There seems to be a little confusion over the photos and pictures that are appearing of Arturo Gatti's wife, Amanda Rodrigues Gatti.
As we know Amanda Rodrigues Gatti is being held by Brazilian police on suspicion of being involved in the death of her husband, Arturo Gatti, over the weekend.
There's been something of a frenzy to find pictures of Amanda Rodriguez, leading at least some sites to go mining Facebook to see what they can find. As here for example. Why not? After all, this is how pictures of Maria Belen Chapur, Mark Sanford's mistress, were found. However, while that top picture there is of one lady with the correct name, it isn't in fact of Amanda Rodrigues Gatti: just of one Amanda Rodrigues.
For, you see, there are some 215 results on Facebook for "Amanda Rodrigues" and so how can we be sure that this is the right Ms. Rodrigues: the Amanda Rodrigues Gatti picture that is of interest?
A pretty Portuguese/Brazilian looking woman with the right name perhaps isn't quite enough. We don't even know if Ms. Gatti has a Facebook entry at all, so assuming that the first one we come across is our purported criminal is going a little too far (the image was also, for a time, the first Google images result for the name).
APPhoto/Clemison Campos/JC Imagen: definitely Amanda Rodrigues Gatti
On the right we have what is definitely a picture of Amanda Rodrigues Gatti, certainly the widow or ex-wife (however you'd like to put it) of Arturo Gatti. Or, if we're going to maintain our stance of some skepticism, the lady that the Brazilian police are holding as Arturo Gatti's wife, if we're going to be completely precise.
Now there is indeed some similarity between the two: both are pretty, young, dark and long haired and both look (at least to this tutored eye, your reporter has spent some time in Iberia) as if they have Portuguese and or Brazilian backgrounds.
But this reporter is not wholly convinced that they are in fact the same person: indeed, is certain that they are not.
We have two photographs of people with the name Amanda Rodrigues. That much we know. However, only one of the photographs is definitely identified as Amanda Rodrigues Gatti, Arturo Gatti's wife. The other picture is simply a case of entirely mistaken identity.
An interesting lesson in these new technologies perhaps: despite all these whizzy things we can do, these new ways of finding things out, the same old journalistic cliches still remain. Check your sources for example.
Comments
That picture may be her a very long time ago, she has had so many cosmetic changes to change her appearance because she was a prostitute.
How do you know she was a hooker?
the girl in the first pic is younger and the face is fuller, and she has contact lenses on. A very good possibility. Also notice the light on her face/nose area?
I was friend with Arturo and know Amanda for many years as well.. The picture above is not her! The picture with the police officer is Amanda...and for the record Amanda was a crazy sick girl from day one.. I wish Arturo just listened to all of us as we all saw she was not a good fit for him... It is very sad and hurtful...RIP Arturo
"However, at the risk of annoying my colleague, the Celebrity Examiner" WTH? Why did you mention another Examiner who doesn't even have a picture up of her? Are you just trying to get hits and are sending us around to sites for no reason? How stupid! Is she your girlfriend or what? Grow up
Love the video on the Celebrity Examiner link you provide so thanks for that
LOL I am going to laugh when you get sued for putting some random pic of some random girl up
She does NOT have any sex videos or any cosmetics changes, and that girl in the picture isn't her. And perhaps you're the prostitute with cosmetic changes, at least for what i know, GINA is a common hoor name
First thing that came to mind after seeing the 2nd picture was, 1st picture looks alot chubbier for them to be the same person. Also there was another published photo of her with wearing yellow and her face concealed. She also appeared to be too chubby in the picture compared to the bottom pic on this page. So I guess even the press can't get the right pictures of her?
Hey jerk I see you had to remove the picture and the connection to the other Examner - glad to see someone stepped in since you were too stupid to know right from wrong. Or does going after hits no matter what speak of your character?? Has to be one or the other!
you my friend are a terrible disservice to examiner.com. why do they let you remain?
I URGE everyone to keep reporting this - the title is misleading and he had a facebook photo and link up of some innocent girl (please let her sue) and he linked to other Examiner stories saying unkind things when HE was the jerk with his lying titles and stolen photos! WHY IS THIS NOT DELETED????
I think it's time all of the Examiners getting mad about this calm down and get back to your own pages and posts. Let's be civilized, people, and stop attacking one another.
"I URGE everyone to keep reporting this - the title is misleading and he had a facebook photo and link up of some innocent girl (please let her sue) and he linked to other Examiner stories saying unkind things when HE was the jerk with his lying titles and stolen photos! WHY IS THIS NOT DELETED????"
That would be because I was actually pointing out the error that others had made in posting that Facebook photo. Which is what the piece is still doing now after it had been edited. Pointing out that some people had been using a Facebook photo of the wrong person.
This type of petty arguing amongst Examiners make the website look bad, not the content of the article. Don't you all play for the same team?
Not sure what this article means. Is it about the fact that there are people on face book with the same name or that we don't have a straight on photo or that the boxers wife is or isn't on facebook? Sorry, I'm not trying to be dumb, I just don't get it!
"That would be because I was actually pointing out the error that others had made in posting that Facebook photo." Tim, really is this the best stage to do that in? Why choose to publically point out an error of a co-worker publically? Wouldn't it have been better (or kinder, or more professional) to simply email the person and let them know privately? And yet your choice was to write up a public article with names and links! Beside that writer didn’t even have a picture up! It just seems really mean spirited. Maybe this should just be deleted as it isn't really serving anything positive is it?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!