may be recommended by the Tennis Manager for children who are particularly strong players. It is very clear what is offered.

Mini LTA courses

Ages 3 to 5 years

Mini red awards

This course is taught using short racquets and soft balls. It's just like the real game and your coaching includes learning different shot types and focusing on longer rallies.

And a photo is attached showing both these items.

The balls are yellow and RED, to distinguish them from the full “adult’ ones.

They are freely available.

For example on Amazon one can find [5]

Wilson Kid's Starter Tennis Balls (Pack of 3) - Yellow/Red

Large low compression tennis ball for 10 & under tennis

Newly developed 75mm felt covered ball

75% lighter than common tennis balls

So we may deduce that -

Madeleine was not playing tennis on this occasion. Her footwear is inappropriate, the sun hat is inappropriate, and the tennis balls she is clutching are inappropriate.

There are three different accounts by three different people of how, when, and by whom, this photo was taken.

They are, as we now expect, totally incompatible with one another, and openly contradictory.

It is variously described as having been taken by Kate on Tuesday 1st May,

“. . . I ran back to our apartment for my camera to record the occasion. One of my photographs is known around the world now: a smiling Madeleine clutching armfuls of tennis balls” p. 57 [6]

or by Jane Tanner on Thursday 3rd May [7]

Rachael Oldfield (Rogatory interview):

1578 "The third of May, are you able to summarise the days activities"?

Reply "Yeah, ... . . . Madeleine and Ella and their sort of group came to have a tennis lesson as part of their crèche activities, erm and Kate didn't have her camera and Jane was there then as well and Jane took some photos of both Madeleine and Ella, that's one, that poster of Madeleine with the tennis balls, that sort of pictures".

1578 "That was taken on the"?

Reply "Yeah that was that morning."

1578 "Thursday"?

Or perhaps not by Jane Tanner, even on Wednesday 2nd May - she doesn’t say. [8]

Jane Tanner (Rogatory interview):

Reply "No. Err the Wednesday, err again I think it would have just been a, Evie would have had a sleep and just round the pool or in the, each other apartments, until, until high tea but I think Ella, and Ella would have, Ella went to err, Ella went to the err the kids club.

Actually that morning was the morning Ella and Madeleine had the tennis lesson I think on the Wednesday. You've got the picture of..."

Many years ago a commentator and researcher posted this on a blog [9]

In short, Rachael describes how Jane took the photograph on Thursday, Jane describes the event taking place on Wednesday and Kate describes how she (Kate) took it on Tuesday. SNIPPED

Looking at clothing and the tennis balls it becomes more clear that this was not during any mini-tennis session. Which neatly disposes of Rachael’s and Jane Tanner’s “evidence”.

In any event there was only one mini-tennis session scheduled for Madeleine's play group – on the Monday morning (10.00 – 11.00 a.m.) 30th April [10]

On that day -Monday -between 10.00 and 11.00 it was a chilly 17º with almost total cloud cover.

On the following day, when Kate insisted it was taken, the weather was no better [11]

Is Madeleine not merely clutching tennis balls, but also ‘freezing’ ?

But now let us look away and think of an alternative, maybe more probable scenario.

We know that Sunday 29th April was the only warm and cloudless day in the entire holiday, but even that day by later afternoon and early evening the weather front brought a cloud bank which persisted for the following five days, and brought cold wind and rain. [12]

The chart shows that by 6 pm on Sunday there was 50% cloud cover but, also importantly, that the air temperature was at its warmest for that day, 21º C, a relatively pleasant 70ºF.

If that be correct, then the T shirt, shorts and sun hat are entirely appropriate.

As would be keeping the children up and outdoors for a little longer than planned.

We then look at the position of the sun.

Sunset on Sunday 29th April was 20:15, but it was early in the season, and the sun only reached 67º at Solar Zenith at 13:29.

Again the charts are instructive [13]

17:30 32º

18:00 26º

18:30 20º

In other words the sun is very low in the sky, and there is a dense bank of cloud as shown clearly in the available photos. [14]

Is this then compatible, at least, with Madeleine collecting tennis balls, during or after a game involving Gerry, late in the afternoon, possibly even after tea, with the sun low in the sky and behind a cloud bank ?

If so, then that could easily have been on Sunday 29th April

We note that on the available Tennis Court booking sheets, which apparently start only on Tuesday 1st May, the time from 5:30 to 7:30 is shown as “Mixed night”.

On the previous evenings the courts may either have had this session, or may well have been ‘free’ - as in not booked - and the men may well have gone for a short knock-up.

Is it not at least conceivable that as a ‘special treat’ Madeleine was

allowed to stay up and act as ball girl ?

Other hypotheses are possible.

The Tennis Balls Photo (TBP) was not taken by Jane Tanner on Thursday (Claim 1).

The TBP was not taken by Jane on Wednesday (Claim 2).

The TBP was not taken by Kate McCann on Tuesday (Claim 3).

Instead, it is possible that it is a genuine photo of Madeleine taken by Gerry or Kate McCann during the early evening of Sunday 29 April, perhaps after some of the men had been playing tennis. IF CORRECT, the three separate, false claims would surely suggest a deliberate attempt to conceal the real date that the photograph was taken.

An additional observation leads to a slightly different hypothesis.

There are four photographs from the holiday that we can accept as having been taken on the McCanns’ camera on that holiday: the three 'playground' photos, which were clearly taken on the Saturday, and the Pool photo, which the McCanns insist was taken on Thursday 3rd May, but evidence clearly indicates was actually taken on Sunday 29th April.

All these four photos, almost certainly taken by Kate, show evident ability to use the 'Zoom' button, and to frame a shot reasonably well.

The larger version of the TBP, however, even in the format available to us, shows that the 'Zoom' button was clearly NOT used. When that is added to the poor framing and ‘construction’ of the image and the grainy and unclear colour saturation, there is therefore a reasonable argument that Kate did NOT take the Tennis Balls Photo on the Canon PowerShot.

That in turn leads one to question whether someone else – neither Kate nor Jane – may have taken the photo on another camera. When we consider such a scenario, still other possibilities come into view.

Was the photo actually taken that week ?

Could it be a composite photo, with Madeleine superimposed on a background shot of the tennis court ?

Also, as some have suggested, could it be a triple composite: a girl, not Madeleine, added on to a background shot of the tennis court, with Madeleine’s head photoshopped on to replace the head of a different girl ? The image is so grainy that this might not be difficult.

Once we begin to accept

1 that Kate McCann’s account of how and when the Tennis Balls Photo was taken is false

2 the garbled and contradictory accounts of Jane Tanner and Rachael Oldfield are false

3 the photo was NOT taken on the Canon PowerShot, and has therefore never been presented with the EXIF date and time shown

any serious researcher must consider every one of the possibilities and scenarios listed above to be a reasonable hypothesis.

Further analysis can then be undertaken to try to eliminate some of those scenarios and to concentrate on the one that has the best evidence to support it.

ADDENDUM. Another strange issue

In her autobiography, ‘madeleine’, Kate McCann is clear about the sequence of events on Tuesday 1st May. It is so extraordinary that I quote it in full from p. 57 [6]

During Gerry’s tennis lesson, Madeleine and Ella came to the adjoining court with their Mini Club for a mini-tennis session. Jane and I stayed to watch them. It chokes me remembering how my heart soared with pride in Madeleine that morning. She was so happy and obviously enjoying herself. Standing there listening intently to Cat’s instructions, she looked so gorgeous in her little T-shirt and shorts, pink hat, ankle socks and new holiday sandals that I ran back to our apartment for my camera to record the occasion. One of my photographs is known around the world now: a smiling Madeleine clutching armfuls of tennis balls. At the end of their session, the children had been asked to run around the court and pick up as many balls as they could. Madeleine had done really well and was very pleased with herself. Gerry loves that picture.

The implication is clear.

There was an entire group of children, the mini-club, comprising 6 children, (according to the somewhat dubious crèche sheets) under the instruction of Cat, the nanny.

They were playing mini-tennis, so there would have been racquets and the special soft balls appropriate for 3 year olds. (see above)

But the photo shows Madeleine, alone, with “adult’ tennis balls.

No nanny, no adults, no Mini Club of other children, no tennis coach

No parents, no adults playing tennis on the other court . . .

NOTHING. Nobody.

And Kate says she ran back to the apartment to collect the camera to record the occasion.

So let us accept what she says, apply logic, and consider whether this is remotely credible.

Kate implies that she saw Madeleine in that pose. ( Her use of the pluperfect ‘had been asked” denotes an action completed prior to her next action)

THEN thought how 'gorgeous' she looked

THEN decided to run back to her apartment for her camera

THEN ran back

THEN unlocked the door (if she went round the front through the car park, or opened the unlocked sliding patio doors if they were leaving the apartment unlocked - with camera and passports, and other valuables - during the day as well as during the evenings)

THEN retrieved the camera

THEN locked the door again - (if she did,) or pulled the patio doors closed

THEN ran down the stairs, out of the wicket gate which she closed behind her,

THEN ran or jogged through the reception area, round the pool, across the lawn

THEN found Madeleine

THEN asked her to pose and

THEN took the photo.

How long would all this take?

It is possible to envisage and then to calculate the distance involved. [15]

Applying the shorter distance option with the unlocked patio doors and insecure apartment we see this and we can put way-points on the path - thus - ( blue with red and white dots) and then allow the computer to calculate this distance - thus [16]

Allowing Kate to climb the stairs, enter, visit whichever room contained the camera, and exit we can probably round this up to 110 metres. Each way.

Kate herself says the distance from Tapas bar to apartment “ was only thirty to forty-five seconds away,”. That is the way-point marked in black above. (In fact at a brisk walk from Tapas to the wicket gate it is one minute).

Even allowing that Kate is a distance runner, the return trip, past obstacles, with frequent changes of direction, of 220 m. and at a civilised jog perhaps mixed with a brisk walking pace, rather than a determined sprint, is likely to have taken at least three minutes, and very probably up to, and even well over four.

The children - all six of them, have to collect a few tennis balls from a court which is totally surrounded by chain link fencing. How long would this realistically take ?

And who was with Madeleine while Kate rushed back?

To whom did she speak and say: “Hold Maddie there for three or possibly four or five minutes, I must just grab a pic of her!”

Kate tells us none of this, arousing suspicions that her account of this incident may not be entirely accurate !

But to reiterate, so that we do not get seduced into believing even a little bit of this extraordinary story:

There was only one mini-tennis session scheduled for Madeleine's play group – on the Monday morning (10.00 – 11.00 a.m.) 30th April [10]

Some time ago another researcher and seeker for the truth, who posts under the name Dr Martin Roberts, examined the claims made about the Pool photo - according to Kate McCann the very last photo she took of Madeleine - in some detail. [17]

He begins quoting the same passage from Kate’s autobiography “madeleine”.

“During Gerry's tennis lesson, Madeleine and Ella came to the adjoining court with

their Mini Club for a mini-tennis session... Standing there listening intently to Cat's

instructions, she (Madeleine) looked so gorgeous in her little T-shirt and shorts,

pink hat, ankle socks and new holiday sandals that I ran back to our apartment for

my camera to record the occasion. One of my photographs is known around the

world now: a smiling Madeleine clutching armfuls of tennis balls".

“Thus Kate McCann tells us in her book (madeleine), clearly and unambiguously, exactly where her daughter Madeleine was that Tuesday morning, May 1st. She arrived at the tennis courts, together with Ella O'Brien, during Gerry's tennis lesson, which had started at 10.15. She [Madeleine] was not therefore where she should have been at that time – with her kid's club playmates, at the pool.

On Thursday afternoon at about 2.40 p.m. [actually Kate says it was 2.29pm] Kate McCann tells us she captured the iconic 'last photo' - the pool photo - of her daughter dressed in "an outfit I'd bought especially for her holiday: a peach-coloured smock top from Gap and some white broderie-anglaise shorts from Monsoon".

Madeleine was wearing nothing else but a sun hat. She was signed into the crèche by Kate that same afternoon at 2.50 p.m., [Kate actually says she dropped the twins off at 2.40pm] no doubt following a hurried exodus from the pool area, but unfortunately twenty minutes late for the 'chalk space pictures' activity, which began at 2.30 p.m. Between them the McCanns arranged for Gerry to collect the children later while Kate went off for a run. That is what Kate McCann says in her book. There is no mention whatsoever of any additional visit to the children's playgroups in the meantime.

Since Kate has told us exactly what Madeleine was wearing at 2.40 p.m. [actually from 2.29pm to 2.50 pm and also of course whilst she was at the pool with Gerry and Kate before 2.29pm ] we also know what she was not wearing – her swimming costume. So what did she do come the 'dive and find' time at the pool from 3.30 to 4.30 p.m., stand and watch?”

[My observations]

Our earlier analysis has shown that the only time the ‘Last photo’ - the Pool photo - could possibly have been taken was the Sunday that week, 29th April. Only on that day does the weather match what we see in the photo. This clearly implies that what Kate says about taking Madeleine to the crèche at 2.50 pm is simply unsustainable.

But to return to Dr Martin Roberts’ analysis of what Kate says about the Pool photo in her book, he finishes off his article with the trenchant observation:

"It is not possible to be certain that Madeleine McCann attended at the Ocean Club playgroup during the times referred to above and, by extrapolation, on any other occasion that week.”

NOTA BENE

It must be noted that Kate’s account was published in her book in 2011.

The PJ files, including Kate’s and Gerry’s statements, the Tapas 7 statements and rogatory interviews, crèche records, photos, and everything else were released on DVD by the PJ when the case was ‘shelved’ in 2008.

Kate and her husband Gerry, her advisors, their teams of Lawyers, proof readers, friends, the Tapas 7, and their family had ample opportunity to cross check what she had written before publication, if only to ensure that what was said did not personally compromise them or impugn their individual veracity.

It seems no one took on that awesome responsibility.