Let me play devil's advocat here:

1) We know that unsharp low resolution images have a tendency to distort the outline of glittering diamond studded elements, and even that of single stones.

In your first image of Mrs John Ward, there might in fact be a large diamond in the middle of the central element, one which is large enough that its facets depict in the photo, while its outline and setting do not.



(On a side note, I find it difficult to come up with a convincing idea, what the centre of this quatrefoil element might have been, if there was indeed no large single stone: the four outer elements are not wide enough to join in the middle, and the uniformly geometric design of the tiara makes casually entwined lines – as they appear on the photos – in the centre of the design extremely unlikely.)

The effect a blurry photo has on glittering jewels might also distort the outline of the quatrefoil element. Its side parts seem distinctly more pointed in Mrs Ward's photo compared with the tiara auctioned by Drouot.



2) The tiara worn by Mrs Ward does indeed look quite short in side view, but her coiffure might cover parts of it.

3) BUT — blurry photos or not, any quatrefoil element placed within the detailed repetitive pattern of the tiara would depict, maybe not clearly, but in any case perceptibly! While the side elements might be out of sight in the first frontal shot of Mrs John Ward which you've posted already in 2019 and was used by FD Gallery a couple of days ago, any additional quatrefoil element would necessarily be visible in your recent find, the three-quarter view of Mrs John Ward from 1956.

So yes, I think you're right, Jean Templeton Ward's tiara which was later seen being worn by her daughter-in-law Mrs John Ward had only one quatrefoil element and is different from the one auctioned at Drouot's.