48 – A Change of Narrative and a Reshoot?

Fig.  260 – a still from Sky News aerial footage taken at 16:12.

Fig. 260 – a still from Sky News aerial footage taken at 16:12.

<< Previous - Next >>

By 4:12pm on the early evening of 22nd May 2013, Sky News had a helicopter in the air of Woolwich taking aerial shots of the scene. The BBC had the same coverage by 4:42pm. By then a blue and white tent had been constructed at the bottom of Artillery Place, and carried up the road to be placed over Rigby’s body. Plastic sheets had been laid and taped over the evidence scattered at the bottom of the road.

Fig.  261 – a still from BBC News aerial footage taken at 16:51 – the author has another one time stamped with the slightly earlier time of 16:42.

Fig. 261 – a still from BBC News aerial footage taken at 16:51 – the author has another one time stamped with the slightly earlier time of 16:42.

The little blue and white tent was tied down with three guy ropes (or even police tape as a substitute) and attached to a bollard in the barracks’ access road to the south, a bollard on the corner with Rectory Place to the north, and also to the white lorry. In fact, some other footage released by the Telegraph caught this tent being put in place. Rigby, at this time, is covered in a red blanket, as he was in the image featured in Fig.169. We know by the sequence of events suggested by these images, then, that the plain-clothed policeman known as Cream-Hoodie was on the crime scene (wearing surgical gloves) before the tent was set up. We also know from comparing other shots from before Cream-Hoodie’s visit that in the images of the crime scene with the tent set up, the “bumper-clock” has been moved so that it points to a 3-o-clock position.

Fig.  262 – the moment that Rigby’s body is covered by the tent. The “bumper-clock” has been moved to the 3-o-clock position. Who by?

Fig. 262 – the moment that Rigby’s body is covered by the tent. The “bumper-clock” has been moved to the 3-o-clock position. Who by?

This is not the only irregularity that we can notice with the crime scene from aerial shots after the event. Certain footage shows forensics lab people on the scene in hazmat suits. The shadows that fall across the road in some of these images tells us that it is late in the evening – about 8pm to be exact; we can discover this by analysing the angles cast by street furniture with the kerb-line in software that allows us to discover the position of the sun in the sky at any point in history. In these images the “bumper clock” has moved again – but, not just spun to face in another direction. It has actually been flipped over onto its other side, and placed further down road. Moreover, the blue and white tent has been unattached from its anchors, and is being repositioned, or held down by a group of three uniformed policemen.

Fig.  263 – the tent is unattached, and the “bumper clock” has been moved a long way from its starting position.

Fig. 263 – the tent is unattached, and the “bumper clock” has been moved a long way from its starting position.

Fig.  264  - compare with Fig. 262; this is from between 4pm and 5pm.

Fig. 264 – compare with Fig. 263; this is from between 4pm and 5pm.

Fig.  265  – this is from about the same time as the moment caught in Fig. 263. The shadows tell us that it is late – about 8pm.

Fig. 265 – this is from about the same time as the moment caught in Fig. 263. The shadows tell us that it is late – about 8pm. This is what the banner says too.

What could be going on here? Why have pieces of debris from the car been moved around since the end of the incident, and why was the tent adjusted between 4/5pm and 8pm?

There could very well be a clue as to what had happened in the form of an peripheral event that was mentioned on the Telegraph live update at 5:46pm.

17.46 Elliston House, a 21-storey block of flats near the scene, is being evacuated to allow police to perform a controlled explosion on a blue car parked in front of it.

‘Soldier beheaded’ in Woolwich machete attack: as it happened[1]; Daily Telegraph Reporters; 22nd May 2013

Fig.  266 – the angle of the shadow cast by the sun is about 55 degrees to the kerb.

Fig. 266 – the angle of the shadow cast by the sun is about 55 degrees to the kerb.

The author is not an expert, but he is certainly hard pressed to understand where the explosion had happened to the Tigra in images taken much later in the evening – for surely that is the vehicle being referred to in the article. Could it be that the detonation was merely a ruse to get the residents out of Elliston House? The Independent seems to have interviewed people as this was evacuation was going on – but didn’t let on that the interviewees were being excluded from their homes. A line gives it away:

Sherifah William [was] waiting with her neighbours outside the police cordon.

Terror in Woolwich: One woman was crying – ‘They killed him. They killed him’[2]; Sanchez Manning; 22 May 2013.

One of the residents expressly makes the point about what is going on at the time:

Mother-of-one, Naomi, 27, who lives with her partner and baby in flats just yards from where the incident, painted a somewhat different picture of Woolwich. She said: “Our flat has been evacuated. I’m worried because I live adjacent to where it happened and who’s unwell.  Woolwich is known for trouble”.

Terror in Woolwich: One woman was crying – ‘They killed him. They killed him’[3]; Sanchez Manning; 22 May 2013.

Fig.  267 – the sun would have cast a 55 degree angle at a few minutes to 8pm (notice that the sun rises directly along the line of Artillery Place that day).

Fig. 267 – the sun would have cast a 55 degree angle at a few minutes to 8pm (notice that the sun rises directly along the line of Artillery Place that day).

Fig. 152 shows lots of people waiting at the Rectory Place cordon, and the shadows suggest that the time is between 5 and 7pm. Are these people being kept out of Elliston House – and a long way away to boot? Could it be possible that the conspirators needed an opportunity to re-film something – which they could do with impunity with all the roads closed down, and the people who would have lived in Elliston House all behind a police cordon? Could it be that this re-filming called for the removal of the tent so that some of the street scene looked like it did before 3pm? There is a tantalising piece of evidence that suggests that this could very well be the case. It is from the Council Footage, and if it is real, it would involve some clever editing and splicing so that reshoot footage is placed seamlessly into the film, and a new narrative is introduced.

Fig.  268 – Adebolajo milling about waiting to attack police.

Fig. 268 – Adebolajo milling about waiting to attack police.

Fig.  269 – Adebolajo on his run. No sign of the crowd behind him.

Fig. 269 – Adebolajo on his run. No sign of the crowd behind him.

Fig.  270 – here Fig. 269 is superimposed on top of Fig. 268. The collage suggests that we should see some detail of the crowd in the former image.

Fig. 270 – here Fig. 269 is superimposed on top of Fig. 268. The collage suggests that we should see some detail of the crowd in the former image.

To elaborate, consider two frames of the footage – see Figs. 268 and 269. There are 35 seconds between these frames, and in one, the crowd at the top of Artillery Road on the barracks’ corner is in fine fettle, but in the other, it has disappeared. Now, it could be that these people just moved back. Or it could be that the charge at police was re-shot, and this extra footage was very cunningly spliced in. Remember, we don’t get to see a fluid transition between the interruption at the moment Adebolajo jumps near the police vehicle, and the rejoin at the moment police are standing over him. Also, on the Council Footage, when this charge is happening, the image is framed closely around Adebolajo so that we don’t get to see what’s in the periphery. Likewise, when this charge is captured in the Mirror Footage, it is framed with the ARV in the top left hand corner, and we don’t even see beyond it enough to perceive the other side of the vehicle, and on the right hand side, all the paraphernalia at the top of Artillery Place is out of shot.

Fig.  271 – here is a scene from the Mirror Footage that got chopped out in the release to the public, but also found its way to Channel 4 news. The perpetrators are gone – and so are the armed police – leaving their vehicle on site. Is this normal?

Fig. 271 – here is a scene from the Mirror Footage that got chopped out in the release to the public, but also found its way to Channel 4 news. The perpetrators are gone – and so are the armed police – leaving their vehicle on site. Is this normal?

Admittedly, the author cannot see how any new footage was so cunningly stitched into other stuff – it really is seamless. However, if there was a reshoot, it might explain the presence of the paramilitary-type cop. Imagine the scenario. The conspirators think everything is in the bag according to an original storyline of the perpetrators having been shot dead. James Henegan has been on the radio telling everyone that they are dead already. However, it appears that Adebolajo and Adebowale have been seen on video not to be shot in such a way that would incur assured death to follow. A change of script is required (and more evidence for that is about to be suggested), but the original actors who played the police would have already been shipped out of the country never to be seen again, not even by the judge at trial (see Fig. 271). The solution is to have the impression of a figure with a gun getting out of the car to be in the right place when Adebolajo charges. The public would never notice, especially if it was just a glance of him.

Fig.  272 – the image and caption underneath an embedded video on the BBC website. Does this look like a man telling the truth?

Fig. 272 – the image and caption underneath an embedded video on the BBC website. Does this look like a man telling the truth?

When we deal with how the conspirators changed the story, we also inevitably deal with how they managed to broadcast it so as to get that narrative established in the first place. Quite evidently, the two principle figures involved in this were Boyadee and James Henegan. James Henegan has been discussed at length. However, here is a collection of all Boyadee’s tweets as sent out from around 3pm onwards.

 Ohhhhh myyyy God!!!! I just see a man with his head chopped off right in front of my eyes!

Mate ive seen alot of s*** im my time but that has to rank sumwhere in the top 3. I couldnt believe my eyes. That was some movie s***.

The two black bredas run this white guy over over then hop out the car and start chopping mans head off with machete!!

People were asking whyyy whyyy they were just saying we’ve had enough! They looked like they were on sutn! Then they start waving a revolver

Then thats how u know they were on sutn cos they actually went for armed feds with just two machete and an old rusty lookin revolver

Then the next breda try buss off the rusty 45 and it just backfires and blows mans finger clean off… Feds didnt pet to just take him out!!

Terror in Woolwich: One woman was crying – ‘They killed him. They killed him’[4]; Sanchez Manning; 22 May 2013.

Now, interestingly, this was published by the Independent long after the incident – it’s from the same article in which the evacuees from Elliston House are interviewed. And there is the startling omission of one very colourful tweet:

The first guy goes for the female fed with the machete and she not even ramping she took man out like robocop never seen nutn like it

Woolwich attack: colourful running commentary delivered on Twitter[5]; Staff Writer; 23 May 2013.

Boyadee, who wants the world to believe he saw a decapitation, also wants the world to know that the woman was immensely heroic and put one of the perpetrators down on her own. Furthermore, the animated news film mentioned in Chapter 10 shows a female police officer firing all 6 rounds at the two men as they charge her car. There is yet more. Joe Tallant told BBC news[6] that he saw the female police officer shoot both of the perpetrators. He also said that they walked calmly towards police with their weapons by their sides – this is clearly not what happened, not in the version released to us.

Fig.  273 – “Taylor” points in the direction of the road he used to arrive at the scene.

Fig. 273 – “Taylor” points in the direction of the road he used to arrive at the scene.

Fig.  274 – on the left, Taylor; on the right, the fellow in the black hood.

Fig. 274 – on the left, Taylor; on the right, the fellow in the black hood.

But this is not all. Sky News also interviewed Joe Tallant – along with a pal of his. A fellow called Taylor was also asked about his eye-witness experience (see Fig. 273), and he reported the following:

I come up from that road behind the van [pointing in the direction of Wellington Place] I hear two gunshots I see a load of crowd running down everyone started walking up more then I see a armed police car… whotwosit…armed police woman first and I see her shoot the gun off at the man.

There is a school of thought that has it that Taylor is the little fellow in the black hooded coat who spends a lot of time during the waiting phase by the doors of the Number 53 (see Figs. 214 and 215 – and then Fig. 274 to compare the two). If Taylor is indeed this chap, then of course he didn’t hear the gunshots go off as he was walking up Wellington Street (past a van, no less). However, this is all off the point rather – which is that here again is a witness testimony that is blatantly incorrect. And judging by the footage, it is so far off what a witness should have seen, one has to wonder if these people aren’t just all parroting a script that they have been supplied with.

Fig.  275 – the Korean animated news company, NMA, went with a narrative that had been supplied to it – that a police woman got out of the car and shot the perpetrators.

Fig. 275 – the Korean animated news company, NMA, went with a narrative that had been supplied to it – that a police woman got out of the car and shot the perpetrators.

It could well be that the original narrative could have been framed in a progressive-Marxist fantasy and about the heroism of the female police officer against jihadi misogynists; it would symbolise the slaying of the forces of regression by someone who was demonstrably more than an equal.  It’s very important for the continuation of the sort of government the UK now has to promote what is essentially a myth of across the board equality. Only through these sorts of Hollywood moments are they able to do it. How unfortunate it was for them that in the end D49 looked like a good advert for why women should not be police officers. The repercussions of Woolwich could have been far worse than they were.

<< Previous - Next >>


[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10074029/Shootings-and-machete-attack-in-south-east-London-live.html

[2] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/terror-in-woolwich-one-woman-was-crying–they-killed-him-they-killed-him-8628143.html

[3] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/terror-in-woolwich-one-woman-was-crying–they-killed-him-they-killed-him-8628143.html

[4] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/terror-in-woolwich-one-woman-was-crying–they-killed-him-they-killed-him-8628143.html

[5] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/10075557/Woolwich-attack-colourful-running-commentary-delivered-on-Twitter.html

[6] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22630303