Reality Check – We accept your challenge Mr Zullo

Reality check has challenged Mr Zullo

What will Zullo do? He can chose to show how a ‘criminal investigation’ deals with information that contradicts its findings, or he can ignore it.

Either way, Zullo is faced with quite an unfortunate situation of his own creation.

It should come as no surprise that the JPEG’s quantization tables and the Comment match. Even the masking layer matches, as in both cases you need to release the mask once to be able to select all the objects, contrary to Hermitian’s claims.

Hermitian once again shows why Zullo should be looking and why he probably won’t.

jpeginfo -C lfbc-xerox-7535-hiresprintpreview-000.jpg
lfbc-xerox-7535-hiresprintpreview-000.jpg 1664 x 1280 24bit n/a   N  265202 “YCbCr

#File: lfbc-xerox-7535-hiresprintpreview-000.jpg

Quantization table
Precision=0; Table index=0 (luminance)
8  10  11  13  11   9  14  13
12  13  16  15  14  17  22  36
23  22  20  20  22  44  32  33
26  36  52  46  55  54  51  46
50  50  58  65  83  70  58  61
78  62  50  50  72  98  73  78
86  88  93  94  93  56  69 102
109 101  90 108  83  91  93  89
Estimated quality level = 47.48%

Quantization table
Precision=0; Table index=1 (chrominance)
8  10  11  13  11   9  14  13
12  13  16  15  14  17  22  36
23  22  20  20  22  44  32  33
26  36  52  46  55  54  51  46
50  50  58  65  83  70  58  61
78  62  50  50  72  98  73  78
86  88  93  94  93  56  69 102
109 101  90 108  83  91  93  89
Estimated quality level = 47.48%
Average quality: 47.48% (47%)

29 thoughts on “Reality Check – We accept your challenge Mr Zullo

  1. Be forewarned. Zullo is the only “police investigator” on the planet who will not accept anonymous “tips” and demands notarized affidavits before he’ll even look at the workflow. /snark

  2. So far I has seen little evidence of anything that amounts to a serious investigation.

    And I doubt there will be any improvements here…

  3. You are both correct of course. I thought it was worthwhile to directly contact Zullo to document that he has “exculpatory evidence” which of course he will completely ignore. I know others like John are surely feeding him stuff but this was all public and documented.

  4. NBC

    As I have pointed out many times before, these Xerox images simply don’t measure up.

    Just a few of the shortcomings are:

    1. The PDF file “lfbc-xerox-7535-hiresprint.pdf”, when opened in Adobe Illustrator CC, displays the image in Landscape orientation whereas the WH LFCOLB PDF image opens in Portrait orientation.

    2. When “Select/ALL” is executed, all objects are revealed, whereas (for the WH LFCOLB) one must first apply “Object/Clipping Mask/Release” twice before Select/ALL reveals the objects.

    3. When the file “lfbc-xerox-7535-hiresprintpreview.pdf” is opened in Adobe Illustrator CC it opens in Portrait mode whereas the file “lfbc-xerox-7535-hiresprint.pdf” opens in Landscape mode.

    4. The command “Object/Clipping Mask/Release” must be applied before Select/All can reveal all objects whereas for the WH LFCOLB the command “Object/Clipping Mask/Release must be applied twice before “Select/All reveals the objects.

    And that’s just the way it is.

    So why would Zullo even bother ?

  5. Hermitian is still confused about the effect of preview on the orientation of the PDFs.
    Illustrator does not properly handle Xerox created pdfs but once preview has ‘touched’ the file, it works just like the WH LFBC pdf.

    This has been explained to him many times now… Still a bit slow here.
    As to the clipping mask, it is exactly the same…

    Not to mention that the embedded JPEG comment, the alignments, the rotations, the scaling the quantization matrices all line up.

    Hermitian prefers to ignore this… But data does not disappear just because he refuses to acknowledge it.

    Zullo need not bother… The whole ‘investigation’ is mostly a non issue anyway. But a real investigation would at least look at the data seriously.
    But that may result in them having to admit that they were wrong…

  6. NBC

    I have pointed out many times that the layer structure of the Xerox / Preview PDF is different from the layer structure of the WH LFCOLB.

    Proof of that is as follows (repeated from my last post)

    4. The command “Object/Clipping Mask/Release” must be applied before Select/All can reveal all objects whereas for the WH LFCOLB the command “Object/Clipping Mask/Release must be applied twice before “Select/All reveals the objects.

    Come back when you have fixed this deficiency in your glorious workflow !

  7. Hermie – watch the first several; minutes of this video.

    It shows the WH LFBC was scanned in landscape mode.

  8. Hermie – “2. When “Select/ALL” is executed, all objects are revealed, whereas (for the WH LFCOLB) one must first apply “Object/Clipping Mask/Release” twice before Select/ALL reveals the objects.”

    What’s he talking about? Both files (WH LFCOLB and lfbc-xerox-7535-hiresprint.pdf) act exactly the same in Illustrator CS2. Select all reveals the objects in both PDFs.

  9. 1. The PDF file “lfbc-xerox-7535-hiresprint.pdf”, when opened in Adobe Illustrator CC, displays the image in Landscape orientation whereas the WH LFCOLB PDF image opens in Portrait orientation.

    3. When the file “lfbc-xerox-7535-hiresprintpreview.pdf” is opened in Adobe Illustrator CC it opens in Portrait mode whereas the file “lfbc-xerox-7535-hiresprint.pdf” opens in Landscape mode.

    What’s the LD50 for stupidity? Hermie must be approaching it rapidly.

  10. WKV wrote:

    What’s the LD50 for stupidity? Hermie must be approaching it rapidly.

    Hermitian is what passes for a Birther expert too. The ones like Vogt and Irey are even dumber.

  11. Come back when you have fixed this deficiency in your glorious workflow !

    This would be hilarious were it not so pathetic… Come on my friend, do the experiment and you too will find out that the WH LFCOLB also requites Mask/release once.

    You are getting incredibly sloppy here my friend… This should have taken you a minute to verify and you failed to do so…

    Shame on you… This is just incredibly sloppy…

  12. What’s he talking about? Both files (WH LFCOLB and lfbc-xerox-7535-hiresprint.pdf) act exactly the same in Illustrator CS2. Select all reveals the objects in both PDFs.

    Hermitian is now creating facts of his own… Sloppy or just poor research… Regardless, this is what Hermitian’s objections have been reduced to…

    Nothing relevant…

  13. In all my years in vector graphics, never have I heard of selecting objects referred to a “revealing” them LOL

    Someone sneak up behind Herms and tap Ctrl + Y on his keyboard. It will blow his mind😛

  14. Herms has nothing to say regarding the nature of Zullo’s “challenge” and responses to it? This place needs another birther or two. They are in such short supply these days.

  15. 4. The command “Object/Clipping Mask/Release” must be applied before Select/All can reveal all objects whereas for the WH LFCOLB the command “Object/Clipping Mask/Release must be applied twice before “Select/All reveals the objects.

    Come back when you have fixed this deficiency in your glorious workflow !

    Step 1. Download a fresh copy of the WH LFBC.

    Step 2. Check the METADATA to verify that the file downloaded properly.

    Step 3. Observe that the command “Object/Clipping Mask/Release” only needs to be applied once before Select/All can reveal all objects.

    Step 4. Laugh at Hermie’s terminal stupidity.

  16. I will have new documents for NBC very soon. I did Workstation 7535 scans of a printout of the AP JPEG printed on green security paper. The paper is not ideal. It is lighter green than the paper apparently used for the LFBC. However the results look very good. Just to tease you a bit here is what I saw in a very quick look at them: 90 degree rotation in Illustrator, green background with “holes” and the form, letters touching the form lines were pulled into the background, halos, perfect separation of the signature and date stamps, and a white border added by the Edge Erase on the Xerox. That is with one push of a button.

    Also, I have scans on a WorkCentre 7435 for the first time. I haven’t even had time to open them yet. I scanned right side up and upside down on both machines.

    Some better security paper is in the works for later experiments. It was a bad day for the CCP.😉

  17. I may have to check the copyshops around to see if they have any WorkCentres. One of the things we haven’t really done anything with is the embossed seal. As a licensed Professional Engineer, I have my own embossing stamp. Also, Zullo wouldn’t be able to hide behind my anonymity like he has with you guys, since I’m not posting under a pseudonym.

  18. It’s an even worse day for Hermitian. Unable to defend his claims about the WH LFBC requiring two mask releases, he has now embarked on another foolish path involving the “two pdfs”.

    While one has a single pdf extension, the other has a double one, that’s the only difference.

    Poor Hermitian, continuing down into total irrelevancy.

    He is free to explain himself about the WH LFBC and apologize for his mistakes or even present more nonsense but I am not going down another rabbit hole with him just because he cannot properly preserve data.

  19. You guys showed Hermie that his theory about Scott Tepper and Sam Begley submitting a new forgery of the LFBC was nonsense and that a normal workflow explained the PDF submitted to the court. Is Hermitian now guilty of perjury if he does not submit a corrected affidavit?

  20. Is Hermitian now guilty of perjury if he does not submit a corrected affidavit?

    No. I just re-read his affidavit, and very little there could rise to the level of perjury. Advancing a flawed theory does not constitute perjury – perjury requires making false statements of fact. About the closest Blake comes to perjury is falsely claiming that an image is in greyscale when it is actually in color (I think this is just a typo – by context he seems to be referring to a part of an image, not the image as a whole) and claiming that the metadata shows that a document may have been scanned on a “Fugitsu S1500 flatbed scanner” (it’s Fujitsu, and that model is actually a top-fed scanner, not available as a flatbed).

    However, our findings would go a long way towards impeaching his expert testimony, should his affidavit ever be accepted by the court. Which it won’t, so there’s no chance of perjury. On the other hand, based on his activities on this blog, he would very likely end up committing perjury should he ever be called upon to testify. Assuming he survived voir dire.

  21. I am just yanking Hermie’s chain of course. His affidavit is a worthless piece of nothing. It had nothing to do with the case before the court. I just love how Birthers like Hermie put their names on wild speculation and crappy investigative work and pretend because it is in an affidavit it is suppose to carry some significance.

  22. No embedded YCbCr and quantization matrix does not match.
    Using Distiller suggests to me that it was not emailed but rather imported directly into Distiller via USB. Will look at it some more.

  23. “imported directly into Distiller via USB”

    Most Copy stores that use the Xerox also don’t do the scan to e-mail but use the scan to USB. Would that make a difference?

Comments are closed.