GRAPHIC: Was Sandra Bland Mugshot Post-Mortem?

While its a mug shot, and not a phone pic/candid photo, it's her COLOR that's got me scratching my head...

Her color looks "off" and not just her face. Her neck and even her ears appear cyanotic (gray, lack of oxygen) to me. I've cared for countless individuals with a darker skin tone who have low blood oxygen levels. They tend to turn a paler shade of their natural skin tone, very much like her skin tone color in the photos. Her lips also appear to be cyanotic to me.

Because this may include her face, head (ears, etc.), and lips points to central cyanosis which is never normal and is only caused by the blood changing color due to the lack of oxygen in it.

Again, this is just what I see as a person who has experience caring for people with low blood oxygen levels. She also appears to be laying down to me. That, or she's been bulking up in the shoulder areas quite a bit.

I hope her family finds the absolute truth about what happened to her. Her arrest WAS quite voliolent, IMHO. And senseless.

a reply to: Rocker2013

Just a side note...

In my earlier years I hate to admit that I was arrested several times, nothing major just being a young stupid pothead.. However, since booking was always so slow they always had me in jail clothes before my glamour shot. With that said, I still believe she was dead when the photo was taken, I'm not trying to discredit that one bit and this is a great thread. I hope we see some progress on this case because this is revolting.

~NWD

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Shamrock6

Should she be in an orange jump suit during booking? Is that normal?

That's a good question. I haven't gone through the whole thread yet, but can anyone present another mugshot from anywhere in which the accused is wearing a prisoner's uniform?

a reply to: Ridhya

Thanks for that gif superimposition. You marked the various areas that change?" What about on the right side, just inside the collar on her neck. Its morphs also. Why would that be changed, you think?

a reply to: Rocker2013

I went to the Walker county TX mugshot site and all those arrested are wearing street clothes. Why was she in a orange jumpsuit already? Also I found another arrest pic of her but she's wearing a yellow shirt so that was from a different arrest because in the dash cam video she's wearing darker colors. They have not posted her new arrest mugshot...not sure why?

Sandra Bland old mugshot

a reply to: Rocker2013

I've read almost every comment. I don't think anyone has asked this:

If she hung herself where are the wounds from the hanging? Not a thing shows in the photo.

a reply to: teslarocks

it has been asked. but that would still mean that at least one of the pictures was shopped by someone.

originally posted by: teslarocks
a reply to: Rocker2013

I've read almost every comment. I don't think anyone has asked this:

If she hung herself where are the wounds from the hanging? Not a thing shows in the photo.

Well a lot of people dont think she hung herself so there would be no wounds.

never mind

originally posted by: BiffWellington

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Shamrock6

Should she be in an orange jump suit during booking? Is that normal?

That's a good question. I haven't gone through the whole thread yet, but can anyone present another mugshot from anywhere in which the accused is wearing a prisoner's uniform?

Go through the thread. The question has been addressed multiple times, with comment and picture both.

a reply to: lovebeck

In a lot of agencies/jails (including the one I worked for) the camera used to take mugshots are of a less than stellar quality.

I always found that the images appeared to be very dull and grayish.

The program used to take and store the photos did not have the capability to edit the pictures.

With my extensive background in digital graphics and video / image analysis, I can tell you without a doubt that the image that is claiming to be the "postmortem original" with the woman's eyes rolled back, is indeed a fake. White color was added on top of her iris and pupils on her eyes to make them appear rolled back. The telltale sign of image manipulation is also the dark bags under her eyes. The darkness under her eyes is not natural and shows signs of a digital "push" or "smudge" or "clone" tool being used to extend the natural dark spots outward to make them appear bigger.

This seems to be a hoax.

I don't have time to get into detail today, but I will write up more information and post it later.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Shamrock6

I am trying to find it again, I should have posted it as soon as I found it. There was a five point list and one of them was that the mugshot was fake, and then someone in the comments posted a heavy cross-link that went through the two images to show the second had been altered, much like Ridhya did here. For the life of me I can't find that comment now though.

here it is...
heavy.com...

a reply to: teslarocks

Why would her mugshot show her neck wounds? Several media outlets have confirmed she had injuries to her neck matching suicide by strangulation:

Source

Bland...did not have injuries on her hands. Defensive injuries there are typical, though not always found, in cases of violent homicide, Diepraam said.

"There were no bite marks or other injuries on her face, on her lips, on her tongue, which would be consistent with a violent struggle," he said.

If there had been a violent struggle, the prosecutor said, examiners would most likely not expect to see a uniform and consistent mark around Bland's neck -- which is what they, in fact, observed. They also did not observe damage to her trachea and esophagus, which they might expect to see if there had been a violent struggle, he said.

So as that quote shows, they found uniform and consistent wounds to her neck resulting from strangulation without a struggle.

info on the officer ...


heavy.com... igation-desk-duty-fired-charges-wrongdoing-photo-age-experience/

this is interesting.....

thinkprogress.org...

Newly released video of Texas State Trooper Brian Encinia arresting Sandra Bland, an African American woman who was found dead in her jail cell three days later, shows the officer rapidly escalating a minor argument over a cigarette into a forcible arrest. Shortly after Encinia brings Bland a warning citation for changing lanes without signaling, he asks her to extinguish her cigarette. When Bland declines to do so, the officer opens her door and tries to physically remove her from her car. He eventually draws what appears to be a stun gun and screams at Bland that he will “light you up” if she does not exit the vehicle.

Just a few minutes later, Bland is in handcuffs and off camera. When Encinia instructs her to “wait right here,” she informs him that she “can’t go nowhere with a #ing knee on my back.”

After watching the video, Texas state Sen. Royce West (D) commented that “once you see what occurred, you will probably agree with me she did not deserve to be placed in custody.” It is likely that the United States Supreme Court would also agree. Indeed, Trooper Encinia’s conduct probably violates a decision the Supreme Court handed down just last April.

Rodriguez v. United States held that police could not extend the length of a routine traffic stop, even for just a few minutes, absent a safety related concern or reasonable suspicion to believe that the driver may have committed an additional crime. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg explained in the opinion of the Court, “[t]he tolerable duration of police inquiries in the traffic-stop context is determined by the seizure’s ‘mission’ — to address the traffic violation that warranted the stop, and attend to related safety concerns.” A police stop “may ‘last no longer than is necessary to effectuate th[at] purpose.’ Authority for the seizure thus ends when tasks tied to the traffic infraction are — or reasonably should have been — completed.”

By the time Encinia asks Bland to put out her cigarette, the “mission” of his encounter with Bland is almost at completion. He has already written the citation and brought it to Bland. While she is being handcuffed, Bland even indicates that she was “trying to sign the #ing ticket” before Encinia tried to pull her out of her car. Had the officer not decided to extend the length of the stop over the argument about the cigarette, it is likely that Bland would have been sent on her way very shortly after she declined to extinguish her cigarette.

Under Rodriguez, a stop may be extended if the officer uncovers new evidence that provides reasonable suspicion that a suspect has committed some other crime, but cigarette smoking is legal so that could not have justified extending the length of the stop. That leaves one other possible justification: an officer may extend a stop to address “safety concerns” that arise out of an encounter with a suspect. Thus, if Bland’s survivors challenge this arrest in court, Encinia might try to argue that the cigarette presented a potential safety concern — perhaps he thought that she might try to use it as a weapon and burn him.

A search of the Lexis database of court decisions found no federal or state court cases that would bind a Texas officer which answers the question of whether a lit cigarette presents the kind of safety concern relevant to the Supreme Court’s decision in Rodriguez. Nevertheless, there are two reasons why a court should be skeptical if Encinia claims that he decided to extend and escalate his confrontation with Bland because of safety concerns related to the cigarette.

The first is just how rapidly Encinia escalated this confrontation. The officer never gives Bland a direct order to extinguish the cigarette — his exact words to her are “you mind putting out your cigarette, please, if you don’t mind?” So, even if Encinia did have the lawful authority to demand that she put out the cigarette, Bland reasonably could have viewed this as a request that she could refuse. When Bland did refuse, Encinia immediately orders her out of the car without taking the intermediate step of actually ordering her to put out the cigarette. This rapid escalation extended the length of the stop without a clear justification for doing so.

Additionally, Trooper Encinia did not mention the argument over the cigarette (or the fact that he pulled his stun gun) in his official incident report. If Encinia truly believed that the lit cigarette was a danger to his safety that offered a legal justification for his actions, then it is unlikely that he would not have mentioned it in the report.

Ok, I found some time.

First I will post the below gif animation so you can compare the two images. It should make the differences quite clear.


1: The "postmortem" darkness under her eyes is fake.

The dark spots under her eyes are obviously fake. They are "cartoonish", extremely rounded on the bottom, artificially dark, and the edges are a bit too sharp and abrupt. The "hardness" of the edges are too "hard", and equally so all the way around, and it doesn't look natural, its not blended naturally. The photo that is supposedly photoshopped to make her look alive is more realistic, and imperfect and uneven, which is what you would expect.

It appears someone used a "push" tool with a circular brush to "push" preexisting dark color over to create the dark spots. They used a "hardness" factor of about 10% on the brush so the edges of the brush are not perfectly sharp, but somewhat blended, and they used the same "hardness" setting for the entire thing. They did not take the time to blend it more or less in other areas which is what make it look so fake on the edges. They also used an opacity of about 30% on the brush, so that the original color below blends in. I know this because of the following evidence:



There is a white mark under the right eye (her left eye) which I circled in red. This white mark is prominent on the "alive" image. If you compare it with the "postmortem" image, you can see that white mark is still visible, however, it has slightly been covered up. It was covered up by a digital paint brush with an opacity of about 30%, so the white mark was not fully erased, and is still visible. This means the image of her "alive" was the source image, and the "postmortem" is the manipulated image.

It would not make sense if it were the other way around because that would mean someone purposefully increased the visibility of that white mark. This white mark seems to be a light reflection, or skin pigmentation issue, or some other artifact, and I do not see a need for someone to add it into the picture if they are trying to make her look "alive". I do however see it being covered up in an attempt to make her eyes look darker, and to start a hoax.

2: Her "postmortem" iris is too large.



In an attempt to photoshop her eyes to appear rolled back into her head, someone simply added white color to the bottom of her irirs and pupils. While doing so, they did not do a very good job of shaping and or sizing her iris. So the iris appears wider than average, and even oval shaped, on her "postmortem" image.

Her iris are assumed to be naturally circular, and of course the widest part of a circle is the middle of the circle. If her eyes were rolled back, we would not see the widest part of her iris, we would see a much smaller part of the iris on the bottom. In the "postmortem" image, it appears they didn't bother to reduce the width of the iris in any significant manner, the just reduce the height, and slightly rounded it. So the width of her iris in the "postmortem" image is almost identical to the width of her eyes in the "alive" image. This makes the "postmortem" image appear fake and unnatural, and the evidence suggests the "alive" image is the source image.

3: Signs of original eyes visible on "postmortem" image.

This may be a difficult for many to see, but I can see it clear as day. I appears that when someone added the white color to her eyes to make them appear rolled back, they didn't use 100% opacity. You can actually see the original eyes under the white. It is more visible on the left eye (her right eye).



Look at the white part under her iris long enough, and you will see a "ghost iris" still exists. They covered her dark iris with a somewhat transparent white, so it did not get fully erased or covered. This is actually a mistake, and a sign they used a digital paint brush with an opacity setting that was not 100%.

-------------

With that I can conclude this is a hoax.

Wanna talk about a conspiracy, who is sending out doctored photos to rile people up even more, who benefits? I wonder if this is the 1st time in one of these situations lately that it's happened or if it's just the first one that's been caught.

a reply to: Rosinitiate

However, I very distinctly see the end of a blur tool mark under her right eye in the photo where she is alive.

And that was what I was thinking, not that they were both edited (possible though?), but I was thinking it was the photo of her with her eyes open that may have been manipulated, however I'm not certain.

Whenever I first saw any photo-I saw the shot with her eyes open, and even then I felt something was not right. I realize this is only conjecture on my part, but I felt no life in those eyes whatsoever. Her coloring is off, but that can be anything from camera, to lighting, or something else.

I'm late to commenting, but I've been reading and keeping up with the topic. I didn't want to post early on because I was letting my emotions get in the way of my thinking. I'm very irritated about this and my instincts have never let me down. I don't know if she was dead in the photo (LEO couldn't be that stupid,..), but I don't think this was a suicide.