U.S. government sues Apollo astronaut over camera

reply to post by backinblack


You think it was not stolen? Maybe you are right (we will see where the case goes).

But I doubt they cavity search astronauts...I may be wrong.

I just always see this guy talking in interviews and always sense total lies in his mannerisms and tone. He comes off as a liar....and now, well, he comes off as a thief and a fencer of stolen merchandise.

Just my opinion. As always, very possibly wrong.

But yes, I think it would be incredibly possible to steal this camera if you were this man.

MM

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by chaztekno

 

Because he's money hunggrrryy..
Like I said 75 bucks for an autographed picture at his website.
What kind of integrity is that for an astronaut, one of America's hero's?

Well you'd pat 10 times that for an autographed pic of Tiger Woods or Lady Gaga..

Maybe these REAL heroes feel they deserve some too.

reply to post by Mr Mask


lol, the cavity search was a joke but remember, these guys went through decontamination and isolation after the flight..

There's another thread that explains how he got the camera and a few other trinkets..

IMO NASA must know and only complained at the thought of him selling it, not him possessing it.

reply to post by backinblack


Um.. probably because Woods and Gaga aren't sitting at home signing autographs for money.
They furthered their fame and give autographs for free so they are much more rare.

Poor point friend.

reply to post by backinblack


Yeah.. because he'll be making tens of thousands of dollars off of the tax payers. NASA probably thought he'd have some integrity and donate it to a museum at some point.

This is just ridiculous, plenty of people take small souvenirs with them. We don't really need to call it stealing, don't be ridiculous, if he had brought it back it would be stuck in a stupid museum or tossed in dumpster somewhere.

The only reason this lawsuit has come about is because NASA has it out for the guy because he won't behave exactly like they train all their employees to do.

I hope he at least has the dignity to go out like a legend.

reply to post by Tephra


Little trinket?? That camera probably cost the tax payers a tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars!
Read my above post to learn why they are suing.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by backinblack

 

Um.. probably because Woods and Gaga aren't sitting at home signing autographs for money.
They furthered their fame and give autographs for free so they are much more rare.

Poor point friend.

Like hell it's a poor point..

All Tiger Woods can do good is hit a little ball and sleep around, Lady Gaga IMO can't even hold a tune..

They make $millions from fans with NO qualms..

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Tephra

 

Little trinket?? That camera probably cost the tax payers a tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars!
Read my above post to learn why they are suing.

THAT camera was going to be left to rot on the moon..

The tax payer was NEVER going to see the money from it..

reply to post by backinblack


but they aren't selling their autographs. that's not how you treat fans.

reply to post by backinblack


So this guy deserves to profit from it? Still would have wound up in a museum where the people who paid for it could see it. You cats are wrong on this one.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by backinblack

 

but they aren't selling their autographs. that's not how you treat fans.

Mate, if Tiger Woods wasn't earning $millions for appearing in commercials then he WOULD be selling autographs..

He doesn't because it is pushing the Tiger Wood's brand so he can MAKE more money..

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Tephra

 

Little trinket?? That camera probably cost the tax payers a tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars!
Read my above post to learn why they are suing.

But isn't that the American way?

Steal from the taxpayers, enrich yourself at the expense of everyone else and whoever dies with the biggest pile of cash wins?

Surely his attempt to rip off the public makes him a true American (Randian) Hero?

reply to post by esteay812


To the young people on this thread talking about what may be "on" or "in" the camer.

On it there may be dust
In it there will be an empty space where the film once was, and perhaps a little more dust.

Man! History people, they teach it a schools!!!

They just want it back as he was not supposed to have it. I think this is a bit pathetic but hey ho! it is their propertty I suppose.

reply to post by Shamatt

They just want it back as he was not supposed to have it. I think this is a bit pathetic but hey ho! it is their propertty I suppose.

Does anyone really think he took this thing out of the capsule, through decontamination and quarantine and then out the doors of NASA without them knowing??

Have you seen the size of these cameras??

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Shamatt

 

They just want it back as he was not supposed to have it. I think this is a bit pathetic but hey ho! it is their propertty I suppose.

Does anyone really think he took this thing out of the capsule, through decontamination and quarantine and then out the doors of NASA without them knowing??

Have you seen the size of these cameras??

No. I expect he found it in a workshop or storage area some years later and decided to chuck it in the back of his truck as a keep sake.

In my opinion the camera belongs in a museum, it's a piece of history after all. As far as the lawsuit i hope NASA wins, im certian they will put it in a musuem where this guy sells it it will be in a private collection.

reply to post by Shamatt

No. I expect he found it in a workshop or storage area some years later and decided to chuck it in the back of his truck as a keep sake.

Apparently he actually brought it back with him knowing that NASA intended to leave it on the moon..
It was always in HIS possession and I'm pretty sure NASA knew that..
He also brought back a few other trinkets like the joystick from the LM..

Isn't possession 9/10th of the law?

I wonder what the statue of limitations is on this matter.

What value could a film based camera have now?

-E2

The camera is not the point. I would say that they really could not care less about that camera. What they are worried about is if he has that camera then what else does he have? Just watch how this plays out. I bet they will drop everything if he turns over everything he has. the camera is just a way to get a foot in the door to see if he has anything of real valve they do not want anyone to see.

OK, I just had a though. Maybe the camera is the whole point after all. What if someone bought the camera and did test on it and got proof that it never was on the moon or even in space. Maybe the camera is not really capable of operating in a vacuum or some such thing as that. That would really make a mess of things to find out a camera that was ment to be left on the moon never was there in the first place or maybe would not be workable if it had been.

I found this