Why people think this photo of JFK's killer is fakeFeb 20, 2022
United States President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963. Within hours of his death, a gun was found in a nearby building and police arrested accused murderer Lee Harvey Oswald. Oswald denied it. I didn't shoot anyone. He said someone had done it. set him up, but when the Dallas police searched his belongings, they found these two
photos of Oswald posing in his backyard holding the gun that killed the president. The
photos definitively linked Oswald to the murder weapon and sealed the case against him in the minds of investigators. but when Oswald was shown the photos, he insisted they were
fakes and that his head had been superimposed on someone else's body.
The next day, Oswald was shot and killed while in police custody, sparking rumors that the US government was covering up the true story of the murder and who else might be involved and
thisphoto that has been examined , since deconstructed and rebuilt is the center of everything after Kenn Government investigators of Edy's assassination spent 10 months compiling evidence and concluded that only Oswald killed the president, an explanation the public has doubted since conspiracy theorists argue that a powerful entity such as the KGB CIA Mafia or Kennedy's successor to the presidency had to be involved in such a high-profile assassination and if these photos are false, it suggests that a far-reaching conspiracy framed Oswald for a crime he said that he did not commit or at least did not commit on his own
thisis the most notorious of the backyard photos that appeared on the cover of Life magazine in February 1964 and circulating in newspapers around the world,
peoplequickly noticed something strange: the rifle on the cover of Life had a telescopic site and in other news outlets the scope was missing, the news outlets explained that they had touched up the photo before printing and inadvertently altered the appearance of the rifle, but the controversy convinced
peoplearound the world that the photo was
fake, and indeed if it was fake. now it's fake who faked not why they faked it and opens up this whole can of worms this guy knows a lot about photo fakes my name is Hani Farid I'm a professor here at UC Berkeley specializing in digital image forensics I work at criminal cases in civil cases where the authenticity of an image or video has been questioned to read is also the latest in a long line of experts who have used science to try to find out if the photo of Lee Harvey Oswald is real, oh, that's amazing you have the original oh that's beautiful so what's the deal with this photo?
Okay, first of all, I guess I can keep this. There are four things that people consistently point to in the photo as alleged evidence and tampering. First of all, people have argued that the lighting and shadows in the photo are physically impossible, particularly if you look at the ground, there is a long shadow to her right, but if you look at her face, the shadow of hello The nose appears to be falling straight down so people were like oh his head was spliced into a photo of someone else holding the gun and the lighting was wrong that was number one number two is if you look at Oswald in the photo , he has this. quite bulky chin, it's quite wide, but if you look at his mugshots and other photos of him, he seems to have this very sharp chin, so it adds to the evidence, if you want to call it, that this isn't really his face that the the chin appears to be too wide inconsistent shadows and a wide chin are the most commonly cited signs of alleged manipulation this theory even found its way into this scene in Oliver Stone's 1991 film JFK starring Gary Oldman as Oswald I never saw this image which is my best, but my face has been superimposed.
Look at the way the shadows on the nose fall in a straight line like it's noon. A shadow down here on the ground reads more like late afternoon or early morning. Number three is that in the photo it looks like the weapon. to be shorter than the actual gun that was used to kill the president and then number four was his posture looks weird he looks like he's leaning back and he should be unsteady holding that gun like this when you look at the photo yeah at first sight something looks a little strange there and that is what has been present in this photo for a long time in the 1960s and 1970s forensic experts tried almost everything to prove the authenticity of this photo they examined it in several exhibitions to verify if there were signs of tampering found no photographs of the rifle that killed Kennedy at various distances and angles to compare to the weapon in the backyard photo the dimensions matched the side-by-side analysis of the mugshot of Oswald confirmed it was him they also took photos with the seized weapon from Oswald's camera to verify if the unique artifacts specific to the negatives produced by that camera in this case, these 11 Scratch marks would appear on other photos they took, ie backyard p The photos were taken with Oswald's camera.
The researchers even recreated the photo multiple times to see if the shadow angles were possible in a single image, most successfully in this one taken exactly four years after the original at the same time in Oswald's old backyard. The shadows matched directly. down on the face and at an angle for the body, they can include again and again that the backyard photos were taken with Oswald's camera and there were no signs of forgery, but even they presented the facts, the controversy surrounding the photo persisted and i
thinkthat is turned into conspiracies anything that is inconsistent with your core belief is simply evidence that that person is part of the conspiracy to withhold information from you.
Watch this fake mail-order video made by famed conspiracy theorist and amateur photographer Jack D. White, who was obsessed with debunking the authenticity of this photo. Let me show you the results of my photo analysis and see if you too can spot it. The graphic blenders that prove a powerful conspiracy resulted in the death of President Kennedy. This guy was quoted in the national media as an expert and in a 1978 BBC TV documentary a real forensic expert was confident that one can only conclude that Oswald's head has been jammed. On a chin, the flaw in these approaches is that people tend to overestimate their ability to determine the physics of the real world from a single two-dimensional image and it turns out that we're really, really bad when it comes to certain things like Shadows as Reflections and mirrored surfaces, but if you
thinkabout it, it shouldn't surprise you that this here, the visual system didn't evolve over millions and millions of years to reason on a flat sheet of paper, so Farid and his team reconstructed the scene using 3D models. software to rule out the four problems in the photo the shadows the shape of the chin the length of the weapon and the stance this is how they built it so we know a thing or two about Oswald we know how tall he was and what his weight was at the time when he was arrested, so what you're looking at here is a three-dimensional model that's been scaled to his height in real-world units, they added Oswald's known weight. to the model and posed him to match the pose in the photo, adding the weight of the weapons he is holding to test his balance.
Oswald's mugshot provided a reference for the narrow chin and the shape of the nose. Finally, they illuminated the scene with a single moving light source. Flip around until the Shadows look right. You can see how closely the 3D model matches the original photo in this overlay means we have a 3D model of Oswald and the Sun and the ground plane that is consistent with what was happening. in that physical scene in 1963. Now they could examine the shadows. He has this long shadow from his nose. He's got this long shadow cast to his right and those are consistent with a single light source, so it just turns out that shadows sometimes look weird, so what happens to that very sharp chin is that it suddenly turns very fat well why isn't it actually the shape of his chin it's just a shadow so number two oswald's chin is consistent with what you see in the photo the weapon whose measurement we know is perfectly consistent with the there's nothing wrong with the photo it's exactly the right size and lastly the physics of the pose you're stable on your feet when that center of mass is projected directly towards the ground it's surrounded by your feet we have a 3d model of oswald we know where it is his mass, we project him down and what you see here is that he's inside the speed limit area, which means the pose with the gun and the weird recoil. the leaning he is doing is perfectly physically plausible, some people may never pass up this photo, but ultimately the simplest explanation is usually the strongest.
I think you have to start asking how complicated you are. r explanation of what happened it is plausible that in 1963 someone doctored a photo to make it completely consistent in a way that an analysis 50 years later cannot find evidence of manipulation I don't find that to be a convincing argument, so when you start to rule out that any artifact in the image anything in the image that I think is evidence of tampering that we can start to explain now at some point he comes to the end and says ok the only plausible explanation left is that the image is authentic and now you have to move on I talked to another scientist, Pawan Sinha, about light and shadows.
He is a professor of visual neuroscience at MIT and described a study that he and his colleagues designed to test how bad humans are at recognizing inconsistent lighting in images shown to subjects. several pairs of real world scenes, one digitally altered to introduce lighting inconsistencies, the other unaltered, were instructed to spot the original, the test went like this two seconds for the first image, a gray screen, then two seconds for the second image, people chose the correct image only 50 times, increasing the view time to 5 seconds, increasing that rate to 70, but the study concluded that humans simply don't naturally recognize lighting and consistencies in images, there are a link to the article in the description of this video, plus Honey Farieed's full study of the Oswald photo along with everything you need to read about the investigations of this photo over the years.
If you have any copyright issue, please Contact