G goldrod Active member Nov 12, 2015 130 104 43 Aug 6, 2022 #1 https://www.leolist.cc/personals/female-escorts/greater-toronto/durham_-6196566?source=list If you look the the pics, many are dated 2004 and those not, have the 04 removed or all of the date stamp. Zero chance she is going to look the same after 18 years lol 647-496-5328
https://www.leolist.cc/personals/female-escorts/greater-toronto/durham_-6196566?source=list If you look the the pics, many are dated 2004 and those not, have the 04 removed or all of the date stamp. Zero chance she is going to look the same after 18 years lol 647-496-5328
A ATR1973 Member Nov 13, 2020 41 24 8 Aug 7, 2022 #2 Weird. Some are timestamped 2004 and others ( red lingerie) appear to be 2020
bluebro69 On a Mission from God Sep 15, 2017 1,639 871 113 Aug 7, 2022 #3 ATR1973 said: Weird. Some are timestamped 2004 and others ( red lingerie) appear to be 2020 Click to expand... Maybe the pics are taken with a camera with the date not set correctly?
ATR1973 said: Weird. Some are timestamped 2004 and others ( red lingerie) appear to be 2020 Click to expand... Maybe the pics are taken with a camera with the date not set correctly?
C curvluvr Well-known member Mar 28, 2017 1,234 856 113 Aug 13, 2022 #5 I think the pics are from 2020. The 04 is part of the time stamp. You can see how the "20" and the "04" aren't in perfect alignment. I don't think digital cameras could take hi-res pictures like that in 2004.
I think the pics are from 2020. The 04 is part of the time stamp. You can see how the "20" and the "04" aren't in perfect alignment. I don't think digital cameras could take hi-res pictures like that in 2004.