Video footage fake: Media expert Siri Hewa picks up holes in UN Rapporteur’s findings

On 25 August 2009, Channel 4, one of the Television stations in the United Kingdom came out alleging that, “just three months after the Sri Lankan government declared the country liberated from the Tamil Tigers, video footage has emerged apparently showing government troops summarily executing Tamils.”

Channel 4 revealed that “Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka”, which obtained the material, said it was filmed in January 2009 - when the international media were prevented by the Sri Lankan government from covering in the conflict zone.
On August 31, it was Asian Tribune that came out with truth about the alleged video footage and said that it was a fake one and there is no truth in that video footage.

The video clipping analyzed by the UN is a cooked up one and not the same that was shown in the Channel 4. This is the most important factor that has to be taken into consideration said Siri Hewawitharana, Director IPTV and Media- CTO Office Sydney Area, Australia Broadcast Media.

He was one of the technical experts subsequently contacted by the Sri Lanka Government to analyze and report on the authenticity of the Video clippings aired by the Channel 4.

Siri Hewa, the former head of Cisco’s global broadcast and digital video practice, at present an Executive Director at IPTV System, who currently serves as the chief architect of Optus’ Network Systems Design Broadcast and Satellite TV operation, has uncovered evidence of doctoring in the original footage telecast by the Channel 4. It shows the extent to which the bosses of Channel 4 go in combining malice and ignorance in equal measure.

As the matter died down, suddenly on January 7, the issue has been reopened by a United Nations human rights expert, at press conference held at the UN Headquarters, called for an independent investigation into war crimes and other grave violations of human rights law in Sri Lanka, based on an examination he commissioned to determine the authenticity of a video footage that apparently depicts the shooting of naked, bound prisoners said to have occurred in Sri Lanka.

Philip Alston, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said that the cell-phone video, which was purportedly shot sometime early last year before the Sri Lankan Government declared victory over rebel Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) after years of fighting, had been submitted to three highly-qualified technical experts.

In the press conference Philip Alston pointed out that in September 2009, he recalled, he had called for an independent probe into the authenticity of the video, stating that the four separate investigations carried out by the Government after the airing of the video on Channel 4 in the United Kingdom in late August, had not been impartial and that the evidence presented by the Government was “impressionistic rather than scientific”.

At that time, however, the United Nations Human Rights Council, to which he reports, called on him to withdraw his call for an investigation and apologize to the Government. He then decided to commission expert opinions, identifying three individuals who he said were clearly highly qualified and were totally removed from the conflict.

Those experts were Jeff Spivak, a forensic media analyst, Daniel Spitz, a forensics pathology examiner, and Peter Diaczuk, a forensic firearms expert. Their technical reports are appended to a “Technical Note” that Mr. Alston presented at the press conference.

Subsequently, Asian Tribune contacted Siri Hewa and asked for his comments on the Technical Note prepared by the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Mr. Philip Alston, in relation to the authenticity of the “Channel 4 videotape”

Here is what Philip Alston, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions said at the press meet and fitting comments by Siri Hewawitharana, Director IPTV and Media- CTO Office Sydney Area, Australia Broadcast Media.

Over view

On 25 August 2009, a United Kingdom television station released video footage which appears to show the summary execution of Tamils by Sri Lankan soldiers. A group named Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka claimed that the killings had been filmed in January 2009 by a Sri Lankan soldier with a mobile phone. This was at a time when the international media did not have access to the conflict zone.

Siri Hewa: How do you identify these as Sri Lankan soldiers? These are not in Sri Lankan Army uniforms?

How do you know this is taken in Sri Lanka? If it is SL, then where is it taken?

Philip Alston, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions said in the Press Conference on 07 January 2010: Since the video’s release, the Government of Sri Lanka has claimed that the video is a fake.

Over the past four months, I have been engaged in a series of communications with the Government about this video, in which I requested it to conduct an independent investigation. While the Government initially refused to do so, on 7 September 2009, it issued a response stating that it had commissioned four separate investigations, and that they “have now scientifically established beyond any doubt that this video is a fake”.

At the time, I expressed concern about the objectivity of the investigations, in part because two of the “independent experts” worked for the Sri Lankan armed forces. Some of the reports seemed more impressionistic than scientific, and I have never been provided the full version of the reports.

Siri Hewa: It can be said UN experts view as expressionist as well since almost 90% of the review based on subjective analysis and in video evidence to be authenticated UN need to take hard technical data and should NOT take views based on subjective analysis since this can be argued from both side.

Philip Alston said - I decided that it was incumbent upon me to commission independent and impartial evaluations of the videotape. I retained three experts: in forensic pathology (Dr Spitz), forensic video analysis (Mr Spivack), and firearm evidence (Mr Diaczuk). Together, the reports by these experts strongly suggest that the video is authentic.

1. Mr Diaczuk concluded that the recoil, movement of the weapon and the shooter, and the gases expelled from the muzzle in both apparent shootings were consistent with firing live ammunition, and not with shooting blank cartridges.

2. Dr Spitz found that the footage appeared authentic, especially with respect to the two individuals who are shown being shot in the head at close range. He found that the body reaction, movement, and blood evidence was entirely consistent with what would be expected in such shootings.

3. Mr Spivack’s forensic video analysis found no evidence of breaks in continuity in the video, no additional video layers, and no evidence of image manipulation.

Siri Hewa: Most Important Factor is, Video that analyzed by UN got different video and audio characteristic of the original Ch 4 video and the video I got that came from a US defense source….

Meaning - someone cooked the video again after my publication of my technical report to show that video is from mobile source… Doing so the wrapper they use to create mobile format gave away the whole forgery since metadata layer from original video is there and also it created 15 frames anomaly which UN experts cannot verify. Worst part is that the UN specialists are dishonest when they say we have 15 frames of video we cannot identify BUT video is authentic… This goes to the heart of the credibility, not only the UN, but also the people they hired.

In video ONE frame anomaly is enough to identify an edit point which can be used to manipulate the video… They find 15 frames and still say video is real… Are they stupid or are they blind?

For a supposed to be a lawyer, Mr. Alston is a disgrace to the profession and the humanity.

I am afraid Mr Spivack does not understand basic video technology since ‘No Expert’ can verify if any video got previous layers or not after all the layers are edited and put into the final edit.

Chroma Key functions are so advanced at final edit, and if final edit is analyzed it can be verified on ONLY video framing and audio framing continuity and such relationship if it is done on CCIR 601 format… And today this is the highest SD video standard, which is not compressed, and once 601 video is compressed then it will create greater uncertainty since lots of video data are discarded. I use 601 as a reference since Professionals use this and all the movie and Broadcasters use this today and unfortunately Mr Spivack’s does not seem to have experience in this side of technology since this is how we create fantasies into realities using chroma key.

Today most of the home computers can do this if you know how to use the video editing software. Movies are created using Chroma key (or Blue screen- laymen terms) and this is how different scenes with different people are created with different video shoot in different locations and finally edited to show final video as real.

Once final edit are all done in Chroma key domain , No Expert in the world can say how the layers are done or if there are any layers at all.. Of course people do understand reality and Mr Alston should have seen Star Wars and Dr Who’s Time travel and hope he does not believe those videos are real as well… Bottom line is they All Look Real… But are They ?

Philip Alston, further said at that press Conference that , Moreover, the independent experts’ analyses also systematically rebutted most of the arguments relied upon by Sri Lanka’s experts in support of their contention that the video was faked.

For example:

(a) A Sri Lankan expert stated that there was no recoil or movement of the weapon discharged. However, Mr Spivack and Mr Diaczuk described the recoil visible on the video, and the way in which the movement was consistent with firing live ammunition.

(b) A Sri Lankan expert stated that the lack of audio synchronization with the video indicated manipulation. However, Mr Spivack stated that the video/audio synchronization in the video was well within acceptable limits, and that audio can be ahead or behind video, subject to various variables.

Siri Hewa: To say it is within acceptable limits is misleading and dishonest since editing also create the same anomaly and if it is original video, then audio should not be few frames late to video and this indicate video is heavily manipulated since audio is never late for basic video and it should be in sync with video or early to video…

Those are basic editing and conversion facts if you know your basic editing and behavior of video and audio edit and conversion.

Philip Alston: A Sri Lankan expert stated that the movement of the second victim after being shot was not consistent with the normal expected reaction. However, Mr Spitz stated that the movement was entirely consistent with the manner in which the individual was apparently shot.

(d) A Sri Lankan expert stated that while wind could be heard on the audio, it was not evident in the video. Mr. Spivack however described multiple places in the video where there is clear evidence of wind.

(e) Sri Lanka’s experts argued that the footage was likely recorded on a digital camcorder, and not a mobile phone. Mr Spivack concluded that the metadata he retrieved from the video was entirely consistent with multimedia files produced by mobile phones with video recording capability, and that it would have been very difficult to alter the metadata.

Siri Hewa: I am afraid video should not compared with a multimedia file since video analysis should be done on real time broadcast domain, and not using cheap software.

To say metadata cannot be altered indicate how amateurish these experts are, since we do alter metadata all the time in the broadcast domain.. This will create credibility issues to the UN… May be UN should hire me next time since I will offer free services since I teach this subjects free of charge.

Philip Alston, said in sum, while there are some unexplained elements in the video, there are strong indications of its authenticity. In addition, most of the arguments relied upon by the Government of Sri Lanka to impugn the video have been shown to be flawed.

Siri Hewa: Is this doubletalk here? Or is this double negative? UN credibility here is in serious trouble.

Philip Alston said - In light of these conclusions, and of the persistent flow of other allegations concerning alleged extrajudicial executions committed by both sides during the closing phases of the war against the LTTE, I call for an independent inquiry to be established to carry out an impartial investigation into war crimes and other grave violations of international humanitarian and human rights law allegedly committed in Sri Lanka.

Siri Hewa: Where is the proof that video is created in SL or these are SL soldiers?

Siri Hewawitharana is no ordinary person; he is one of the top technologists. He has worked in top end of the Video broadcast and Cinema technology and expert in video Reaserch & Development in Analog , Digital and compressed domain and he was the head of the R&D that created the world first Cinema to video converter in London in late 80’s which won the 2nd Emmy award to his company. His knowledge of video editing or manipulation is very high.

Probably his full profile will be of interest to the readers. Hence his profile link is here:

http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=16119632&trk=tab_pro

- Asian Tribune –