February 13, 2007
I have used a photo editing program to create versions of the three images that register; that is, they match up when stacked on top of one another. This makes it easier to see changes when they are viewed in quick succession.

Left| Middle| Right

July 15, 2001

NOTE: Objections to this page have been raised, in response to which I have prepared a statement .

July 22, 2001

The incident was the result of poor crowd control, not a "riot"...Notes on further research

In April, 1989, an image of British soccer fans apparently crushed against a fence made news worldwide. Ninety-six people were reported to have been killed in this incident of mishandled crowd management. But look more closely. Is it really a picture of people who are in imminent danger of suffocation?

The three versions of the image shown below were published in, from left to right, Paris-Match, the New York Times Book Review, and the daily New York Times. At first glance, they might seem to be merely different croppings of the same shot... (Click on an image for an enlargement in a separate window.)

However, close inspection reveals that the shots are separated horizontally by small angular differences from left to right in the order in which I've arranged them. To see this, note how each image views the woman who is prominent at the lefthand edge of the rightmost image, as excerpted below.

Having established that the images are separated in space, I show that they are apparently separated in time. I consider certain contradictions between moving and motionless elements in them.

Next, I consider how plausible it is that the number of people represented by the arms and hands in the center of the picture occupy the space that their arrangement implies.

Then, I examine some other oddities.

Finally, I draw conclusions about the veracity of these images and what they might tell us about photojournalism in general.

Time

The three images below are the original images cropped to retain the area they have in common.

Below are details from the lefthand and middle images that show the person at the top turned in different directions. This means that the two photos were not taken simultaneously, contrary to the impression that might be given by their lower portions, in which the child appears not to have moved.

Below are details from the middle and righthand images that show changes in the position of the man, unseen except for his arms, holding a cap. During the interval between these two shots, the woman gripping the fence appears not to have moved.

What constraints do these details put on the time interval between the shots? The upper limit would seem to be the maximum time that the individuals who don't move from one image to the next, and who are apparently contorted in pain, could hold their positions. The lower limit would be the minimum time taken by the persons in the background to change their positions to the degree that the images show. If that minimum is greater than that maximum, we would be justified in questioning the veracity of the pictures.

Body Count

How many people are touching the fence in this picture?

I count 11 persons, consisting of four individuals whose heads are visible and seven others whose bodies are obscured, but whose hands are touching the wire. Obviously, the seven invisible persons have to be positioned immediately behind the four visible ones. Is this plausible? Perhaps this kind of thing could happen in a contest to pack telephone booths, in which volume is slowly and carefully filled. But it seems highly improbable in this purportedly chaotic situation, especially since the fence area on either side of this group doesn't seem closely packed (see full image below).

Other Oddities

Is this woman daydreaming? Supposedly, people around her are being crushed. Why isn't she being crushed too?

Are these the hands of people in distress?

Are these anatomically correct hands? The one at right in particular looks impossibly elongated. Try bending your own fingers into the same positions and look at the distance between your thumb and fingers.

Conclusion

The scene in these three photographs seems to be dramatic and emotional on first inspection, an image of people in acute pain and stress. But closer inspection reveals too many contradictory details. I conclude that the scene is a staged reenactment. Further, I submit that the contradictory details were intended to be there, as clues to the astute news consumer.

Return to the Scrapbook page

Return to the Scrapbook title page

Charles Packer mailbox@cpacker.org
Home page