UCLA pic taken on 06/24/09!

2»

Comments

  • RavenRaven Posts: 709
    Last days I´ve been working on the UCLA pics that I posted on the stretcher thread.
    But now I have just realized one thing that have petrified me.

    I can´t show it to you here, so to see what I found you have to do what follow:
    Go to this pic and save it in your computer:

    ambulance-arrives-at-hospital-with-michael-jackson.jpg

    http://www.bittenandbound.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/ambulance-arrives-at-hospital-with-michael-jackson.jpg

    Ok, then go to the windows explorer and open the folder.
    Choose to see "Details" view mode.
    Make shure that "Image taken date" (can´t see if this is so in English Windows) is displayed.
    And tell me what date was it taken...

    06/24/09 20:00

    I just cannot understand this!!!

    It happens the same wih this one:

    michael-jackson-arrives-via-ambulance-at-ucla-medical-center.jpg

    http://www.bittenandbound.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/michael-jackson-arrives-via-ambulance-at-ucla-medical-center.jpg
    <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) --> One that I saved in the past with exactly the same name, exact same picture has date "06/24/09 19:00"
    Could be that the camera with which the picture was taken did not have the correct time set...I have that often too
  • Perfectly, although it´s strange in a camara from a professional...
    Who knows!
  • I´ve changed my sistem to windows 7 and now I have realized that the creation date can simply be changed in properties with windows explorer... so I´ve come to the conclusion that:

    IT IS POSSIBLE TO CHANGE THAT DATA.

    Although I still can´t see the sense to do so.
  • simplymesimplyme Posts: 649
    Last days I´ve been working on the UCLA pics that I posted on the stretcher thread.
    But now I have just realized one thing that have petrified me.

    I can´t show it to you here, so to see what I found you have to do what follow:
    Go to this pic and save it in your computer:

    ambulance-arrives-at-hospital-with-michael-jackson.jpg

    http://www.bittenandbound.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/ambulance-arrives-at-hospital-with-michael-jackson.jpg

    Ok, then go to the windows explorer and open the folder.
    Choose to see "Details" view mode.
    Make shure that "Image taken date" (can´t see if this is so in English Windows) is displayed.
    And tell me what date was it taken...

    06/24/09 20:00

    I just cannot understand this!!!

    It happens the same wih this one:

    michael-jackson-arrives-via-ambulance-at-ucla-medical-center.jpg

    http://www.bittenandbound.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/michael-jackson-arrives-via-ambulance-at-ucla-medical-center.jpg

    For the purpose of illustrating how easy it is to screw with people...........check the date on this.
  • That´s what I have just stated.
  • simplymesimplyme Posts: 649
    That´s what I have just stated.

    I'm sorry, I didn't see your post. The "sense" is everyone screws with the hoaxers. They do it on purpose and keep you running in circles getting all lathered up about absolutely nothing.
  • Yes, we don´t know... maybe someone messing around, or maybe true...
    Thank you for the pic!
  • Since I am new here I am bouncing from place to place to see what has already been talked about and came upon one of my favorite subjects - the ambulance at UCLA!

    Yep, the date stamp does say 06-24-2009 - when I first saw this a long time ago all I could think of was what Ben said, "that day and the other day".

    Here are two pics where I have done some comparing on where things line up:

    Pic 1:

    topportionwithoutgapwithwords.jpg

    Pic 2:

    topportionwithgapwithwords.jpg

    I labeled the tiles and you can see that things don't line up to each pic, and we have a gap between the ambulance and the door....now even taking into consideration different camera angles reflections shouldn't move from tile to tile. You can even see where the reflectors on the side of the ambulance don't even match up.


    Original Pic 1:

    anotherpic-Copy.jpg

    Original Pic 2 (the one dated 06-24-09)

    pic3.jpg

    Here is what I have in the property section for the one dated June 24-09:

    Title: michael jackson hospital arrival 250609

    Description: Michael Jackson arriving by ambulance at the UCLA Medical Center, after suffering fatal heart attack at the age of 50. Los Angels, California - 25.06.09

    ***no TMZ, no Access Hollywood, no Extra, no Inside Edition, no Entertainment Tonight. Available for the rest of the world***

    Credit: (Mandatory) WENN.com

    Camera Model: nothing listed

    Date Taken: 6/24/2009 8:00 PM (I have 2 other times of 6:00 PM and 7:00 PM - I think it refers to time zones)

    Other captions on this picture:

    michael-jackson-arrives-via-ambulance-at-ucla-medical-center
    Type: JPEG Image
    Date taken: 6/24/2009 7 PM
    Rating: Unrated
    Dimensions: 640x427
    Size: 45.7 KB
    Title: michael jackson hospital arrival 250609

    Description

    Title: michael jackson hospital arrival 250609

    Origin:

    Authors: HTA/ZOJ ( am assuming these are the initials of the people involved)
    Date Taken: 6/24/2009 6:00 PM
    Copyright: WENN.com

    I too see the different time stamps and am not sure what that means unless somehow time zones are figured in somehow.

    From these two pics I think we have two different ambulances that were at UCLA. And also look that there are actually different people in the pics as well.

    Love you Michael!
  • Yes for shure, confusion.
    Be a photographer is part of my work and don´t see the point on doing that.
    I stock my almbums and work with metadata to sort etc.

    The metadata was modified, but wasn´t the modifying date what was changed to be on 24,
    it reflects that on 24 the metadata was changed... don´t know if I explain myself.

    There are many ways to work, OK, and maybe I can´t see the reason to modify the modifying date.

    Tell us Christiana, can you give us a reason to do that, just asking...

    I just don´t know if the pics were taken on 24, and of course if it was so, on 25 they had to reproduce a little of the scene. But all this is strange.


    i don't know if i am anywhere near close but are you saying this could have been taken any time prior to the 24th and that on the 24th the date was changed to the 25th? <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
Sign In or Register to comment.