Parents tend to carry favourite photos of their children in their wallets (and indeed Gerry McCann was most upset at losing some special photographs of Madeleine when his wallet was ‘stolen’). Saving favourite photos on phones is even more common now, but leaving one on the memory card of one’s camera is not helpful if you want to have a look at the image from time to time.
Another guest, Bridget O’Donnell wrote: It was Thursday, May 3.Earlier that day there had been tennis lessons for the children, with some of the parents watching proudly as their girls ran across the court chasing tennis balls. They took photos. Madeleine must have been there, but I couldn't distinguish her from the others. They all looked the same - all blonde, all pink and pretty. 2)
These are very strange. One of these girls is definitely Madeleine, the other girl has quite a different smile, a broader face and her hair is very blond. It is almost inevitable that one is reminded of the iconic and tragic last photo of the two Soham girls of 2002. Just five years before Madeleine disappeared. Was it the intention to have one photograph of two girls in Everton shirts together? Could it possibly be the case that it was thought too obvious? It could explain why both photos were released, it makes no sense however to release both and may well have been an accident.
These were released by the family and are somewhat of a puzzle. I seems to me:
- That Madeleine is about three years old there.
- That she is or has been ill.
The following clips illustrate the difference of the teeth:
Following on from the Everton/Soham photo 'link', it is of interest to note that the first website was called: ‘bringmadeleinehome.com’. Very reminiscent of the well-known song from ‘Les Miserables’ of which the lyrics ran:
He is young
Let him rest
Bring him home
Bring him home.
Gerry McCann reads a short prepared statement to the waiting press [..] He specifically emphasises that they will 'leave no stone unturned' in the seaarch for Madeleine. [..] It would appear from this statement that the name of the company had already been decided and that this was a form of public preparation for the launch of Madeleine's Fund.
The lawyers who arrived on the 11th of May issued the following media release:
Gerry and Kate are very grateful for all the support and generous offers of help that they are receiving. Details of how contributions can be made to help get Madeleine back to the safety of her own family will be made available in the next couple of days. unquote
First photo of a toddler which will not help identification at all.
Tennis photo taken on the 1st or the 3rd,- published wrong way round.
In the playhouse photo taken on the 29th April, the girl is wearing the trainers which Maddie should have been wearing on the 1st or the 3rd to play tennis.
The description of her hair as blond having chestnut tips down to the shoulder is more of less the case with the red dress photo, but not the tennis photo or the pool photo (which I have studiously avoided in this post..) .However, hair tends to colour naturally the other way round, Bleached in summer, darker in winter, this rarely results in chestnut tips.
The point is that this description was given on the night to the GNR officer and none of the photos, the tennis, pool or playground photo show anything like this hair colouring.
What is also strange that only the small mark on her leg is mentioned as an individual marking.
The colour of the eyes and the brown spot (there is indeed a tiny brown spot in the iris, as can been seen in photographs published here in 'The logic gates') but no mention of a veritable thunderbolt in her eye which was THE identifiable feature of her face.
What's more, her different colour eyes are all but undetectable.
It would have been helpful to find exactly what the description in the passport is, but this is not at all clear from the files. As the GNR had Maddie's passport however, any description given by the parents would have to be close to that given in the passport. Therefore we have the small spot in the eye, the different coloured eyes and the mark on the leg. But to give her height on the night s as 90 cm, is off the chart for a four-year old and she is clearly much taller in the tennis photo. Obviously the 90cm cannot have come from the passport as that was issued a mere three months after Maddie was born.
As Bridget O'Donnell wrote: Madeleine must have been there, but I couldn't distinguish her from the others, they looked all the same....'.