There is a pink flag on both pictures you blind fuck

For starters, the “blood” doesn’t look like blood in the first photo. Blood isn’t orange, last I checked. In the second photo it’s at least dark enough to appear to be blood, however, so perhaps the color has been adjusted or tampered with, right?

Except…. the skin tone of both boys is identical in both photos, and therein lies another rather significant problem. Unless these photos were taken within literally seconds of their deaths, there is no way that their skin should look as vibrant and healthy as a living person’s. Blood begins to pool almost immediately upon death, which is why corpses look so, y’know, corpse-like. Grey. Pale. It happens quite fast. Dead people aren’t known for having lustrous, smooth complexions.

So their skin-tone is enough in itself to demonstrate that these people are either a.) not dead, but merely lying on the floor pretending to be dead or b.) very, very recently dead. So recently that they should still be seeping blood. Blood which shouldn’t be orange. And if the orange is a result of photo tampering then why did the tampering not also affect their skin tone? And if the tampering was done on the “blood” and only the blood… why?

These photos don’t “prove” anything regarding who killed who or when. If anything they only muddy the water further, in that the kids don’t actually appear to be dead at all and, even if they are, the photos have clearly been manipulated to some degree. I mentioned blood seeping for a short time after death, and in one sense the photos would appear to confirm that. But, why does the blood pool around one kid look so much larger in photo 2, while the other kid’s pool hasn’t changed at all? Did he have less blood in his head than the other kid? That would seem odd, to say the least. Clearly some interval of time has passed because in photo 2 there is an additional pink flag near the hip of one kid that isn’t there in pic 1. Why, then, is there so much more blood around that kid in pic 2, while the other boy’s blood pool hasn’t changed at all?

And, again, I must ask: if all that “blood” is his and has seeped out post-mortem, then why the fuck is his skin still so pink and healthy looking?! Despite losing an additonal pint or more in the time between the two photos he still just looks like a kid lying on the floor pretending to be dead. I’ve seen people lose less blood than what appears to be on that floor and they were already looking pale, even while alive. Dead, they’d have gone grey as.. well as grey as a fucking corpse, as a matter of fact.

Which leads me to the face of the kid lying against the bookcase, in photo 2. Again: are you kidding me with that image? What the fuck is going on with that kid’s face? Why does it look as if his entire face has slid off his skull toward the floor? More importantly, why is the area where his face should be a smooth expanse of blank skin? How the hell does someone having their face shot off result in the spontaneous regrowth of smooth, very alive-looking skin where their face used to be?

Does one need to tamper with legitimate photos? If you have real corpses lying in real pools of blood, what purpose would it serve to fiddle with the contrast and saturation of the blood and only the blood?

Those photos are a joke, especially the goofy manipulation that resulted in the “sliding face”. Who knew that having your face shot off would result in the immediate regrowth of new, youthful skin? One wonders why more L.A. socialites aren’t lining up to be shotgunned in the face. The skin-care industry should’ve had a field day with this “evidence”.