Thursday, 17 February 2011

"The Last Photograph"

High Resolution link Here:

The "Last" Photograph

Here is an extract of a post-reply I recently published on another site, on this topic:

The EXIF says that it was put to Adobe Photoshop CS Windows.
I have this info from Stevo's book (Faked Abduction) where we can read a lot of details on page 187 and around. Many details were already found on forums and I WISH that the old 3 Arguidos were still alive because so much searching was conducted there. we could know what camera they had, (I can't remember if Gerry & Kate had 2 different ones... I think Kate's was a Canon(?)... If you have the time to search it, all the details will be in the files (See pamalam's site ).

It was released on the 24th May 2007, so indeed the big question is: why not give this photo to the police (and keep copies obviously) as soon as possible?! instead of using old photos.....

There is no proof of this photo being authentic but on the opposite, only clear facts that prove it's a fake!

-the fact that they put the photo through EDITION. Ok it could have been JUST to enhance it, BUT then why keep the original, why not give it to the police immediately- even if it was just to clear the doubts...

In fact PJ should have DEMANDED this original. It's so important!!! What des PJ know about this so-called proof that Maddy was there on the 3rd May? Nothing, because they never even saw the original! Why didn't they want to know in which way it was modified, since it was about the "PROOF" of Maddy being there on that crucial day?! (imo it's all to do with the deliberate sabotage of the investigation!)

There are 3 elements (at least) that prove that it's NOT a genuine!!!!:
1) the strange line between Amelie's t-shirt and arm.
2) a minuscule forgotten bit near Gerry's finger.

3) the edition marks on Maddy's skin (near her left arm, on the right when we face the photo)!cpZZ2QQtppZZ20

- it's only small and you would need to do it by yourself, perhaps with enlarging the hi res photo a bit, someone had made a much better one on the defunct 3as forum, the marks were similar to an older photo of "Madeleine" : the patterns that left a trace on this 'Last' Photo looked like the garment that the child was wearing on that old photo! (as shown on my album link)
So to me, no, this is NOT , no way like the original, I bet that it's fabricated out of 3 photos, Maddy alone (anywhere), Gerry and/or Amelie sitting near the tile (hence the illogical black & white line), and another for a common background.

I still would like to see if "Maddy alone " matches in patterns with the mini-wall... but is that really relevant? since even if it matches, it's not even proof that it was the original, a good idea would be to work on that exif...

Cheers and you've had a brilliant idea to resurrect this topic! Cause not many people actually realise that it's 100% fake and how vital it is for this case.


The SHADOWS on that photo (the 'complete' one with Gerry, Amelie and 'Madeleine') DO SHOW that the solar time was NOON, with the sun being at its most vertical position, zenith. So this does NOT match the said time of 2:29pm (14h29). The relaxing-chair shadow is very clear:

Open for comments and links, simply click on the title to comment, with compliments, thank you for caring.

-please click on the link at the beginning of this post for a large hi res copy-

Here's one that I found interesting too (thank you author - I do not know who created it):

Here is the Ocean Club pool in September 2007, with no one on:
(click on all photos to enlarge)

and the other version with only "Madeleine" on (so which is the genuine photo? or is any of these authentic?):


  1. I found a couple of photos of Gerry standing on the spot and looking at the poolside where the photo of Madeleine with Ameliee and Gerry was taken from, and another one from behind Gerry looking from the area where Madeleine was sitting with Ameliee and Gerry, will those do, cause if you want them I'll pop them in an email for you to post on here?

  2. Thank Ka Ossis!!! Now I don't even think that comparing the wall patterns on each photo would even be of use (yet it's great to have these photos anyway for further/ else study.)because since that plenty elements prove that "The Last Photograph" is modified, only the ORIGINAL would be of real use!!! Since they edited this one, the one with only Madeleine can have been edited -in every way- too. So I will change this title I think, from "Help Needed" to "The Last Photograph, the facts". I greatly appreciate your efforts, please know this. A view of what Gerry was looking at from that spot and angle is very useful for the sunglasses reflection!!! Cheers!

  3. Here's a comment I've just posted on the great Little Morsals blog:

    Hi Sasha and all, so many points... how about the photo of a photo...?!
    How about if the date on the cam was modified just for the day? I can set my cam as it was the 25th December 1012 if I want, then the exif will say that! LOL.
    How about the EXIF if the OTHER photo, the one where Maddy is alone on it?
    So which one is genuine, this one, the other, none?

    - i agree strongly, WHY insist on the TIME when NO original was provided to PJ?! LOL.

    Since obviously a line was PASTED there (or left over from edition) as obviously it IS there,+ oother edition marks SHOW, this means that Stevo is RIGHT in his own EXIF search, it DID go through Photoshop! Stevo wrote his book with great professionalism, he worked over 6 months on it, just to write it because he had previously pre-worked on it. Are some here trying to say that his work is worth nothing regarding that photo? Why would it be genuine when so many anomalies are present? On a genuine photo there is NEVER any anomaly of the sort, all is therefore self evident! Pieces were crafted together, just like for justice in GB, ;), Jack Straw bringing the law on free masons being entitled to keep their secret society membership SECRET, at a RIGHT time for them all, well why would I be 'prudent' when things are so obvious?!
    Only the facts will bring light on new, limpid tracks in this case, not speculations (asserted here as a CERTITUDE by some - I agree with Sasha, a bit of 'explanation' is needed as to why the certitude on the DATE since a date can be changed! LOL!!!).
    After saying this last bit, I am THROUGH with these photoS, with an S: Look at the SHADOWS, I'm not the only one finding they indicate NOON, which is what in BST:(same time in Portugal)between 11 am and 1 pm, certainly NOT 2:29 pm.

    --it is still funny to see how some go to such extra lengths to try and demonstrate what has already been done (The Author, Stevo, myself etc etc)and proven with facts, trying to demonstrate the IMPOSSIBLE is so vain and ridiculous, I'm moving on because don't like faked stories like now in the USA , just before the BOOK, pre-marketing ploy comes to mind.
    -Hugs Sasha- xxx megafund line


Thanks for leaving a comment: