Court told de Menezes photo manipulated

[tarannau]

You really trust ANY of the media not to have altered the picture before publishing?

I trust the media about as much as I trust a £1000 an hour QC. (Which isn't much).

What the hell are you all bibbling on about? So all these busy picture editors independently sent their versions of the Menezes photo-comparison to be manipulated, where they all cleaned up the police's press-released photo and came up with identical images. Or perhaps they used a central media press--distortion room

You seem to have little grip on practicality or reality

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Given the track record of the media in recent years I just don't trust ANY pictures published in the media.

I imagine that if they have manipulated the photo, the Met will complain about this. Do you not think?

 

[jæd]

Given the track record of the media in recent years I just don't trust ANY pictures published in the media.

How about ones advertising tin-foil hats...?

 

[chymaera]

I imagine that if they have manipulated the photo, the Met will complain about this. Do you not think?

Any decision in the court will be based on pictures shown in the court. That is all that matters.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Any decision in the court will be based on pictures shown in the court. That is all that matters.

It is, and it is an answer to a question different to the one I asked.

 

[Kenny Vermouth]

yawn it's not open to deabte but is a matter of pulbic record.

off you tod now and peddle your continued racist agenda back to your mission brothers at stormfront now child and let the adults talk...

Your pro-BNP and pro-NF rants are well known, my socially retarded friend.

You, no doubt, were loving it when the cops took out the foreign man.

 

[chymaera]

It is, and it is an answer to a question different to the one I asked.

I really don't see why the police would bother complaining.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

I really don't see why the police would bother complaining.

Yes you do.

 

[chymaera]

Yes you do.

No I don't, just what would be the point.

 

[UID]

He stopped to pick up a Metro then used a travelcard to pass through the barriers. I bet you believe he was wearing a heavy coat with a bunch of wires sticking out of it too.

Well Denim IS unseasonal....it wasn't in season fashion wise at all at the time...perhaps it WAS the fashion police?





*hides out of date clothes*

*hides out of date self*

 

[detective-boy]

That's the like-for-like image isn't it?

I don't think so - I think that is the one which was produced and which it is alleged has been altered to make them appear similar ... which does rather make the allegation seem a little, er, weak ...

 

[detective-boy]

unless you happen to beleive the intial police reports which have later been corrected (ie the lie was found out)

No. Unless you believe the initial MEDIA reports from an unverified witness which were later corrected by the police (albeit not as swiftly as they could have done).

 

[detective-boy]

Had Brixton station not been closed and the chap had been able to get in, would they have shot him? What were their plans at that point?

They would have reported their inability to make a positive identification to their control room just the same. They would not have had the additional bit of information about getting off and then back on the bus which was interpreted as possible anti-surveillance and thus undoubtedly strengthed their concern it may be.

They would have been told to maintain the surveillance until an armed unit could have been sent to meet with them, wherever they happened to be and JCdM would have been challenged in whatever circumstances prevailed at that time, unless something else was observed which changed things one way or the other in the interim (the chances being that the circumstances of the interception would have allowed a brief face-to-face briefing for the armed team, which would have meant they did not have the erroneous belief that a positive ID had been made and that he was considered an immediate threat as a suicide bomber by the surveillance team).

 

[socialist]

Here is another doctored comparison picture of Met Police Chief Sir Ian Blair.

 

[detective-boy]

Well either I have, or the police have been busy photoshopping up another version to distribute to the press in the hope of convincing Joe Public that they're not a bunch of myopic trigger-happy incompetents.

The only thing the photo is meant to show is that Osman and JCdM were sufficiently similar that it is reasonable for a surveillance team, in the context of a live surveillance, to be unable to make a positive identification either way - if you were a surveillance officer do YOU think you could positively say it wasn't Osman without stopping and checking them (bearing in mind the photo the team had had been taken of Osman some time earlier)?

 

[chymaera]

You seem to have little grip on practicality or reality

My grip on what devious underhanded bastards there are in all walks of life is somewhat more realistic than most.
Photo manipulation has been going on for years. I don't trust any photo unless it has been subject to expert photographic analysis.
I also suggest if you have to sign a statement in a police station, sign your name in every gap in the document so nothing can be added to it.

 

[DrRingDing]

The only thing the photo is meant to show is that Osman and JCdM were sufficiently similar that it is reasonable for a surveillance team, in the context of a live surveillance, to be unable to make a positive identification either way

You are very quickly undoing any image of a 'decent copper' you've created.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Not that I doubt this, but is there an article to show this is correct? There seems much consternation that he wasnt meant to be here.

Details of his immigration status at the bottom of this article

 

[tarannau]

The only thing the photo is meant to show is that Osman and JCdM were sufficiently similar that it is reasonable for a surveillance team, in the context of a live surveillance, to be unable to make a positive identification either way - if you were a surveillance officer do YOU think you could positively say it wasn't Osman without stopping and checking them (bearing in mind the photo the team had had been taken of Osman some time earlier)?

Reposted from the other thread, but still relevant.


All I can say is that I hope that these surveillance guys don't play Guess Who? or something trying.

Here's a picture of the 21/7 bomber-wannabees, including supposed Menezes lookalike Hussain Osman. In fact it's actually not that easy to spot the similarity.

The worrying thing is that I look far more like Menezes than Osman ever did, as do 75 people I could grab off Brixton high street in less than 5 minutes. It's a weak excuse - somewhat akin to the discredited view that all darkies/mixed race/arab-brazilians/insert racial mix here look the same

 

[jæd]

Photo manipulation has been going on for years. I don't trust any photo unless it has been subject to expert photographic analysis.

I also suggest if you have to sign a statement in a police station, sign your name in every gap in the document so nothing can be added to it.

Wouldn't that make it very unreadable...!

 

[butchersapron]

The only thing the photo is meant to show is that Osman and JCdM were sufficiently similar that it is reasonable for a surveillance team, in the context of a live surveillance, to be unable to make a positive identification either way - if you were a surveillance officer do YOU think you could positively say it wasn't Osman without stopping and checking them (bearing in mind the photo the team had had been taken of Osman some time earlier)?

Yes, and in order to do that it appears that they may have altered the photo of JCDM - which is exactly what this thread is about.

 

[SpookyFrank]

The only thing the photo is meant to show is that Osman and JCdM were sufficiently similar that it is reasonable for a surveillance team, in the context of a live surveillance, to be unable to make a positive identification either way - if you were a surveillance officer do YOU think you could positively say it wasn't Osman without stopping and checking them (bearing in mind the photo the team had had been taken of Osman some time earlier)?

Then why not show both pictures?

I can tell the difference, can you?

 

[butchersapron]

Reposted from the other thread, but still relevant.


All I can say is that I hope that these surveillance guys don't play Guess Who? or something trying.

Here's a picture of the 21/7 bomber-wannabees, including supposed Menezes lookalike Hussain Osman. In fact it's actually not that easy to spot the similarity.

The worrying thing is that I look far more like Menezes than Osman ever did, as do 75 people I could grab off Brixton high street in less than 5 minutes. It's a weak excuse - somewhat akin to the discredited view that all darkies/mixed race/arab-brazilians/insert racial mix here look the same

Don't follow db down that blind alley - it's not about whether a misidentification was possible, but about the later doctoring of photos to make it appear as if it was. A totally different issue. He's throwing out red herrings. I mean, why would the potential for misidentification justify post-shooting doctoring of photos?

 

[tarannau]

It's a fucking shit likeness isn't it? Which just goes to show how fatuous, pointless and deliberately misleading that whole police photoshop job was.

It actually makes me angry that they're trying to wiggle out of taking responsibility for their incompetency once again.

 

[SpookyFrank]

It actually makes me angry that they're trying to wiggle out of taking responsibility for their incompetency once again.

Incompetency is one thing, evidence tampering quite another

 

[Stobart Stopper]

I still can't see any likeness at all except for the hairline. Maybe I am just thick.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

I still can't see any likeness at all except for the hairline. Maybe I am just thick.

That's cos you're not a highly trained polis marksman innit.

 

[tarannau]

Don't follow db down that blind alley - it's not about whether a misidentification was possible, but about the later doctoring of photos to make it appear as if it was. A totally different issue. He's throwing out red herrings. I mean, why would the potential for misidentification justify post-shooting doctoring of photos?

It's both really.

FWIW I think the photoshop job by the police is clumsy broadbrush operator stuff rather than deliberately designed to fool the jury by adapting minute details of the face piece by piece. However the fact remains that such a fat-headed, almost entirely useless comparison approach was used in the first place - it holds little relevance and obviously tries to obscure the fact that police shot someone who looked very different to the suspect in question.

It's a cheap stunt by the police - pretty much any two heads could have been grafted together to show 'similarity' in some way - that should never have been used in the first place. It's insulting and shamateurish that they'd even try

 

[butchersapron]

That's cos you're not a highly trained polis marksman innit.

Exactly, it takes years of training in expert identification in various situations to be able to pull off something like that.

 

[DrRingDing]

Exactly, it takes years of training in expert identification in various situations to be able to pull off something like that.

Wasn't there an SAS soldier there who didn't shoot a single round?

He would of been the only person trained extensively for this sort of situation.

Funny that.