I can't say for sure whether or not John McAfee is innocent or not, if he were to get caught he would not get a fair trial in the country where he currently resides. His money and assets would all be taken from him, he'd be thrown into a cell and possibly tortured. There is something about the way McAfee handles himself that leads me to believe this guy might have some mental issues and require attention of a medical professional, he is obviously paranoid and whether or not it's warranted, I think there's a bigger underlying issue here.
Something seems fishy about all of this. The photo looks extremely fake (inconsistent lighting direction). Even if this were all true, why would Vice post the data including his address? If John were to be killed, the blood would be on Vice and the author's hands for getting him killed, where is the decency?
"His money and assets would all be taken from him, he'd be thrown into a cell and possibly tortured."
He isn't in the backwater of Afghanistan, he's in a democratic country with an independent judiciary. What makes you think he would be tortured, let alone killed?
He seems to suffer from interactions with corrupt police. They could certainly beat the shit out of him after arrest with very few consequences. That's true even in the US.
As an example of special circumstances: how's Bradley Manning's trial coming along?
That's a Logical fallacy. This has nothing to do with Bradley Manning.
As far as you and I know Mcafee quite possibly killed his neighbour. Why shouldn't the authorities in the country where the crime was committed get hold of him?
If the dead neighbour had been an American celebrity, this argument would sound very different.
Yes it has, in the context of the present argument. Grandparent is saying that because you supposedly are in a "democratic country with an independent judiciary" doesn't mean that you won't be tortured/get a fair trial/etc., and uses Bradley Manning as an example of this.
If you were to assert that in democratic societies with functioning justice systems people are not let off for murder, then I think OJ would be a perfectly reasonable counter argument.
There's actually a lot of evidence that the vic was involved with and owed a lot of money to coke dealers who killed her in a manner consistent with prior M.O.s so while I did at one point believe OJ did it, there is some doubt in my mind and without having been at the trial and heard all the evidence I do not believe OJ actually would be a reasonable counter argument.
She had been telling the coke dealers, "Don't worry my man's rich he'll pay." When in fact he had told her many times that he wouldn't pay and many of his friends told him he better get very far away from her while he still can and before she gets herself and maybe him killed by the people she had been taking drugs from.
If you are going to call something out as fallacious, you should name which fallacy it is. Otherwise your statement is just as good as saying 'you are wrong!'
Not to sidetrack things, but Manning was not a civilian, and thus does not enjoy the same freedoms under the law as a civilian.
So comparing a civilian's (Mcafee's) fate with that of a non-civilian is apples and oranges.
Military justice is not the same as civilian justice -one's rights are curtailed. Thst's not to say your assertion is incorrect, rather, it might give the impression one might have rights akin to that a civilian --that, I understand, would be incorrect.
That's true, but all humans have the same human rights and he's a human, so the law is largely irrelevant in any discussion regarding ethics and democratic ideals.
I'm not going to defend the Belize justice system. But I wouldn't depend on the Heritage Foundation for any objective information. It's a right wing think tank.
Why would that matter? They show their methodology, the "corruption" index is mostly taken from Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index, where Belize and Guatemala do not do well.
I don't understand why you would assert that he is in a democratic country with an independent judiciary when Belize's corruption index is extremely high. See for yourself (it's near the bottom of the list):
We are talking about a country here where money is king. If you have money, you have clout and influence. There's nothing stopping anyone taking assets and offing him in some remote desolate field where nobody would find him. Considering the amount of attention McAfee has received, if he were to disappear there would be some serious questions so I doubt they'd kill him.
I don't know, would there actually be questions if he disappeared? The guy seems pretty crazy, if he dropped off the face of the earth completely I don't think I would really think much of it.
Now, if he or the government announced that he were captured, then he disappeared, that would certainly be different.
You think there are no government-driven assassinations even in democraties with "independent" judiciary ? You live in a very safe world, then. This being said, I know nothing about Belize so this comment may or may not apply to that part of the world.
I don't see the inconsistent lighting directions folks are talking about. I'm curious what directions you guys are seeing. (FWIW - I'm a photographer). I read the lighting direction as potentially about 4pm from the photographer and rather lowish (some shade over subjects), McAfee's face shaded by the other subject, and some of the other differences (highlight on top of VICE guy's shoulder versus McAfee's for instance) very explainable by the dappled light from trees above them and in the background. Maybe I'm missing something though, I definitely haven't spent much time attempting to identify fake photos :)
Agreed on the lighting. Perspective is a bit off though, and his face also appears to have less contrast than the reporters'. Both of these could be due to a smudge on the lens, but I wouldn't be surprised if it does turn out to be a cardboard cut-out.
The strangest thing for me is why on earth would a reporter publish a picture where he stuck his finger in front of the lens? Everybody is relaxed, sure there was time to take another one?
It's a shot from McAfee's own camera, which I guess he handed to another guy for a quick pic. McAfee also says he created some kind of emergency which forced the Vice guys to publish quickly so they wouldn't mess with the EXIF data.
> Even if this were all true, why would Vice post the data including his address?
Same reason everyone else posts images with EXIF geolocation data from their iphone in them -- they don't think about it, they never knew or forgot that the iPhone added this to photos.
I downvoted you for a couple of reasons. 1. You say you're not sure if he's innocent, but yet you cast aspersions on the legal system, as if it's better for him to not be caught. 2. Photo does not look fake, and Vice most likely forgot about EXIF data. Not like they deliberately attached the address to the photo.
By the way, "blood would be on Vice and the author's hands, where is the decency?" - wow, really?
That's fair, you're inclined to downvote if you feel it's right. Only John knows if he's innocent and unless Belize has some smoking gun they're either going to manipulate evidence to convict him or he'll get a fine and walk free. As far as I am aware they've said they only want to talk to John, he's not charged with anything he's merely a suspect who won't get a fair trial. The aspersions on the legal system are somewhat warranted, Belize doesn't have a glowing reputation when it comes to a fair justice system. Here's a story from 7 News Belize from 2011 that points this out: http://www.7newsbelize.com/sstory.php?nid=20213
As for the photo looking fake, I'm not the first to notice the image looks a little unbelievable. Look at the contrast on his skin; tricky shadows from lighting interference or something else at play? The photo looks like it was taken using a 0.8 megapixel webcam on a laptop from 1999.
And fair enough about the EXIF data, however I find it hard to believe that a "security expert" like John McAfee would make such an amateur mistake like letting an image with location identifying data be put up online. John obviously needs some psychiatric help, the dude is obviously deteriorating if you read his posts they're sounding more and more like ramblings of someone with an unravelling mind.
Do you find it easier to believe now that he has admitted the coordinates were correct and the image was real, and has deleted his earlier "apology" in which he claimed to have faked the EXIF? Or do you still think the "contrast on his skin" points to a greater conspiracy?
By the way, how long have you been an expert on the Belizean justice system?
Something seems fishy about all of this. The photo looks extremely fake (inconsistent lighting direction). Even if this were all true, why would Vice post the data including his address? If John were to be killed, the blood would be on Vice and the author's hands for getting him killed, where is the decency?