ARRESTED- Luka Rocco Magnotta:1st deg murder charge #8

[MechanicalMan]

GRAPHIC

It's possible that there is evidence, beyond video, that points to cannibalism. Perhaps there was flesh cut from the torso that was not recovered, leading police to believe that it was consumed. If some flesh had been removed from body parts found at the apartment building, then combined with the "implied cannibalism" in the kill vid and blood found in the refrigerator, LE may be inferring that cannibalism occurred without direct video evidence of it. Just a thought.

 

[kaRN]

Not sure where you get that he was obviously 'into it'. Couldn't he have been drugged? No real evidence that he agreed to be tied up (none to the contrary either, agreed....)

Me neither but the unsubtantiated claims are getting rather tiresome IMO.

 

[HastingsChi]

I don't know if anyone has seen them, but I though it might help anyways. There is a guy who argued with Luka on the internet back in 2007-2008, he had made the videos private but with what happened made them public again (it will have a recent posting date but that's b/c they was just put back on, but you can see there's older comments from like four years ago), and he also made a new video on that account reading some of the old e-mails luka sent from various accounts (acting as others or fans) to him back at that time saying that LM was to be praised as a prince and loved cupcakes, would forgive them if they helped him sell his shirts to make money for a boat to travel to Bahamas, and etc.. His account on youtube is bloglops. It really gives a interesting look into his personality. Also on the videos are some comments from supposedly "luka fans" which he (and I do too) believe was posted by LM himself, which I listed below with some reasons why I think their from accounts made by him. But maybe you guys can dig a little deeper and find some more stuff out. Hope it helps.

c*******p (some bernardo && homolka vids && luka pics)
s*******s1 (comments defending luka)
L*******gs (not sure about this one, but b/c of the name && defending comments about luka)
p*******ud19 (comments praising luka as prine && refernces michael jackson)
l*******id (has I love luka as title && defends luka in comments
m*******an (defends luka && calls him prince)

Great post ccaudill0062; thanks for sharing what your excellent sleuthing uncovered. Really interesting.

I know I've said it before but just want to reiterate that when people get a spike in traffic to their YouTube sites they are potentially profiting off of the death of Jun Lin.

In a recent discussion with a pretty well-known hacker that I've known for years, I was shocked to learn that YouTube can be manipulated to make a video uploaded today appear to be uploaded at any date before today. I also learned that comments can be manipulated in the same manner.

The context and examples relayed to me in this discussion involved various predictions of major events and the manner in which people will post material "predicting" something after the event occurred; in this case the 2011 earthquake, tsunami and Fukushima nuclear plant. As traffic spiked for these videos, those who manipulated the system profited financially. Really scary that things like this can be done.

 

[Sillybilly]

How do you explain the "MAY HAVE" then, if you say he MAY HAVE eaten you are saying that there is EATING GOING ON and it MAY HAVE BEEN LUKA, if there was some QUESTION AS TO WHETHER there was eating going on then why even bring up the EATING and the word CONFIRMED? I read it as:

Police say Luka may have been eating body parts, that means they can SEE SOMEONE EATING BODY PARTS that much is confirmed and it MAY HAVE been Luka but they cant be certain because they cant see him but they CAN SEE body parts being eaten.

Does anyone follow me here, the may have clearly indicates they cant prove it is LUKA doing the eating only that there IS EATING GOING ON and it MAY HAVE BEEN LUKA but since they cant see his face they are not CERTAIN it was him.

GRAPHIC WARNING

My interpretation of the wording is they see LRM eating something that may be body parts. The word "may" does not precede the reference to Luka, it precedes the reference to the act of eating something ... IOW, they know it is him and they can see him eating something, they just can't tell exactly what it is LRM is eating.

ETA: Sorry to add this, but LRM is known to have posted under his cutelittlenemo1 account that he liked eating feces.

 

[MechanicalMan]

Yes, a bit like the gay *advertiser censored* thing. At least one of the *advertiser censored* vids he was in was straight *advertiser censored*, but suddenly he is a gay *advertiser censored* actor. I think the tabloids just love the word gay in a lurid headline.

FWIW, the earliest articles that I saw about him referred to him only as a "*advertiser censored* star" and did not specifically mention gay *advertiser censored* or his sexual preference.

 

[BorgQueen]

Yes, a bit like the gay *advertiser censored* thing. At least one of the *advertiser censored* vids he was in was straight *advertiser censored*, but suddenly he is a gay *advertiser censored* actor. I think the tabloids just love the word gay in a lurid headline.

They really do, and it infuriates me. And I am not even gay.
People are people.
Love is love.
Sex is sex.
*advertiser censored* is *advertiser censored*.
Doesn't matter what the genders are. It is simply what it is, and I can't stand this constant "OMG! HE WAS GAY!!!!" business that the media is so in love with.


I guess HastingsChi's PSA is correct! Gay people will murder you!! :rocker:
(give me a break...)

(and I should probably take a break before I end up derailing the thread lol :blushing: )

 

[HastingsChi]

oh please.....the VICTIM was NOT obviously into it.

he actually appeared very out of it as if drugged. there was ZERO signs of him being into this.

that is offensive to the victim.

prima : I absolutely agree that Mr Lin was not into the idea of being the star of a snuff film; but it is important to note that in the world we live in there ARE people (heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, transgender) whose fantasies include staring in such a film.

 

[Chorley8]

Italian fan

Previous posts I surmised that 1. L.M. may have some non-imaginary high level contacts of various sorts even as one night tricks and that is going to be a problem for various governments and therefore mass media. 2. That Canadian media at least will stay away from any right wing aspect to the case as someone has said we will always hear "gay" and "cannibalism". 3. There is no commentary (even here) about the political aspects of this case the threat to the P.M. etc.

I tried to ask this morning here if L.M. had ever actually travelled to In. Russia or Tolyatta and someone instantly called me a spammer because this info was not from the BBC or Al Jazeera even though clearly it is a primary source written by a friend of L.M. or L.M. most likely and of course even though the famous video was not exactly produced by CBC I mean was not from an actual official media source yet we are all discussing it.

I agree that a clear homophobic sub-text is emerging in the media.

 

[Cappuccino]

They really do, and it infuriates me. And I am not even gay.
People are people.
Love is love.
Sex is sex.
*advertiser censored* is *advertiser censored*.
Doesn't matter what the genders are. It is simply what it is, and I can't stand this constant "OMG! HE WAS GAY!!!!" business that the media is so in love with.


I guess HastingsChi's PSA is correct! Gay people will murder you!! :rocker:
(give me a break...)

(and I should probably take a break before I end up derailing the thread lol :blushing: )

I agree with you. The tabloids probably think they are pandering to their readers' prejudices but they have been left behind in the 1990s. Just as they are left behind in the reporting of this case by internet forums, look at how behind us they are in tracking Luka's internet history. The print media is rapidly becoming obsolete IMO, but this is all obviously OT.

 

[PAXIMUS]

GRAPHIC WARNING

My interpretation of the wording is they see LRM eating something that may be body parts. The word "may" does not precede the reference to Luka, it precedes the reference to the act of eating something ... IOW, they know it is him and they can see him eating something, they just can't tell exactly what it is LRM is eating.

ETA: Sorry to add this, but LRM is known to have posted under his cutelittlenemo1 account that he liked eating feces.

I understand that is possible but I would like to think we are dealing with professionals here and that when they use the words BODY PARTS as in Police have confirmed Magniotta may have eaten body parts, they are certain it was body parts that were being eaten and not french fries, I mean it would be terribly irresponsible to float the idea that body parts had been eaten if they didnt know or have some pretty damned good evidence to back that idea up.

But that is just my take on it.

This is a great conversation but I am gonna starve if I dont make my own dinner so I have to run for a bit maybe we can pick it up later, thanks for the input though I do appreciate ALL opinions and view points.

 

[Sealuzna]

Ok here's something to ponder wrt to the video timeline, i.e. the delta between the first portion and the second portion of the video.

Some who have seen it have said that the bed looks different in both portions (i.e. the bedsheets are positioned differently)

We know from an apartment eyewitnesses that LRM had someone in his apartment about two weeks prior to the killing, and was overhead saying to this guest "so are you staying the night?" to which the guest was heard to answer in the negative.

My question: can anyone here think of why the first part of the video couldn't have been taped two weeks prior?

It would have been around the same time the video began to be "shopped".

Thoughts?

 

[HastingsChi]

Are gay hook up sites any more likely than straight hook up sites to have people looking for S & M? I don't think so.

Why are you trying to link the fact of being gay to the fact that some people, of all perusasions, like a bit of bondage?

You are correct. Statistically, S&M is an activity which is more popular in the heterosexual community (dominatrix, submissives, etc) this is evidenced by the sheer number of web sites, adult videos and "social clubs" aimed at S&M. Additionally Madonna (not Jesus' mom, the singer) would agree as her S&M themed album was accompanied by the NY Times best selling book "Sex" and a film.

 

[prima.facie]

prima : I absolutely agree that Mr Lin was not into the idea of being the star of a snuff film; but it is important to note that in the world we live in there ARE people (heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, transgender) whose fantasies include staring in such a film.

apparently ive given off the impression i hate animals and dont know anything about sex.
:waitasec:


off to google "sex" for a lesson......
lol


ETA: SHOCKING!

lol

 

[Dutchie43]

There is one thing I don't understand: why did he put the leg in the refrigerator?
And like I said: I watched the video, I just don't understand why he placed photo's of things unseen in the video, at the end of the video.

Maybe he put the video on the internet (deep web) as a trailer. Maybe he was trying to sell the full video to a sicko.

 

[Sillybilly]

4 pages behind still, but addressing this in case Pax is still having the issue with the wording

Consider this, you sit down and you watch the unedited version of the video, you EITHER SEE body parts being eaten OR YOU DO NOT, IF YOU DO then you report that BODY PARTS HAVE BEEN EATEN, if you do not see that then YOU NEVER BRING UP THE IDEA that body parts were eaten, SO SINCE THEY DID bring up that body parts were EATEN on the video, THE ONLY REASON FOR THE USE OF THE WORDS "MAY HAVE" is to suggest that it MAY HAVE BEEN LUKA but they do not know for sure since they cant see his face.

I am not trying to go on and on about this but it is VERY IMPORTANT to me from a legal standpoint as to whether they actually see his face on that video and I see NO REASON for the use of the words MAY HAVE unless it is wrt the fact that they arent certain WHO ATE THE BODY PARTS.

Does anyone follow me here or am I crazy?

I argue semantics for a living so maybe I am just being anal here but what I say above is the proper use of my language.

Pax ... i have a legal background as well and tend to analyze the heck out of certain things (notice the word analyze contains the word "anal" ). You are obviously not crazy , but I do think you are having a mental block on the wording for some reason.

They see LRM ... it seems LRM is eating something ... that something MAY BE body parts

 

[Cappuccino]

Ok here's something to ponder wrt to the video timeline, i.e. the delta between the first portion and the second portion of the video.

Some who have seen it have said that the bed looks different in both portions (i.e. the bedsheets are positioned differently)

We know from an apartment eyewitnesses that LRM had someone in his apartment about two weeks prior to the killing, and was overhead saying to this guest "so are you staying the night?" to which the guest was heard to answer in the negative.

My question: can anyone here think of why the first part of the video couldn't have been taped two weeks prior?

It would have been around the same time the video began to be "shopped".

Thoughts?

That's an interesting idea. Pure speculation, as is much of this conversation at this point, but its one of the more realistic pieces of speculation I've seen so far. MOO.

 

[Streets]

GRAPHIC

He did move, AFTER LM sat on him.He looks disorientated, sleepy. Between that scene and the stabbing, the film was cut. The ropes were gone and JL was dead.
In my opinion: JL thought he was going to have sex, or just a friendly drink at LM's place. But instead he got drugged and became the victim of a terribly sick mind.
LM dismembered him in the bathtub I think, washing of the blood. I've seen pictures of the head, foot and something else in the bathtub, still wet from the water. LM moved the body around alot, because the sheets on the bed in the video, change or are draped differently every time.

Yes, I watched the video a couple of times. Not for kicks, but to see if I could find any evidence of a second person helping LM, or something else.

Where did you see these pictures? I don't recall any mention of this?

 

[PAXIMUS]

4 pages behind still, but addressing this in case Pax is still having the issue with the wording



Pax ... i have a legal background as well and tend to analyze the heck out of certain things (notice the word analyze contains the word "anal" ). You are obviously not crazy , but I do think you are having a mental block on the wording for some reason.

They see LRM ... it seems LRM is eating something ... that something MAY BE body parts

I get that Billy but it is IRRESPONSIBLE to suggest it is body parts if they arent sure so I really dont get why they would do that. And that is why I saw it THE OTHER WAY. I figured these people are professional they would not just sensationalize cannibalism for the fun of it they either know he ate body parts or they dont and if they dont why bring it up?

My position is simple enough, his face is never seen on that video, we will see someday if I am wrong or not.

/end

 

[Sillybilly]

Someone posted the link to this on here and when I looked at the video it really disturbed me. It seems that if nothing else the person posting the video on youtube should be reported for terrifying and threatening a little child. When I looked for a place to report it online, all I could find was this internet crime report site with a very constraining report form. It only allowed for complaints about crimes toward one's self.

Has anyone reported this video or youtube profile to the authorities yet?

[/QUOTE

I tried reporting it on youtube but I don't know where else to report it at....I find it very disturbing. the YT account is Trolley Rulle...but I'm like you and don't know where to report it

Have you tried www.cybertips.ca ??

 

[kaRN]

You seem to be missing the point. Police aren't obligated to tell us what evidence they have, but there is also no reason for them to be misleading us with vague implications that they possess evidence that they (possibly) do not actually possess. If they choose to speak to the media about certain pieces of evidence, then they should be more clear and straightforward with their statements.

The French LE are trying to answer English media, in English. I was born and raised in Quebec and still struggle for the right words to communicate exactly what I want to say in French without resorting to Franglais. I applaud them for even trying.