Sorry Lucky - an opinion based on flimsy or flawed evidence, as opposed to one based on more substantive material, is not worth the ink it's penned with or the bandwith it takes up. The view that this is not Bride is not based on 'lack of evidence' - it is based on evidence - the captioning by Brown, and a categoric statement by Bride himself. Unless, as I say, you think he lied under oath, for no discernable motive you have produced, and with no evidence to back up this insinuation that he lied? This particular furphy has unfortunately gained widespread currency, so needs to be tackled. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. But not all opinions are equal. I prefer to draw my conclusions based on where the bulk of the historical evidence lies - particularly when it is contradicted by nothing more than a subjective interpretation of a visual source that is belied by other sources.