The man executed, the entire video, we see him from the front: I wonder why!
We zien de gekruisigde de hele video alleen van de voorkant. Waarom? Voor een deel van de video is dat logisch, maar het is vreemd dat we hem de gehele video alleen van de voorkant mogen zien.
On April 24 2015 in Ukraine, allegedly a man was crucified by what seems to be militairy men. Since we do not know yet the origin of the video, we can not report on its meaning yet. So far we do have some questions about the authenticity.
There are only two parts of the video in which it makes sense to show the target only from the front. That is a) when the sentence is explained; b) When the cross is set on “fire”.
To the right a picture of the men dragging the target backwards to the cross. In my opinion, it would be more natural to have the target walk with them in the same direction. If he would refuse to walk, they can drag him. To me it seems the target is trying to walk from this “dragging position”. It is unnecessary.
The cross is positioned in a way, so we again do not see the back of the man. This might be a coincidence, but I actually think it is not.
Raising the cross from the ground upwards (2:41s – 3:41s)
Again, the lifting is done in a way so we do not see the back of the cross. Again, this might be a coincidence, but I think it is not. To be honest, the guy could prevent the cross from being raised by simply shifting balance and moving around. He is not!
For the visual effect it makes sense the public sees this from upfront. The only thing odd is: why do they stop?
Conclusie: We zien de gekruisigde de hele video alleen van de voorkant. Waarom? Voor een deel van de video is dat logisch, maar het is vreemd dat we hem de gehele video alleen van de voorkant mogen zien.