Sinclair Inquest: (un)Moving pictures
Just a quick update to the missing hospital camera footage situation, which raised a lot of eyebrows and questions.
While my other duties have prevented me from delving further into this myself, many have stepped forward through social media and other means to offer greater details.
First, I’d submit the following Twitter posts from Steve Lambert at The Canadian Press, a colleague of astonishing awesomeness:
[They need to be read in reverse order].
So, in this instance, there’s a legitimate reason for the missing footage: with the camera zoomed in, and nothing moving, there was nothing to film over the five-minute period. [Although why the camera was zoomed in to this degree is an outstanding question].
We then have colleague Bruce Owen’s short piece this morning on an outside expert’s view of the HSC’s “recording on event” camera system, further corroborating the HSC’s position the missing video is “normal” in the circumstances.
If it’s the case, two of the three questions I asked in my last post appear to be answered to some degree.
The other: how the cop probing the case for a year didn’t notice the missing footage until he was told about it this week, remains to be answered.
I’m still left wondering why the camera didn’t pick up a rush of activity around the ER when staff finally approached to check on him.
Again, quoting CBC:
“The inquest heard a security guard realized Sinclair was not breathing and took him to get help. He was pronounced dead at 12:51 a.m. on Sept. 21, 2008. The security camera footage is missing from 12:47 a.m. to about 12:53 a.m.”
I wear no tin-foil hat. But it just boggles that in this case such a key portion of a major piece of evidence the inquest has to work with isn’t there.
We’re often told of the objective value of surveillance cameras in public-safety scenarios, how they “don’t lie” and provide a neutral view of what took place [such as the murder of Gerald Crayford at the Pizza Hotline.]
But here ….