
Edited by john_s, 06 June 2007 - 07:53 AM.
Posted 06 June 2007 - 07:46 AM
Edited by john_s, 06 June 2007 - 07:53 AM.
Posted 06 June 2007 - 07:51 AM
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:00 AM
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:02 AM
On a serious note can the lad actually be charged with anything? I mean they say something about the times on the photos but I cant remember seeing any.
Was just talking to the lads at work and they all think that he cant be properly charged maybe just warned / cautioned.
Edited by XXX, 06 June 2007 - 08:04 AM.
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:04 AM
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:05 AM
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:06 AM
Edited by iceman, 06 June 2007 - 08:07 AM.
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:07 AM
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:11 AM
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:12 AM
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:19 AM
OMG!
I am amused, but equally it must have been someone on here who shopped him out (unless someone at the Sun owns a VX...), which is a bit out of order, in my opinion.
I can't see him being prosecuted for anything, because as said, although it's pretty obvious he did it, you can't actually prove it beyond reasonable doubt. But that's not really the point, it's still going to mess up his life. Yes, he shouldn't have done it, and yes, he certainly shouldn't have boasted about it, but there's a pretty good chance that now his friends, his family, his coworkers, his boss, are all going to find out about it, whether he wanted them to or not.
Seems a bit much, to me.
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:20 AM
OMG!
I am amused, but equally it must have been someone on here who shopped him out (unless someone at the Sun owns a VX...), which is a bit out of order, in my opinion.
Seems a bit much, to me.
Edited by Dave, 06 June 2007 - 08:22 AM.
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:27 AM
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:27 AM
The photograph of the motorway was taken at 07:26:43 on Sunday 27th May, the photograph of the speedo was taken 16 seconds later at 07:26:59. The photographs are sequential (i.e. there were no other shots taken between the motorway photo and the speedo photo).
I would guess a few hours after sunrise. And he's shown us a picture of his speedo. I give you that the two of these are not together but he is incinuating their relation.
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:27 AM
Yes, I'm having difficulty wiping theedit sorry I cant stop
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:29 AM
Tosser.
Thanks.As someone said above, we all get tarred with your (stupid) brush now.
If you do it and are prepared to bend over and take the consequences, fair enough but to admit it and to post evidence of it in public must take an extra special level of stupidity.
Whatever you do, don't forget the 11th Commandment boys & girls.
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:31 AM
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:33 AM
Every camera writes something called metadata into the file, which stores a whole bunch of information about what camera was used, what settings, when it was taken, and so on. The data is typically called EXIF data. (In the case of some cameras it can even contain your name, typically entered in when you install the software on your PC, and then transferred into the camera the first time it's connected - although the files in this case did not contain a name).How was this information extracted?
Edited by snoopstah, 06 June 2007 - 08:34 AM.
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:34 AM
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:42 AM
But lets not be to harsh and point fingers as I think he may not be the only one to have broken the speed limits in a VX [or indeed in any car], he may however be the only one that self incriminated himself so deserves a bit of a ribbing over that at least.
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users