And when was the last time you saw a newspaper throw a way the opportunity to use a rape headline?
student sex attack
- Thread starter gambitt
- Start date
And when was the last time you saw a newspaper throw a way the opportunity to use a rape headline?
My thoughts exactly. You can see the CCTV operator clocks the man approaching her around 3:33 because the camera pans to focus directly on them. Then he's seen walking back down the same lane/road at 3:42, so he wouldn't have got back to his car until around 3:46 - plenty of time for the police to get to him imo.
I watched en episode of road wars where they caught a guy on CCTV coming out of a pub, moving his van a few feet into a residents permit bay and then get into a taxi. The CCTV operator called the police who pulled the taxi over and arrested him for drink driving.
http://yourcardiff.walesonline.co.uk/2010/10/21/police-appeal-over-cathays-student-sex-attack/
Did an actual attack take place after he walked for a few minutes with his arm around her or was the act of putting his arm around her all that took place? The article isn't clear and makes references to "inappropriate behaviour", although it is past my bed time and I'm feeling a little sluggish.
They seem to be taking it very seriously so I assume something more actually took place but you never know these days!
I read the OP, but more importantly I read the article where it is blatantly obvious they are referring to events PRIOR to the attack, and not during.
I'm not trying to make you look bad either, you do a reasonable job of that without my help.
Correct, but I agree, it is pretty weak.
What do you mean "more importantly I read the article"? My request in the OP was to read the article.
How were you planning on answering my question without reading it? 
Don't some of these cameras track things automagically?
My sentiments exactly.
What do you mean "more importantly I read the article"? My request in the OP was to read the article.
If you had read the article properly then you would not have had to ask the question in the first place. I can see you are confused, there is no need for a smilie as it was plain from the OP just how confused you are.
BTW I answered your question, I merely found it surprising that you had to ask in the first place although given your replies I am not longer surprised just saddened.
If you had read the article properly then you would not have had to ask the question in the first place. I can see you are confused, there is no need for a smilie as it was plain from the OP just how confused you are.
I already said in the OP that I was confused, I didn't find the article clear so I asked the question on a discussion forum. Why are you telling me something which I already told you?
Not great at comprehension are you?
If you had read the article properly it was obvious that the events were prior to the attack, The title states it is an APPEAL, (so the footage was released to identify the attacker, not to illustrate the actual crime, hence no footage of the actual attack) and the article itself states THE FOOTAGE LEADING UP TO THE ATTACK so either you did not read the article properly or you have some innate problem with comprehension generally. Given the tone and content of your replies to me I am leaning toward the latter.
Last edited:
im probably been watching too much 24/csi etc but firstly cctv vid quality isnt brilliant (not the worst ive seen though) and you dont get a front clear view of his face but you do get a fairly decent sideview.
Now my question is - why havent they used tech to enhance, zoom in and take snapshots of his face? then run it through some kind of facial recognition software?
ALSO...dna fragments of when he put his arm around her. Has he got gloves on or?
Now my question is - why havent they used tech to enhance, zoom in and take snapshots of his face? then run it through some kind of facial recognition software?
ALSO...dna fragments of when he put his arm around her. Has he got gloves on or?
Not great at comprehension are you?
If you had read the article properly it was obvious that the events were prior to the attack, The title states it is an APPEAL, (so the footage was released to identify the attacker, not to illustrate the actual crime, hence no footage of the actual attack) and the article itself states THE FOOTAGE LEADING UP TO THE ATTACK so either you did not read the article properly or you have some innate problem with comprehension generally. Given the tone and content of your replies to me I am leaning toward the latter.
I know you are trying to get the last word, but you still cannot grasp the purpose of this thread. Does it make you feel better that something wasn't clear to me when I was tired and had to ask for help?
Life must be so wonderful for someone who never needs anyone to check anything for them.
Last edited:
I grasp the purpose just fine, I was not the one who got all offensive for no reason. Maybe ocuk needs a remedial sub forum for threads like this.
im probably been watching too much 24/csi etc but firstly cctv vid quality isnt brilliant (not the worst ive seen though) and you dont get a front clear view of his face but you do get a fairly decent sideview.
Now my question is - why havent they used tech to enhance, zoom in and take snapshots of his face? then run it through some kind of facial recognition software?
ALSO...dna fragments of when he put his arm around her. Has he got gloves on or?
You have indeed been watching too much CSI.
Apparently not.
Please provide examples of my offensive behaviour.
Finally, this IS the remedial subforum. Perhaps you glazed over the "spec me a toaster" threads that are so very popular in GD. There is a Speakers Corner for more profound topics.
Would you like to keep digging?