Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ugh, the camera appears to be a Sony MVC-FD90 Mavica. It was released in 2000. This is an old, old camera. It uses Sony's MemoryStick media, but its primary storage is floppy disks. My worry: whoever took these pictures may have bought it second-hand in the first place. Authorities say the pictures were from the last 5 years. I don't think this camera was in production in 2006.
I agree 100% about the camera, it's from 2000. I even got the manual for it and yes, it's copyright 2000:
http://esupport.sony.com/US/perl/model-documents.pl?mdl=MVCFD90
Digital cameras in 2005/2006 were vastly better and used modern (CF) memory cards and cost way less.
I have not heard anything about the dress.
I am quite sure that this dress may be helpful for a few reasons.
A) It's not a real common brand (KT Kids/Kenneth Tool Kids) and not a real common dress. I do not know how much more common it is in Florida, but I know it's not at all common online.
The snip below is from MorenoI's link upthread. This really stands out to me.
"It looks as though that camera was used for multiple purposes; it documented injuries like bite marks from kids and it was used to take photos of a Christmas program," Wilkinson said.
The camera could have belonged to the day care center, to someone who had a child at the center or to someone who worked at the center, he said."
I don't think most facilities document biting, other than a written report of the incident. Just seems "off" to document injuries for a child that is being abused by someone who uses the same camera...
I thought it seemed obvious that this was a home-run daycare because of the sofa picture. What am I missing?
And I'm wondering why there is such focus on one particular dress ... I haven't read anything that states that is the child in question? Am I missing a link?