Found Deceased IN - IMAGE discussion re Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
No it's not said:
Wow, great find Michael! This is a big slip of the LE agency distributing the image IMO. The poster was initially placed by the Newton County Sheriff's Office on their FB page:

https://www.facebook.com/5905190110...519011044153/1249421495153898/?type=3&theater

The poster clearly states it is Law Enforcement sensitive and also states it is supposed to be distributed to LE agencies only, unless approval is given to distribute in a different way.

Yes, that frame is different from the other two. It is the first frame prior to the other two IMO. Here is a slightly better quality, just enlarged/re-sampled:

attachment.php


Sequence is 2-1-3 IMO, look at how the shoulder moves compared to the twigs in the background.

All IMO

-Nin
Click to expand...

I remember seeing this photo when the case first got going. It then disappeared (I can see why now according to your explanation). One of the WS members found it and posted it again but it got lost in the threads. I did a cursory look for it at one time but it never came up in my searches. Glad to have it back. Still another "look" for BG and possibilities for sleuthing his person.

Nin, I see how your sequencing "works" but funny how my mind wants to say 3-2-1 because it looks more like a complete step sequence to me: the end of lifting of the right leg (the kicking out right before putting it down, which moves him forward), putting that right foot down (has moved forward the one step) as the left lifts in back, and then the left knee coming up getting ready to take the next step (in which the left leg would now kick out to move forward).

Also, with that tree clearly visible in the back and then not in the other two frames, it seems he has stepped away from it. Again, it may just be my mind sees the tree in one but not the other two so it feels like he's moved on from it, especially since we know he does move forward and away.

Also I wonder if perception of BG's position could be slightly skewed because of the possiblility that Libby herself was moving or at least the camera was moving while she was filming. For example, she could have been moving off the platform and making her way down off the bridge or was at the end of the bridge but trying to move further away.

What would be really great is if we had been privy to the wider shots before they were cropped. That tree is probably in all three backgrounds and would probably reveal the sequence easier.

Another point that this additional photo brings to mind: we have three stills, three, which almost constitute a complete step sequence and LE would not release a video clip that at least showed this? Why on earth not? Nothing has been revealed here but one step.

Okay, I have edited this at least 8 times and must stop. These are just my thoughts only.
 
No it's not said:
Wow, great find Michael! This is a big slip of the LE agency distributing the image IMO. The poster was initially placed by the Newton County Sheriff's Office on their FB page:

https://www.facebook.com/5905190110...519011044153/1249421495153898/?type=3&theater

The poster clearly states it is Law Enforcement sensitive and also states it is supposed to be distributed to LE agencies only, unless approval is given to distribute in a different way.

Yes, that frame is different from the other two. It is the first frame prior to the other two IMO. Here is a slightly better quality, just enlarged/re-sampled:

attachment.php


Sequence is 2-1-3 IMO, look at how the shoulder moves compared to the twigs in the background.

All IMO

-Nin
Click to expand...

What pic is on the billboards: pic 2 I think? (Had thought before that LE only removed the white thing on his left leg.)
 
FromGermany said:
What pic is on the billboards: pic 2 I think? (Had thought before that LE only removed the white thing on his left leg.)
Click to expand...

attachment.php


FromGermany, here is the billboard with the photo, so #3. For whatever reason, this is the only photo of BG that the FBI uses now.
 
Hi michael. In the moving image that Nin has it shows that something could be visible down the right side of his right leg but may have been removed by an editing tool. I can't remember who first mentioned this but do you see any evidence of this? Like perhaps a weapon has been edited out as he removes it from a pocket or from behind his back for instance?
Eta. Pic 3 is the one that looks like there has been something cut out from his jeans edge down the right (his right) side.
 
WebSight said:
I remember seeing this photo when the case first got going. It then disappeared (I can see why now according to your explanation). One of the WS members found it and posted it again but it got lost in the threads. I did a cursory look for it at one time but it never came up in my searches. Glad to have it back. Still another "look" for BG and possibilities for sleuthing his person.

Nin, I see how your sequencing "works" but funny how my mind wants to say 3-2-1 because it looks more like a complete step sequence to me: the end of lifting of the right leg (the kicking out right before putting it down, which moves him forward), putting that right foot down (has moved forward the one step) as the left lifts in back, and then the left knee coming up getting ready to take the next step (in which the left leg would now kick out to move forward).

Also, with that tree clearly visible in the back and then not in the other two frames, it seems he has stepped away from it. Again, it may just be my mind sees the tree in one but not the other two so it feels like he's moved on from it, especially since we know he does move forward and away.

Also I wonder if perception of BG's position could be slightly skewed because of the possiblility that Libby herself was moving or at least the camera was moving while she was filming. For example, she could have been moving off the platform and making her way down off the bridge or was at the end of the bridge but trying to move further away.

What would be really great is if we had been privy to the wider shots before they were cropped. That tree is probably in all three backgrounds and would probably reveal the sequence easier.

Another point that this additional photo brings to mind: we have three stills, three, which almost constitute a complete step sequence and LE would not release a video clip that at least showed this? Why on earth not? Nothing has been revealed here but one step.

Okay, I have edited this at least 8 times and must stop. These are just my thoughts only.
Click to expand...
That's what I think. Ignoring the background the sequence of what could be a complete step looks like 321. Could the moving sequence be done as 321 with no background possibly just so we see that complete step?
Eta .. I wonder if they don't want to release the video because there is a weapon, knife, baseball bat and they perhaps can't edit that out of a video?
 
FromGermany said:
I think what you are describing is a "Vokuhila" (German slang) (Fußballerfrisur), that means in English "business in the front, party in the back" [mullet]. Haha, never heard of the English description! :D
This hairstyle -IF the BG had the style, don't know- I would assign only to middle aged/older bikers nowadays.
What I saw on some pic BG's hairstyle indeed is looking like so-to-say the business part of the mullet (at rear top), just like that!
Click to expand...
I've never heard a mullet explained like that (and I'm English) but I do love that description Germany.
 
mi_hiker said:
First, thank you and all others for the countless hours of effort on these photos. For me, it's allowed me to "see" the photos in many new lights. When I get overwhelmed with the edits I go back and view the unedited versions for a reset.

Question for Michael. In your opinion, what would be the benefit/reason for LE to print and then rescan the edited versions?

One reason I thought of was to make sure all exif data was wiped, but I'm sure there are formats and editors that would remove the data without the extra work.

I forget what format the official ISP released photos are in and this is probably a long shot but has anyone checked for exif or other meta data?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Thanks for the nudge ;-)

1. Here is my opinion as to why LE *might* print and re-scan photos: The digital image data may have been extracted on a CLASSIFIED or LE SENSITIVE computer network. Bringing an UNCLASSIFIED image out of a CLASSIFIED network can be done faster by printing the image and re-scanning on an UNCLASS network, compared to bringing digital data out. This is from my own past experience.

2. I double checked, here is what I found on the EXIF metadata:

In my opinion (you can look at the EXIF yourself using above URLs), the EXIF metadata was stripped or sanitized for the Feb 15th images. The Feb 16th FB post JPG has EXIF that seems like replaced by Facebook specific EXIF. The in.gov, CMYK JPG has a PhotoShop EXIF metadata signature, with edit date of 2/21/2017, and also color half-toning metadata hinting towards a scanned document.

Hopefully all the above links work so you can view the EXIF yourself and draw your own conclusions. A simple Google search on the different metadata tags usually will tell you what they mean.
 
To my untrained eye, BG's size/physique changes in one of the pics. It's amazing how the angle makes such a difference.
 
My first time posting on the image thread so im sorry for repeating anything.... could the white thing be some kind of hack saw? It seems to stay the same shape.....
48a7e375966b4ecbe7faf06742f7e8da.jpg


Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk
 
mi_hiker said:
Someone mentioned on the main thread in the last few weeks that they could possibly see a skull style face mask/bandana. As soon as I read that I realized that was exactly what I was seeing but hadn't been able to fully visualize until it was pointed out. Of course this is all just MOO.

I've watched the animated images our wonderful sleuthers created and I feel like the movement from image 1 to image 2 supports a fabric half face bandana.

Here is an example of the type of face bandana I see. Traditionally worn by bikers but of course not limited to them.



1a0231dcc7ac1173e197bf617d6de3cc.jpg
Click to expand...

Oh, how very terrifying. I so hope BG did not pull up a scary face bandana while with our girls.

On that note, I also believe it is a skull of a particular sector. It appears to be silkscreening on the shirt's fabric. If it were goggles, wouldn't we notice a glare from one or both of the lens? One reason that could explain the shape appearing to move positioning, is that we don't know what he is wearing underneath the garments that could push the imagery out of whack as he is rushing toward the two victims. If it is a bandana, or a shirt, perhaps the movement is due to wind resistance or from BG moving his right hand.

Perhaps I should review the videos of the amazing biker ride fund raiser as approximately 4000 riders attended the remarkable February 18 fundraiser for the two families. There is not a state law in IN that requires motorcyclists to wear helmets. Therefore, surely some wore bandanas.

To quote the kind organizer, "This is just what we do anytime there is a child involved. The Biker Brotherhood comes together as a whole...." @ 1:26

[video=youtube;rpPGy1AxHWc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpPGy1AxHWc[/video]
 
Just catching up cuz I've been swamped at work. Very interesting.

Would they halftone the image to prepare for a large print (such as the pictures they displayed at the press conference)? In other words, could they have done the halftoning in a photo editor?


michael.gartley said:
Thanks for the nudge ;-)

1. Here is my opinion as to why LE *might* print and re-scan photos: The digital image data may have been extracted on a CLASSIFIED or LE SENSITIVE computer network. Bringing an UNCLASSIFIED image out of a CLASSIFIED network can be done faster by printing the image and re-scanning on an UNCLASS network, compared to bringing digital data out. This is from my own past experience.

2. I double checked, here is what I found on the EXIF metadata:

In my opinion (you can look at the EXIF yourself using above URLs), the EXIF metadata was stripped or sanitized for the Feb 15th images. The Feb 16th FB post JPG has EXIF that seems like replaced by Facebook specific EXIF. The in.gov, CMYK JPG has a PhotoShop EXIF metadata signature, with edit date of 2/21/2017, and also color half-toning metadata hinting towards a scanned document.

Hopefully all the above links work so you can view the EXIF yourself and draw your own conclusions. A simple Google search on the different metadata tags usually will tell you what they mean.
Click to expand...
 
With this 'new' image, you can tell, IMOO!, how he was scrunching himself, inside his jacket, making him appear 'smaller'. I think he will be a bit taller and thinner (in the legs at least) than people are thinking.

Can someone handy put the three pictures together in one frame and label them? If it's already been done, link please.

I does look like a fanny pack, it does appear he has a blondish/grayish mustache and perhaps a bit unshaven in the lower jaw and chin area. And I feel that his left hand is actually BEHIND his back.

We should keep in mind that these photos were done by LE, the one pic does not seem to be appropriately sized, if that makes any sense. It's squished down make him appear 'toad' like.

ALL MOO of course!
 
Spiritecho said:
With this 'new' image, you can tell, IMOO!, how he was scrunching himself, inside his jacket, making him appear 'smaller'. I think he will be a bit taller and thinner (in the legs at least) than people are thinking.

Can someone handy put the three pictures together in one frame and label them? If it's already been done, link please.

I does look like a fanny pack, it does appear he has a blondish/grayish mustache and perhaps a bit unshaven in the lower jaw and chin area. And I feel that his left hand is actually BEHIND his back.

We should keep in mind that these photos were done by LE, the one pic does not seem to be appropriately sized, if that makes any sense. It's squished down make him appear 'toad' like.

ALL MOO of course!
Click to expand...

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • POI 123.jpg
    POI 123.jpg
    57.3 KB · Views: 464
This could be emphasized by the fact (as you mention) that the "new" picture appears a little squashed on the vertical, either due to a resizing mistake, a simple display issue at some point or the camera 'jello effect' IMO. This makes BG appear shorter/wider than the other pictures. IMO, the other two stills look more accurate in display, just based on head and face shape.

But, I agree....to me he's always looked like he's hunching and lowering his face.

Spiritecho said:
With this 'new' image, you can tell, IMOO!, how he was scrunching himself, inside his jacket, making him appear 'smaller'. I think he will be a bit taller and thinner (in the legs at least) than people are thinking.

Can someone handy put the three pictures together in one frame and label them? If it's already been done, link please.

I does look like a fanny pack, it does appear he has a blondish/grayish mustache and perhaps a bit unshaven in the lower jaw and chin area. And I feel that his left hand is actually BEHIND his back.

We should keep in mind that these photos were done by LE, the one pic does not seem to be appropriately sized, if that makes any sense. It's squished down make him appear 'toad' like.

ALL MOO of course!
Click to expand...
 
WebSight said:
attachment.php


FromGermany, here is the billboard with the photo, so #3. For whatever reason, this is the only photo of BG that the FBI uses now.
Click to expand...

It's odd that this is the image they choose to distribute, because it's the one where we see the LEAST amount of his face! Also, it's more difficult to get a good look at his body shape when he's walking with one leg so far forward.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Dawning3 said:
It's odd that this is the image they choose to distribute, because it's the one where we see the LEAST amount of his face! Also, it's more difficult to get a good look at his body shape when he's walking with one leg so far forward.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
And for me personally it's hard to see the hoodie on head in the other, I finally seethe hoodie, for once, but the other it's harder to make out and does look like bushy thick hair. This "new" one, if its not squished horribly, jello effect, mentioned up one), I would feel like that cheek,jawline, is more distinctive.( on the only side you can really see the face) but if it is squished, maybe it's over distinctifying (< new word) the face, like when you flatten a marshmallow idk! Imo always

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk
 
Billy Mabou said:
This could be emphasized by the fact (as you mention) that the "new" picture appears a little squashed on the vertical, either due to a resizing mistake, a simple display issue at some point or the camera 'jello effect' IMO. This makes BG appear shorter/wider than the other pictures. IMO, the other two stills look more accurate in display, just based on head and face shape.

But, I agree....to me he's always looked like he's hunching and lowering his face.
Click to expand...

Very possible! I scaled the new frame (NF) as an accurate overlay of the ISP1 pic. This is how the POI/BG would look, if the frame did not have that "wider" look:

attachment.php


All IMO

-Nin
 

Attachments

  • poi new frame scaled.png
    poi new frame scaled.png
    176.6 KB · Views: 105
  • poi scaled and original.png
    poi scaled and original.png
    338.7 KB · Views: 556
No it's not said:
Very possible! I scaled the new frame (NF) as an accurate overlay of the ISP1 pic. This is how the POI/BG would look, if the frame did not have that "wider" look:

attachment.php


All IMO

-Nin
Click to expand...
Nice. That seems more fittin w other two imo. What's the green patch on the hood of hoodie( for whoever else sees hoodie now) doesn't match background leafage to me personally.

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 164 more.
Total: 1,929 (members: 165, guests: 1,764)

Online statistics

Members online
165
Guests online
1,764
Total visitors
1,929
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,488
Messages
18,095,892
Members
230,862
Latest member
jusslikeme
Back
Top