In Federal Court, the 1000-series rules govern video evidence. For example, Rule 1001 contains Definitions.
RULE 1001. DEFINITIONS THAT APPLY TO THIS ARTICLE
In this article:
(a) A “writing” consists of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent set down in any form.
(b) A “recording” consists of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent recorded in any manner.
(c) A “photograph” means a photographic image or its equivalent stored in any form.
(d) An “original” of a writing or recording means the writing or recording itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by the person who executed or issued it. For electronically stored information, “original” means any printout — or other output readable by sight — if it accurately reflects the information. An “original” of a photograph includes the negative or a print from it.
The key here is “If it accurately reflects the information”
That is the issue. Based on other corroborating evidence, we do not believe that the video on 911 accurately reflected reality. We think that the video on 911 constitutes an intentional type of “Cognitive Illusion” called a “Fictional Illusion”.
In fact, we believe that there was broad use of CGI imagery. We also believe that video compositing overlaid fake video inserted over a CGI background.
Courts generally allow video evidence. In order to challenge the admission of video evidence under current rules, it would be necessary to examine the video for “evidence of tampering”. In that case, you could have that video excluded.
This is an area where the Rules of Evidence have not kept pace with advancing technology. It is possible to create a digital scene that does not show “evidence of tampering”.
Why would the perps choose to present background CGI imagery with composited fake planes? “To fool the mind – combine at least two tricks”. Because the technique of “combining at least 2 tricks” is commonly used by professional illusionists to further confound an audience – methods used by professional illusionists, information warriors.
Some commenters asked “without the video evidence – what else is there”? Well, the “video evidence” on 911 constitutes “Testimony” by sources unknown who cannot be cross-examined – and that we are all supposed to take as “credible” and unimpeachable. This was the intention of the perps.
Once you exclude the fake video from consideration, you remove the Cognitive Illusion influence that it was designed to induce. Then, you focus on other available evidence – such as information, testimony (only of witnesses you can cross-examine), physical evidence, and other types of direct and circumstantial evidence.
There are well-established procedures for getting to the truth in matters such as these. We mentioned a few, such as, Structured Methods of Intelligence Analysis.
Will this provide “all the answers”? No. But it will ensure you aren’t being tricked. If you want more answers, start arresting people and questioning them.