RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

jlf1961 -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/31/2013 5:28:22 AM)

I am still trying to deal with the possibility that the security camera taps were altered, as suggested by one poster.



tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/31/2013 2:56:34 PM)

Suggesting it cant be?



jlf1961 -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/31/2013 3:16:15 PM)

Suggesting that if the clear images of the two suspects were not taken at the time and place of the incident, it would mean that they were put there digitally if they are recorded on a disc, or spliced into the tape if vhs.

I.e, they have the suspects on video in the parking where the incident took place, and at the approximate time of the incident.

Add to that one suspect making the statement "We beat him up after he would not give us the drugs we paid for."

So we have a suspect that was inserted into the security video of the parking lot giving a reason for beating up a man that he actually did not beat up because the security footage was altered.

So that means the suspect was coerced into giving a reason for beating up an old man that he really did not beat up, and the police having the digital editing equipment to alter the video so that his story is plausible.



tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/31/2013 3:34:48 PM)

Not what I asked you. How about answering the question. Can video surveillance be altered?

http://www.policeone.com/police-products/investigation/video-surveillance/articles/2085224-Can-video-evidence-be-trusted/

I have not seen the video I have no desire too. Nor did I say in this case the video was altered. I said it was possible as one of the reasons NOT to jump to the immediate assumption that someone is guilty.



jlf1961 -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/31/2013 4:47:46 PM)

Digital surveillance footage can be altered, however to do so well enough to avoid detection requires a good bit of skill. It is not as easy as crime shows and movies make it out to be.

I do not see a police department having the software or a person with such skills on the payroll.

and honestly, what would be the point? To implicate two individuals with violent criminal records in a crime rather than the actual people who did it and were probably on the original video?

I have a few problems with the article you linked to, considering that the security industry does set standards for video systems, as does the insurance industry.

I could agree with the article in light of older technology but since hidef cameras are cheap enough for anyone to purchase, I mean I have hidef video cameras around my property, and the zoom feature is incredible. Only cost me a few hundred for six cameras and installation.



BamaD -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/31/2013 6:26:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Suggesting that if the clear images of the two suspects were not taken at the time and place of the incident, it would mean that they were put there digitally if they are recorded on a disc, or spliced into the tape if vhs.

I.e, they have the suspects on video in the parking where the incident took place, and at the approximate time of the incident.

Add to that one suspect making the statement "We beat him up after he would not give us the drugs we paid for."

So we have a suspect that was inserted into the security video of the parking lot giving a reason for beating up a man that he actually did not beat up because the security footage was altered.

So that means the suspect was coerced into giving a reason for beating up an old man that he really did not beat up, and the police having the digital editing equipment to alter the video so that his story is plausible.

And the reason he gave was in a letter to his brother.



BamaD -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/31/2013 6:32:34 PM)

Zimmerman not a word about he is only accused.
Crocker how dare you say it may only be manslaughter
Kids caught on tape beating a guy to death we have to be very careful not to rush to judgment

Why are we required to show greater care for these two's non convicted status than for the other's?



BamaD -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 7:53:42 AM)

This link doesn't seem complete but it is all they gave

Kpopstarz.com

They say the "young men" (hopefully respectful enough) were arrested for "a drug deal gone sour"

They also mention that Glenn had previously convicted of beating someone using a baseball bat with nails in it.

Real nice kid

I gave high points in case link doesn't work.



tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 8:58:44 AM)

quote:

I do not see a police department having the software or a person with such skills on the payroll.


I suggest you review my posts on this issue without a set of blinders. I have repeatedly said they are more than likely guilty. My objection is their guilty sentences BEFORE being tried.



BamaD -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 3:00:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

I do not see a police department having the software or a person with such skills on the payroll.


I suggest you review my posts on this issue without a set of blinders. I have repeatedly said they are more than likely guilty. My objection is their guilty sentences BEFORE being tried.

You mean like you did with Crocker?



tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 3:10:22 PM)

Do show me where I said what sentence Crocker was to receive.



BamaD -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 3:20:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Do show me where I said what sentence Crocker was to receive.

Ah yes I see the difference.
As long as everyone agreed that he was guilty of the maximum crime you didn't care what the penalty was like Saul you would just hold the coats.
And when Kendom suggested he sould have been beaten to death you were all over him weren't you?
How about a year of silence when people were talking about what should be done to Zimmerman.
The point is you have suddenly gained a great concern for the fair treatment of the accused.
Is it because this time they were compassionate enough to use flashlights instead of guns or because these guys are black?



tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 3:26:27 PM)

Nope. try again. The discussion was based upon what he should be charged with. He admitted to the killing. The fact remains that it's not been proven it was murder. I do recall a few even pointed that fact out on that thread.

He was charged with second degree murder and the Judge is allowing the case to proceed.



BamaD -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 3:59:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Nope. try again. The discussion was based upon what he should be charged with. He admitted to the killing. The fact remains that it's not been proven it was murder. I do recall a few even pointed that fact out on that thread.

He was charged with second degree murder and the Judge is allowing the case to proceed.

Still not a word about the suggestion he should have been beaten to death
Not a word to the people suggesting penalties for Zimmerman
Still you are more protective of the rights of people caught on tape doing the crime why, because they didn't use a gun?



tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 4:36:28 PM)

Oh hell, Zimmerman case was all over the place and you fellas with guns ruled the day. Dont even go there with me.

As far as DomKen's post....

Perfectly legal according to SYG. They really should have beat him to death before he got a chance to kill an innocent person.

That was in reference to the actual scene... not in retaliation to what happened or the perceived guilt of Crocker.



BamaD -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 4:58:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Oh hell, Zimmerman case was all over the place and you fellas with guns ruled the day. Dont even go there with me.

As far as DomKen's post....

Perfectly legal according to SYG. They really should have beat him to death before he got a chance to kill an innocent person.

That was in reference to the actual scene... not in retaliation to what happened or the perceived guilt of Crocker.


Fine you can't see your bias and I'm not going to make this about you.
Do you see one thing that says these guys might not be guilty?
Even Glenn's "defense" admits guilt.
Did you know that Glenn used a baseball bat with embedded nails to attack a guy because he saw a black bandana on the ground?
That bat was a homemade mace.
This doesn't make him guilty but it decimates the good kid image.
We guys with guns hardly ruled the day I was called a liar, racist, and coward just to name a few.
But we were right.
So I guess you own a flashlight so that must be the reason for your stance here (makes as much sense as ascribing my stance on Zimmerman to my owning a gun)



tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 5:38:48 PM)

I have no bias.

quote:

Do you see one thing that says these guys might not be guilty?


Does it matter what I think might be true or not? I already said... in more than one post... they they probably are guilty.

But, damn, the way you boys are talking, lets go ahead and shove a needle of battery acid in their arm. What happens if their civil rights were violated during the process? Evidence didnt follow chain of command?

But, by all means, lets skip the trial and go right for the death penalty. Go ahead, you two, continue planning their deaths.



BamaD -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 6:34:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I have no bias.

quote:

Do you see one thing that says these guys might not be guilty?


Does it matter what I think might be true or not? I already said... in more than one post... they they probably are guilty.

But, damn, the way you boys are talking, lets go ahead and shove a needle of battery acid in their arm. What happens if their civil rights were violated during the process? Evidence didnt follow chain of command?

But, by all means, lets skip the trial and go right for the death penalty. Go ahead, you two, continue planning their deaths.

A I have told you that anything we said they deserved was IF FOUND GUILTY.
B Quit pretending you can read my mind.
C I am aware that the law will not, can not, give the killers what they deserve.
D Give one indication, other than wishful thinking, that even hints at their rights being violated?
E Give one time we indicated directly, not your supposition that we didn't want a trial.



BamaD -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 8:30:19 PM)

It appears that the maximum penalty in Wash. is life ( for 2nd degree murder)



BamaD -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (9/1/2013 9:31:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Nope. try again. The discussion was based upon what he should be charged with. He admitted to the killing. The fact remains that it's not been proven it was murder. I do recall a few even pointed that fact out on that thread.

He was charged with second degree murder and the Judge is allowing the case to proceed.

And in spite of the beliefs of many All I did was point out the problems the prosecution was in for.



Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875