This has got to be one of my main rants/gripes about today’s technology.
The following article is about a 15 year old girl who was attacked in broad daylight as she was walking home from a community center. The man grabbed
her, licked her face, and pushed her down, then tried to pull his pants down to rape her. Thankfully, she was able to get away after punching him.
Good for her! I love it when criminals chose victims who are feistier than they appear to be!
A crappy surveillance camera caught the guy getting out of his vehicle and walking in the girl’s direction. The actual attack is out of the
camera’s view. Soon, the man is seen running back to his SUV and driving off.
The attacker is described as a light skinned black man, from 17 to 18 years old, with a medium-length Afro. Police said he also has a tattoo on the
back of one of his arms. (Alas, no description of the tattoo is provided in the article.)
He is also considered nervy (for attacking in broad daylight), drives a blurry gold SUV, sporting white shorts, a black shirt, and a white hat. He is
thin enough to be concealed by a telephone/traffic light pole (pic #5). His license plate is also blurry.
I don’t know how it’s been determined that the assailant has a medium length afro since he’s wearing a hat, but this is what’s been reported
by the victim. Maybe she knocked his hat off and he was able to retrieve it and put it back on before hopping back into his fuzzy vehicle. (Can anyone
on ATS even identify what type of SUV this is from the fuzzy image?)
I also noticed that the pervert’s height wasn’t mentioned. Can’t the cops even use the scale of the SUV while the perp is standing beside it to
determine a general height of the sicko? Yeah, police work at its finest!
So, if anyone in the Orlando area knows an extremely blurry black man that drives an extremely blurry gold SUV (even though it looks silver in the
slideshow), please notify the Orlando Police Department.
(Don’t bother clicking on the video that shows the blurry attacker near his blurry SUV, you’ll just get redirected to a live feed of the Casey
Anthony hearing -- I know, reporting at its best)
I realize I’m being very tongue in cheek with this, but you would think with today’s technology, surveillance cameras would be able to provide
better quality images. I mean, seriously. We have satellites that can zero in on a license plate and read it, but surveillance cameras aren’t able
to provide crisp, clear images? What good are they then? I bet our gubbermint’s facial recognition cameras provide better images, so why can’t
simple surveillance cameras do this, too? It seems to me that the surveillance cameras should be improved upon before we spend more money on red light
cameras and facial recognition technology. If Big Brother really cared about its citizens, it should start by spending money on the basics, then go
from there. I hope this little girl’s attacker is caught, but with the quality of the evidence, I’m afraid it isn’t likely. I do realize that
whoever purchased this surveillance camera is most likely a public sector individual, but I honestly feel that these shoddy cameras should stop being
sold to business owners. Even if they're only buying them to identify valdals, they're getting ripped off. The vandals will be blurry and
So, all the folks who complain about shaky, blurry UFO videos -- remember this thread and realize that today’s technology can’t even be used to
give a clear image of a sick pervert let alone get a crisp image of a craft in the sky.
Welcome to the 21st century.
edit on 2-9-2011 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)
edit on 2-9-2011 by Afterthought
because: (no reason given)