I couldn’t give two monkies ■■■■■ if the data can be changed or not 
Fact of the matter is, unless Kate never took the picture (then I apologise) but she is highly unlikely to change the EXIF to something like a Nokia is she?
Sam Millar:
I couldn’t give two monkies [zb] if the data can be changed or notFact of the matter is, unless Kate never took the picture (then I apologise) but she is highly unlikely to change the EXIF to something like a Nokia is she?
Agreed, but you can never be sure on EXIF data and one thing it doesn’t tell you is who pressed the shutter button. The whole camera never lies thing is ■■■■■■■■. 
the thing that puzzles me is if he thinks the stack he has strapped is liable to shift,then why would`nt the others 
commonrail:
the thing that puzzles me is if he thinks the stack he has strapped is liable to shift,then why would`nt the others
commonrail,your username should be commonsense 
.One of the more sensible posts on this degenerating thread.
OllieNotts:
What kind of handsfree camera takes pictures handsfree? Do you have to say something to make it work?
Voice activated, you say to the person you are with, look at that, take a picture, and you do so with your hands completely free of the camera.
In my photography I frequently make use of a VOL, Voice Activated Lightstand. Also known as my son holding a flashgun standing over there ===>.
I bet he thought that wouldn’t move either.
jayeastanglia:
wonder what people would of been saying if a sheet had come off??joe public would have fingers pointing and sadly its people like that driver who got all those stupid rules and regs we have now…
You can rely on Signode Steel strapping 
commonrail:
the thing that puzzles me is if he thinks the stack he has strapped is liable to shift,then why would`nt the others
because it has one loose sheet that air can get underneath im guessing?
moving this slightly off topic… how many tractors drive about with a load of bales and only the back ones strapped on, a bale falling off a tractor onto a car at a roundabout will cause no end of bother. Likewise its tattie time just now, yet they drive about with only the rearmost box strapped on!
Kate:
Ok, I can see some of you are bored now, so lets shoot the OP for something she hasn’t done…I have re-read all my posts in this topic, and maybe I’m just thick, but I cannot see anything that even insinuates that I took the photo, with or without a hands free camera…
I don’t even own a Nokia phone.
So I see something, somebody else takes a picture. How does that make me guilty of an offence of any description.■■?
Oh, wait, …It doesn’t
Ok… As a professional driver, I wouldn’t dream of taking a picture with anything other than a hands free device…Therefore I have committed no offence.
Okay, seeing that it’s your intention to get the driver sacked anyway, just answer one question - did you take the picture or not? And if you didn’t then who did?
You obviously aren’t going to name this person (if they actually exist!), but just give us a clue. Co-driver? Friend? Your official in-cab Photographer?
ANDY1961:
Okay, seeing that it’s your intention to get the driver sacked anyway, just answer one question - did you take the picture or not? And if you didn’t then who did?
You obviously aren’t going to name this person (if they actually exist!), but just give us a clue. Co-driver? Friend? Your official in-cab Photographer?
How is it going to get any driver the sack, there are no identifying marks on the trailer or the unit, he or she may be an owner driver, there is not even any markings on the steel plate
ANDY1961:
Kate:
Ok, I can see some of you are bored now, so lets shoot the OP for something she hasn’t done…I have re-read all my posts in this topic, and maybe I’m just thick, but I cannot see anything that even insinuates that I took the photo, with or without a hands free camera…
I don’t even own a Nokia phone.
So I see something, somebody else takes a picture. How does that make me guilty of an offence of any description.■■?
Oh, wait, …It doesn’t
Ok… As a professional driver, I wouldn’t dream of taking a picture with anything other than a hands free device…Therefore I have committed no offence.
Okay, seeing that it’s your intention to get the driver sacked anyway, just answer one question - did you take the picture or not? And if you didn’t then who did?
You obviously aren’t going to name this person (if they actually exist!), but just give us a clue. Co-driver? Friend? Your official in-cab Photographer?
you really need to get a life driver.
Wheel Nut:
ANDY1961:
Okay, seeing that it’s your intention to get the driver sacked anyway, just answer one question - did you take the picture or not? And if you didn’t then who did?
You obviously aren’t going to name this person (if they actually exist!), but just give us a clue. Co-driver? Friend? Your official in-cab Photographer?How is it going to get any driver the sack, there are no identifying marks on the trailer or the unit, he or she may be an owner driver, there is not even any markings on the steel plate
Hmm perhaps because Kate has already said she’s knows who it is? 
And to Andy, let’s cut to the chase here, it was Kate who took the photo despite all the protestations to the contrary.
I’m surprised no-one has made a comment about stones and places made of glass yet. 
Wheel Nut:
ANDY1961:
Okay, seeing that it’s your intention to get the driver sacked anyway, just answer one question - did you take the picture or not? And if you didn’t then who did?
You obviously aren’t going to name this person (if they actually exist!), but just give us a clue. Co-driver? Friend? Your official in-cab Photographer?How is it going to get any driver the sack, there are no identifying marks on the trailer or the unit, he or she may be an owner driver, there is not even any markings on the steel plate
This picture had been seen by somebody with a bigger mouth than mine,. and will be brought to the attention of those who need to know on monday. Personally I don’t give a monkeys if anybody thinks I’m a bad person for grassing on another driver… That could be my kids he kills if I were daft enough to keep my mouth shut
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Well whatever her intention is.
Wheel nut that is not an owner driver.
Rob K:
Wheel Nut:
ANDY1961:
Okay, seeing that it’s your intention to get the driver sacked anyway, just answer one question - did you take the picture or not? And if you didn’t then who did?
You obviously aren’t going to name this person (if they actually exist!), but just give us a clue. Co-driver? Friend? Your official in-cab Photographer?How is it going to get any driver the sack, there are no identifying marks on the trailer or the unit, he or she may be an owner driver, there is not even any markings on the steel plate
Hmm perhaps because Kate has already said she’s knows who it is?
And to Andy, let’s cut to the chase here, it was Kate who took the photo despite all the protestations to the contrary.
I’m surprised no-one has made a comment about stones and places made of glass yet.
Yes, exactly!
It doesn’t take Forensic Cross Examination to work out that (1) She knows exactly who the “offending” driver/company is. (2) She took the picture nobody else.
ANDY1961:
Rob K:
Wheel Nut:
ANDY1961:
Okay, seeing that it’s your intention to get the driver sacked anyway, just answer one question - did you take the picture or not? And if you didn’t then who did?
You obviously aren’t going to name this person (if they actually exist!), but just give us a clue. Co-driver? Friend? Your official in-cab Photographer?How is it going to get any driver the sack, there are no identifying marks on the trailer or the unit, he or she may be an owner driver, there is not even any markings on the steel plate
Hmm perhaps because Kate has already said she’s knows who it is?
And to Andy, let’s cut to the chase here, it was Kate who took the photo despite all the protestations to the contrary.
I’m surprised no-one has made a comment about stones and places made of glass yet.
Yes, exactly!
It doesn’t take Forensic Cross Examination to work out that (1) She knows exactly who the “offending” driver/company is. (2) She took the picture nobody else.
Agreed, but that said, I don’t condone what I’m seeing in the picture. Personally I would speak to the driver first to get his side of the story before doing anything else. Unlikely as it may seem, there could be an entirely reasonable explanation for it.
it does not matter one blue ball who took the photo - yes it could have been taken by the driver - it could just as easily been taken by a passenger ( that trick has been played here before ) so you really need to drop this nonsense and concentrate on the load of steel plate .
Anyone happy to let their wife / husband / significant other / children / parents/ relations travel in the cab of this lorry or in a car in front / behind or beside this load of steel ?
Thought not - case closed .
RobK, and Andy1961
Maybe you two need to read what I wrote.
First off I said I knew where this steel had been loaded, That doesn’t mean I know who is driving or who owns the vehicle. How can a word in somebodys ear on monday automatically get a driver the sack? especially if that word is not even to the haulier… You see, if this insecure load has left the premises after loading, the company is still as culpable as the driver and haulier in the event of an accident… Did you never hear of Corporate Manslaughter?
Secondly, I already said I didn’t take the photo… RobK wasn’t there and is in no position to call me a liar.
Rob K:
ANDY1961:
Rob K:
Wheel Nut:
ANDY1961:
Okay, seeing that it’s your intention to get the driver sacked anyway, just answer one question - did you take the picture or not? And if you didn’t then who did?
You obviously aren’t going to name this person (if they actually exist!), but just give us a clue. Co-driver? Friend? Your official in-cab Photographer?How is it going to get any driver the sack, there are no identifying marks on the trailer or the unit, he or she may be an owner driver, there is not even any markings on the steel plate
Hmm perhaps because Kate has already said she’s knows who it is?
And to Andy, let’s cut to the chase here, it was Kate who took the photo despite all the protestations to the contrary.
I’m surprised no-one has made a comment about stones and places made of glass yet.
Yes, exactly!
It doesn’t take Forensic Cross Examination to work out that (1) She knows exactly who the “offending” driver/company is. (2) She took the picture nobody else.
Agreed, but that said, I don’t condone what I’m seeing in the picture. Personally I would speak to the driver first to get his side of the story before doing anything else. Unlikely as it may seem, there could be an entirely reasonable explanation for it.
Agree, and I’m definitely not condoning the driver’s apparent actions either - that’s not a safe load (judging by the picture).
But, sorry to all those who are getting their knickers in a twist, but the driver/photographer seems to be doing a bit of back tracking when it comes to who actually took the picture.
jimboy124:
It cant be an Irish anyway because it would of had a couple of dumper trucks on top of it as well !
Wow, how clever of you. One truck gets lifted for a load of hanging and steel on the floor and you’ll never hear the end of it. Jaysis, just cos a lorry is from Ireland doesn’t mean its illegal or overweight.
Should we keep bleating on about how the english couldn’t behave themselves when they were over for a football friendly and wrecked lansdown road?
Or should we keep mentioning how we thumped the english at home in croke park in the rugby in the most historical game ever to be played in Croke park?
No, so get over yourself you numpty!