It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Naked Man Eating Victim's Face Shot And Killed By Miami Police: Report

page: 39
96
<< 36  37  38    40  41  42 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by steelwidow
 



You just might be on to something...and the reason it seems to hit florida the hardest is because this is where most coke it shipped in and cut for distro all over the nation...I wonder




posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jordan River
reply to post by AGWskeptic
 


Do you really remember him running fast? lol cause i don't.... was that serious reply or some racist remark


It was a joke. That a mod must not have found funny.

But the first zombie to run was a black zombie, he walked under water too if I remember right. He was also the first to use a firearm. A shotgun I think. He was the leader of the zombie horde, another first if I remember it right.
edit on 1-6-2012 by AGWskeptic because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-6-2012 by AGWskeptic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   
I agree that this whole surveillance video is kinda odd... and there are some strange things in there, particularly that reappearing car. But there is far much more "funny business" going on with this video, which I will get to in a moment.

For now, let me start with the the camera itself:
Using google maps (street view) I decided to do some recon of the area, to maybe help pinpoint the location of this camera. Started out right in front of the Herald building. You can punch in 95 Herald Plaza, and you can see that this "road" is very near to the scene... leading right up to the causeway off-ramp. I was moving, zooming and scanning around the buildings, and I get a glimpse of this:




I had initially thought that item # 1 was the camera, as it does kinda look like one but more of a fixed variety. Item # 2 was odd... I first thought it was a light, or something else... but that makes absolutely no sense. Upon further googling there indeed are "dome cameras" that look just like that. Even found a place that sells the kind of poles that little guy is attached to, no link handy for that outfit though.


Now, remember I said there is some "funny business" going on with this footage? Well there most certainly is. In opinion, that camera location is the only one in which that video could have originated, so why are there two different versions?

1. The approximately 7 minute that was first released.
(see Pharaohs post on page 26)
2. The approximately 23 minute one later released by the Herald.

I'm gonna say something here, bluntly. I am now 110% sure that the second video has been doctored, and here is why: That 23 minute one comes from the same footage as the 7 minute one, however it is cropped.

All I had to do was take 1 random frame from the first video that Pharaoh had posted, and 1 random frame from the "long version" released by the Herald. I simply scaled that frame over the larger uncropped 7 minute vid and wala!
Presto changeo, el-strangeo!

I made a simple gif to visualize it:





Which leads me to more questions,
like why is the longer video cropped to show less of the surrounding areas?
Why does a car re-appear?
Why did this go on for nearly 18 minutes?
What are they hiding by cropping the footage?
Is there more footage we don't know about?


As if that wasn't all... I also need to mention -


Say hello to his brother, the other little camera, on the other corner.
Which would have a better view of the causeway, that is.. of course, if it was looking that direction.


- oh I'd also forgot to add, the second - longer video does show more on the left hand side, implying that there is a larger field of view version somewhere... I'd already done the gif, and had most of this written. My apologies.



edit on 12/6/1 by telemetry because: added page reference for the 1st vid.

edit on 12/6/1 by telemetry because: second addition, with some more info.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by telemetry
 


That's is some quality ATS style research you've done. Star.

You raise more questions. I've spotted several other anomalies in the longer video, but haven't had the time to properly document them. I'll work on it soon.

Here's something interesting to add:

911 reports simply state there was a fight, by eyewitnesses, and that one was getting the crap beat out of him. Several calls are placed, but not one says anything about face chewing.

The video shows one cop arriving at the scene, shooting, then the other cops arrive. The video (long version) is released four days later.

As a theory, does the video depict a cop shooting a black man without just cause, and there is a cover-up? The cop doesn't appear to cross the concrete divider, so his life was not in danger. Was deadly force required?

IF there was video from your "other" camera, it would be very condemning, and possibly show the real story.

All we have is footage which I strongly believed is doctored. Why? Our questions deserve answers.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 


I could understand that if this was a cover up in a the way you theorised, that the police would possibly stick together and stick up for the shooter. But, what of the Emergency Services Ambulance Crew on the scene? What of the Nurses and Doctors at the Hospital the victim were taken too? Surely they would question that what is being put out in the news, wasn't the actual case. I mean, if the victim just had the # beaten out of him rather than his faced chewed off, would they not think "Hang on a second, that's not what we have in front of us right now, why are they lying?" and not come forward with their story?

If you want some answers, how about sending some emails to the Miami Herald or even the Miami Police Department? Pointing out all your observations on the anomalies in the released footage and your theories about the attack.

You may not get any, but it's worth a try right?


edit on 2-6-2012 by skitzspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by telemetry
 


Good work telemetry


Also good work to the others that have pointed out anomalies in the video, i don't mean to take that away from you by questioning them and speculating other reasons for them. They are all good observations.

Now onto the things telemetry discussed;

The footage could have just been cropped and zoomed, using software(?) for a closer look at the incident. Maybe messing up some other things in the process, like the cars, disappearing and reappearing etc. Although, if that's the case, it's sloppy work from the Miami Herald.
Someone mentioned a few pages back that the longer video looked very pixelated, i think this is because it was cropped and zoomed. I personally don't think that they did that to hide anything in the surrounding area, i just think they did so for a closer view.

Now if this incident went down exactly like it's being reported and they had a better view of what happened from another camara, do you think they would release that footage?
If there is another tape, that one (if it exists) may likely be used as clearer evidence and the footage we've been shown are the ones they are only willing to show the public. The less gruesome version perhaps.
But, of course you mentioned that it may of not have been pointing in the right direction, it could have been covering the other side of the building more.

Ok, i just looked at the 7 minute version that Pharaoh posted on page 26. That version seems to just show the tail end of the attack, when they are both already hidden from sight under the bridge and then the police cruiser pretty much immediately pulls up just after the 1 minute mark.
The 23+ minute version, shows the first part of the attack which goes on longer, from the attacker walking up to the victim, to him attacking, possibly beating him, rolling him around and such, before pulling him under the bridge, which then goes on for some time, to the first cruiser pulling up. This could be what accounts for the discrepincies in time of the two versions(?).
Perhaps they needed permission to release the full version, hence why it was released 4 days later(?)

The 7 Minute video is the tail end of the attack, it takes just over a minute before the crusier pulls up. The 23+ minute video is right before, during and after the attack (it takes under 18 minutes for the cruiser to pull up in that video). Add them both together and you get footage that is under 24 minutes long. Which pretty much ties in with the length of the video below.




edit on 2-6-2012 by skitzspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Re-reading what i wrote back right now, i'm not sure i explained myself too well. It was early and hadn't had my coffee yet


But in relatively simple terms. The 7 minute video footage is the last 7 minutes of the 23+ minute video footage. Uncropped.

As i mentioned before in my previous post, i don't think the cropping has anything to do with anything other than them just trying to zoom in more, so the full attack can be viewed better.
Miami Herald, may have also caused the glitches in the video, by cropping, zooming, re rendering and uploading, or whatever goes into faffing about with digital video footage.
I also think that they may of had to wait for permission to release the full footage, hence the 4 day(?) delay.


edit on 2-6-2012 by skitzspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by skitzspiricy
 





The 7 minute video footage is the last 7 minutes of the 23+ minute video footage. Uncropped.


That is a realistic premise.




But, what of the Emergency Services Ambulance Crew on the scene? What of the Nurses and Doctors at the Hospital the victim were taken too?


They are not allowed to under HIPAArules.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), Public Law 104-191, was enacted on August 21, 1996.


Basically, they are not allowed to say anything about the patients under their care. If they do, they face huge fines, and lose their certification. That is why there are NO reports from any of the health care workers who have any information. All information released to the media is either through the police department or eyewitnesses. I'm sure the Herald's legal department has their hands full as well.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Druid42
reply to post by skitzspiricy
 




But, what of the Emergency Services Ambulance Crew on the scene? What of the Nurses and Doctors at the Hospital the victim were taken too?


They are not allowed to under HIPAArules.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), Public Law 104-191, was enacted on August 21, 1996.



Oh i understand that, but in a big hospital, people do talk and words do spread. There are also lots of staff other than Doctors and Nurse's. Also Patients, visitors etc. The victim may not be isolated, he may be on an ICU ward. I'm not quite sure how it works over there.

It would be hard to cover up this incident completely if it is as you theorised.


edit on 2-6-2012 by skitzspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   
I've been thinking why this incident could have gone on for nearly 18 minutes before help showed up.

Everything i'm about to say is just speculation.

It's possible they were quite concealed by the wall/barrier. Especially from most of the cars, they were going by quite fast and probably concentrating on the road. The likely witnesses who called 911 may have been the cyclists you see in the video and possibly the black disappearing and reappearing car that does actually pull to a stop around and just after 5:00 mins.

Timeline of possible witnesses:

There may have been some witnesses who spotted the attacker walking along the causeway naked. They could have called that in but may not have been taken very seriously.

The first cyclist that sped by in the beginning before the attacker even touches the victim may not have called it in, all they may have seen was Eugene naked and just thought WTF!?.

The black disapearing and reappearing car around the 5:00 minute mark does stop, so i think they may have called it in, possibly the first. They may not of fully comprehended what they were seeing. as they seem quite far away. But possibly knew something was going down that wasn't quite right.

Around the 15:40 mark, someone walks by pushing their bicycle on the otherside of the wall/barrier. After walking past the scene, they then hightail it out of there, getting back on thier bike and peddling away quite fast, which tells me that this person was spooked. This could have been another witness that called it in. It's also possible that this witness didn't fully comprehend what they saw. It may have just looked like a bloody fight involving two naked men.

Another cyclist goes by slowly on the other side of the wall/barrier at around the 16:30 mark. they appear to look at the scene, swerve a little, then stop right at the top of the screen for a very brief moment (you can see the shadow), then cycles off. This could have been another possible witness. Again, they may not have fully made out what was going on other than a two naked men involved in a bloody fight.

The first police cruiser (i think) goes by at around the 17:42 mins, probably doing a U-Turn off screen and pulls in at around 17:54 mins.

Now i'm going to guess that the Black disappearing/reappearing car at 5:00 mins was the first to call it in because the car does oviously stop. It pulls away at 5:30 mins. Leaving 12:12 minutes for the first police cruiser to appear. Now depending on whether a cruiser was in the area or not, is that a fast or slow repsonse, especially if the driver of the black car wasn't exactly sure what they saw other than a possible fight or attack, involving someone naked?

Edit: Just got Druid42's link to work for me about the 911 calls. For some weird reason it hasn't let me open it until now. The links ok, just think it's my cruddy computer.

Well it seems a few people called the incident in. But as i've been saying in this post, it's possible because the way they were concealed and depending on the time the incident was witnessed. The witnesses may not have fully comprehended what they were seeing, other than a naked man attacking someone, two bums fighting, a naked man on top of another man beating him to a pulp etc.

It would be nice if they released the actual timelines of the witness calls.


edit on 2-6-2012 by skitzspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:07 PM
link   
This is supposed to be a picture of the guy who had his face eaten off. It is very graphic, so you have been warned

www.longislandpress.com...



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by telemetry
 



The surveillance video supplied to CBS4 by The Herald under a news sharing agreement is disturbing. At one point, whomever was controlling the cameras zoomed in to the two men lying nude and partially obscured by the MetroMover track. One man is motionless, but the other, presumably the man whose face was attacked, can be seen flailing his legs, possibly in pain. The Herald used video editing tools to obscure portions of that man’s body as he moved. The video covers a time frame of about 8 minutes, but despite the shooting of the attacker and the obvious distress shown by the victim, paramedics are not seen attempting to rescue him.


Ok, the video is directly linked to the Herald, and they did use video editing tools, so obviously the 4 day delay is because they had to dice and splice the video.

Funny enough, I google searched by image, and ran the photos through an EXIF viewer. All the images (thousands of different sizes) have had the EXIF data stripped off them. There is no way to prove when they were taken, nor from where.

I'm thinking finding more answers will be futile.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 


Where's that from? Anymore to it? You have the link? Ty


As for finding more answers will be futile, i think it's a wait and see scenario for now.


edit on 2-6-2012 by skitzspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   
wow, telemetry....boyyyyy....your post allowed me to conclude something i was thinking about.

i am sure now that "someone", with good/bad intentions, edit this tape and was "protecting" someone or something in the footage....ie COP CAR, 1:58min... imagine if there were other cop cars....so it could be innocent

someone 100 percent "touched" this CCTV before releasing it to the media.

BUT

the INITIAL report that you lot seemed to forget was.... there were 3 suspects.

....NOW....

think about it...we DONT see the victim untill 2:30....plus the way that the cyclist in the first minute flew past, and the fact a cop car, (whose seating in the vehicle is high off the ground allowing him to have clear view of the incident) drove past....and now seeing they cropped the edges....meaning our ONLY view of the suspect in the whole first 2:30 is obscured by the shade...there is no image of the suspect in the sun, for 2 and a half minutes..
would of been nice to see him approach, clearly, to get a positive id




i conclude that we disregard the first 2:30 mins...

now....2:30 till 5mins is where i need to concentrate

as 6 mins onward we hardly see the two (plus the opinion that im seeing the same cars go by as before),

i think now, that 8:20mins...is the dodgy`st scene in the video.....a car pulls up.....could be a witness.....but then the reponse time of the police, is 10 mins plus...which i doubt....
how can the low car see the incident and pickups and police trucks not see it???

maybe the third suspect jumped into that car......

im just thinking out loud now...but this is getting dodgyer by the day


that second footage,from the other camera, now, the HERALD has a "duty to release".

peace


P.S....druid...dude where the screen shot of the cop car 1:58 mins....lol
edit on 2-6-2012 by thePharaoh because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-6-2012 by thePharaoh because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 04:53 PM
link   
ok i watched the tape from 2:30 untill 3:30...

i need you lots assitance......iv made out "possible" movement of a third entity in the scene.

i will try and explain.

DRUID42, brought our attention to two things thrown from the suspect, one into the rd...and one up the causeway.

ok....the one going into the rd ...hmmm....look at this

at 3:18 / 3:19 mins......LOOK CAREFULLY...
the victims legs are kicking out....and something/shadow moves away, north....at a steady pace.

i began to think that the victim was kicking out at a third party

watch the video carefully....i did so for one minute ..2:30...3:30.....by 3:30mins i am adamant that their is someone else here.."photoshoped" out....

PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AND LET ME KNOW



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Druid42, skitzspiricy, thePharaoh:
All very interesting questions - for sure and I appreciate the feedback from you all!I'd like to delve into those things individually, which will most likely require a separate and more lengthy reply on my part

Regarding the "other" security camera on the Herald bldg. I think, that if it was pointed in the right direction... the MacArthur causeway, then perhaps there would be footage of Rudy. They did say he walked down that from Miami Beach yes?

What I'm not so sure of, is whether said second camera would provide any more or maybe better footage of the attack. It is on the same side of the building, but further back on the corner. (just to clarify)

I did some more recon today, and found a few more interesting things that may be relevant. First, here is an image of the wall... on the walkway there. It's a typical "Jersey Barrier" I believe that's what they are called. They are something like 3 or 3 1/2 feet tall, so I don't see how they weren't noticed sooner. Fact is, those things aren't waist high, unless the average person is 4 foot 6. Even crouching, I would think Rudy would have easily been seen - especially from taller cars, suv's.. and more notably from the passenger side. Anyway, here is a picture:



Oh, and get this - I think I might have spotted someone (to me at least) could very well be Ron, hiking across the causeway in april 2011. What do you all think?







I'll take another couple looks at the vid, thePharaoh... and let you know what I think.
T-



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   
just watched the 3:30 till 4:30....come the F ON...THERE IS SOMETHING THERE....

the pixels and shadows move....going into the 4th minute...so from about 3:50 till 4:40 there is movement right behind the suspect...extensive movement...he then drags the body "towards tis movement"......plus there is a white flash/something in the road at the 4 minutes but a bus quikly covers it.....



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
ohh my dayz....really.....sheesh..its him you know!....WTF....



Originally posted by telemetry







edit on 2-6-2012 by thePharaoh because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by thePharaoh
 


Well, to me... it sure does bear a striking resemblance. Weathered look, bag slung over his shoulder and everything. I about jumped out of my chair when I caught him on streetview. Matter if fact, I'm gonna have to jump back on there and get a couple more grabs... ya know, just in case the "scrubbers" come along.

Funny too, as most peoples (faces) are blurred out in google. Not this one.
How ironic is that, if it is in fact him?
edit on 12/6/2 by telemetry because: classified



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   
how the F did the cop car in 1:58min, not see a naked dude eating a dude.......over this....


Originally posted by telemetry




edit on 2-6-2012 by thePharaoh because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
96
<< 36  37  38    40  41  42 >>

log in

join