....THE PHOTO COMPARISON OF
ROY WEBB
AND THE MAN CLAIMED TO BE HIS BROTHER....
In an earlier post, I compared images of Roy Webb, brother of Carl Webb, and the Somerton Man. A more recent comment has added to the concern that I have with the available images.
The image of Private Roy Webb, Service Number VX45944, is, as you can see quite grainy and not of the best quality, however, there are some identifiable features from which we can make a reasonable comparison with the better quality image of the Somerton Man. In putting this comparison together I have made every effort to ensure that both main images of very close in size and angles.
Let's go through this:
1. Line A to B is a datum point if you will, I have used that to set the positioning of the images so that they are better aligned.
2. The Lines C to D show a distinct difference in the 'set' angle of the compared ears
3. Line E to F is a second datum point, it lines up the eyebrows of both images which are roughly aligned.
4.You can also see that the Somerton Man's ear is lower set than that of Roy Webb.
Taking these comparison points into account I suggest that there may not be a relationship between Roy Webb and the Somerton Man.
I understand that the current narrative has the Somerton Man positively identified by rootless hair samples from the plaster bust made by Paul Lawson.
However, that plaster bust was made from the man in the image below:
The man above bears little to no resemblance to the Somerton Man, shown in comparison here:
The only way that we can prove that the Somerton Man and Carl Webb are one and the same is to compare the dental charts of the exhumed remains from the Somerton Man grave with the dental chart taken by Dr. Dwyer at the autopsy, any DNA match must be substantiated using this chart :
UPDATE 20th November 2022:
The comparison image below shows the very blurry image of Carl Webb from ABC's upcoming documentary on the Somerton Man:
I had received a comment about the appearance that disputed my view of the issue which is that there is little to no similarity between Roy Webb and the Somerton Man and, for that matter the latest image, while far from being a clean sharp image, doesn't appear to match either the Post Autropsyor pre-bust photographs either. The facial appearance is quite different and when you add to that the issue of the skull and, according to Paul Lawson, the likelihood of that skull being replaced, there is a great deal of doubt surrounding the authenticity of the pre-burial body of the Somerton Man.
What we do know is that the hair sample that was used to identify Carl Webb as the Somerton Man, was given to Professor Abbott by Paul Lawson. It did not apparently come from the plaster bust.
I want to be clear on this, I think Paul Lawson was a very honest and sincere man, very much old school.
What I am about to say is not meant to be a reflection on Paul Lawson.
What I am about to say is not meant to be a reflection on Paul Lawson.
There is no clear audit trail of just when and where the hair samples were handed over to Professor Abbott by Paul Lawson neither is there an audit trail for when Professor Abbott provided the samples to Colleen Fitzpatrick.
As far as I am aware, there was no comparison drawn between the analysis of the Lawson-provided hair and the hair given to Colleen Fitzpatrick, it would be interesting to note whether there was, for example, the same type of traces that were purportedly found in the original hair from the bust. If this information exists then I have not seen it mentioned anywhere and if someone has that then you would think that they would have shared it publicly.
Maybe it turns up in the Australian Story episode due for screening on the 21st of November 2022 and hopefully with some clearer images of Carl Webb.
The bottom line for me is that we should really be waiting for the Police Forensic analysis result before any claims should be entertained.
"The man above bears little to no resemblance to the Somerton Man, shown in comparison here" ... They have the same ears, same shaped features. The reason they look different is because his body was bruised (likely because of the cast being taken) and because the body was starting to decompose. They're the same person. Also, better quality photos of Roy have been released, and they look strikingly simular. Obviously their features aren't identical; they're brothers, not twins. I believe Somerton man is Mr Webb.
ReplyDeleteHello and thanks for your comment.
ReplyDeleteWhat I will do now is walk through the thinking behind the position and view that I have.
1. On December 10th 1948, the man's body was embalmed and in a reorded statement the son of the embalmer said that his father had made regular visits to the morgue to inspect the body and top up various fluid.
2. One aspect of the embalming process is the removal of the blood it being replaced with a concoction of chemicals. No blood is one reason why there could be no 'bruising' that occurred 7 months after death as you describe in your comment.
3. Next, you should consider the manner in which the bust was made, Paul Lawson in one of the many interviews I had with him, described how they made a frame so that the upper half of the man's body would be vertical so that he could create the bust around him. This means that any fluids, the embalming chemicals, would under the force of gravity sink down to the abdomen region of the corpse. I say region because of course the stomach and other organs had been removed at the autopsy. Thus no staining could occur when the plaster was removed, there was nothing to make it stain as you describe.
4. The most compelling evidence regarding the staining you mention is that the photographs were taken before the bust was made. Thus no plaster had been applied nor could markings have been caused.
5. You also described the ears being the same. I would go one step further and say that they were almost precisely the same ears on the autopsy photograph as they were on the profile photograph taken 7 months later. That interested me because they shouldn't have been almost precisely similar. Paul Lawson described the ears as being a major problem, (a recorded fact) they were decomposed, he couldn't get the special modelling wax to adhere to them because they were in such a state of decomposition. And yet, in the pre bust profile photograph, they are perfect. You might also notice on close inspection of that particular photograph that it had been heavily 'touched up' to remove signs of decomposition. For the record I don't suspect that there was any manipulation of evidence by the photographer Jimmy Durham. The adjustment of the photograph was simply cosmetic in nature, to make it look better than it in fact was. But, in so doing the effect was to show near perfect ear structure when it simply wasn't.
The photographs are in my considered view, of quite different corpses. I will put some additional comparison images in the post for you and others to inspect.
In closing, you have right to your views and opinions, as it happens we disagree and for the reasons I have put forward here. All I suggest is that you seek first to understand what led me to my view.