"Channel-4 video a fake", concludes video forensic analyst
 The
new Channel 4 video of alleged extra-judicial killings in Sri lanka
which the new UN Rapporteur, Prof. Christof Heyns claimed as being
authentic after having same tested by three US forensic experts at the
Geneva sessions of the UNHRC in June 2011, has once again been
determined as a fake by Mr. Siri Hewavitharana of Australia, who is one
of the world's leading experts on digital video systems and former head
of Cisco's Global Broadcast and Digital Video Practice division. Mr.
Hewavitharana is presently the Executive Director of IPTV Systems in
Sydney, Australia.
Mr. Hewavitharana's incisive comments relating to
Channel 4's latest video have been published in a news report carried in
the Asian Tribune of June 6, 2011, which is annexed hereto for easy
reference.
It must also be mentioned here that Mr. Jonathan
Taylor, the foreign affairs correspondent of the Channel 4 News of UK
claimed that the gun wielding men dressed in Sri Lanka army uniforms
were members of the Sri Lankan security forces and that the alleged
victims were members of the Tamil community without providing any proof
as to their identities other than the UN Rapporteur stating that
according to experts hired by him the video was authentic. We are aware
that the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), also known as the
Tamil Tigers possessed such uniforms having overrun Sri Lankan army
installations in the past, which they donned to carry out atrocities
against their own Tamil people and other ethnicities. Yet other data to
question the authenticity of the video, and grounds to reach other
conclusions are given by us following the undernoted comments of Mr.
Hewavitharana.
Full text of the analysis report published by Mr.
Siri Hewawitharana.
Channel 4 Video is Fake, Edited and Video taken by Video Camera
( BY: Siri Hewawitharana)
It seems new Channel 4 video at UN is worse than the
previous one even though new video supposed to show old video clip with
added drama and whole video is fake with a date indicating UTC
2009-07-15 13 :17:23 and taken by a Video Camera and Not by a mobile
phone as indicated.
Worst part is UN's new Rapporteur Christof Heyns hired
a new US based video specialist Mr Grant Fredericks to analyse the
video. I am surprised, with his conclusion, that the video is Edited
using Philips editing software and Never Came from the mobile phone
since video is using an Optical Zoom which is not available in Any
mobile Camera that is available to date.
To me, video editing is so obvious that all it needs
is to look into the video end to see more than one video layer, and
audio is also not synchronized in with the video as indicated by the
previous Channel 4 video.... The technical foot print is identical on
both videos indicating it is edited by the same software and by the same
idiot.
Also Mr. Jeff S. Spivack is now giving different and
conflicting answers but avoiding the main criticism that video is edited
using a PC and he uses childish or dishonest analysis saying rudimentary
editing possible on a mobile phone cannot do this type of a video... Who
is he kidding?
At one part he says the video is edited using Philips
software and using a PC and other part he said it cannot be done with
the mobile phones editing applications.... How does he answer Mr Grant
Frederick's analysis saying these are high quality video that came from
a Video Camera?
What can he say about 17 frames of video that is
inconsistent with the original video? This anomaly was created by a new
video wrapper that try to create from original video camera to the
mobile video format and if you work in this area you know why this
happened, except Mr. Grant says he does not know why it happened? It
will be cheaper that, UN hire clowns since only clowns speak like that.
To me these are what I call hired guns with an agenda
but I would not dignify these people saying they are experts in video.
They are experts in downright incompetence or dishonesty that can be
bought for 30 pieces of silver....
My technical conclusion that was done with the
previous and the present video is almost identical to Mr Grant
Frederick's analysis.
|
