Well here it is, the deliberate use of a paint program to cover up something very sinister on Madeleine's neck, and it's on the original photo that the McCann's published themselves!So what is being covered up on Madeleine's neck on this photo, because it look's like someone's attempted to paint out what could be strangle pressure marks with a photoshop manipulation program, and if it's not strangle pressure marks, then what is it and why?
The McCann's are invited to give us an answer!
http://fakedabduction.com/2010/03/the-author-on-paul-drocktons-blog-talk-radio/
ReplyDelete'Brian: Sure, sure, well Goncalo Amaral he erm, he puts forward the theory that she climbed on the sofa and fell off while unattended erm, I personally don’t believe that, you know, but who am I to say…if she died in the apartment erm, there was some erm reports and early reports in September of 07 talking about a blood spray pattern on the wall er [commencing'] a fractured larynx so you know…
Paul: I’m sorry, a fractured…’
Brian: Larynx in the throat. There’s a branch of forensics that can examine erm you know, where a wound was inflicted from the blood spray pattern on the wall or something.
Paul: Are we talking about literally, I mean this is, you know I’m going to ask the questions, but we’re talking about she could have had her throat slit’
Brian: Ermmmm….I mean, I mean there is no particular evidence in the files or anywhere to say if she died how it occurred and erm, I mean one of the cadaver dog also alerted in a flowerbed outside the apartment er, the veranda was about, I’d say, about eight feet above ground level, so she could have climbed and fallen off and fallen into a flowerbed for example. You know, there’s numerous theories…
Paul: the bottom line is you’re talking about a blood splatter pattern here that seems consistent with someone who er, I mean, if you fracture larynx erm, that’s not going to spray blood, if someone cuts yer that’s going to spray blood and so, I mean this again, I’m just speculating here. But the point is, there’s plenty of evidence there for a, for a criminal investigation and that’s the bottom line is that there hasn’t been one'
Mmmmm!... so it's a slit throat that the Mccann's have deliberately covered up with a photoshop paint brush on Madeleine's neck!
Errmm... Mr UK Cop, are you awake to this obvious evidence of murder or is Kate writing out your perscriptions for Heroin on a Free NHS perscription!
it definitely looks to me too that it's an attempt to mask finger marks, 3 clear fingers -prints on the right and a thumb mark on the left,wow.... Really good finding Ka. I don't agree with PJ's theory either, kids don't die from falling from 1 meter high if that, or not that likely as attracting the "need" to get mentioned so loudly and 'definitely' in a police file conclusion anyway.
ReplyDeleteTHAT would make it so SIMPLE...there was a (vanishing?) article from a PJ leak as stated... mentioning FINE LARYNX SPRAY....and that photo was never released until 3 years after the 3rd May 2007...her eyes look weird on that...
it shows clearly on the thumbnail too that marks exits, I had spotted some as well and they can't pass that as make-up, cause little girls are careful not to put make-up on their necks, they copy their mums, + I never believe that 'dressing table raid' porky, there are LOTS of photos were well-applied make-up is evident. I know how kids put make up on, used to do it myself, + seen lots in my family do it for a laugh, hiding from their mums or me, lol, it wouldn't look like that at all, and the kid had been crying just before.
Yep, there's definately finger marks across her neck, and a thumb mark on the left side of her chin, like a left handed person had grabbed her across the neck and forced her head to the right with such force it left severe bruising of the hand mark, and someone's tried to conceal the bruising with an image tool, perhaps in photoshop Pro or a similar program on a pc or laptop. The splodges the tools made over the bruise marks is pretty evident, not a very professional cover up at all, pretty much a rush job as far as I can make out.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the PJ is actually saying that Madeleine might have fallen of the back of the sofa and accidently hit her head or face on the window sill, I think he's just hopeing by trying the softly softly approach to that surgestion in hope that one of the McCann's would come out with what really happened, cause your right, kid's are pretty resilient when in accidents, falling from one metre off the back of the sofa wouldn't have the force behind it to cause an injury that sprayed blood up to the ceiling, head injuries have very little blood cause there's no major blood vessels in the scalp, and being that it was a spray of blood, notably jugular, then that would be impossible that type of injury would occure, being that sofa was the same height as the window sill, and Madeleine of 3-4 year's of age, would be less than a metre fall from the sofa to the window sill, and even less force that she would have probably had a bit of a bump on her head, and that certainly wouldn't have killed her. Another thing, for a jugular spray to reach the ceiling from a child that young, Madeleine would have had to be undergoing some from of severe attack for that type of blood pressure to occure, basically she'ed have been wide awake and aware of being attacked, and from the bruising on her neck and chin and being held down forcibly, holding the jugular under pressure, then yes, her blood pressure was raised considerably in her brain, and ony a very sharp knife, or scalpal used in a certain way at such an angle and speed across the jugular at the same time as releasing the pressure on the neck hold, would then create that kind of high velocity spray of blood. There's a lot of clues you can deduce from blood stains, like the following:
* Movement and direction of persons or objects while they were shedding blood.
* Position of persons or objects during bloodshed.
* Movement of persons or objects after bloodshed.
* The mechanism or object used to create a specific pattern.
* The direction a stain was traveling when it was deposited.
* The area of origin of an impact pattern.
* The minimum number of impacts during an incident.
* The sequence of events.
But following the high volume of persons that entered the McCann's apartment before the arival of the GNR officers and the PJ, not forgetting that someone or perhaps several persons had spent some considerable time cleaning up the apartment after the blood was depositied, plus the fact that the Mccann's were screaming 'Abduction' every 5 seconds to divert the GNR and PJ from investigating a homocide, is it any wonder that forensics had a hard job of determinging much from what was left and deliberately contaminated by the Mccann's and their friends!
ReplyDeleteLol, my daughter got into my make up bag at about the same age 3-4 year's old, and it wasn't just the eyeshadow she had a play with, and although it was all over her face, something resembling a mushed up triffle and a mud pie on a plate, there wasn't any on her neck at all, so your right there megafundline, kids that age wouldn't look at their necks in a compact mirror whilst applying their Mom's make up, they'ed just use it on their faces. But on this photo of Madeleine, it's not make up, as with blood loss, either from strangulation or a jugular cut on her throat, the first area's to lose oxgenated blood flow, the red blood, would be the eye area, being that the skin is much thinner around the eye's than anywhere else on the face!
I'm pretty much sickened about this photo, especially the fact that the Mccann's have published it illegally in the public media, throwing the face of their dead or mostly dead child in front of our faces and then claiming their daughter is alive, is pretty much psociopathic, cause this photo could be some other child that's practically dead or dying and their own child alive and safe playing happily with her Wendy House in the Mccann's home in Rothley, and it beg's the question of how the Mccann's can get away with porducing a photo of a dead or dying child in the public press and not one professional person, detective, coronor, physician or anyone has noticed... are they all on drug's and brain dead that they can't deduce the bloody obvious!
Could you tell me why publishing this photo was illegal?
DeleteAre we saying she is dead in this foto?
DeleteAnother thing... if this child on this photo had been crying just before it was taken, where's the red puffed up cheeks? There's not one facial muscle tension either, which is what you'ed get from being dead, which is evident from her lifeless eyes, so why havn't the Mccann's been arrested for this childs death, or at least murder, cause do they expect us all to get off on necrophilia like they do!
ReplyDeleteThis photo surgest to me that Kate and Fiona's expertise in anesthetics in the NHS has been involved in making ilegal Snuff videos with children and making profit out of it!
ReplyDeleteIn my Opinion, the LP ENGLISH POLICE OFFICER JOHN SHORD has sent the investigation onto a derailed track intentionally to protect the McCanns further, as THEY, the McCanns, SAID FIRST that they were watched and STALKED and MADELEINE (WHY JUST MADELEINE AND NOT THEIR 3 KIDS??!!) PHOTOGRAPHED. BY STRANGERS... on a fucking beach.... without the parents doing anything and, bizarrely, not even reporting this to police THEN!
ReplyDeleteat the time I did some consistant search work and suspected from my results that the MCCANNs were into SOME SORT OF INTERNET BUSINESS BEFORE "THE ABDUCTION".
AND LOCAL/ WIDENING TOO... cause their ways are STRANGE in all this and towards KIDS too, their own, and their approach on public sites, very inviting OR threatening, employing stupid gitts on the cheap that try to gather INFO (FACEBOOK, YOU TUBE and eveywhere else they can cheaply access) -AND TO TRY AND DISSUADE PEOPLE FROM FINDING THEN EXPOSING THE TRUTH!
THAT is MY OPINION. I have grounds for it since 2007. I have GENUINELY NOTICED ALL THIS, and am not the only one, we regularly get insulted in video comment, censored in FORUMS LIKE ON JILL HARVERN'S, even exposed with our finest private info on specially made sites! (like the JATIKS = "Just a thought you know" = ALL EX MEMBERS OF THE THREE ARGUIDOS FORUM!)
Kate is shadily getting plenty Mothers on the net to think it's ok to LEAVE KIDS UNATTENDED "PROVIDED IT'S SAFE".
WHAT NEXT? COFFEE MORNING IN ROTHLEY?
Or in Resorts abroad? Posher.
I'm imagining the further bit... How long could this been on?! having a 'girly morning' "between us", sack the kids (not for a change obviously), they are SAFE, and see what happens,,, anything anyone, white wine ladies? meanwhile the kids get in costumes, make-up for the girls, Knock- Knock at the door: HI BRIAN! HI TONY! HI GORDON! HI RICHARD! This way, Wooopss, nothing happened, pays out, wooosh!
happy with your extra 200 quid ladies each? bit tipsy so early? come again... was all fun, girlie ans sexy, you've loved it, ask your kids. Or use 'MY' method, kids don't have a say, HERE, an icecream and a teddy, mmmmh! -or a GOOD SLAP IN THE FACE MORE LIKE- Daddy won't grumble it will help him stay home on Friday pretending he's on sick, mum did extra jobs this week, all is OK in the UK!
Facebook makes a wonderfully free platform for these sorts of inviatations I would again imagine, and for free ADS FOR THE COMING BOOK, and for GOADING as to incite YOUNG MOTHERS to REALLY THINK IT'S SAFE LEAVING KIDS UNATTENTED WITH "TURNS OF CHECK"!
All true Megafundline... it's like Gerry and Kate are promoting the reverse psychology of good parenting, like it's safe to leave one's children in an unlocked apartment in a foriegn country for anything up to 5 hours at a time and for 6 nights in a row... oh it's ok to let paedophiles take photos of them on the beach, Gerry love's that kind of thing, and will probably get a profit out of it somewhere, being that they were there out of season and booked into a hotel that specialises in Adult fun that time of the year, stuff the kids and just get back to the fun despite whose the monster raptur hiding behind the kids bedroom door... yet if parents behaved like that at Butlins in Skeg Ness the Social Services would be locking them up in 10 seconds flat! And wasn't it Kate that first mentioned to the media that Portugal didn't have any laws on paedophiles... how the fuck did she know that?!!!... I never knew that till I heard it come out of Kate's gob on Sky News, and if she and Gerry knew that before they took their children there, isn't that parental negligence anyway, especially the fact that they stated that Madeleine was being photographed on the beach at Sagres, and didn't even bother informing the police about it, as if they were deliberately being obvlivious to it and it would have spoiled their fun having to fill out a police statement cause they'ed miss their piss up with their NHS TapHeads at the Tapas Bar... is that really good parenting. cause I'ed say that's how dog's treat their puppys!
ReplyDeleteMadeleine looks so sad and her parents didnt search for her. Utterly disgusting. They are diabolical. I think they knew what happened and she wasnt coming back. Mr Smith said he saw Gerry. He stated that and no matter what the mccanns do to sway witnesses. Mr Smiths word from Sept 2007 is set IN STONE.
ReplyDeleteYes. The Mccanns have tried to sway everyone to think what they done to their children as acceptable parenting. Well, ITS NOT OK. It is utterly DISGUSTING ans STUPID. Why are they not in prison ? Yes it was mentioned about a blood spray pattern leading to slit throat. Its about time the Mccanns got a reality check by having a good long look at themselves. They will see the cold hard truth. That they are rwo very deranged schitzos that need locking up as soon as possible. What a sick photograph. Very disturbing but that's the noem with that diabolical pair. Evil personafied.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI am not saying that this is what happened here i am just saying that bondage can be used in sex. I am not suggesting this happened to this little girl.
ReplyDeleteThe hands around the throat is a common method used in bondage and also a common method used for pedo's to get off when sexually abusing children. Asphyxiation while raping children.
ReplyDeleteThe picture has been tinkered with and with zooming and enhanced color as is shown here you get really bad pixellation and artifacts.It also depends on the paint proogram used and the experience of the user as well as a multitude of other things.
ReplyDeleteSince this is a copy of a copy that has probably been copied multiple times the result is rubbish as best and farcical and useless at worst.
It seems the presumption here is that she is dead.
For fricks sake people in this picture Maddie is very much alive.
I have seen enough dead people in my time to be able to see if someone is alive or dead.
She is NOT FRIKKEN DEAD in this picture.
Now go do some serious research and quit with the bull crap theories over perceived and imagined things is multiply copied photos.
https://youtu.be/xwdvr1iIPCI
ReplyDeleteCreepy but reading above not entirely ludicrous
Why is it that every picture of Madeline that’s been released to the public seems to have been altered or photo shopped in someway?? if my child went missing I wouldn’t try to hide anything or alter anything. I would want a clear picture of exactly what she looks like so people can compare everything down to the freckle. but it looks like they are trying to hide something I’ve done a little bit of research and I think that Madeline has a mole on The lower part of the left side of her neck and they don’t want to seen. Why?
ReplyDeleteDoesn’t make too much sense if she’s dead you wouldn’t be able to identify her via Mark especially by now but what if she’s alive that makes more sense a way for people to recognize her and to match birthmarks moles freckles things like that. That would be a reason to Photoshop distinguishing marks out so that’s why I still think she’s alive somewhere I believe they sold her or they need to pay a debt. I believe that they knew it was coming they weren’t for sure when that’s why when Kate found out she was missing she said “they’ve taken her”. This is why it was so easy for them not to look for Madeline because they ultimately knew pretty much what happened to her and they didn’t want to come up with any evidence steering that that may be the truth so they just let everybody else run around and come up with ideas of what may have happened to her.
Also if you look at a bunch of the pictures of Madeline her eyes seem to be a little bit of a different color in every picture and also I don’t really think her eye and normally stands out that bad I think they made a big deal out of it because that’s distinctive of what they portray Madeline to look like so if somebody spotted Madeline and it wasn’t that distinctive and sit out that much then they can pass it off as it not being her. Also another problem that I had with his case was supposedly they have Dr. picked up the child who who carries a child like that I mean I have a six-year-old and if she’s asleep I don’t carry her like that I pick her up and hold her close over my shoulder but I don’t carry her like that that’s how you would carry a dead body you would carry a live child like that try not to wake them up just seems odd to me that if somebody’s trying to abduct a child I wouldn’t have picked them up like that and expose them to wear the lights maybe they’re a little too bright shining in there on their face would’ve woke them up with no blanket around her so the cold air might wake her up for the change of air temperature might wake her up just seems really really odd to me that’s not how somebody carries a child especially if you’re trying to abduct them because the first thing they’re going to do is open their eyes and see your face that you’re not their mother or dad and probably freak out if you carried them the other way of your shoulder and they woke up they wouldn’t notice it was a stranger carrying them right off the bat. Also there were blankets right there in the bed that he could’ve covered her up with two obscure someone actually recognizing Madeline or seeing her or but instead he carries her out like a dead body unshielded from anyone recognizing her and getting caught up. While I’m at it I might go ahead and add another problem I have with this case. I forgot who it was but one of the men that was At the tapas restaurant the night Madeline went missing volunteered to check on Madeline for Kate that night why did he do this ?why just Madeline ?why not check on the kids ? was there something going on that Kate couldn’t go or maybe didn’t want to go just yet ? I mean that’s really nice of somebody to do that for you but wouldn’t your husband do that for you? Why did he nominate his self ? I feel like something may have been going on where maybe Jerry was flirting with some girl that may have been there and maybe Kate was upset about it and it was her turn to go check on the kids and she didn’t want to go then cause she kind of wanted to stay there because she felt insecure about Gerry or whatever I don’t know , so this other man that was going to go check on his kids nominated to take her place? So she could stay? Maybe this is just me but my husband would nominate his self to do it at all times because that’s what gentlemen do yeah I know it’s a parenting thing and you take turns and can I share the responsibilities but my husband would say honey you just stay here and enjoy yourself I will take care of it because I’m a man and I do those things but obviously gerry doesn’t think this way, so another man had to step up instead of making kate he decided you know what stay here Kate I can do it for you Jerry obviously was too busy entertaining or having a grand time to take the time to go do that so there’s are some things that I have problems with maybe it’s just me. But that’s how I feel.
Delete