Photographic still image taken from crime scene video - The shocking truth...

[scipio_usmc]

That woman is an actress who is about 25/30 years older than Sheila.

Same old Mike though

[Jane]

Like I am saying - when you take a photograph, the format and quality is set at the time the image is captured, so how can you have one photograph which only shows the face of one female, and part of another body close by, which i refer to as dark image (a). How can this dark image, suddenly turn into a light version of the same image, and show two female faces, whereas the original dark image (a), only shows the face of the female in the foreground? So with this in mind, please post a dark version of image (a) with the two faces of the faces contained within it. I do not believe it is possible to do this, because the face of the second female in the background of the light version of image (a) has been superimposed to create an illusion using special effects...

Now, am I right, or am I wrong...

Post the dark version of image (a) showing the faces of both female victims in the same image, that's all I am asking, is that too complicated a request, to request?

Mike, as in an earlier post you admitted to having toyed with us, it shouldn't come as any surprise to learn that some of us are assuming you still are, under which circumstances it would seem foolish of us to believe that you're right.

[mike tesko]

That woman is an actress who is about 25/30 years older than Sheila.

No, its not - its Sheila...

[mike tesko]

No, its not - its Sheila...

This image is of Sheila Caffell, wearing the very same nightdress that PC Bird photographed her in at the scene from 10 O'clock, onwards. It is not an actress playing Sheila, and considering that Sheila's autopsy was carried out on the day of the tragedy (7th August 1985), how could she have been photographed on any other day wearing the same nightdress, and her face and neck showing evidence of the same general blood running from her mouth and across her throat, with additional blood there for good measure? How can anyone doubt that this image was taken on 7th August 1985, and broadcast in the tv footage...

Notice format / quality of image...

[mike tesko]

There is other footage as part of the tv documentary, taken on 7th August 1985, not played by actors, or actresses, so it now transpires that there was a mixture of real time video footage, and photographs taken on 7th August 1985, and the use of actors and actors in the same tv documentary in question...

So, I was right all along...

[petey]

There is other footage as part of the tv documentary, taken on 7th August 1985, not played by actors, or actresses, so it now transpires that there was a mixture of real time video footage, and photographs taken on 7th August 1985, and the use of actors and actors in the same tv documentary in question...

So, I was right all along...

If we actually return to the real world and not some fantasy make believe world, through the post made by ngb we can now see that although it was somewhat surprising, NO police video was actually taken of the crime scene. Then Caroline confirmed with the producers that they had no access to any crime scene footage and everything included in the documentary is explicitly reconstructed with the use of actresses.

Hopefully now you will finally accept that for whatever reason you were wrong and do not have a photographic still image taken from the crime scene video showing Sheila or June.

To continue to make that claim is simply embarrassing for yourself and more sadly, the forum. I think it is quite evident that not one single member of the forum has stood up and supported you or ur claims.

[guest154]

There are lots of way that Mike can help the forum and create debate, he is in possesion of more files than any of us can imagine - it would be helpful if more was scanned and put up onto the board but I think it's time this whole notion of these photographs being June/Sheila was put to bed before it begins to harm forum credibility.

[petey]

There are lots of way that Mike can help the forum and create debate, he is in possesion of more files than any of us can imagine - it would be helpful if more was scanned and put up onto the board but I think it's time this whole notion of these photographs being June/Sheila was put to bed before it begins to harm forum credibility.

Don't you think this thread has done massive harm to forum credibility already. A brief precis of events as I've seen them over the last few days:

1) Mike claims to have ground breaking new photographic evidence that will prove that police stage managed the bodies of Sheila and June in different positions and he will reveal asap.

2) Mike receives a mysterious phone call, from a mysterious source, advising him against publishing photo for a mysterious reason.

3) Mike publishes photos

4) It is soon obvious to everybody that they are stills from a documentary and photos of actresses not June or Sheila.

5) Mike disputes this arguing they are from a crime scene video 'cleverly edited' by the director combining with reconstructions using actresses.

6) Ngb confirms that no crime scene footage was taken and Caroline confirms from the producer of the documentary that everything filmed is a reconstruction using actresses.

7) Mike continues claiming that it is a photo of Sheila

8. Forum credibility further plummets

[guest154]

Yeah, I think harm has been done - not just with this topic either. I hope that this topic would go away after your point 6 (NGB confirming that there was no crime scene video) but it looks like this yarn is here to stay, dissapoints me..... But there are still a couple of people who will believe this.

[Patti]

Do we have to have constant repeats that the photo's are not real. We know they are not real and its going towards goading Mike now. Why don't you all leave him alone and let him post what he wants to without badgering him any further.

There are only so many times you can continue to say it to him.

[guest154]

Do we have to have constant repeats that the photo's are not real. We know they are not real and its going towards goading Mike now. Why don't you all leave him alone and let him post what he wants to without badgering him any further.

There are only so many times you can continue to say it to him.

Certainly not goading anyone. I am just being HONEST because I think that matters, these are real people.

[petey]

Do we have to have constant repeats that the photo's are not real. We know they are not real and its going towards goading Mike now. Why don't you all leave him alone and let him post what he wants to without badgering him any further.

There are only so many times you can continue to say it to him.

Are you for real?!!!!

Mike as forum owner, posts quite blasé that the photo is definitely of Sheila. I think we as posters would be failing in our duty to the credibility of this forum if we didn't pull him up on his error until he backs down and admits he was wrong in his judgement.

How do you think it looks to people who read this forum when they see the forum owner repeatedly posting that the photos are of Sheila?!  It makes it look a laughing stock. 

Without overly critiquing you, I think it is quite negligent of you to state that we should 'leave Mike alone' and 'stop badgering' him.  Would u have said the same if I'd questioned him telling Bridget to hang herself or the abhorrent Hillsborough posts that were made?

[Patti]

Are you for real?!!!!

Mike as forum owner, posts quite blasé that the photo is definitely of Sheila. I think we as posters would be failing in our duty to the credibility of this forum if we didn't pull him up on his error until he backs down and admits he was wrong in his judgement.

How do you think it looks to people who read this forum when they see the forum owner repeatedly posting that the photos are of Sheila?!  It makes it look a laughing stock. 

Without overly critiquing you, I think it is quite negligent of you to state that we should 'leave Mike alone' and 'stop badgering' him.  Would u have said the same if I'd questioned him telling Bridget to hang herself or the abhorrent Hillsborough posts that were made?

Yes I am for real are YOU?

I fully understand where you are coming from and 33 pages later the same thing is still being said. I totally agree with what you are saying and I agree with everyone that has questioned the photo's, but what can we do about it? You give me the answer to that.

I can lock the thread but I'd be a bad bugger for doing that, plus Mike would unlock it.  Its Mikes forum and we choose to be here and those that do not wish to be here move on. 

This has nothing to do with Bridget or Hillsborough Peter and I resent you bringing that into the equation. 

You come up with alternatives on what we are to do.

[petey]

Yes I am for real are YOU?

I fully understand where you are coming from and 33 pages later the same thing is still being said. I totally agree with what you are saying and I agree with everyone that has questioned the photo's, but what can we do about it? You give me the answer to that.

I can lock the thread but I'd be a bad bugger for doing that, plus Mike would unlock it.  Its Mikes forum and we choose to be here and those that do not wish to be here move on. 

This has nothing to do with Bridget or Hillsborough Peter and I resent you bringing that into the equation. 

You come up with alternatives on what we are to do.

Delete every post on this thread where Mike has lied / given erroneous information, to save further damage to the credibility of this forum.

[mike tesko]

Hiding from the truth never got anyone anywhere...

The photo's I posted are of Sheila, and at Hillsboro' some fans were to blame for some of the deaths in the crush...