Jer, the blogger of Nyquil.org, has come forward to claim the prestigious Gleeson Researcher of the Century Award. You will recall I accused the Sun of retouching Natalie Pinkham’s cleavage, and that two days ago, I offered this prize — along with a pint of Guinness — to anyone who could prove that the bizarre cleavage on Natalie Pinkham’s chest in the Sun’s photo might possibly be the result of natural causes, and not foul play.

(Warning: unappetizingly fleshy photographs below.)

Jer has submitted a dramatic 9-second video (see here in AVI or MPEG), showing him manipulating his own chest, with astonishing results. Indeed, this video duplicates certain aspects of the Sun’s shot so well, that it makes an excellent prima facie case for its authenticity.

I have no doubt that Jer’s video is genuine and unretouched. Below are some excerpts from it, with my own explanatory notations overlaid.

The film opens in media res, with Jer standing in his lavatory. Let us refer to the distance from his chin to his breast line as “Distance H.” I have estimated this distance at about nine inches, based on Jer’s total height of six feet, which I also estimated. (His actual height doesn’t matter, only the proportions do. I wanted to put some numbers up for references, and inches seemed easier to grasp than fractions or percentages. But the evidence is just the same no matter how tall Jer is.)

Using his left hand, Jer applies upward pressure to his right breast. I have estimated the upward force applied at about 150 pounds, based on a standard barbell curl for an average man weighing about 190-200 pounds.

This force raises Jer’s right nipple a very impressive 47.5 percent of Distance H, or about four-and-a-quarter inches! This indisputably demonstrates that an upward grope by Price Harry would certainly be enough force to raise Miss Pinkham’s breast by an equivalent proportion.

Furthermore, at maximum lift, an ovoid fold is clearly defined, a semi-ellipse with the nipple as the focus, arching from the armpit to the sternum, not entirely unlike the similar ovals on Miss Pinkham’s chest in the Sun photo.

At its zenith, the top of this ellipse is a mere 33.9 percent of Distance H from Jer’s chin, or about three inches. If Miss Pinkham’s bosom behaves at all like Jer’s, her apparently impossibly foreshortened thorax could plausibly be accounted for.

Is this the proof, then? Has Jer become the first person ever to win the coveted Gleeson Researcher of the Century Award? I can tell you he has a very good shot at it, and whether or not he proved his case, I’m inclined to buy him the beer anyway (if he puts his shirt back on). But I will not pronounce a verdict until tomorrow morning, because I have a lot of work to do today, this being the first day of classes at the college. Also, I want to build suspense, and let anyone else who wants to weigh in with an opinion have a chance. Feel free to comment below, or post on your own blog and send a trackback ping.

UPDATE: According to every linguistic expert consulted for this report, there is no ‘h’ in exonerate.

OUR VERDICT: Jer’s video has demonstrated that a breast can be moved considerably higher than its normal position, if it is mashed upwards. But the evidence suffers from two problems.

One apparent problem is that in the photo, Prince Harry’s hand is cupped, as if he were holding a grapefruit. This posture does not seem consistent with the sort of forceful mashing needed to press Miss Pinkham’s breast against her. (Compare it with Jer’s straight-fingered hand in the video stills, above.) I call this an ‘apparent’ problem, because it is not a fatal flaw in Jer’s evidence, and I would not withhold the award on this basis alone.

The other problem is Miss Pinkham’s other breast. In the photo, her left side is deformed in an identical manner as her right, even though no force of any sort is being applied to it. Note that in Jer’s video, even when his right breast reached its maximum elevation, his left was not appreciably moved. This is a fatal problem in his proof, and I’m afraid he does not win the Gleeson Researcher of the Century Award.

Jer would argue (and has argued) that HRH’s attack on the right flank was so forceful that the fabric of Natalie’s shirt transferred this force to the other side as well. But a tank top is not a T-square. Our own field tests at the Gleeson Bloglomerate have found no garment capable of replicating this effect.

Jer has proved half his case, and is to be congratulated for his impressive research. If he proves the other half, the award is his.

JER TRIES AGAIN: The table did it?