The worst photo lineup EVER!!

Caper

Philosopher
Caper
Joined
Jun 18, 2007
Messages
5,741
If it wasn't so tragic it would almost be funny. Ok, I'm not that good of a person so it's still a little funny.

This guy spent 27 years behind bars railroaded for a series of rapes he did not commit.

Check out the photo line up police used to identify him.

image.jpg


You try. Just by looking at the image, can you figure out who might be guilty?
 
the one you almost can't see, behind 21:confused:

handcuffs?
 
Last edited:
That's ridiculous, but by representing himself at his trial and resisting an ID parade, he hardly helped matters. Yes, he should be compensated, but the amount he gets should be reduced to reflect the fact that he's partly the author of his own misfortune.
 
Pretty obvious. It's the bald guy hiding in the back.

Wait. How many of these people can we pick? They are all men. Rapists and potential rapists. Every last one.
 
With those cock duster moustaches, if they ain't gays they's Pedos fer sure. Should'a locked 'em all up.
 
That was back when Canada required all adult males to wear moustaches.
 
I'm just surprised to see a 5'4" 95 lb cop. Most places wouldn't hire a male officer that size.
 
Modified said:
I'm just surprised to see a 5'4" 95 lb cop. Most places wouldn't hire a male officer that size.
Click to expand...

Unless he has unnaturally long legs and a very short torso, it looks more like a 6' cop with bent knees and his upper body turned towards the camera.
It's hard to see which ones are the cops and which ones are the (potential) perverts. All those porn staches and bowl haircuts make them all look shifty.
 
Last edited:
Porpoise of Life said:
Unless he has unnaturally long legs and a very short torso, it looks more like a 6' cop with bent knees and his upper body turned towards the camera.
It's hard to see which ones are the cops and which ones are the (potential) perverts. All those porn staches and bowl haircuts make them all look shifty.
Click to expand...

He's barely bent over at all, plus the shoes give him an extra inch.
 
Ian Osborne said:
That's ridiculous, but by representing himself at his trial and resisting an ID parade, he hardly helped matters. Yes, he should be compensated, but the amount he gets should be reduced to reflect the fact that he's partly the author of his own misfortune.
Click to expand...

I disagree.
I don't care if he put lipstick on his fingers, spoke in a falsetto voice and defended himself Señor Wences style, if the prosecutors "failed to disclose blood testing from sperm that would have excluded Henry in one of the assaults," then he deserves full compensation.

[I am assuming Canadian jurisprudence is similar to American when I assert that ] The prosecution has an inviolate duty to provide exculpatory evidence. Their duty is not to provide exculpatory evidence only to defendants who act in a rational, mature, and helpful manner.

In short, s'not'awright.
 
Last edited:
Ladewig said:
I disagree.
I don't care if he put lipstick on his fingers, spoke in a falsetto voice and defended himself Señor Wences style, if the prosecutors "failed to disclose blood testing from sperm that would have excluded Henry in one of the assaults," then he deserves full compensation.

[I am assuming Canadian jurisprudence is similar to American when I assert that ] The prosecution has an inviolate duty to provide exculpatory evidence. Their duty is not to provide exculpatory evidence only to defendants who act in a rational, mature, and helpful manner.

In short, s'not'awright.
Click to expand...
Seconded. And there's more disturbing in that article:
Laxton claimed police lacked identification, but finally managed to get it through a complainant with a strong emotional connection to the lead detective in the case.

In a letter only recently disclosed to Henry's lawyers, Laxton said, she told the officer "I didn't want to let you down. I didn't want to disappoint you, and I guess I didn't want to risk never seeing you again."

Laxton said she identified Henry through what the Court of Appeal called a "polluted" array of pictures in which the complainant was shown a photograph of Henry taken in front of a jail cell with the arm of a uniformed officer visible.
Click to expand...
That sounds very much like a false testimony. The girlfriend of the lead detective conveniently is a complainant. Really? :jaw-dropp
 
Wow, without the article I would've assumed it was from one of those "spend the night in a defunct prison" charity events.

Ian Osborne said:
That's ridiculous, but by representing himself at his trial and resisting an ID parade, he hardly helped matters. Yes, he should be compensated, but the amount he gets should be reduced to reflect the fact that he's partly the author of his own misfortune.
Click to expand...

Nah, not at all. Doesn't matter how much or little the defendant helps his or her own case: it's a wrongful conviction either way. He could have diminished mental capacity, received poor legal advice, whatever. Should never have went to trial based on what was provided in the article.

That said, clearly 21; 18 looks pretty sure of it too.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom