Latest on MJJC

surveillance tapes (all threads merged)

Bonnie Blue said:
^^Missredd07 and ruchie - the tapes weren't erased. In the 16 March hearing, walgren clearly says that the tapes are motion activated by movement at the front gate and perimeter wall, so the fact that there are only 15 or so mins of a 24 hr day is because that was the only activity to be taped.
Click to expand...

Thanks. At beginning I only read the summary of each hearing. So I go back to 3/16 post here on the same page and read the hearing content. However, Walgren also state: ANY OTHER VIDEO WOULD HAVE BEEN, WOULD HAVE ERASED ITSELF AND BEEN RECORDED OVER. SO ALL THE VIDEO SURVEILLANCE THAT EXISTS IS IN POSSESSION OF THE DEFENDANTS. I WILL POINT OUT, TOO, THAT THE -- AND THIS WILL BE PART OF THE NEW DISCOVERY BECAUSE L.A.P.D. DID FOLLOW UP ON THAT ISSUE.

So basically they are saying they only got those video (cars arrived MJ's home.)the rest of them will be erased no matter it's motion activated or not.

And the defense argue the video also contain lots of footage with clearly no motion so he question whether it's really motion activated. Can someone tell me are they already confirmed that it's really only motion activated? since Walgren also stated that's what he have been told but Chernoff didn't agree. Do they have any follow up after 3/16 hearing?

But I also agreed that the camera is only taking cars coming in or out so basically it's useless. My point is that people think it's conspiracy like some Jackson family members kept saying the video got erased because they are hiding something. I just wanted to get the fact straight. Thanks for the info.
 
I wouldn't worry about Jermaine and Latoya's theories about erased tapes, they don't do research, they have books to sell and people like a mystery. Honestly, the defence is so desperate at the moment that if chernoff was in any way suspicious about any tapes being erased showing something that could cast any doubt that murray was not the only person in that house that night, they would definitely bring it up. It's a red herring imo.
 
ivy said:
we have seen the tapes. they are quite irrelevant IMO and they show nothing but the gates and the cars come in. It doesn't show who goes into the house or not - We didn't see Michael at all for example.
Click to expand...

That's not right, you can actually see MJ for some seconds in the surveillance tape (watch the vid at full size):


Look at 33:50 - 34:00 - you can see the car driving past the camera. If you stop at 33:55, MJ is visible. You can see part of his face and his face mask and it seems like he's looking out of the window. The vid is very blurry, but at full size he's recognizable.
 
Nonoka said:
That's not right, you can actually see MJ for some seconds in the surveillance tape (watch the vid at full size):


Look at 33:50 - 34:00 - you can see the car driving past the camera. If you stop at 33:55, MJ is visible. You can see part of his face and his face mask and it seems like he's looking out of the window. The vid is very blurry, but at full size he's recognizable.
Click to expand...

take a screen shot?

and like I said it still doesn't show who went into the house
 
Look closely. When the car drives past the camera you can see a glimpse of Michael. I can see his eyes clearly.
 
I can see what looks like a white face and eyes just like Michael with a mask and I can also see what looks like a blurry face at the back in a separate shot, that could be Michael with no mask.

BUT on both occasions. (the first... and the replay back after that) when you see the entry of the car, you see those images before you see the guard driver reach out to the speaker box at the gate where the video is.

So logically this tells me that neither of the blurry images could be Michael, as he would be in the seat behind the guard. Therefore if you saw his image, it should show after you see the guard.

Just my thoughts.... and I spent alot of time running it back and forth to analyse! :)
 
É muito estranho a policia não preservar as gravações da casa de um artista
como Michael, ja que o caso era de morte
Nunca vi isso acontecer nem no meu pais, até aqui a policia trabalha melhor,
não considero incompetencia da policia de LA
Para mim fica claro que a policia protege alguém
E alguém muito influente
 
Everythibg that was needed was taken. the defence started this whole someone else broke in a did it as one of their many theories. but some fans actually support this cause they are so wrapped up in everything being a conspiracy. its ridiculous this conversation is still be had.
 
ivy said:
take a screen shot?

and like I said it still doesn't show who went into the house
Click to expand...

Here's a screen shot:

5d78sm.png


And here's a quick drawn description to recognize MJ better (the parts I've drawn and the arrows pointing at are not in the exact accurate positon, but I hope it gives an over all view):

juye4y.png


Maybe someone can make a better drawing...I'm generally not good in explaining things lol
 
Thats the shot i can see as well that I was talking about, but like I said he is seen "before" the guard reaches out to the speaker box (intercom)

That wouldnt make sense to me as that would mean the driver was behind Michael?

Am I making sense? .....You will have to watch it over and then watch the replay the detectives made that is lowed down and the same happens.



>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Edited to add,

Perhaps he was sitting in the front seat with the guard!

That would fit in. As you see the car turn in and if he was in the front seat you would see him first and then the guard.

Only thing that doesnt make sense now to me is that I have never seen MJ sit in the front seat though!!?

Does he ever sit it the front. ?

It sure looks like it could be him though.

PS I think where you put the ear is his neck and the ear is up further.
 
Last edited:
The tapes could show if there was any unusual activity on the property. They could ascertain whether security were doing their job properly and if they let anyone in through the gates during the night. We would also be able to check people's testimony, such as when they arrived and left the property that morning. We have no idea what the tapes could show because we don't have them to view. There's no way to tell whether they could be relevant or not.
 
I think we cannot exclude "ex ante" the possibility that the tapes could be helpful. This is the other way around - after analysing the tapes we could exclude that they provide any sort of useful information. This is not related to any "conspiracy" theories, but just seems reasonable, when death of a person is involved?

Regarding the video - this is not the full quality that you could have here and maybe the "real" quality tape would make it possible to identify persons.
 
daisy said:
I think we cannot exclude "ex ante" the possibility that the tapes could be helpful. This is the other way around - after analysing the tapes we could exclude that they provide any sort of useful information. This is not related to any "conspiracy" theories, but just seems reasonable, when death of a person is involved?

Regarding the video - this is not the full quality that you could have here and maybe the "real" quality tape would make it possible to identify persons.
Click to expand...

Right. Having the complete tapes would just be reasonable. As it is, the material on that short segment of tape is next to useless. Doesn't show anyone entering the house, doesn't show the coming and going of any cars (except when Michael arrives), doesn't show the entry and exit of the amublance (with time-stamp), or anything.

In a thorough investigation, ALL of that footage would have been retained, and I think it's just SLOPPY that it wasn't. It probably wouldn't have made any difference, though. The defense is not going with any sort of "someone else did it" theory, so the arrivals and departures don't have much relevance to the defense theories. Even so, those tapes should have been, and could have been, kept intact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top