Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Apparently this video has been manipulated. Can Blake Bednarz release the original with the metadata, if this is true.

104,915 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

I cut the ending of Blake stream from last night because what he says about the 3.2GB UVU Review video needs to be heard — and questioned — by everyone following this case. The highest quality recording of the entire event. No independent investigator has the original file. And the metadata raises a question Blake didn't have a genuine answer for. *Let's start with the biggest problem.* On Blake's Mac, the file shows a date of September 9th. The Charlie Kirk event at UVU was September 10th. The video file is dated the day before the event it recorded. When Blake is asked about the Sept 9 date he says "this is the copy.. it was what I downloaded and copied into my iPhoto album." That's not an explanation for a file that predates the event. That's just describing what he did with it. He never gives reasonable explanation for the Sept 9 date. Keli Rabon asks the obvious question: "So, like why would it say Sept 9 is what they are asking?". A commenter originally asked about the date which is seen in the video below. Blake's response: "I have no idea." "I have no idea" is not acceptable when you're the sole custodian of the highest quality recording in a capital murder case. That metadata anomaly can be examined and potentially explained — but only with access to the original 3.2GB file. Which no independent investigator has. Blake claims he "released" the video on X back on November 5th. Technically true. What he released was a version he edited, watermarked, and uploaded to X — which compresses everything. The result? The public got files in the range of 15MB to 600MB. The original is 3.2GB. That's not a release. That's a fraction of the data. For forensic work — acoustic, ballistic, visual — compression destroys exactly the information that matters. Frame-level detail, audio fidelity, embedded metadata. All of it degraded or stripped. His defense: he's not a professional video editor and didn't realize that editing, watermarking, and uploading to social media would degrade the quality. You don't need to be a professional to understand that a 3.2GB file doesn't come out the other end at 15MB without losing almost everything. It gets stranger. Elizabeth from UVU Review contacted Blake and asked him to take the video down. He posted screenshots of that conversation on X. So there's a documented chain of custody complication — UVU Review wants it pulled, Blake had the file, and nobody doing forensic analysis has the original. When pressed on why he won't just release the 3.2GB file, Blake tells people to contact Elizabeth at UVU Review directly. He has the file. He chose to edit it, watermark it, compress it, and upload the degraded version. Now he's redirecting responsibility to someone who asked him to take it down. Then there's the "metadata verification". midGray on X who has been inactive in the investigation for months, supposedly examined the file and concluded there was no intentional tampering. He pulls the video midGRAY made in an attempt to validate himself. Blake says midGray worked from files downloaded from X but also contradicts himself by showing midGRAY also says Blake sent him the original file for which he has screenshots of metadata and was able to examine in hand. Watch the end of this stream. Keli Rabon starts asking the right questions — pointed, specific, reasonable — and Blake visibly checks out. Stops engaging. Gets uncomfortable. That's not what confidence in your own position looks like. This isn't about accusing Blake of anything nefarious, although it is very strange. It's about a simple principle: If you possess the highest quality recording of a capital murder case, and the metadata shows a date that predates the event, and investigators are asking for the original file — you release it. You don't compress it, watermark it, and tell people to ask someone else. Why not just release the original file for investigators to examine Blake ?

troofevades

46,017 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce