14 thoughts on “FBI criminal complaint on Capitol incursion used Photoshopped 4chan hoax picture as evidence”

  1. What is the point? Somebody photoshopped the wall painting for their own humor.

    Does that make the ID of the folks who are in focus any less accurate?

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    2. RE: “Does that make the ID of the folks who are in focus any less accurate?”

      It might, but what makes you think the photoshopped image is being used for identification?

      Like

      Reply

        1. RE: “Really? Know that for sure, do you? Was that in Chain of Evidence 595?”

          The rules of evidence are fairly straightforward. A doctored photo would never meet the authenticity test, and would therefore be disallowed.

          As Wikipedia puts it: “Certain kinds of evidence, such as documentary evidence, are subject to the requirement that the offeror provide the trial judge with a certain amount of evidence (which need not be much and it need not be very strong) suggesting that the offered item of tangible evidence (e.g., a document, a gun) is what the offeror claims it is. This authentication requirement has import primarily in jury trials. If evidence of authenticity is lacking in a bench trial, the trial judge will simply dismiss the evidence as unpersuasive or irrelevant.”

          Like

          Reply

          1. But the background painting is not part of the evidence. The Zapruder film evidentiary value was 3 or four frames. The rest could be doctored as much as you want. The photograph in question is loaded with metadata that tells where the camera was located and all the reference angles to subject. So long as the prosecution can assure that the subject was not altered, it’s admissible.

            Liked by 3 people

      2. Nobody says you have to use the photo to convict, just to identify the terrorists. Most have been singing a high pitch once they realize they are in deep poop legally.

        And most seem to find solace in the same song: “The president invited us…”.

        Liked by 3 people

        Reply

        1. RE: “Nobody says you have to use the photo to convict, just to identify the terrorists.”

          You have a queer view of the law if you believe that a doctored photo can be used to identify anyone.

          Like

          Reply

        2. How do you know if the photo is even real? The whole thing could be photoshopped and represent nothing true. Can you proveotherwise? Besides, most are charged with just trespassing. Hardly a capital crime that you liberals make it up to be.

          Like

          Reply

          1. Can I call you as an expert witness the next time they use photo enhancements to read a license plate taken from a security camera? I’m sure you can overturn the convictions in which victims have been identifed by overlaying the photo of a skull with a family photo.

            Liked by 3 people

          2. Hardly a capital crime?

            Actually, treason (making war on the United States) is the ONE “capital crime” defined in the Constitution. It is punishable by death.

            But, yeah, we liberals have very funny ideas. We think it is bad to try to cancel an election with violence. We think it is bad to send a drooling mob of insurrectionists into the Capitol to hunt down Mike Pence, Nancy Pelosi, AOC and any Senators daring to uphold the law. We think it is bad to smash public property, steal things and kill people. But, hey, that’s just us. You “real Americans” obviously have different ideas.

            Liked by 3 people

  2. …”but the problem of seeing what we wish to see afflicts all of us.”

    The same is true of NOT seeing what you DON’T want to see.

    That is where it appears your issue lies.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment