[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Jasper
Date: 8/10/03
Time: 1:01:55 PM
Remote Name: 68.73.54.210
Lollie,
That's what I said in Iago. The key to whether or not the photos were faked is in the expertise of the people who took them, who controlled the people who could have taken them and the length of time it took for them to show up.
In 1995 and 1996 only a few professional photographers would have had access to this technology and the skills necessary to remove the telltale signs of tampering. These photos had all of the people necessary and followed the necessary trail to one of the few independent labs at the time (in England, I believe) that could produce them.
The author of the article got two important facts wrong. 1) The photos the prosecution had in the criminal trial were not accepted into evidence. The photos that were accepted into evidence in the civil trial were different. 2) A different photographer supposedly took them on the same day in the same stadium but the original film was never authenticated. For a professional photographer with the right equipment and enough time, it would have been just as easy to photograph the altered photos and pass off the negatives as the original film. –Jasper