Jamesy Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Unbelievable!! http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3330325/Killer-caught-in-family-snap.html THIS is the moment a killer is caught on camera - by his own victim. Gangster Michael Gonzales was captured behind his target's smiling family - aiming his gun straight at the man he is about to murder. Politician Reynaldo Dagsa, 35, unwittingly took the horror snap while gathering his family to pose for a New Year's Eve photograph in the garage of their own home. Revenge ... Gonzales had crept in unnoticed and was lying in wait for them in the Philippines capital Manila. Dagsa's wife, daughter and mother-in-law smiled at the camera, unaware of the gunman bracing himself against their car and holding a pistol. A man to the right is thought to be an accomplice. A split-second after Dagsa took the picture he was dead - but his family did not even hear the shots above the din of fireworks. The attack was in revenge for Dagsa ordering police to arrest crook Gonzales for stealing cars. City police chief Jude Santos said yesterday: "He inadvertently took a picture of his own killer." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Attero Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I saw that. I don't think there's many words I can say about this. Just a very strange way to get caught. Or just plain stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 No way! Surely you'd break the camera if you see a picture being taken and you might be in it, about the do a murder! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy442 Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Or maybe you didnt realise you'd been snapped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Or maybe you didnt realise you'd been snapped. Maybe he thought he shot in time, true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Or maybe he was just a thug with no brains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I saw that last night on CNN. Mental. I guess there's no question of who did it though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havard Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 They were technically shooting each other, although I have never heard of a camera killing someone..!! H. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I was watching CSI last night, we have been catching up on the original series, and I commented on how it's funny that the evidence just happens to be there all the time. Example, bleach poured down a drain to hide hair evidence but 1 hair just happens to miss out on the bleach. Would be fine if it didn't happen with every single case on the show. This just goes to show that sometimes with cases you do get that lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 It would have been cool if the camera had taken the picture as the gun went off so there was a muzzle flash in the shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 It would have been cool if the camera had taken the picture as the gun went off so there was a muzzle flash in the shot. I doubt the photo would have turned out had that been the case.... a bit like taking a picture of the sun with the camera in a night mode setting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 and I commented on how it's funny that the evidence just happens to be there all the time. It's not funny - it's a story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 It's not funny - it's a story. Well it makes me laugh when it happens episode after episode, cynically though I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 They were technically shooting each other, although I have never heard of a camera killing someone..!! H. He was actually shooting his family! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Well it makes me laugh when it happens episode after episode, cynically though I guess. Perhaps I phrased that wrong. It's not reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Perhaps I phrased that wrong. It's not reality. Oh, I didn't think it was. Perhaps I phrased it wrong.... I was talking about how a fictitious show was, IMO, not representing reality very well, as the linchpin of every investigation just happened to be there. This particular case reminded me of those type of unlikely scenarios as it is a very improbable situation to be in. On a sidenote, have you been assigned to me or something lately? Seem to be getting a lot of attention from you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamesy Posted January 6, 2011 Author Share Posted January 6, 2011 On a sidenote, have you been assigned to me or something lately? Seem to be getting a lot of attention from you Scottish lust Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 On a sidenote, have you been assigned to me or something lately? Seem to be getting a lot of attention from you Really? Do you have examples? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Really? Do you have examples? Not sure if this will work but... http://www.mkivsupra.net/vbb/search.php?searchid=243853 More hits in the last 4 months than in the previous 2 years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Not sure if this will work but... http://www.mkivsupra.net/vbb/search.php?searchid=243853 More hits in the last 4 months than in the previous 2 years Doesn't work. Don't flatter yourself though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Doesn't work. Don't flatter yourself though. I'll try to keep my feet planted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_b Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I was watching CSI last night, we have been catching up on the original series, and I commented on how it's funny that the evidence just happens to be there all the time. Example, bleach poured down a drain to hide hair evidence but 1 hair just happens to miss out on the bleach. Would be fine if it didn't happen with every single case on the show. A bit off topic from this thread, but this has given rise to what's known as the CSI Effect, where jurors expect to see hard, unequivocal forensic evidence before they're willing to convict someone. Programmes like CSI raise jurors' expectations unreasonably, where a few clothing fibres and 15 mins playing with a fancy software package leads to cast-iron evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 A bit off topic from this thread, but this has given rise to what's known as the CSI Effect, where jurors expect to see hard, unequivocal forensic evidence before they're willing to convict someone. Programmes like CSI raise jurors' expectations unreasonably, where a few clothing fibres and 15 mins playing with a fancy software package leads to cast-iron evidence. The Jo Yeates murder is a good example. It's taken them since Xmas day and they're not much closer to catching anyone. I don't in any way think murder is "good" but the killer has done well not to be caught. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 A bit off topic from this thread, but this has given rise to what's known as the CSI Effect, where jurors expect to see hard, unequivocal forensic evidence before they're willing to convict someone. Programmes like CSI raise jurors' expectations unreasonably, where a few clothing fibres and 15 mins playing with a fancy software package leads to cast-iron evidence. A good read that, and I'm not at all surprised. I really enjoy watching the show but I have to scoff at some of the ways they process the evidence and the results that they get using computer software and random keypresses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 The Jo Yeates murder is a good example. It's taken them since Xmas day and they're not much closer to catching anyone. I don't in any way think murder is "good" but the killer has done well not to be caught. I think that's a little unfair. Christmas day was only 13 days ago. Some murder trials go on for years. It's only that there has been very little 'news' over the Christmas period as always that this has been so prolific in the media. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.