Search results for query: *

Ugh lol. Anyway no she hasn't a extremely long nose. Second photo is original. It's a woman or maybe a blow-up doll but her nose bridge is flat. If it's an actual person I think it's that's curly brunette (who btw has also junk in her hair and on het body, check out that "growth" on her shoulder...

Thanks for that site which contains all the images. Imo it's not blood but an object or several behind the carpet. I also thinks she's actually standing up and not laying down.

Now that I started looking I've found much more females with things in their hair, on their face etc. My conclusion for now it's that they were part of an assignment for what's now Tisch School of Art. I also wonder how many of these particular females were fellow students or hurt students in...

I stand corrected. Even this girl has things in her hair. And there's an other girl too that I had forgotten. This is the original photo, so I have not altered it in any way. This one is made in his Manhattan place, at least I've seen that carpet in another photo.

Does anyone have clear pictures of these two?

What's her status now?

This was an old post but I saw a blurry picture of Monique and it's not the unknown girl.

That's not the same girl. The one with the headphones looks very much like Louise McMillen. I sent it in like years ago.

This is one bonkers photo. A lot of work to make it look like that. Once you start to enhance and analyse you see a lot of objects in her hair and around/on her. Same as the other picture of her. I don't think it's helmet girl but very similar. As much as I think the person in foliage is a...

It's as I said simple, turn a picture around full circle. It should still be clearly a person. Furthermore, he also adds stuff to actual females like things in their hair. First is a screenshot from 48 hours. Second one has been enhanced by me. That's not her bust. It's also not a garden but...

I made a screenshot from a 48 hours documentary. The strange light effects are as far as I know not original but because of how the documentary treated them (they're presented in very rapid cascade consisting of many of Bradford's photos). Turn the photo upside down. It's all fake, the faces...

Yeah Henley tried to save his skin imo. Still the police should have investigated his claims. Ramsland trying to defend him on account of him being young? Nah. I don't care also that the family was very poor. Who the hell will procure a man with a boy for money??

The police did buy the explanation given by Mary and Elmer Henley (the boys were fooling around with Corll's tools which he parked in their shed). But when filmmaker Vargas found the item in Henley's possessions (his mother allowed him this when he visited her) he gave this photo to LE! And now...

Found it. Presumably the boy on the left. Back to the Polaroid photo, what is going on? Look at the metal things left and right of his head. And what is that object right beneath the tip of his collar? Most puzzling to me is what seems to be going on with his mouth. Poor Ronny.

Yeah I'm going to need to see a picture of Ronny.

What? That's totally unknown to me. Let me do do some digging. Edit: Redirect Notice It was not Henley's trailer but an old schoolbus where his mother kept all his things after his arrest. Police didn't search his belongings. Btw what a shoddy investigation and what a weird storage place. Of...

Even this way better picture shows tons of anomalies. From the now defunct murdersquad site. Unaltered by me.

Sorry, I sent one regarding Jay being the boing on tre picture found in Henley's trailer.

Fandom site lists rule outs too!

Take a good look at this picture. First one is the original. Notice anything about the hands? If you turn a photo of a face upside down, no bizarre things should pop up.l (this applies of course to all body parts) The second one is enhanced. I don't know what's going on, but I think this was an...