Blue_Tackler wrote:
Yes, but it is easy to explain why. If the why has no relevance then I'll give this one a miss.

Hemingway wrote
They needed to have him wearing recent clothing, clothing that they know he still owns, so would not use an old photo of him at the station, but made an image of him wearing clothes from his current wardrobe.
And then yes dressed the corpse.

Why is everyone ignoring the Argos van?

If somebody got killed - My sincere condolences go out to the family/s

However, Both Sandy Hook/Lee Rigby "conspiracy theories" point to the whole thing being a fabrication. They both work on the theory that nobody was, in actual fact, killed. And in my opinion there is substantial evidence pointing towards that.
One of the best theories for the Lee Rigby murder is that presented by Chris Spivey. There are some inconsistencies and suppositions that are dodgy or lacking in detailed examination or knowledge of how the armed forces work; but generally he has dissected the incident with a rigorous scrutiny. But, to give him additional credit, to carry him past the inevitable "he's a whacko" ignore him period; he is still working on the final presentation. So we have to wait and see.
If people look at the Lee Rigby incident, in a linear fashion, with a clear detached eye; it isn't long before some glaring inconsistencies come to mind. On that day, pretty much everyone involved, behaved in an atypical fashion. Using the balance of probabllity factor - at least some people would have acted how they should have according to legacy and contemporary psychological orthodoxy.
When Chris publishes his Magnum Opus on this subject I might attempt a blow by blow critique of what his conclusions are. But if his Tome lives up to the promise I will probably sit back and slip out a subtle "Yeah, nice one" and leave the MSM fuckwits to do their, predictable, hit job.

Hemingway wrote:
Is it easy to explain why the definition of the paving changes at the border of his trousers and why there is a white line between the contour of his trousers and the platform floor?

PS and round his sleeve.
PSS and a black line at the other side.

Bt, i've zoomed in to that enlarged photo as far as i can. It gets well pixelated. I can't say iif the shirt is being cut or not.
I would err on the side of not from what i can see though.
If you were shot in the torso you'd be lucky not to suffer quite severe blood loss. It's chocked full of organs innit.
I see no sign of blood and that makes me pretty confident he hasn't been shot in the torso.
What is the official list of his wounds?

dubmeup wrote:
it's all a bit vague but the reports appear to suggest arm and leg wounds, it looks a bit to me like the policeman is scissoring his shirt. Yes it's hard to tell for sure, but the shirt has been pulled up and the hand placed inside as if holding a wound, perhaps it's theatre?

I've read all of Spivey's "work" so far on the subject and it didn't impress me. I don't remember him coming to any conclusions on what happened at all - he just does what has been done here. All the alternatives to what was presented to the jury are far more bizarre than the one the defendants were found guilty of - that's why there are so few attempts to present any.

ETA Sorry should have quoted Wise Haven in this reply.

@dubs ''Adebowale was shot in the stomach and leg by officer E42 and fell to the ground but attempted to aim the gun at them again, the court heard.''

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/woolwich-t...878015#ixzz2uwVNDzvH

Where de blood?

Tum Tum

7:10 onwards bullet proof vest.

To say "shot in the stomach" in an official context, is specific. It doesn't mean "shot somewhere below his rib cage".
That man clearly has not been shot in the stomach when the photo was taken.
Idk if i'll be convinced of.authenticity by a mirror report unless it contained court transcripts. Same for any paper/outlet tbh no?
Is it transcripted.as " shot in the stomach"?
I know i am being a bit of a pain but my interest is piqued now

I'm not sure the court transcipt is available dubs...

Though here's Channel 4 saying the same thing ''


The officer said Mr Adebowale had been shot in the leg and stomach, and raised his arm before he was hit again. "The next two shots shot his thumb off. The hand holding the weapon," E48 said.

He said that he and other officers try to save the lives of suspects who have been shot. "Once the threat is neutralised we have a duty of care to all persons to save life, no matter who they are''

www.channel4.com/news/lee-rigby-adebolaj...-woolwich-old-bailey

dubmeup wrote: There are two basic orthodoxies when it comes to armed response.
Options:
1, Counter Terrorist agencies: Weapon present or suspected - Shoot to kill: Double tap to the head.
2. Armed Police (Domestic situation): Weapon present or suspected - Secure an outer cordon to protect the publi (unarmed officers)c. Inner cordon (armed police) to contain the shooter. Negotiation and observation (talk down the shooter)
Potential breach of inner cordon or threat to life - Double tap to main body (Trunk).
Option 1. requires specific and very controlled Home Office procedure and authorisation. The police relinquish control of the scene on orders from the Home secretary or their representative - to another agency. Once the operation has concluded - within minutes usually - the Home secretary or their representative are handed back control from the involved agency and the crime scene is then handed over to the police.
If you look at the Lee Rigby situation non of the options were attempted in any meaningful sense. Which either points to gross negligence by the parties involved or some sort of third world diversity appeasement exercise.
Twas all bollocks and if this was a genuine event heads should have rolled for such an appalling performance.

"third world appeasement exercise"
Can you expand on thT please?

dubmeup wrote: In the interests of diversity - some first world nations occasionally look bad on purpose to make third world buddies feel it aint such a stretch to be as good as their sponsors. Bit like dads letting little Johny kick a goal into the net. Or in this case....look at us, we sometimes fuck it up too.
I know, bit of a stretch, but it does happen....depending who is flavour of the month.

Blue_Tackler wrote:
Notice the thick white line that's running along side the train on the platform, look how it ends at his arm, that's not right I tell ya!!

It's because he has a white aura around his arm.

Correct me please if I'm wrong, is the rail carriage next to 'LR' at a different angle than the rest of the carriages?

Cop using scissors to cut clothes.

Fake blood packers?

Unless it's something else ?

I guess if it is fake blood packets they could not use them because of all the people watching, some filming taking/photos on the near by grassy corner.

truthfrequencyradio.com/blood-packets-at...lice-shooting-scene/

'ere's the bag son, keep it schtum !!

Blue_Tackler wrote:
I've just had the picture into a graphics program. The train is straight judging by the gap between the train and the platform, the yellow line is straight, and the rippley concrete that changes in the foreground is also straight. It's the white fuzz around LR that is the potential giveaway of a photoshop.... & that rippley concrete is a bit weird how it changes.

Here's Woolwich Arsenal Railway Station from a different angle.

The 'rippley concrete' area is dimpled warning slabs for the visually impaired and appear to run continuously on both sides of the platform. (which would make sense of course)



Remembering that this is a still from a cctv camera, I would strongly suggest the artefacts around LR are most probably tv scanlines.

Other than a newspaper photo editor perhaps wanting the top of someone else's head tidied out of that pic, the flat grey area at the bottom left is shady and badly done/hurried imo.