MissedItByThatMuch
Former Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2013
- Messages
- 52
- Reaction score
- 0
My fellow crime fighters, Elisa's blood cries out.
Forgive for such long posts and so many of them, but I thought this post should go as close as possible to the related one above, where I showed that video doctoring by the police didn't make a lot of sense so that we should instead turn focus to the hotel staff. Let's polish our magnifying glasses and put on the eagle's eye; let's not miss a thing. I'm going to play the part of the murderer; I'm a hotel staffer who needs to doctor the video. Here's how I go about it.
But in this scenario, understand that Elisa was taken from the earth on her last night in the hotel because the guilty staffer wanted the police to believe that she left the hotel, and went missing elsewhere. That's how you can know that her bags and other property were not in her room at check out time, because the staffer made sure to remove them so that no one might have a clue that the hotel is where she died. In this picture, the staffer is not overly concerned about the body in the water tank because it appears that Elisa left the hotel. But just in case, he wants to doctor the elevator video because there is something damning on it. He is a staffer with access to the video room. Who might that be?
The police reported that they had in their possession some of Elisa's belongings. How could these belongings be from her room? For if they were from her room, the hotel staff would have known from day one that there was something wrong. My understanding is that the police or hotel were not alerted of any wrong until some days later when Elisa's parents called to inquire. So where did the police get some of her belongings if they were not from her room?
In this scenario, we have no choice but to assume that the original timestamp is in pixels, because there is no other way that the staffer can get away with his doctoring of the video.
Alright, I'm the murderer. I work in the hotel. I've got to change the video. I know that no other staffer views the security videos because its more boring than any human can take. I know I can alter the video while no other staffer or manager or owner will notice. But I've got to fool the police if it ever gets to that. I've got to remove the 24th minute where all the evidence appears against me and/or my friends. The police might notice the timestamp irregularity if I do that, however, so I've got to paste some timestamp in there to fool them into thinking that nothing's doctored. My problem is, I've got to blend in with the original timestamp at some point, and the place to do that is when the elevator goes down from the 14th floor. There's nothing of guilt evident from that point on.
[Pause. In other words, from the closing of the elevator door at 25:14, to 24:59, the timestamp reflects the true and original time.]
I see that Elisa has pressed the door-hold button at 22:09. I know that the door-hold button lasts two minutes long. The police will probably know this too, so I had better make the splice to reflect that more or less bang-on. My problem is, my splice goes to 25:14, and, besides, the door closes at 25:14. That's over three minutes long. So, I'll cut out just the right amount of time to make it appear that the door closes two minutes after 22:09, and hopefully the police won't learn to decipher the pixels. End of scenario.
The staffer is in a real pickle. And he makes mistakes out of what could be sloppiness. Better yet, he starts doctoring on one shift but doesn't finish, then can't get back to finishing for some reason. Perhaps the police notifies the hotel manager that the video system should be locked down. The staffer has now nailed his own coffin by leaving the video insufficiently doctored. The first problem, he had replaced the timestamp at the 24:00 mark with 21:00, but that was part of plan A, and it needed to be removed for plan B instead. The latter plan was to make the elevator door look like it closed two minutes after 22:09. The 25:00 was supposed to replace 21:00 so that the police would be fooled into thinking that 25:00 was 24:00. So he snipped out some seconds from his splice, and retained 25:00, 25:01, 25:02, 25:03, 25:04, 25:07, 25:10, 25:11, and 25:14 (to 25:59). Count them: nine seconds. It makes it look like the elevator door closed at roughly 24:09...under the condition that the police don't bother to check / decipher the pixels. Otherwise he's going to jail.
Why would the guilty staffer slow the video? The way it is now, the elevator door starts to close about 2:48 minutes of real time after Elisa presses the door-hold button. That does not jibe with the plan B of making the door seem to be closing two minutes after she pressed the button. If a police officer decides to compare the video time with his watch, the's staffer's in trouble. If, on the other hand, the staffer lets the video run in real time, then, correct me if I'm wrong, it looks to the police watch that all is well. It would appear that there were two minutes indeed from the time of pressing the door-hold button to door-close time.
Of course, if the police were ask why the elevator door did not close two minutes after Elisa last pressed the button at 23:12 and 23:15, the staffer could be in trouble. I suppose he had planned to lie, to say that the door-hold feature holds for two minutes maximum regardless of how many times the button is pressed within the two minutes. Or, that could be the truth.
Forgive for such long posts and so many of them, but I thought this post should go as close as possible to the related one above, where I showed that video doctoring by the police didn't make a lot of sense so that we should instead turn focus to the hotel staff. Let's polish our magnifying glasses and put on the eagle's eye; let's not miss a thing. I'm going to play the part of the murderer; I'm a hotel staffer who needs to doctor the video. Here's how I go about it.
But in this scenario, understand that Elisa was taken from the earth on her last night in the hotel because the guilty staffer wanted the police to believe that she left the hotel, and went missing elsewhere. That's how you can know that her bags and other property were not in her room at check out time, because the staffer made sure to remove them so that no one might have a clue that the hotel is where she died. In this picture, the staffer is not overly concerned about the body in the water tank because it appears that Elisa left the hotel. But just in case, he wants to doctor the elevator video because there is something damning on it. He is a staffer with access to the video room. Who might that be?
The police reported that they had in their possession some of Elisa's belongings. How could these belongings be from her room? For if they were from her room, the hotel staff would have known from day one that there was something wrong. My understanding is that the police or hotel were not alerted of any wrong until some days later when Elisa's parents called to inquire. So where did the police get some of her belongings if they were not from her room?
In this scenario, we have no choice but to assume that the original timestamp is in pixels, because there is no other way that the staffer can get away with his doctoring of the video.
Alright, I'm the murderer. I work in the hotel. I've got to change the video. I know that no other staffer views the security videos because its more boring than any human can take. I know I can alter the video while no other staffer or manager or owner will notice. But I've got to fool the police if it ever gets to that. I've got to remove the 24th minute where all the evidence appears against me and/or my friends. The police might notice the timestamp irregularity if I do that, however, so I've got to paste some timestamp in there to fool them into thinking that nothing's doctored. My problem is, I've got to blend in with the original timestamp at some point, and the place to do that is when the elevator goes down from the 14th floor. There's nothing of guilt evident from that point on.
[Pause. In other words, from the closing of the elevator door at 25:14, to 24:59, the timestamp reflects the true and original time.]
I see that Elisa has pressed the door-hold button at 22:09. I know that the door-hold button lasts two minutes long. The police will probably know this too, so I had better make the splice to reflect that more or less bang-on. My problem is, my splice goes to 25:14, and, besides, the door closes at 25:14. That's over three minutes long. So, I'll cut out just the right amount of time to make it appear that the door closes two minutes after 22:09, and hopefully the police won't learn to decipher the pixels. End of scenario.
The staffer is in a real pickle. And he makes mistakes out of what could be sloppiness. Better yet, he starts doctoring on one shift but doesn't finish, then can't get back to finishing for some reason. Perhaps the police notifies the hotel manager that the video system should be locked down. The staffer has now nailed his own coffin by leaving the video insufficiently doctored. The first problem, he had replaced the timestamp at the 24:00 mark with 21:00, but that was part of plan A, and it needed to be removed for plan B instead. The latter plan was to make the elevator door look like it closed two minutes after 22:09. The 25:00 was supposed to replace 21:00 so that the police would be fooled into thinking that 25:00 was 24:00. So he snipped out some seconds from his splice, and retained 25:00, 25:01, 25:02, 25:03, 25:04, 25:07, 25:10, 25:11, and 25:14 (to 25:59). Count them: nine seconds. It makes it look like the elevator door closed at roughly 24:09...under the condition that the police don't bother to check / decipher the pixels. Otherwise he's going to jail.
Why would the guilty staffer slow the video? The way it is now, the elevator door starts to close about 2:48 minutes of real time after Elisa presses the door-hold button. That does not jibe with the plan B of making the door seem to be closing two minutes after she pressed the button. If a police officer decides to compare the video time with his watch, the's staffer's in trouble. If, on the other hand, the staffer lets the video run in real time, then, correct me if I'm wrong, it looks to the police watch that all is well. It would appear that there were two minutes indeed from the time of pressing the door-hold button to door-close time.
Of course, if the police were ask why the elevator door did not close two minutes after Elisa last pressed the button at 23:12 and 23:15, the staffer could be in trouble. I suppose he had planned to lie, to say that the door-hold feature holds for two minutes maximum regardless of how many times the button is pressed within the two minutes. Or, that could be the truth.
