New Development in Booth Case Coming Soon

[L Verge]

(04-18-2019 04:38 PM)Houmes Wrote:  

(04-18-2019 05:24 AM)Gene C Wrote:  A short promo of the show, about 1 minute long.
I did notice from watching one previous episode of this show, the host always has his hat on, like he's trying to be a modern day Indiana Jones.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_eCN4jpRxo

From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

"Facial Characters can be like a fingerprint, but much depends on the "the quality of the photos..." That's a huge factor, the best samples are taken in a controlled environment. You're not going to get 90 percent accuracy if you have a photo of questionable of printing."

" George's photo was nearly a perfect match with Boot's, within the top 1 perfect of those barely similar facial features, said researchers who worked with the creator of the New York Police Department's first
dedicated facial-recognition unit. What's more, he was within one pixel
of having the same eye structure."

Those two paragraphs above have several flaws.

1) The image John Wilkes Booth used, and no image has to my knowledge photographed ever sitting facing forward.
2)The most allowable difference for a photo match would normally be about 0.5% (that's half a percent).
3)The image of David E. George is mutilated to the point that is doubtful and (like Booth) is tilted back.
4)Booth's eyebrows are horizontal with lateral eyebrows (frontozygomatic) drooping. George's don't.
5)Ears cannot be measure tilted back. Ears equal finger prints.
6)Booth's face has a chin furrow, George doesn't.
7)Angle of the lower jaw. Booth has a rounded jaw, George has a square jaw.
8)Booth has lower eyelids at the lowest midpoint.
9)David E. George has false eyes, when you see a photo of him in the
chair (embalmed any number of times) with a newspaper. Rather macabre.
10)Undertaker W.B. Penniman: "I never was able to see any striking resemblance between the body and the tin type...Finis Bates is the only man who ever tried to convince me as the real identity of this bird."

It is so good to have your comments, Blaine, because you have been in the fight to disprove this myth as long or longer than I. More importantly, you have the broad experience of years in the medical field as well as a coroner to back up your statements.

One question - what is the history of glass (fake) eyes? Were they around in 1903?