Re: Textusa releases new statement (6 Nov 2015) on 'The Last Photo' - says it is a photoshopped composite of THREE different photographs, two of which were taken on Friday 18 May 2007

by **Jill Havern** 13.11.15 19:50

Pheasantplucker wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Pheasantplucker wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Pheasantplucker wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:Make use of your limited time here, Pheasantplucker, the clock is ticking.
Why ?
It's a question of concern
Why the haste to shrug it off ?
Because of your posts on the Dog's thread. You're not here for good reasons.
I'm here like you For the truth, no matter where it may lead. I'm not trouble.
Yeah, right, we'll see. You have not made a great start. Like I said, you have limited time here so make the best of it.
I'm not quite sure what I've done wrong. I'm sorry if my question came across wrongly

Your first post attacked aquila and PeterMac...so explain yourself.

by Pheasantplucker 13.11.15 19:55

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Pheasantplucker wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Pheasantplucker wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Pheasantplucker wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:Make use of your limited time here, Pheasantplucker, the clock is ticking.
Why ?
It's a question of concern
Why the haste to shrug it off ?
Because of your posts on the Dog's thread. You're not here for good reasons.
I'm here like you For the truth, no matter where it may lead. I'm not trouble.
Yeah, right, we'll see. You have not made a great start. Like I said, you have limited time here so make the best of it.
I'm not quite sure what I've done wrong. I'm sorry if my question came across wrongly
Your first post attacked aquila and PeterMac...so explain yourself.

To be honest I have lurkedfor some time and was taken aback when aquila made a comment about Joyce and it was uncalled for, but not my business just explaining. Then she began to question where Peter was and I just thought he maybe needed a break from all this. It is common for people to take a break I guess when things go wrong.

by **Jill Havern** 13.11.15 19:59

Pheasantplucker wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Pheasantplucker wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Pheasantplucker wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Pheasantplucker wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:Make use of your limited time here, Pheasantplucker, the clock is ticking.
Why ?
It's a question of concern
Why the haste to shrug it off ?
Because of your posts on the Dog's thread. You're not here for good reasons.
I'm here like you For the truth, no matter where it may lead. I'm not trouble.
Yeah, right, we'll see. You have not made a great start. Like I said, you have limited time here so make the best of it.
I'm not quite sure what I've done wrong. I'm sorry if my question came across wrongly
Your first post attacked aquila and PeterMac...so explain yourself.
To be honest I have lurkedfor some time and was taken aback when aquila made a comment about Joyce and it was uncalled for, but not my business just explaining. Then she began to question where Peter was and I just thought he maybe needed a break from all this. It is common for people to take a break I guess when things go wrong.

Not your business, but you registered with an unpleasant username anyway to have your say against aquila and PeterMac. Why would you think things have gone wrong here?

by Pheasantplucker 13.11.15 20:02

Now if possible, could I ask Tony how Philip Edmonds replied to an email adress he didn't supply. It's a simple a dhonest question.

by Pheasantplucker 13.11.15 20:03

Sorry, am now tablet. Sorry for spelling.Fat fingers lo?

by **Tony Bennett** 13.11.15 20:08

Pheasantplucker wrote:Another good question regarding any photos whatsoever would be this, and it needs a full honest answer.
Tony, how did Philip Edmonds respond to you about photos he had. It's impossible to reply to someone whom they firstly don't know, and also to reply by email to someone they once again don't know and like yourself did not give your email in correspondence, so come on tell us how he plucked your email address out of nowhere.
It would be a benefit to come up with an honest answer.
Seriously, it would

Honest answer coming up.

I just interrogated my Word Doc database and here was how my letter began.

Note carefully the bit in bright red

---------------------------------------

From: Anthony Bennett MA                          66 Chippingfield
Tel: 01279 635789                                           HARLOW
e-mail: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]                Essex
Mobile: 07835 716537                                     CM17 0DJ

Mr Philip Edmonds, BA                                    Friday 22 July 2011
Deputy Chairman
Uldry Steel SA
BP 1203
Rte de Lavaux 29
CH - 1800 VEVEY 1
S W I T Z E R L A N D

Dear Mr Edmonds,

---------------------------------

And just in case I really need to spell it out for you, I posted my letter to Mr Edmonds, giving him my postal address, my landline, my e-mail address and mobile 'phone number, and he elected to answer me by e-mail.

Simples, eh?

And now here's a little add from me.

Do you seriously think that if there was credible evidence of Madeleine being alive on Thursday 3 May 2007, as Edmonds claims there was on his photograph, that we wouldn't have seen it by now?

by Pheasantplucker 13.11.15 20:11

If I recall from browsing forums, your email was never once before quoted. I may come across as confrontational but tonight is the first time you have placed that email in myopinion

by Pheasantplucker 13.11.15 20:13

This is why any photo discussions are so heated.Why ?

by **Tony Bennett** 13.11.15 20:17

Pheasantplucker wrote:If I recall from browsing forums, your email was never once before quoted. I may come across as confrontational but tonight is the first time you have placed that email in my opinion

Actually, you're right about that. When I occasionally post copies here of letters I have written, I invariably do leave out details like my personal landline, my personal e-mail address and my personal mobile 'phone number.

You see, it minimises the risk of malicious nutters like Andrew from candyfloss's forum ringing me up with death threats at 5.34am.

But now everyone has them, just to satisfy your idle curiosity.

I would have thought "Thank you Tony for clarifying that" would have been nice. But then you don't sound like a very nice person.

by **Tony Bennett** 13.11.15 20:21

Pheasantplucker wrote:This is why any photo discussions are so heated. Why ?

Because, as 'Carrry On Doctor' posted a couple of days ago, the 'Last Photo' is a piece of tangible forensic evidence which has a massive bearing on what really happened to Madeleine McCann.

A number of people posting on this thread (including your ~~good~~ self) are acutely aware of that fact

by Pheasantplucker 13.11.15 20:22

I believe this clarification goes way back before you had any worries. Why on the original topic created by Stella, before as you was a subject of bounding was your home and mobile numbers given, but no email. So how did Edmonds reply? Sorry for being like a pain

by Pheasantplucker 13.11.15 20:26

Tony Bennett wrote:
Pheasantplucker wrote:If I recall from browsing forums, your email was never once before quoted. I may come across as confrontational but tonight is the first time you have placed that email in my opinion
Actually, you're right about that. When I occasionally post copies here of letters I have written, I invariably do leave out details like my personal landline, my personal e-mail address and my personal mobile 'phone number.

You see, it minimises the risk of malicious nutters like Andrew from candyfloss's forum ringing me up with death threats at 5.34am.

But now everyone has them, just to satisfy your idle curiosity.

I would have thought "Thank you Tony for clarifying that" would have been nice. But then you don't sound like a very nice person.

So why before any forum problems did you omit your email but not your phone numbers?
It's an important question why you didn't feel fit to give Edmonds your email but he managed to reply by email did you ever wonder how and why ?

by Pheasantplucker 13.11.15 20:28

Sorry tablet talk and fat fingers

by Pheasantplucker 13.11.15 20:47

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Took me ages to find. OP was Stella if I recall

And the thread has been heavily altered in my opinion

by **Jill Havern** 13.11.15 20:50

Pheasantplucker wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Took me ages to find. OP was Stella if I recall

What's your point? That thread is a sticky in 'The Most Important Areas of Research' section.

by Pheasantplucker 13.11.15 20:53

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Pheasantplucker wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Took me ages to find. OP was Stella if I recall
What's your point? That thread is a sticky in 'The Most Important Areas of Research' section.

Hang on a minute please. The thread has been heavily edited on a very important matter. I can't explain it can I.

[ Are you sure you really want to go to the bother of explaining it? You've been working very hard this evening. Take a little break and have a nice cuppa - Mod ]

by **Tony Bennett** 13.11.15 20:55

Pheasantplucker wrote:

MESSAGE 1
I believe this clarification goes way back before you had any worries. Why on the original topic created by Stella, before as you was a subject of bounding was your home and mobile numbers given, but no email. So how did Edmonds reply? Sorry for being like a pain

MESSAGE 2
So why before any forum problems did you omit your email but not your phone numbers?
It's an important question why you didn't feel fit to give Edmonds your email but he managed to reply by email did you ever wonder how and why?

MESSAGE 3
Sorry tablet talk and fat fingers

MESSAGE 4
Took me ages to find. OP was Stella if I recall

MESSAGE 5
And the thread has been heavily altered in my opinion

I have given you a 100% true answer by faithfully reproducing exactly the letterhead I used on 22 July 2011 when writing to Mr Edmonds.

I have explained that I put my e-mail address in my letter, thereby providing him an opportunity to reply by e-mail if he wished to do so - and which he did.

I have been asked to reproduce this letter many times by people with unduly suspicious minds and while I can't remember exactly, I'm sure that on some of those occasions I have redacted either my email, or e-mail and 'phone numbers, or quite possibly the whole address.

If you do not accept this as a wholly truthful, honest and complete answer, I'm sorry but I can't help you any further.

P.S. And no, the thread has not been 'heavily altered' as you suggest

by willowthewisp 14.11.15 11:49

Philip Edmonds states he handed copies of the photograph he had in his possession to the UK Police, McCann family as per the Madeleine McCann site, so if the family have this photograph(s)from Mr. Edmonds, this may verify certain aspects of the case?

by j.rob 14.11.15 16:11

Tony Bennett wrote:
Pheasantplucker wrote:If I recall from browsing forums, your email was never once before quoted. I may come across as confrontational but tonight is the first time you have placed that email in my opinion
Actually, you're right about that. When I occasionally post copies here of letters I have written, I invariably do leave out details like my personal landline, my personal e-mail address and my personal mobile 'phone number.

You see, it minimises the risk of malicious nutters like Andrew from candyfloss's forum ringing me up with death threats at 5.34am.

But now everyone has them, just to satisfy your idle curiosity.

I would have thought "Thank you Tony for clarifying that" would have been nice. But then you don't sound like a very nice person.

This concerns me. Why write this on a public forum? If it is true that a person - any person - did this it is a matter for the police. In any event, a person is assumed innocent unless proven guilty so I think it is extremely unwise to make comments like this on a public forum.

I also find the last sentence unnecessary especially given the rude insults that have been slung around on here - some aimed at me - which have been unchallenged.

by Guest 14.11.15 16:27

Special attack TB day?

Back on topic, please. Mod.

by cbeagle 16.11.15 4:40

Just to add to the bougainvillea flower issue, this picture of Madeleine shows a bougainvillea against a wall that is not in flower.
It looks like the first (arrival) day, but not sure if it's the same tree, stone wall and white wall as the "last photo".

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

(also here: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/photos-e6frewxi-1111120336321?page=9 )

by Guest 16.11.15 7:18

cbeagle wrote:Just to add to the bougainvillea flower issue, this picture of Madeleine shows a bougainvillea against a wall that is not in flower.
It looks like the first (arrival) day, but not sure if it's the same tree, stone wall and white wall as the "last photo".

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

(also here: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/photos-e6frewxi-1111120336321?page=9 )

What is that in the background?

Can you prove it is a bougainvillea?

It's a stem of something anyway, have you looked where bougainvillea actually flower?

by j.rob 16.11.15 10:36

What is that in the background?

Can you prove it is a bougainvillea?

It's a stem of something anyway, have you looked where bougainvillea actually flower?

----

What do you think?

by joyce1938 16.11.15 10:38

Some time ago I read a bit about the time bug. flowers and it seemed that there had to be certain conditions just before it would begin to flower. Is anyone able to look into this as I keep recalling it but don't know how to do so. The people that said it I think lived in that region and would notice it each year. joyce1938

by j.rob 16.11.15 10:54

cbeagle wrote:Just to add to the bougainvillea flower issue, this picture of Madeleine shows a bougainvillea against a wall that is not in flower.
It looks like the first (arrival) day, but not sure if it's the same tree, stone wall and white wall as the "last photo".

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

(also here: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/photos-e6frewxi-1111120336321?page=9 )

There would be a great many people from that week who would know whether the bougainvillea around this part of the pool complex had been in full flower, partial flower or not flowering at all (the latter I suspect given the cool weather) during the course of the week.

If the bougainvillea had been in full flower, as depicted in the last photo, then it would have been quite a spectacular sight and I would imagine at least some holiday-makers would have wanted to photograph it. Or at least provide it as a backdrop to their photos or filming.

The Ocean Club gardeners and grounds-men would have been aware of when the bougainvillea flowered and when it flowered that particular year. They have to tend the grounds and would be aware of what flowers when and if one particular year is different to the rest.

Given that the weather was poor that week (Kate claims in her book it was so cold in the evenings that she needed five layers of clothing to feel comfortable while in the tapas in the evenings) and also windy, if the bougainvillea had been in full flower the flowers and leaves would have been blown off from their stems and strewn around the gardens and into the swimming pool.

Resort swimming pools - even if it is out of season and they are rarely used as too cold - need to be kept clean and free of debris otherwise the resort looks unkempt and scruffy. So it would be the job of the Ocean Club swimming pool cleaners/swimming pool staff to keep the pool clean and free of leaves, flowers and other debris blown in from the gardens. If interviewed at around this time or a few weeks later they would remember whether they had had to work extra hard to keep the pools clean from debris. Rain, in particular (Kate says in her book it rained on Wednesday) tends to bring leaves and other debris into pools and cloudy the water making everything look messy and uninviting. Not to mention bugs, insects and other small animals that end up in swimming pools.

Other staff like Ocean Club nannies/sports instructors, even restaurant and bar staff, might well have remembered details like this and may also even have photos. No doubt some of the staff would have larked around in the resort complex/gardens after hours having a quick fag or drink after a long session serving in the bar or restaurant.

It really should be quite easy to verify whether the bougainvillea around the pool was in full bloom when that last photo was allegedly taken at lunchtime on Thursday 3rd May 2007.

Textusa releases new statement (6 Nov 2015) on 'The Last Photo' - says it is a photoshopped composite of THREE different photographs, two of which were taken on Friday 18 May 2007

The Last Photo...