I almost forgot A few comments on your remarks about the video evidence are in line First your statement that the waiters accounts cannot be used to support what is independently evident on the video merely because it was not the scene of a crime have absolutely no basis in either logic or Wikipedia guidelines To conclude that a persons statements must have been made under oath before they can be used to corroborate anything  let alone an event that is independently captured on film and which lends credibility to the waiters accounts itself  is nothing short of a fiction I strongly recommend that you reread WPCITE and WPRS I havent dug around for mainstream media outlets reporting the news or the video and its authenticity for that matter primarily because I just dont care enough at the moment but rest assured that if they have or do I will recognize  compliant with Wikipedia guidelines  any Wikipedians citation of it In fact Im likely to support its authenticity on its own accord though Im still debating the matter Best JM