[ShepherdsDog]

No one is claiming they saw the video, except some Star reporters. Others have said they believe it exists, or that they know where it may be. My nieces believe in Santa Claus and believe he can be found at the North Pole. This isn't confirmation. We have photos of Nessie, Bigfoot and UFOs, and people believe they exist, but there is no confirmation. This video of Ford is similar. A press release by the police, after forensic analysis of an actual video, is needed. Hasn't been one.

[Thanos]

At a certain stage the Toronto PD should come clean about the video. The more they sit on it the more they stir up any conspiracists that might believe that the video exists and that it's being deliberately suppressed to protect Ford. The wave of resignations from Ford's office a couple of months ago, a sure sign if there ever was one that something was going on and simply wasn't a bunch of nonsense stirred up by the Star and Gawker, threw a lot of fuel on the fire and it won't go out until what's known about the alleged video is made fully public.

[ShepherdsDog]

The conspiracy nuts think that Ford was behind the death of the drug dealer.

[QBall]

I think we're getting the concept of "the Star's reporters saw a video" and "the Star's reporters saw a video that was authenticated". I have no doubt the Star's reporters saw a video, but no one has confirmed that the video is not a fake. The Star reporters saw the video on a little iPhone screen, hardly the best viewing platform to determine if what you are looking at is real. The other fact that the video has disappeared tells me it was never real. Just a Somali drug dealer looking to play and get paid by an organization who is so blinded by their agenda they will sell out their integrity to advance it.

[saturn_656]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

A press release by the police, after forensic analysis of an actual video, is needed. Hasn't been one.

But it's much more fun to jump to conclusions and operate on speculation and hearsay!

[OnTheIce]

QBall QBall:

I think we're getting the concept of "the Star's reporters saw a video" and "the Star's reporters saw a video that was authenticated". I have no doubt the Star's reporters saw a video, but no one has confirmed that the video is not a fake. The Star reporters saw the video on a little iPhone screen, hardly the best viewing platform to determine if what you are looking at is real. The other fact that the video has disappeared tells me it was never real. Just a Somali drug dealer looking to play and get paid by an organization who is so blinded by their agenda they will sell out their integrity to advance it.

According to Lemmy, the existence of the video was indeed confirmed by aids to Rob Ford.

[ShepherdsDog]

rob ford has aids??? I saw it on the internet.

[llama66]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

QBall QBall:

I think we're getting the concept of "the Star's reporters saw a video" and "the Star's reporters saw a video that was authenticated". I have no doubt the Star's reporters saw a video, but no one has confirmed that the video is not a fake. The Star reporters saw the video on a little iPhone screen, hardly the best viewing platform to determine if what you are looking at is real. The other fact that the video has disappeared tells me it was never real. Just a Somali drug dealer looking to play and get paid by an organization who is so blinded by their agenda they will sell out their integrity to advance it.

According to Lemmy, the existence of the video was indeed confirmed by aids to Rob Ford.

As I remember there was a staff meeting where Ford blurted out the tape location.

[N_Fiddledog]

I remember that Llama.

Remember they were serving those little cocktail weinies, and Laura from sales was wearing those little, pink, short shorts. And Rob just all of a sudden blurted out the location of the video, then he started passing out pictures of himself with a sniper rifle on the grassy knoll, and told us how the video is hidden in his time machine.

[Benn]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Benn Benn:

Until it is public its all hearsay which amounts to squat so for now I'm calling BS.

Then you don't comprehend the definition of hearsay. The existence of the video is a confirmed story. Hearsay is a rumour. That's something different from a story that's been confirmed. You don't have to believe it. Those independent sources could be lying, but that doesn't make it any less confirmed.

OH I do, I deal with it all the time at work. I'm not saying the guys how claim to have seen the video are committing hearsay, just everyone who is forwarding their claims.

One can't lie and call it confirmation.

Lets make it easier, if you heard (hear) the video exists and have said (say) to other it does then you've committed hearsay. Hearsay is not worth anything without proof and IMO anyone who clams to have seen this video is lying until someone produces it.

You say Fords staff "KNEW' of it. So someone told them and they forwarded this information then that is hearsay.


In the end you are arguing on the existence of something that has never been produced other than to a couple people (Their claims are not hearsay, but likely lies) without established credibility but with something to gain from the attention.

Good luck with that, come talk to me when you have the video LMAO!

[Jabberwalker]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

rob ford has aids??? I saw it on the internet.

... fewer and fewer every day.

[Lemmy]

Sorry, Benn, but you still aren't comprehending the difference between hearsay and a confirmed story. It's not hearsay when someone reports having seen something. People are presumed to be telling the truth. That's why we allow people to testify about what they've seen in court. Hearsay, on the other hand, is when a person who's seen something tells a third person and that third person makes statements about it. That third person's testimony is hearsay and inadmissible in court.

When independent sources report having seen the same thing, that's called confirmation, which is what the Toronto Star (and all legitimate newspapers require to publish a story). That's what the Star has here, a confirmed story: multiple, independent sources reporting having seen the same thing (the video).

Now, those people could be lying, but that still doesn't make it hearsay.

[OnTheIce]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Sorry, Benn, but you still aren't comprehending the difference between hearsay and a confirmed story. It's not hearsay when someone reports having seen something. People are presumed to be telling the truth. That's why we allow people to testify about what they've seen in court. Hearsay, on the other hand, is when a person who's seen something tells a third person and that third person makes statements about it. That third person's testimony is hearsay and inadmissible in court.

When independent sources report having seen the same thing, that's called confirmation, which is what the Toronto Star (and all legitimate newspapers require to publish a story). That's what the Star has here, a confirmed story: multiple, independent sources reporting having seen the same thing (the video).

Now, those people could be lying, but that still doesn't make it hearsay.

Dodge.

[Zipperfish]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Lemmy Lemmy:

Sorry, Benn, but you still aren't comprehending the difference between hearsay and a confirmed story. It's not hearsay when someone reports having seen something. People are presumed to be telling the truth. That's why we allow people to testify about what they've seen in court. Hearsay, on the other hand, is when a person who's seen something tells a third person and that third person makes statements about it. That third person's testimony is hearsay and inadmissible in court.

When independent sources report having seen the same thing, that's called confirmation, which is what the Toronto Star (and all legitimate newspapers require to publish a story). That's what the Star has here, a confirmed story: multiple, independent sources reporting having seen the same thing (the video).

Now, those people could be lying, but that still doesn't make it hearsay.

Dodge.

Ford.

[saturn_656]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Lemmy Lemmy:

Sorry, Benn, but you still aren't comprehending the difference between hearsay and a confirmed story. It's not hearsay when someone reports having seen something. People are presumed to be telling the truth. That's why we allow people to testify about what they've seen in court. Hearsay, on the other hand, is when a person who's seen something tells a third person and that third person makes statements about it. That third person's testimony is hearsay and inadmissible in court.

When independent sources report having seen the same thing, that's called confirmation, which is what the Toronto Star (and all legitimate newspapers require to publish a story). That's what the Star has here, a confirmed story: multiple, independent sources reporting having seen the same thing (the video).

Now, those people could be lying, but that still doesn't make it hearsay.

Dodge.

Ford.

Win.