Replies

Butterdezillion,

The sequence I posted here can be saved and clicked thru to animate it.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3428362/posts?page=330#330

It shows a person with long black pants and a black shoe standing near Rosa Key, and the hand is reaching, curling the fingers in as to grasp, and extending.

It comes —into— the field of view, from upper right, while the field of view is not moving/turning too much, and goes across, forward toward the camera lens, rotates about the long axis of the wrist —without the camera rotating— and then backs off.

The hand is also shown in rx’s post here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3428362/posts?page=258#258

Which corresponds to pic —#20 & 21— in my sequence.

The legs also move toward the center of the field of view.

The cabin scene posted by Rx and where the passengers are id’ed, shows Yamamoto with long dark pants:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3428362/posts?page=117#117

Therefore the hand belongs to Yamamoto.

A mannikin cannot flex, curl, make grasping motion, reach out, rotate about the long axis of the wrist, or back up.

The sequence of posts I did show the context of the single image in post #258.

Again, not a mannikin, but Yamamoto’s hand.

Vexatious Litigation

A legal action or proceeding initiated maliciously and without Probable Cause by an individual who is not acting in Good Faith for the purpose of annoying or embarrassing an opponent.

The U.S. legal system permits persons to file civil lawsuits to seek redress for injuries committed by a defendant. However, a legal action that is not likely to lead to any practical result is classified as vexatious litigation. Such litigation is regarded as frivolous and will result in the dismissal of the action by the court. A person who has been subjected to vexatious litigation may sue the plaintiff for Malicious Prosecution, seeking damages for any costs and injuries associated with the original lawsuit.

Litigation is typically classified as vexatious when an attorney or a pro se litigant (a person representing himself without an attorney) repeatedly files groundless lawsuits and repeatedly loses. Under the Common Law, the frequent incitement of lawsuits by an attorney constituted the crime of Barratry. In modern law, however, barratry is viewed as an archaic crime and is rarely enforced. Attorneys who encourage vexatious litigation are subject to discipline for violating rules of professional conduct and may be suspended from the Practice of Law or disbarred.

Sometimes pro se litigants who have lost their initial lawsuits file new actions based on the dispute contained in the original suit. Because the judgment of the original case is dispositive, a court will ultimately dismiss these new actions. To avoid the expenditure of court resources, as well as the costs associated with the defendant’s defense of repeated frivolous claims, a court may issue an order forbidding the pro se litigant to file any new actions without permission of the court.

Vexatious litigation is a type of malicious prosecution that enables the defendant to file a tort action against the plaintiff. A plaintiff in a malicious prosecution must prove that a legal proceeding (or multiple proceedings) was instituted by the defendant, that the original proceeding was terminated in favor of the plaintiff, that there was no probable cause for the original proceeding, and that malice, or a primary purpose other than that of bringing the original action, motivated the defendant. A plaintiff in such an action may recover, for example, the expenses incurred in defending the original suit or suits, as well as resulting financial loss or injury. A plaintiff may also recover damages for mental suffering of a kind that would normally be expected to follow from the original action.

You can download the higher resolution video here:

https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdmss/search/hitlist.cfm?docketID=58552&CurrentPage=2&EndRow=25&StartRow=16&order=1&sort=0&TXTSEARCHT=

If that link doesn’t work go here:

https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdmss/

click search

enter WPR14FA068 in the NTSB Accident ID field. The two Puente’s videos are on the second page.

Some screen shots

Image 1

Notice what is missing in Image 1? The head of the "manikin" is not visible over the top of the headrest.

Image 2

Notice what is missing in Image 2? Jake's head is missing and the edge of "manikin" head is beginning to show where the headrest meets the top of the screen.

Image 3

Jake's head is still missing but the top of the "manikin" head is clearly visible over the top of the headrest. Remember in Image 1 the "manikin" head was not visible over the top of the head rest.

Image 4

Image 5

In image 4 & 5 the head of "manikin" is more visible. Bright sunlight completely washes out the color in the headrest edge. Jake's pony tail could be hidden by the seat back.