Gardener1850
Timeline Guru (Still Remembering Cupcake)
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2016
- Messages
- 42,106
- Reaction score
- 117,301
Is the tattoo a skull and crossbones?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
I think it looks like part of a rose. :dunno:
Is the tattoo a skull and crossbones?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
It could have been run through filters to clarify the design but I've only rarely seen less graphic as a motivation. Could be, though. A tattoo image from restored mummified skin is hard to see at best. They might have made it black and white to sharpen it.It looks to me like someone ran that tattoo image through a bunch of crappy photo filters to make it 'less graphic' or something. And the result is an image that's muuuuuuch harder to discern.
Has anyone seen this done before?
NaMus: https://identifyus.org/en/cases/17054
Already Ruled out is Samantha Ann Puckett 1987 Oklahoma
Is the tattoo a skull and crossbones?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
No, not odd. Patches of skin often mummify and can be recovered by a variety of means that rehydrate the skin or lift the ink. Yes, it looks partial to me; the part that's white looks like whatever material they used for recovery.
I guess it's possible that the material had deteriorated to the point where they couldn't tell exactly what the item of clothing had been. I dropped a cotton t-shirt in my yard last June and by the time I found it in September, it was just shreds. Looked like an animal might have taken part of it for a nest and the rest had faded to pale. You couldn't even tell what color it had been, though the neck band was still identifiable.
The whole file reads like a stub entry. Hopefully they'll fill in more later as they get more and better information.
Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk