If butter were to present, for example, that image of Fuddy which I have now posted several times, (and regardless of what various impressions we might have) enter a caption beneath the image:
Is this a photograph of a dolphin with a speargun?
We could respond with a simple YES or NO.
But what we see is a series of stills from a less than perfectly clear video, and a question:
WHAT DO YOU SEE?
So some are going to see nothing but a blur, some are going to see the Madonna, some will see something sinister, and they are all going to argue with each other.
The method isn’t going to achieve anything, imo. So change the method.
Maybe CAN YOU SEE WHAT I SEE would work better. But to do that, butter, you have to be prepared tell us what YOU THINK YOU SEE.
Hard to argue with what you say Fred.
Absent an expert in the field of tearing apart video and putting it back together I’m still of mind of interviewing those on the scene. I don’t see any other means of getting to what happened when, where and why.