Oswald Picture Not Faked

[Craig Lamson]

Sheeesh bernie, how hard is it to read this from the link I gave you? I'm constantly amazed at how hard research is for some "researchers" In any case I'll pull a bernie and cut and paste the thing.

Bill, I'm going to give you first chance to respond.

Your work on the backyard photos center on the head size and neck size...correct? To make comparisons you took the backyard photos and scaled them all the the same headsize and found the bodies to not match in size...correct? And you scaled bodies to the same size and the heads did not match...correct? Finally you took a backyard photo and a sample photo of Oswalds head and scaled them to the same size and noticed the neck did not match...correct?

Your error is that you just can't scale things from different photos and expect thingts to match..or not.

You can test this concept easily, as I did.

I took three photos of a yardstick, with the same camera and same lens focal length. Much like the camera height in the backyard photos , the camera height was placed about in the middle of yardstick length(using 0 to 22 inches on the yardstick). And again like the backyard photos the the camera was placed in three different distances from the yardstick (subect) It was also like the backyard photos pointed upward or level to include the lenght of the yardstick as the camera moved closer the the yardsticki.

These are the three quick photos:

Now lets resize each yardstick so that the first 4 inches is the same on each yardstick (head). Notice how the "body ' is not the same size on each yardstick and also the the 'neck" ( width of the yardstick) is different as well. The point here is that you can't just scale different photos taken from different camera to subject distances and expect things to match up.

Comparison photo of all three yardsticks together and scaled so the top 4 inches match:

So bernie, here is the long and short of it. If you take two images of Oswald from the different backyard photos, resize them so the both have the same head size, and then say...Look, the bodies are different sizes so it must be fake....all you have proven is that you don't have the first clue how photography works, not that the images are fakes.

Here is the very best part. This same principle applys to EVERY 'study" ever done on the JFK photos that involvles resizing different photos taken from different places with the intention of comparing sizes between the photos. I think we can find quite a few examples of the 'dear learder" Jack the Hack doing this very thing, and citing the results as proof the images, whatever they my be are faked. He failed in his so called proof, but he did prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that when it comes to understanding the basics of photography, he does not. Now to be fair, he is not the only one to make this mistake and I'm sure he won't be the last. But the bottom line is that work produced via this method gets tossed into the trash bin of stupidity.

Edited November 14, 2009 by Craig Lamson

[David Andrews]

A good thread. Belatedly, thanks, Bernice, for the Mee interview and also the many LHO photos. I was especially interested in seeing if LHO ever posed with his legs contorted anywhere near the way they are in the backyard photos.

Independently, I ran across the web article Robert Walker linked in post #5, and thought the material merited investigation. And, as Bill Kelly pointed out in post #31, the front page stories in the commie papers are provocative. It's an old criminal trick to photograph newspapers containing clues - but I don't know how much subtlety we can ascribe to the photo forgers.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread411261/pg1

Edited November 14, 2009 by David Andrews

[Craig Lamson]

A good thread. Belatedly, thanks, Bernice, for the Mee interview and also the many LHO photos. I was especially interested in seeing if LHO ever posed with his legs contorted anywhere near the way they are in the backyard photos.

Independently, I ran across the web article Robert Walker linked in post #5, and thought the material merited investigation. And, as Bill Kelly pointed out in post #31, the front page stories in the commie papers are provocative. It's an old criminal trick to photograph newspapers containing clues - but I don't know how much subtlety we can ascribe to the photo forgers.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread411261/pg1

The material at the above top secret link is based on resizing photos taken from different camera to subject distances, and you just can't do that, as the empirical, experimental data I provided above proves. This is UNIMPEACHABLE fact.

But hey, I've not seen many jfk ct's let the cold hard facts get in the way way of a good fantasy.

[Dean Hagerman]

A good thread. Belatedly, thanks, Bernice, for the Mee interview and also the many LHO photos. I was especially interested in seeing if LHO ever posed with his legs contorted anywhere near the way they are in the backyard photos.

Independently, I ran across the web article Robert Walker linked in post #5, and thought the material merited investigation. And, as Bill Kelly pointed out in post #31, the front page stories in the commie papers are provocative. It's an old criminal trick to photograph newspapers containing clues - but I don't know how much subtlety we can ascribe to the photo forgers.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread411261/pg1

The material at the above top secret link is based on resizing photos taken from different camera to subject distances, and you just can't do that, as the empirical, experimental data I provided above proves. This is UNIMPEACHABLE fact.

But hey, I've not seen many jfk ct's let the cold hard facts get in the way way of a good fantasy.

I have been trying to figure out what group to put you in Craig

Your not a "LNer", your not a "CTer", your not even an "On the Fencer"

Your either an "I dont give a shiper" or a "Nobody"

[Craig Lamson]

A good thread. Belatedly, thanks, Bernice, for the Mee interview and also the many LHO photos. I was especially interested in seeing if LHO ever posed with his legs contorted anywhere near the way they are in the backyard photos.

Independently, I ran across the web article Robert Walker linked in post #5, and thought the material merited investigation. And, as Bill Kelly pointed out in post #31, the front page stories in the commie papers are provocative. It's an old criminal trick to photograph newspapers containing clues - but I don't know how much subtlety we can ascribe to the photo forgers.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread411261/pg1

The material at the above top secret link is based on resizing photos taken from different camera to subject distances, and you just can't do that, as the empirical, experimental data I provided above proves. This is UNIMPEACHABLE fact.

But hey, I've not seen many jfk ct's let the cold hard facts get in the way way of a good fantasy.

I have been trying to figure out what group to put you in Craig

Your not a "LNer", your not a "CTer", your not even an "On the Fencer"

Your either an "I dont give a shiper" or a "Nobody"

I made my position perfectly clear, deano, it seems you don't follow along very well....

I deal in the photography, I really don't care who is pushing crap, I'll point it out. The intellectually honest will verify the data and adjust their position. The intellectually dishonest will stick their fingers in their ears and chant..na na an. Which one are YOU deano?

[Len Colby]

Just a question. Has anyone here read A Deeper, Darker Truth yet? It covers the work of Tom Wilson and was written by Donald T. Phillips. Amazon has it for $25.15 (free shipping).

Adele

It is being discussed here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=14895

This new DISINFORMATION

Interesting double standard at play, when truthers publish papers in obscure for profit online only “journals” that charge hefty publishing fees but don't follow standard peer review procedures Peter unquestioningly accepts their conclusions telling critics “If you have problems with, it publish your own scientific paper” but when a paper is slated to published in an established scientific journal in the top 24 – 33%* of its field he classifies it as “DISINFORMATION” without having even read it, I doubt he even watched the video.

* http://eigenfactor.org/results.php?fulljou...p;Submit=Search

So Peter, working on that paper?

is a DIRECT response to the new book on Wilson's work

Quite unlikely the self published book is very obscure and seems only to have been noticed by the faithful

Amazon.com Sales Rank: #113,978

BN Sales Rank: 105,826

....and I have word more will be forthcoming in the next few weeks. Jack White, and others, long ago proved the photos fakes....and the constant finding over time of new versions [as well as how and where the 'first' and 'only' originals were found] strengthens that. More versions 'out there'. Can't say more. Only the blind or cognitively impaired believe those photos were taken by Marina, and not composite fakes. 

LOL I have yet to hear a rational explanation from people who think the photos were faked for LHO's mom saying she destroyed a copy of a similar photo

Edited November 16, 2009 by Len Colby

[Len Colby]

Well, i don't know what the professors intention is, but the result is wrong.

The head model is pretty good (ears are wrong) but what happend to the rest of the body?

No more budget?

Stork legs?

You obviously didn’t watch the entire video; he showed the body model after 2:33

Every 3D novice can place a light source at a location to make sure the shadow on a 3D face model looked like that.

He showed no wireframe, no view from the left or the right.

What is the distance to the pole and the fence behind? How high is the the fence? Actually measured in Neely?

No word mentioned.

What about the correct Longitude/Latitude (coordinates) from Neely street?

No word mentioned.

To complain an incomplete work as a convincing result is somehow an insult of a professor status.

It appears to be easy: Place a professor in front of the camera, let him claim positive evidence of Oswald's guilt and you got the great stage.

Since presumably you haven't read the paper (it has NOT been published yet) and you didn’t even watch the entire video your criticism is premature.

[William Kelly]

So what has become of this guy, the new JFK assassination photo specialist from Dartmouth?

Are there any followup interviews with the guy?

Will he answer questions, if not become a member of this forum?

Is he going to continue his studies, or was this a one time only, flash in the pan,

one hit wonder?

And has anybody come up with complete issues of the Militant and the Worker that Oswald flashes in the backyard photos, along with the alleged murder weapons?

BK

[William Kelly]

Hany Farid

Hany Farid received his undergraduate degree in Computer Science and Applied Mathematics from the University of Rochester in 1989. He received his Ph.D. in Computer Science from the University of Pennsylvania in 1997. Following a two year post-doctoral position in Brain and Cognitive Sciences at MIT, he joined the Computer Science Department at Dartmouth in 1999. Hany is the William H. Neukom 1964 Distinguished Professor of Computational Science, and the Director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science. Hany is the recipient of an NSF CAREER award, a Sloan Fellowship and a Guggenheim Fellowship.

From working with federal law enforcement agencies on digital forensics, to the digital reconstruction of Ancient Egyptian tombs, Hany works and plays with digital media at the crossroads of computer science, engineering, mathematics, optics, and psychology.

The Lee Harvey Oswald Backyard Photos: Real or Fake?

H. Farid

Perception, 2009 (in press)

Paper (pdf) Bibtex

Ever since the assassination of U.S. President Kennedy, numerous theories have circulated purporting that Lee Harvey Oswald, the accused assassin, acted as part of a larger criminal conspiracy. It has been suggested, for example, that incriminating photographs of Oswald were manipulated, and hence evidence of a broader plot. Specifically, it has been argued that the lighting and shadows in these photos are physically impossible. Because the visual system is often unable to reliably judge 3-D geometry and lighting, we performed a detailed 3-D analysis of the Oswald photos to determine if claims of tampering are warranted.

http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/publicat...erception09.pdf

http://newsfeedresearcher.com/data/article...wald-farid.html

Dartmouth scientist says Oswald rifle photo real

The Associated Press -

Nov-08-2009

Dartmouth scientist says Oswald rifle photo real

Oswald is the man who was being charged of shooting the President John F Kennedy in 1963.

In that photo, he was in the backyard of his home holding a rifle in one hand and Marxist newspaper in the other. Hany Farid, director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Sciences, Dartmouth claims that the shadows were exactly where they should be.

He is a famous analyst who uses Digital Forensic tools and often works with the law enforcement authorities.

He said he had requests to analyze the photo for years but he did not start working on it unless he had a Software to create three dimensional models of Oswald'''s head and surroundings.

After getting desired software, he started working on it and made three dimensional images and proved that a single light source can create both a shadow falling behind Oswald and to his right and one his nose. [1]

"You can never really prove an image is real, but the evidence that people have pointed to that the photo is fake is incorrect," Farid said Thursday.

"As an academic and a scientist, I don't like to say it's absolutely authentic. but it's extremely unlikely to have been a fake."

Farid, whose work using digital forensic tools to analyze images often has been used by law enforcement, said he has been getting requests from conspiracy theorists to analyze the photo for years.

He said he held off until he had the appropriate software to create three-dimensional models of Oswald's head and surroundings. With the modeling software, he was able to show that a single light source could create both a shadow falling behind Oswald and to his right and one directly under his nose. Farid admits even he was skeptical before starting his research.[2]

Several scientists have pointed out inconsistent lightings and shadows that added to the fake theory. In his ground-breaking claim, Professor Farid said that he couldn't really ascertain about the authenticity of the photo, but felt pretty certain that it is not a fake.

He had used the appropriate software to create a three dimensional image of Oswald's head. He created a light source that explained all the shadows in the photo that had seemed incongruous. He felt it is improbable that someone could have tampered with a photo so long back this perfectly.[3]

Some claim the photo was fake, noting what appeared to be inconsistent lighting and shadows. Hany Farid, director of a computer science institute at Dartmouth, says the shadows are exactly where they should be based on his analysis, which involved creating a computerized three-dimensional model of Oswald and his surroundings.

Farid says he has been getting almost daily requests from conspiracy theorists to analyze the photos for years but held off until he had the appropriate software to create the models. He says it's extremely unlikely the photo was faked.[4] Over the years, many others have pointed out what appear to be inconsistent lighting and shadows. Hany Farid, director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science at Dartmouth, said the shadows are exactly where they should be.[2]

Dartmouth computer science professor Hany Farid, the director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science, has found evidence that the infamous photograph of President John F. Kennedy assassin Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle was not faked, according to a College press release.[5]

CONCORD, N.H. — The infamous photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle in his backyard would have been nearly impossible to fake, according to a new analysis by a Dartmouth College professor.

Oswald, who was shot to death days after being charged with the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy, claimed the photo of him holding a rifle in one hand and Marxist newspapers in the other had been doctored.[2]

ScienceDaily (Nov. 6, 2009) - Dartmouth computer scientist Hany Farid has new evidence regarding a photograph of accused John F. Kennedy assassin Lee Harvey Oswald.[6]

Nov. 6, (THAINDIAN NEWS) A digital forensic scientist and computer science professor from Dartmouth College, Professor Heny Farid said that he has unearthed new evidence that the photos of Lee Harvey Oswald are not doctored.[3] A Dartmouth forensic scientist says he has new evidence that the iconic photograph of JFK assassin Lee Harvey Oswald in a backyard holding a rifle is authentic.[4] A professor of Dartmouth College have made new analysis of controversial snap of Lee Harvey Oswald in which he is shown holding a rifle in his backyard.[1]

Hany Farid says the infamous photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle is real.[7]

Farid, a pioneer in the field of digital forensics, digitally analyzed an iconic image of Oswald pictured in a backyard setting holding a rifle in one hand and Marxist newspapers in the other.[6] At a casual glance, the lighting and shadows in the Oswald photo appear to many to be incongruous with the outdoor lighting. To determine if this was the case, Farid constructed a 3-D model of Oswald's head and portions of the backyard scene, from which he was able to determine that a single light source, the sun, could explain all of the shadows in the photo. "It is highly improbable that anyone could have created such a perfect forgery with the technology available in 1963," said Farid. With no evidence of tampering, he concluded that the incriminating photo was authentic. "As our digital forensic tools become more sophisticated, we increasingly have the ability to apply them to historic photos in an attempt to resolve some long-standing mysteries," said Farid.[6] Hany Farid of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science used digital forensic tools to analyze the photo. He says the shadows are exactly where they should be and it's extremely unlikely the photo is a fake.[8] Farid and his team have developed a number of digital forensic tools used to determine whether digital photos have been manipulated, and his research is often used by law enforcement officials and in legal proceedings.[6]

Farid led a team of computer scientists that developed digital forensic devices that can verify whether digital images have been altered, according to the press release.[5]

"Photo is fake is incorrect," Farid said Thursday. "As an academic and a scientist, I don't You can never really prove an image is real, but the evidence that people have pointed to that the like to say it's absolutely authentic but it's extremely unlikely to have been a fake." He spent about two months off and on analyzing the Oswald photo. "I felt because it's the Kennedy assassination and because there's so much history about this, you really want to answer this correctly," he said. "You don't want to make a mistake on something of this magnitude."[1] "When I looked at the photo, I didn't understand it. I didn't understand the shadows, and I do this for a living," he said. Farid's latest finding, which will be published in the journal Perception, is in keeping with his earlier research that showed the human visual system does a poor job at judging whether cast shadows are correct, he said. "It turns out we're really bad at it. Even though our visual system is very, very good. we are really bad at judging shadows," he said. "I'm bad at it and this is what I do for a living." He spent about two months off and on analyzing the Oswald photo. "I felt because it's the Kennedy assassination and because there's so much history about this, you really want to answer this correctly," he said. "You don't want to make a mistake on something of this magnitude."[2]

Lee Oswald Harvey is the man who was convicted of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. He was shot to death a few days after he was arrested. Police obtained the photo while he was in their custody.[3] The photo shows Oswald standing, holding a rifle in one hand and a Marxist newspaper in the other. He said that the photo is too real to be termed fake. This discovery puts an end to all theories that claims that Oswald was part of a bigger plot to assassinate the president.[3] Oswald and others claimed that the incriminating photo was a fake, noting the seemingly inconsistent lighting and shadows.[6] Oswald claimed the photo was doctored, and over the years, many others pointed out what appears to be inconsistent lighting and shadows.[7]

In analyzing Oswald'''s photo, Farid built 3-D models of Oswald'''s head and the backyard scene of the photograph to reenact the setting of the image. From this model, Farid deducted that the lighting ''' the major point of skepticism ''' was not tampered with and that the image was legitimate.[5] "If we had found evidence of photo tampering, then it would have suggested a broader plot to kill JFK," said Farid, who is also the director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science at Dartmouth. "Those who believe that there was a broader conspiracy can no longer point to this photo as possible evidence." Farid added that federal officials long ago said that this image had not been tampered with, but a surprising number of skeptics still assert that there was a conspiracy.[6]

The play of light and shadow was fundamental in the Oswald photo analysis. "The human brain, while remarkable in many aspects, also has its weaknesses," says Farid.[6] Oswald refused to admit that it was really him, and kept insisting that the photo had been doctored. Even many years after his death, it has never really been definitely ascertained whether the photo is a fake or not.[3]

SOURCES

1. Lee Harvey Oswald Rifle Photo

2. The Associated Press: Dartmouth scientist says Oswald rifle photo real

3. Professor Heny Farid Claims Lee Harvey Oswald Photo Is Not A Fake

4. Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Texas/Southwest

5. TheDartmouth.com | Daily Debriefing

6. Iconic Photo Of JFK Assassin Oswald Was Not Faked, Professor Finds

7. Dartmouth professor: Oswald photo real | NECN

8. The Associated Press: Dartmouth scientist says Oswald rifle photo real

http://www.vizworld.com/2009/11/oswalds-fa...constructed-3d/

Hany Farid, researcher at Dartmouth College, has just completed a virtual 3D reconstruction of Lee Harvey Oswald’s face from the famous photograph of him and his rifle. The goal was to prove or disprove the shadows and reflections on his face, pointed out by conspiracy theorists as evidence that the photo is doctored.

He used a computer program Facegen, to build a virtual 3D model of Oswald’s head. Once that was completed, he added in the background features of the photo. Through a series of computations, he figured out where the camera had to be, the trajectory of the sun and where Oswald was in relation to the camera.

The result is that it’s definitely possible. That alone isn’t proof that the photo is real, but does eliminate one common point of argument.

via UnionLeader.com – New Hampshire news, business and sports – Dartmouth expert: Oswald photo appears real – Friday, Nov. 6, 2009.

BILL KELLY NOTES - THIS GUY IS HEAVY INTO MONEY FROM NATIONAL SECURITY - HOMELAND SECURITY - FOUNDATIONS - ETC., (SEE: NEUKOM) AND IS IN THE FOREFRONT OF A NEW FIELD - DIGITAL FORENSICS - YET - IT ISN'T THE NATIONAL SECURITY PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN BUGGING HIM - ASKING HIM DAILY TO LOOK INTO PHOTOS CONNECTED TO THE MURDER OF THE PRESIDENT - IT'S CONSPIRACY THEORISTS -

AND ALTHOUGH HE HAS MULTIPLE TYPES OF TESTS - IF YOU READ SOME OF HIS PAPERS - "EXPOSING DIGITAL FORGERIES IN VIDEO BY DETECTING DOUBLE QUANTIZATION" - THAT HE COULD APPLY TO THE Z-FILM - AND PROVE THAT IS REAL TOO - INSTEAD HE BUILDS A MODEL OF OSWALD'S HEAD - AND PROVES THAT THE SHADOWS FALL RIGHT.

AM I MISSING SOMETHING HERE?

HANNY FARID HAS UNCOVERED SOME REALLY FAKE PHOTOS THOUGH

HOW ABOUT THIS ONE - OPHRA'S HEAD OVER ANN MARGRET'S BODY?

I WAS FOOLED BY THAT ONE.

NOW I KNOW THIS GUY IS A REAL SLUTH.

WILL SOMEONE PLEASE SUPERIMPOSE CASTRO'S FACE OVER OSWALD'S IN THE BACKYARD PHOTO AND SEND IT TO THIS GUY?

http://www.stinkyjournalism.org/editorialI...T_Image_340.jpg

http://www.stinkyjournalism.org/editordetail.php?id=340

It was August 1989, TV Guide published the above image of Oprah Winfrey featured as queen of daytime TV talk shows on its cover. The doctored photo composites an image of Oprah's head with Ann Margret's body.

The Oprah TV Guide cover is only one example from a very good and updated list of altered photo cases on Dartmouth professor, Hany Farid's web site, called "Photo Tampering Throughout History." Many faked images in the list were made with techniques from the earlier days of photography that predates Photoshop. The best part of the list is examples of photo fakes that aren't often seen around the web.

For those interested in learning more about photo fakery, go the Hany Farid's Research page. His publications are found here. Professor Farid's site continues to be an excellent resource on the subject.

http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/research/digitaltampering/

Edited November 17, 2009 by William Kelly

[Craig Lamson]

Hany Farid

Hany Farid received his undergraduate degree in Computer Science and Applied Mathematics from the University of Rochester in 1989. He received his Ph.D. in Computer Science from the University of Pennsylvania in 1997. Following a two year post-doctoral position in Brain and Cognitive Sciences at MIT, he joined the Computer Science Department at Dartmouth in 1999. Hany is the William H. Neukom 1964 Distinguished Professor of Computational Science, and the Director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science. Hany is the recipient of an NSF CAREER award, a Sloan Fellowship and a Guggenheim Fellowship.

From working with federal law enforcement agencies on digital forensics, to the digital reconstruction of Ancient Egyptian tombs, Hany works and plays with digital media at the crossroads of computer science, engineering, mathematics, optics, and psychology.

The Lee Harvey Oswald Backyard Photos: Real or Fake?

H. Farid

Perception, 2009 (in press)

Paper (pdf) Bibtex

Ever since the assassination of U.S. President Kennedy, numerous theories have circulated purporting that Lee Harvey Oswald, the accused assassin, acted as part of a larger criminal conspiracy. It has been suggested, for example, that incriminating photographs of Oswald were manipulated, and hence evidence of a broader plot. Specifically, it has been argued that the lighting and shadows in these photos are physically impossible. Because the visual system is often unable to reliably judge 3-D geometry and lighting, we performed a detailed 3-D analysis of the Oswald photos to determine if claims of tampering are warranted.

http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/publicat...erception09.pdf

http://newsfeedresearcher.com/data/article...wald-farid.html

Dartmouth scientist says Oswald rifle photo real

The Associated Press -

Nov-08-2009

Dartmouth scientist says Oswald rifle photo real

Oswald is the man who was being charged of shooting the President John F Kennedy in 1963.

In that photo, he was in the backyard of his home holding a rifle in one hand and Marxist newspaper in the other. Hany Farid, director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Sciences, Dartmouth claims that the shadows were exactly where they should be.

He is a famous analyst who uses Digital Forensic tools and often works with the law enforcement authorities.

He said he had requests to analyze the photo for years but he did not start working on it unless he had a Software to create three dimensional models of Oswald'''s head and surroundings.

After getting desired software, he started working on it and made three dimensional images and proved that a single light source can create both a shadow falling behind Oswald and to his right and one his nose. [1]

"You can never really prove an image is real, but the evidence that people have pointed to that the photo is fake is incorrect," Farid said Thursday.

"As an academic and a scientist, I don't like to say it's absolutely authentic. but it's extremely unlikely to have been a fake."

Farid, whose work using digital forensic tools to analyze images often has been used by law enforcement, said he has been getting requests from conspiracy theorists to analyze the photo for years.

He said he held off until he had the appropriate software to create three-dimensional models of Oswald's head and surroundings. With the modeling software, he was able to show that a single light source could create both a shadow falling behind Oswald and to his right and one directly under his nose. Farid admits even he was skeptical before starting his research.[2]

Several scientists have pointed out inconsistent lightings and shadows that added to the fake theory. In his ground-breaking claim, Professor Farid said that he couldn't really ascertain about the authenticity of the photo, but felt pretty certain that it is not a fake.

He had used the appropriate software to create a three dimensional image of Oswald's head. He created a light source that explained all the shadows in the photo that had seemed incongruous. He felt it is improbable that someone could have tampered with a photo so long back this perfectly.[3]

Some claim the photo was fake, noting what appeared to be inconsistent lighting and shadows. Hany Farid, director of a computer science institute at Dartmouth, says the shadows are exactly where they should be based on his analysis, which involved creating a computerized three-dimensional model of Oswald and his surroundings.

Farid says he has been getting almost daily requests from conspiracy theorists to analyze the photos for years but held off until he had the appropriate software to create the models. He says it's extremely unlikely the photo was faked.[4] Over the years, many others have pointed out what appear to be inconsistent lighting and shadows. Hany Farid, director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science at Dartmouth, said the shadows are exactly where they should be.[2]

Dartmouth computer science professor Hany Farid, the director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science, has found evidence that the infamous photograph of President John F. Kennedy assassin Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle was not faked, according to a College press release.[5]

CONCORD, N.H. — The infamous photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle in his backyard would have been nearly impossible to fake, according to a new analysis by a Dartmouth College professor.

Oswald, who was shot to death days after being charged with the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy, claimed the photo of him holding a rifle in one hand and Marxist newspapers in the other had been doctored.[2]

ScienceDaily (Nov. 6, 2009) - Dartmouth computer scientist Hany Farid has new evidence regarding a photograph of accused John F. Kennedy assassin Lee Harvey Oswald.[6]

Nov. 6, (THAINDIAN NEWS) A digital forensic scientist and computer science professor from Dartmouth College, Professor Heny Farid said that he has unearthed new evidence that the photos of Lee Harvey Oswald are not doctored.[3] A Dartmouth forensic scientist says he has new evidence that the iconic photograph of JFK assassin Lee Harvey Oswald in a backyard holding a rifle is authentic.[4] A professor of Dartmouth College have made new analysis of controversial snap of Lee Harvey Oswald in which he is shown holding a rifle in his backyard.[1]

Hany Farid says the infamous photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle is real.[7]

Farid, a pioneer in the field of digital forensics, digitally analyzed an iconic image of Oswald pictured in a backyard setting holding a rifle in one hand and Marxist newspapers in the other.[6] At a casual glance, the lighting and shadows in the Oswald photo appear to many to be incongruous with the outdoor lighting. To determine if this was the case, Farid constructed a 3-D model of Oswald's head and portions of the backyard scene, from which he was able to determine that a single light source, the sun, could explain all of the shadows in the photo. "It is highly improbable that anyone could have created such a perfect forgery with the technology available in 1963," said Farid. With no evidence of tampering, he concluded that the incriminating photo was authentic. "As our digital forensic tools become more sophisticated, we increasingly have the ability to apply them to historic photos in an attempt to resolve some long-standing mysteries," said Farid.[6] Hany Farid of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science used digital forensic tools to analyze the photo. He says the shadows are exactly where they should be and it's extremely unlikely the photo is a fake.[8] Farid and his team have developed a number of digital forensic tools used to determine whether digital photos have been manipulated, and his research is often used by law enforcement officials and in legal proceedings.[6]

Farid led a team of computer scientists that developed digital forensic devices that can verify whether digital images have been altered, according to the press release.[5]

"Photo is fake is incorrect," Farid said Thursday. "As an academic and a scientist, I don't You can never really prove an image is real, but the evidence that people have pointed to that the like to say it's absolutely authentic but it's extremely unlikely to have been a fake." He spent about two months off and on analyzing the Oswald photo. "I felt because it's the Kennedy assassination and because there's so much history about this, you really want to answer this correctly," he said. "You don't want to make a mistake on something of this magnitude."[1] "When I looked at the photo, I didn't understand it. I didn't understand the shadows, and I do this for a living," he said. Farid's latest finding, which will be published in the journal Perception, is in keeping with his earlier research that showed the human visual system does a poor job at judging whether cast shadows are correct, he said. "It turns out we're really bad at it. Even though our visual system is very, very good. we are really bad at judging shadows," he said. "I'm bad at it and this is what I do for a living." He spent about two months off and on analyzing the Oswald photo. "I felt because it's the Kennedy assassination and because there's so much history about this, you really want to answer this correctly," he said. "You don't want to make a mistake on something of this magnitude."[2]

Lee Oswald Harvey is the man who was convicted of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. He was shot to death a few days after he was arrested. Police obtained the photo while he was in their custody.[3] The photo shows Oswald standing, holding a rifle in one hand and a Marxist newspaper in the other. He said that the photo is too real to be termed fake. This discovery puts an end to all theories that claims that Oswald was part of a bigger plot to assassinate the president.[3] Oswald and others claimed that the incriminating photo was a fake, noting the seemingly inconsistent lighting and shadows.[6] Oswald claimed the photo was doctored, and over the years, many others pointed out what appears to be inconsistent lighting and shadows.[7]

In analyzing Oswald'''s photo, Farid built 3-D models of Oswald'''s head and the backyard scene of the photograph to reenact the setting of the image. From this model, Farid deducted that the lighting ''' the major point of skepticism ''' was not tampered with and that the image was legitimate.[5] "If we had found evidence of photo tampering, then it would have suggested a broader plot to kill JFK," said Farid, who is also the director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science at Dartmouth. "Those who believe that there was a broader conspiracy can no longer point to this photo as possible evidence." Farid added that federal officials long ago said that this image had not been tampered with, but a surprising number of skeptics still assert that there was a conspiracy.[6]

The play of light and shadow was fundamental in the Oswald photo analysis. "The human brain, while remarkable in many aspects, also has its weaknesses," says Farid.[6] Oswald refused to admit that it was really him, and kept insisting that the photo had been doctored. Even many years after his death, it has never really been definitely ascertained whether the photo is a fake or not.[3]

SOURCES

1. Lee Harvey Oswald Rifle Photo

2. The Associated Press: Dartmouth scientist says Oswald rifle photo real

3. Professor Heny Farid Claims Lee Harvey Oswald Photo Is Not A Fake

4. Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Texas/Southwest

5. TheDartmouth.com | Daily Debriefing

6. Iconic Photo Of JFK Assassin Oswald Was Not Faked, Professor Finds

7. Dartmouth professor: Oswald photo real | NECN

8. The Associated Press: Dartmouth scientist says Oswald rifle photo real

http://www.vizworld.com/2009/11/oswalds-fa...constructed-3d/

Hany Farid, researcher at Dartmouth College, has just completed a virtual 3D reconstruction of Lee Harvey Oswald’s face from the famous photograph of him and his rifle. The goal was to prove or disprove the shadows and reflections on his face, pointed out by conspiracy theorists as evidence that the photo is doctored.

He used a computer program Facegen, to build a virtual 3D model of Oswald’s head. Once that was completed, he added in the background features of the photo. Through a series of computations, he figured out where the camera had to be, the trajectory of the sun and where Oswald was in relation to the camera.

The result is that it’s definitely possible. That alone isn’t proof that the photo is real, but does eliminate one common point of argument.

via UnionLeader.com – New Hampshire news, business and sports – Dartmouth expert: Oswald photo appears real – Friday, Nov. 6, 2009.

BILL KELLY NOTES - THIS GUY IS HEAVY INTO MONEY FROM NATIONAL SECURITY - HOMELAND SECURITY - FOUNDATIONS - ETC., (SEE: NEUKOM) AND IS IN THE FOREFRONT OF A NEW FIELD - DIGITAL FORENSICS - YET - IT ISN'T THE NATIONAL SECURITY PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN BUGGING HIM - ASKING HIM DAILY TO LOOK INTO PHOTOS CONNECTED TO THE MURDER OF THE PRESIDENT - IT'S CONSPIRACY THEORISTS -

AND ALTHOUGH HE HAS MULTIPLE TYPES OF TESTS - IF YOU READ SOME OF HIS PAPERS - "EXPOSING DIGITAL FORGERIES IN VIDEO BY DETECTING DOUBLE QUANTIZATION" - THAT HE COULD APPLY TO THE Z-FILM - AND PROVE THAT IS REAL TOO - INSTEAD HE BUILDS A MODEL OF OSWALD'S HEAD - AND PROVES THAT THE SHADOWS FALL RIGHT.

AM I MISSING SOMETHING HERE?

HANNY FARID HAS UNCOVERED SOME REALLY FAKE PHOTOS THOUGH

HOW ABOUT THIS ONE - OPHRA'S HEAD OVER ANN MARGRET'S BODY?

I WAS FOOLED BY THAT ONE.

NOW I KNOW THIS GUY IS A REAL SLUTH.

WILL SOMEONE PLEASE SUPERIMPOSE CASTRO'S FACE OVER OSWALD'S IN THE BACKYARD PHOTO AND SEND IT TO THIS GUY?

http://www.stinkyjournalism.org/editorialI...T_Image_340.jpg

http://www.stinkyjournalism.org/editordetail.php?id=340

It was August 1989, TV Guide published the above image of Oprah Winfrey featured as queen of daytime TV talk shows on its cover. The doctored photo composites an image of Oprah's head with Ann Margret's body.

The Oprah TV Guide cover is only one example from a very good and updated list of altered photo cases on Dartmouth professor, Hany Farid's web site, called "Photo Tampering Throughout History." Many faked images in the list were made with techniques from the earlier days of photography that predates Photoshop. The best part of the list is examples of photo fakes that aren't often seen around the web.

For those interested in learning more about photo fakery, go the Hany Farid's Research page. His publications are found here. Professor Farid's site continues to be an excellent resource on the subject.

http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/research/digitaltampering/

Always a hoot to see a JFK CT with their shorts in a bunch. Thanks for the grins Bill!

[Guest John Gillespie]

Wow. Nice work, B.K. I was suspicious of this guy - not in any concrete way - and lo and behold Soupy Sales passes away and I get a call from one of my old photo/ tech/Intel buddies who tells me that the pic the wire services distributed over Sales' obit actually is a superimposition - or, if you'll pardon the expression, Souperimposition - of the Soupster's puss on a Fred Astaire shot; done, you know, to give the man a bit more dignity in his passing (some say the same was done with Mo Howard's face on a Liberace pic some years ago, but that's another story).

JG

Edited November 17, 2009 by John Gillespie

[William Kelly]

Wow. Nice work, B.K. I was suspicious of this guy - not in any concrete way - and lo and behold Soupy Sales passes away and I get a call from one of my old photo/ tech/Intel buddies who tells me that the pic the wire services distributed over Sales' obit actually is a superimposition - or, if you'll pardon the expression, Souperimposition - of the Soupster's puss on a Fred Astaire shot; done, you know, to give the man a bit more dignity in his passing (some say the same was done with Mo Howard's face on a Liberace pic some years ago, but that's another story).

JG

I got a hoot out of it too Craig.

And JG,

My condolences re: Soupy Sales. I always wondered, if you imagine how much history would have changed if Ruby had put a custard pie in Oswald's face instead of killing him?

I was going to write to Hany"Sam" Farid to see which of the backyard photos he studied, and whether he included the published version that was retouched, removing the scope.

But its pretty clear he really isn't interested in any real digital forensic study of the JFK assassination evidence.

It makes me wonder how they figured out it was Ann Margret's body?

Did they wait for a computer program to be invented so they could build a body like her's?

Besides getting money from Homeland Security, and Defense Contractors, and Alfred P. Sloan and Guggenheim, Farid is the director of the Neukon Institute for Computer Science (NICS), as in William Neukon, the head of the legal affairs for Bill Gates.

The NICS does accept applications for fellowships and projects, and maybe an interested student should apply for a grant to do what Hany Farid said he did - apply all the latest digital forensic technology available to all of the relevant photographic evidence in the assassination of the President, and see if they'll give out any money.

Tell them it really is a matter of national security.

BK

Edited November 17, 2009 by William Kelly

[Craig Lamson]

Wow. Nice work, B.K. I was suspicious of this guy - not in any concrete way - and lo and behold Soupy Sales passes away and I get a call from one of my old photo/ tech/Intel buddies who tells me that the pic the wire services distributed over Sales' obit actually is a superimposition - or, if you'll pardon the expression, Souperimposition - of the Soupster's puss on a Fred Astaire shot; done, you know, to give the man a bit more dignity in his passing (some say the same was done with Mo Howard's face on a Liberace pic some years ago, but that's another story).

JG

I got a hoot out of it too Craig.

And JG,

My condolences re: Soupy Sales. I always wondered, if you imagine how much history would have changed if Ruby had put a custard pie in Oswald's face instead of killing him?

I was going to write to Hany"Sam" Farid to see which of the backyard photos he studied, and whether he included the published version that was retouched, removing the scope.

But its pretty clear he really isn't interested in any real digital forensic study of the JFK assassination evidence.

It makes me wonder how they figured out it was Ann Margret's body?

Did they wait for a computer program to be invented so they could build a body like her's?

Besides getting money from Homeland Security, and Defense Contractors, and Alfred P. Sloan and Guggenheim, Farid is the director of the Neukon Institute for Computer Science (NICS), as in William Neukon, the head of the legal affairs for Bill Gates.

The NICS does accept applications for fellowships and projects, and maybe an interested student should apply for a grant to do what Hany Farid said he did - apply all the latest digital forensic technology available to all of the relevant photographic evidence in the assassination of the President, and see if they'll give out any money.

Tell them it really is a matter of national security.

BK

As much as I love watching JFK CT's get their shorts in a bunch, nothing beat watching their paranoia run amuck! Man this has been an entertaining evening!

[Guest John Gillespie]

Wow. Nice work, B.K. I was suspicious of this guy - not in any concrete way - and lo and behold Soupy Sales passes away and I get a call from one of my old photo/ tech/Intel buddies who tells me that the pic the wire services distributed over Sales' obit actually is a superimposition - or, if you'll pardon the expression, Souperimposition - of the Soupster's puss on a Fred Astaire shot; done, you know, to give the man a bit more dignity in his passing (some say the same was done with Mo Howard's face on a Liberace pic some years ago, but that's another story).

JG

I got a hoot out of it too Craig.

And JG,

My condolences re: Soupy Sales. I always wondered, if you imagine how much history would have changed if Ruby had put a custard pie in Oswald's face instead of killing him?

I was going to write to Hany"Sam" Farid to see which of the backyard photos he studied, and whether he included the published version that was retouched, removing the scope.

But its pretty clear he really isn't interested in any real digital forensic study of the JFK assassination evidence.

It makes me wonder how they figured out it was Ann Margret's body?

Did they wait for a computer program to be invented so they could build a body like her's?

Besides getting money from Homeland Security, and Defense Contractors, and Alfred P. Sloan and Guggenheim, Farid is the director of the Neukon Institute for Computer Science (NICS), as in William Neukon, the head of the legal affairs for Bill Gates.

The NICS does accept applications for fellowships and projects, and maybe an interested student should apply for a grant to do what Hany Farid said he did - apply all the latest digital forensic technology available to all of the relevant photographic evidence in the assassination of the President, and see if they'll give out any money.

Tell them it really is a matter of national security.

BK

__________________________________

BK,

That's some great absurdist imagery of Ruby giving the ol' Max Sennott treatment to LHO. Yeah, I tend to be real skeptical about this cat's motivation and who is behind it. So, now I know. Thanks. And you're right: where is the interest in Mr. Z's little celluloid package?

The member Mr. Walker, not Andy, (hope I didn't blow his name; I'm up way past my bedtime right now) asked a very simple question about why and why now. Anyway, keep up the good work, guys, I'm off to listen to Coast To Coast AM. Hey, BK, when you gonna be on again??

JG

[Guest Tom Scully]

Bill,

If it looks like a winger psy-op, walks like a winger psy-op... Oh, it's possible this photographic "expert" is a non-partisan, earnest scientist with no particular agenda, but it we would be remiss if we did not note the background of the key sponsor of his chair and department. Dartmouth was also the alma mater of 1950's brothers Joseph and Peter Dryer and their classmate and good friend. Ernest Hemmingway's son, Jack.

Two questions;

One: after reading the bio of the man who endowed the "chair" your boy Farid now occupies at Dartmouth, are we in agreement that it looks like he never really left Preston Gates, and that it's impossible to tell where Preston Gates ends and Microsoft begins, or vice-versa?

Two: If William Horlick "Bill" Neukom was described as a CIA recruit and then was shepherded by the DCI to a CIA affiliated entity and then he later became DCI himself, would you suspect he had been CIA through his whole career?

This doesn't pass the smell test, Bill. Walk away. It got so bad for Preston-Gates, because of the stench of it's ties to Abramoff and whacko Tom Delay, a political leader who claimed publicly that his pastor and spiritual advisor was his former chief of staff, Edwin Buckham, who employed Delay's wife, ran a lobbying firm affiliated with Jack Abramoff ,

that Victoria Toensing (see bottom of this post, click middle link in bottom quote box for background on Toensing.) was

enlisted to spout favorable propaganda on behald of Preston Gates. The link I referred to in the previous sentence is to a late 90's WaPo article that says Toensing and her former Fed. prosecutor husband made 800 TV appearances attempting to put lipstick on Ken Starr's WhiteWater farce.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/delay.php

Alexander Strategy Group provided access to DeLay.

Alexander Strategy Group was founded by former DeLay Chief of Staff Ed Buckham, and was considered the gatekeeper to DeLay's power in Washington. In its early days, ASG was run out of the "Safe House," a townhouse in Capitol Hill owned by the U.S. Family Network (USFN) and used by DeLay for fundraising and other activities. Americans for a Republican Majority, DeLay's leadership PAC (which also employed Buckham), used the townhouse as well.

In August 2001, DeLay and his wife Christine went to South Korea at the expense ($106,000) of a group called the Korea-US Exchange Council. House rules do not allow for travel by representatives funded by foreign agents. The trip was arranged by the Alexander Strategy Group.

USFN was sending hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments to ASG. The money was coming from Abramoff clients who were getting help from DeLay in Congress. At the same time, DeLay's wife was on ASG's payroll for $3,200/month.

DeLay used the U.S. Family Network, a fund set up by Buckham and funded by Abramoff's clients, as a slush fund.

Owners of textile companies in the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands gave USFN $500,000, according to tax records. The company, an Abramoff lobbying client, was looking to block legislation that would increase their labor costs by imposing a minimum wage in the CNMI, which DeLay publicly promised he would do.

Russian oil execs laundered $1 million through a law firm in London to the USFN in 1998. The executives needed DeLay's help on legislation that would allow the IMF to bailout the Russian economy. The Russians were Abramoff's clients.

Abramoff's tribal clients donated to TRMPAC and the USFN allegedly in exchange for help from DeLay.

The Mississippi Choctaw Indians, lobbying clients of Abramoff, donated $250,000 over two years to the USFN. They were seeking DeLay's help with legislation that was aimed at taxing their gambling revenues. The first $150,000 came just one day after DeLay returned to Washington after spending three days at the Choctaws Casino and Golf resort.

Shortly after TRMPAC received a $1,000 donation from the Choctaws, DeLay sent a letter to the US Attorney General, John Ashcroft, calling for the US Department of Justice to investigate and shut down a Casino run by the Alabama Coushatta Tribe, which was in direct competition with the Choctaw's casino. ...

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=off&...c443ffcb5a5cce1

Hany Farid Appointed Director of the Neukom Institute for ...

Oct 20, 2008 ... The mission of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science is four-fold: to strengthen and broaden interdisciplinary and collaborative...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Neukom

William Horlick "Bill" Neukom is the leader of the San Francisco Giants baseball team ownership group. He has held this position since October 2008. Prior to holding this position, he was President of the American Bar Association in 2007-08.[1]. He was the principal legal counsel for Microsoft for almost 25 years. He was also the Chairman of the Gates law firm in Seattle, now part of K&L Gates.

Dartmouth

Neukom received an undergraduate degree from Dartmouth College (Class of 1964). Thirty years later, between 1996 and 2007, Neukom served as a trustee of Dartmouth College and he served as chair of the College's Board of Trustees from 2004 to 2007. Three of his children have attended Dartmouth. He is the founding donor of The Neukom Institute for Computational Science at Dartmouth College which is dedicated to advancing computing resources and applications in multiple aspects of the Dartmouth curriculum.....

...Legal Career and Microsoft

After completing his law degree, Neukom served as a clerk for Judge Theodore S. Turner of the King County Superior Court in Seattle in the years 1967-68 .

By 1977, he had joined the Seattle law firm Shilder, McBroom, Gates & Lucas (later Preston Gates & Ellis). Mr. Neukom's relationship with Microsoft began in 1978 when managing partner Bill Gates Sr. asked him to advise his son's fledgling software business. Neukom started doing legal work for Microsoft when the company had just 12 employees. He would continue to be Microsoft's lead legal counsel for nearly 25 years. [3]

Mr. Neukom joined Microsoft as an employee in 1985 and thereafter built its corporate law department from an initial staff of five to more than 600 attorneys and support personnel. He became an Executive Vice President at Microsoft. He spent 17 years as Microsoft's general counsel and chief legal officer, managing the company's legal, governmental affairs and philanthropic activities.

He was actively involved in legally defending Microsoft's intellectual property rights around the world, most notably in Apple v. Microsoft. He also was involved in defending Microsoft from a series of complex antitrust suits (i.e. United States v. Microsoft. While at Microsoft, Mr. Neukom also directed the company's community affairs program, which initiated corporate-giving programs including the Microsoft Giving Campaign, the Microsoft Matching Gifts Program, and the Microsoft Volunteer Program. In 2002 Neukom retired from Microsoft as Executive Vice President, Law & Corporate Affairs.

After Microsoft, Mr. Neukom returned to Preston Gates & Ellis as a partner in the firm's business law practice. In January 2004 he was named chair of that firm. In 2007 Preston Gates & Ellis merged with Kirkpatrick and Lockhart of Pittsburgh to form the large law firm now named K&L Gates.

http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=buc...n&scoring=a

Former DeLay Aide Enriched By Nonprofit

Washington Post - Mar 26, 2006

Buckham, an evangelical minister, also continued to serve as DeLay's spiritual adviser and prayed frequently with him, the former aides said. ...

Church Leader Says He Was Lured into Abramoff Web

NPR - May 23, 2006

Buckham was viewed as one of the most powerful staff members in Congress. He was also DeLay's spiritual advisor. Geeslin himself had ordained Buckham into ..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer

DeLay Airfare Was Charged To Lobbyist's Credit Card

By R. Jeffrey Smith

Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, April 24, 2005; Page A01

The airfare to London and Scotland in 2000 for then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was charged to an American Express card issued to Jack Abramoff, a Washington lobbyist at the center of a federal criminal and tax probe, according to two sources who know Abramoff's credit card account number and to a copy of a travel invoice displaying that number.

DeLay's expenses during the same trip for food, phone calls and other items at a golf course hotel in Scotland were billed to a different credit card also used on the trip by a second registered Washington lobbyist, Edwin A. Buckham, according to receipts documenting that portion of the trip.

House ethics rules bar lawmakers from accepting travel and related expenses from registered lobbyists....

...The documents obtained by The Washington Post, including receipts for his hotel stays in Scotland and London and billings for his golfing during the trip at the famed St. Andrews course in Scotland, substantiate for the first time that some of DeLay's expenses on the trip were billed to charge cards used by the two lobbyists. The invoice for DeLay's plane fare lists the name of what was then Abramoff's lobbying firm, Preston Gates & Ellis.

Multiple sources, including DeLay's then-chief of staff Susan Hirschmann, have confirmed that DeLay's congressional office was in direct contact with Preston Gates about the trip itinerary before DeLay's departure, to work out details of his travel. These contacts raise questions about DeLay's statement that he had no way of knowing about the financial and logistical support provided by Abramoff and his firm.

Yesterday, DeLay's lawyer, Bobby R. Burchfield, said that DeLay's staff was aware that Preston Gates was trying to arrange meetings and hotels for the trip but that DeLay was unaware of the "logistics" of bill payments, and that DeLay "continues to understand his expenses" were properly paid by the nonprofit organization, the National Center for Public Policy Research.

In 2000, Abramoff was a board member of the group. In a telephone interview yesterday, Hirschmann said the contacts between DeLay's office and persons at Preston Gates occurred because Abramoff "was a board member of the sponsoring organization." Hirschmann added: "We were assured that the National Center paid for the trip." ...

... The article also reported that Abramoff submitted an expense voucher to Preston Gates seeking a reimbursement of $12,789.73 to cover expenses for meals, hotels and transportation during the London and Scotland trip incurred by DeLay; his wife, Christine; and his two aides.

The new receipts add more detail about these expenses, make clear that the total expenses for all of the participants were at least $50,000 more than was previously known, and connect Abramoff directly to the payment of some charges.

For DeLay, the 10-day trip began on May 25 with a flight to London from Dulles airport and ended on June 3 with a return trip from Europe via Newark and ending in Houston. In between, his itinerary called for stops in Edinburgh, Glasgow, and St. Andrews, in Scotland. DeLay said the purpose of the trip was to hold meetings with "Conservative leaders" in Britain and Scotland, including Margaret Thatcher. The former prime minister's office has confirmed that such a meeting occurred.

DeLay's two aides, Tony Rudy and Susan Hirschmann, had an overlapping itinerary; Rudy participated from May 29 to June 3, and Hirschmann participated from May 22 to June 2. The spouses of Rudy and Buckham also were present.

The travel receipts do not make clear how the expenses for the entire trip -- which involved at least 10 people and which two sources said exceeded $120,000 -- were paid. One source familiar with the billings said yesterday that the National Center reimbursed Abramoff for the charges incurred by DeLay and his staff that were billed to Abramoff's credit card; but the receipts themselves do not indicate whether some of the charges incurred by Abramoff were ultimately reimbursed and, if so, by whom.

The receipts make clear that flights for DeLay and his wife were initially billed to Abramoff. The plane ticket for the husband of one of DeLay's aides -- David Hirschmann -- was billed to the same American Express card used for the DeLay tickets, according to a copy of the invoice.

Although Amy Ridenour, director of the National Center for Public Policy Research, has said she organized the trip, two other sources said that DeLay's round-trip business-class tickets on Continental Airlines and British Airways were booked by Preston Gates employees.

The itinerary and invoice for DeLay's trip, prepared by a travel service in Seattle, was sent by the service to Preston Gates on May 23, 2000, according to a copy of the invoice. That was two days before DeLay's departure. The invoice states that DeLay's business-class tickets on Continental Airlines and British Airways cost $6,938.70.

The records also indicate that the expenses associated with DeLay exceeded those that he declared in a signed statement to the House clerk on June 30, 2000. That form listed the purpose of the trip as "educational" and gave a tally of $28,106 in expenses for DeLay and his wife, or an average of $2,800 a day; it stated that all of these charges were paid by the National Center for Public Policy Research, which provided the data to DeLay. ....

.... Buckham, a former chief of staff to DeLay, was at the time a registered lobbyist for AT&T, Enron Corp., and the Nuclear Energy Institute. DeLay's wife was employed, at the time of the trip, by Buckham's lobbying firm, the Alexander Strategy Group, and was receiving a salary from it, according to DeLay's personal financial disclosure statement for that year, on file with the House clerk.

Abramoff, at the time of the trip, represented eLottery Inc. , a gambling services company that opposed the Internet gambling bill pending before the House. Preston Gates registered as a lobbyist for eLottery on June 2, 2000, one day before the trip ended;...

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/03/us/at-50...s-with-gop.html

At $500 an Hour, Lobbyist's Influence Rises With G.O.P.

By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM

Published: Wednesday, April 3, 2002

In the last six months of 2001, the Coushatta Indians, a tribe with 800 members and a large casino in southwest Louisiana, paid $1.76 million to the law firm of Jack Abramoff, a Republican lobbyist here.

Last month, the Bush administration handed the tribe a big victory by blocking construction of a casino by a rival tribe that would have drained off much of the Coushattas' business...

...''I call Jack Abramoff, and I get results,'' Mr. Worfel said. ''You get everything you pay for.''

http://seattle.bizjournals.com/seattle/sto.../26/focus7.html

Friday, June 23, 2006

Preston Gates has grown in both Washingtons

...There are 242 Preston Gates attorneys in Washington; just over half of them, 124, are partners, said firm spokeswoman Piper Turner.

The firm reported $196 million in gross revenue in 2005.

Another big Preston Gates office is in Washington, D.C., where most of the firm's lobbying and public policy work is done, Turner said.

Preston Gates says it is proud of its lobbying work, even in a time when lobbying has gotten something of a bad name from accusations being made in the "other Washington." Discredited influence peddler Jack Abramoff worked for Preston Gates from 1994 through 2000.

"I think part of the reason why we have a policy practice is the approach we take to serving our clients' needs," Turner said. "We can help them in the courts; we can help them from a regulatory standpoint ... with all three branches of government. We can help them across all of those, kind of take a 360 (degree) approach."

It was this dedication to the "360-degree approach" that brought Abramoff briefly into the company. According to The Seattle Times, after the Republican party took control of Congress in 1994, firm partner Emanuel Rouvelas looked at the political makeup of the firm and found that, while the firm's representatives were half Democratic and half Republican, it did not have a conservative Republican with strong ties to the new Republican leadership. Rouvelas extended a job offer to Abramoff, a former chairman of the College Republican National Committee, who was at the time a movie producer, entertainment agent, and book agent for conservative authors.

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com...prestongates07m

Saturday, January 7, 2006 - Page updated at 12:00 AM

Can Seattle firm Preston Gates avoid lobbying-scandal fallout?

By Alicia Mundy

Seattle Times Washington bureau

.....The firm has hired outside attorneys, though senior partner O'Neil declined to name them.

Corallo also said Preston Gates should portray itself as another victim of Abramoff's schemes. "You want to claim victim status, and I think they are [victims] to some extent," he said.

Despite the potential black eye, Victoria Toensing, a former Justice Department official and now a corporate defense lawyer, doubts the firm will face criminal liability for Abramoff's dealings. "The company is not going to be indicted," she said. "The firm did what they were supposed to do — represent its clients."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/polit...ouple022798.htm

......A classic Washington power couple, diGenova, 53, and Toensing, 56, occupy a strange, symbiotic nexus between the media and the law that boosts their stock in both worlds.[/b} They are clearly players, which gives them access to juicy information, which gets them on television, which generates legal business.

"Dozens of Washington lawyers are trying to get on these shows," diGenova says. "I think it's very healthy. We can destroy myths and shoot down misunderstandings." Toensing sees televised debate as a good way of sharpening the old legal skills. "It's something that gets the body juices going," she says.

The two law partners not only talk about the Monica Lewinsky investigation -- they've been quoted or on the tube more than 300 times in the month since the story broke -- but have been drawn into the vortex....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7021601705.html

Trial in Error

If You're Going to Charge Scooter, Then What About These Guys?

By Victoria Toensing

Sunday, February 18, 2007; Page B01

Could someone please explain to me why Scooter Libby is the only person on trial in the Valerie Plame leak investigation?.....

Edited November 17, 2009 by Tom Scully