Reagan Attorney Claims He Saw "Puff" on Unreleased Video

wrote:
boringguy wrote:
It could of been, they were calling film,
"video" as the film was transferred to video?

Why transfer it to video at all? That wasn't done for the Rogers
Report, and the major broadcasters had no problem belatedly televising
film photos of alleged "puffs" at lift-off.

I should add that blindly transferring to video 51-L lift-off film (of
various frame rates and from various look angles) makes it even more
difficult for the public to time-correlate the key smoke events.

From a government attorney's perspective, doesn't reference to a "puff"
seen on "dramatic video footage" deflect public attention from
government-impounded *film*, exposed by press cameras which recorded the
lift-off?

NASA claimed the press cameras were impounded to assure no loss of
footage valuable to understanding the disaster's cause. If that's true,
it strikes me as bizarre (in light of what the UPI photo's perspective
adds to those in Rogers' Executive Summary) that no press footage was
officially acknowledged as helpful to the investigation.

If the media had been permitted timely 51-L photo release (e.g., within
12-24 hours), the public would have had much more assurance that smoke
(key to an explanation of the cause) was not ultimately misinterpreted
or overlooked by official investigators.

Challenger's Ghost