The Perils & Pitfalls Of The Old Family Photographs Of Carl Webb.... The Third Family Of 4 Image?. UPDATED...

....WEBB FAMILY GROUP OF 4:

Original Webb Family Black/White 

Note that the writing was on an original image and the image you see here is actually a photograph of the original image which had the writing on it...

IMAGE 1

IMAGE 2

Above Image With Coloured Writing

And Finally Here's Another Photo, Black & White
With Something Missing:

IMAGE 3.

There Are No Names & Charlie Is Missing

Was this the first image that later had the names added?

It seems that way...

I do not know why the writing colours and locations were changed. You will note that whilst the writing is in colour, the image itself is in Black/White.

There is a final puzzle to resolve. In the 3rd Image, there are no names and Charlie has been removed from the group. I presume that removing Charlie's image was done originally to build up interest in the following press announcement. On closely examining the colored writing, it appears to me that it was possibly done by hand and they overwrote the initial grey-coloured writing. I say that because the coloured handwritten lettering is actually slightly thicker/wider for each letter in each name. It was done very carefully it seems. Why would that be done?

Did you notice that in Photograph 3, the bottom of the pic has been torn off?

Who put the names on the first B/W image and how did they know the names? We can look at Roy and compare that to his Army enlistment photograph which I have done separately and whilst it is loosely similar it is not a perfect match.

Here's the Large family and friends group photograph:

Introduction

For all the fellow travelers (not a reference to communist party members ) who have been following the winding, twisting, and often tortuous road associated with the premature, in my view, identification of Carl Webb as the Somerton Man, this post reviews the issue of the now, notorious Webb family photos and of course that of the young footy playing Carl. 

There was much fanfare and not a little vaudeville that accompanied the initial release of the ‘family group of four’ photograph which was quickly changed so that the original names written in faded grey ink alongside each family member, underwent a miraculous colour change. I’ve put the two pics at the head of this post for those who missed it.

That family group photo is charming: Mum, Dad, Charlie, and Roy. A very joyful and healthy version of Roy compared to his later Army records photo. Roy was to join the fallen in the service of his country. That must have been a horrendous time for the family. While not wishing to dwell on Roy’s appearance, it is important to compare that happy day photograph and image of Roy with the service record one. Would you have immediately recognised that military pic as being the same person? Similar, Yes, but would you swear to it? That’s the power and the pitfall of photographs.

But let’s move on.

The Photos We Have

There’s the classic family group of four, where Carl (Charlie) is pictured with Mum, Dad and older brother Roy. This particular photograph has been floating around in discussions for a while now. Then, we have the larger family and friends group photo, which, although a little busier, gives us more context about Carl’s life and connections. And then, of course, there is the younger Carl Webb in that football team photo, this is arguably the best photo we have of our 'man'. Imagine, all those family pics kept in a family album and not one wedding group photo among them. Well, not any that have been released. A little odd.

Challenges of Photo Quality

Old family photos are charming, but they’re not always the clearest. The family group of four, for instance, has seen better days. Fading has blurred some of the finer details, making it tough to pick out things like the sharpness of Carl’s jawline or the exact shape of his nose and the all-important distinguishing shape of his ear, his left ear. The larger group photo has its own issues—some faces are just too small and blurry to analyze properly and that applies especially to Carl Webb who, at first glance at this blurred image looks much younger than the Carl in the 'group of 4' photo. And then there’s the football team shot, which is in far better shape, that one had to have been taken by a professional photographer whereas I have doubts about the photographer of the family pics. If only they had turned those photos over, in those times the pro photographer’s name and details would be found there. Worth running a comparison of professionally taken large group photos versus one taken by a well-meaning but less skilled family member or friend perhaps.

Blurriness and fading aren’t just annoyances; they can seriously impact our ability to make accurate comparisons between Carl and the Somerton Man. When details like facial lines or the texture of skin get lost in the fog, it’s easy to mistake one feature for another—or miss something crucial entirely. The only stand-out feature is that mop of very blond hair, you’ll see that in the 'group of 4' pics in particular, ‘Charlie’s’ hair colour is notably different to his brother Roy’s hair. In the larger group photo, there’s that same mop of blond hair, and the same shirt with the long collar, just like Roys in fact. Was Charlie’s hair sun-bleached? I think so, not the sort of bleaching you get from a couple of days at the beach, I would say that it's possibly the result of prolonged exposure to the sun together with salt and wind.

This next image compares Charlie from the 'group of 4' photo seen on the left with Charlie from the larger group of family and friends:

The hair of both images appears to be exactly the same.

Note that the image comparison above are the 'raw' images, neither

has been enhanced or coloured

Next is the image comparing Charles Richard Webb on the left with the Charlie photo on the right:

 Charles Richard, on the left, has a distinct parting in his hair and it sits quite

differently in comparison with Charlie's hair on the right.
The images were taken at different angles.

Impact on Age Estimation

Let’s look at age estimation, which, in a photograph is like guessing someone’s age at a glance, but with a lot more science behind it. The thing is, this science depends heavily on clear, detailed images. Wrinkles, skin tone, the definition of facial features—all of these provide clues that help the experts in forensic photography estimate how old someone is. But when those clues are hidden behind a veil of faded blurry pixels, all bets are off.

 Note the parting in this photo

Take the football team photo above for example. Carl looks much younger here, and we could probably narrow down his age to within a couple of years. But even with this relatively good shot, any guess about his age comes with just a grain or two of salt. The family photos pose even bigger problems for age estimation, especially when the finer details are lost. One of its saving graces, however, is we get a clear image of his left ear in the team photo. As you can see in the image, he has a ‘tapered’ ear, quite distinctive. Back to the issue of age, we can’t really nail that and as far as I’m aware, I don’t think that’s been done as yet, 

Photo Enhancements and Facial Recognition: Pros and Cons

Photo enhancement tools and facial recognition software can work wonders on old images, but they’re not magic. Enhancing photos can sometimes bring out details we might have missed, but it can also introduce new distortions, making things even murkier. And while facial recognition software can compare features between Carl Webb’s photos and the Somerton Man, it’s only as good as the data it’s working with. If the original images are poor quality, the software might give us false matches—or fail to recognize a match that’s actually there.

On the plus side, these tools have come a long way and can certainly aid our investigation by cleaning up some of the visual noise. But they also have their limitations, especially when it comes to older, degraded photos. It’s a bit of a double-edged sword: while they offer more clarity, they also bring in the risk of over-interpreting the results.

Photo Line Ups, A Chequered History

Mistaken identity based on police photo lineup, images did happen in Australia although I think it's fair to say that it is not common these days due in no small part to less reliance on the technique. Here are a few examples of where Photo identification really fouled up

1. Case Name: Darryl Beamish

• Location: Perth, Western Australia
• Date of Incident: Convicted in 1961, exonerated in 2005
• Summary: Darryl Beamish, a deaf-mute man, was wrongfully convicted of the murder of Jillian Brewer in 1961. His conviction was based largely on a confession he allegedly made through sign language, but also on eyewitness testimony that included photo lineup identification. The victim's neighbor identified Beamish in a photo lineup, which contributed to his wrongful conviction. Decades later, new evidence, including confessions from serial killer Eric Edgar Cooke, led to Beamish’s exoneration in 2005.
• Source: "The Innocence Project: Darryl Beamish," Sydney Morning Herald, 2005.

2. Case Name: Andrew Mallard

• Location: Perth, Western Australia
• Date of Incident: Convicted in 1994, exonerated in 2006
• Summary: Andrew Mallard was wrongfully convicted of the murder of Pamela Lawrence in 1994. His conviction was significantly influenced by the identification from a photo lineup, where witnesses identified Mallard as being in the vicinity of the crime scene. The identification was later found to be unreliable, and Mallard was exonerated in 2006 after serving 12 years in prison. The case highlighted significant flaws in the use of photo lineup evidence and the potential for misidentification.
• Source: "The Fallibility of Eyewitness Identification: The Andrew Mallard Case," Australian Law Journal, 2007.

3. Case Name: Raymond John Carroll

• Location: Brisbane, Queensland
• Date of Incident: Initially convicted in 1973 (murder case), later exonerated of perjury in 2002
• Summary: Raymond John Carroll was wrongfully convicted of perjury related to an earlier murder case involving the death of Deidre Kennedy. The perjury conviction was influenced by witness identification from a photo lineup, which was later discredited. The identification was shown to be flawed due to the influence of police suggestion and the inherent unreliability of photo lineup procedures. Carroll was eventually exonerated in 2002.
• Source: "Misidentification and Wrongful Convictions: The Role of Photo Lineups in the Carroll Case," Queensland Law Review, 2003.
  

4. Case Name: Farah Jama

• Location: Melbourne, Victoria
• Date of Incident: Convicted in 2008, exonerated in 2009
• Summary: Farah Jama was wrongfully convicted of rape in 2008. Although DNA evidence played a major role in his conviction, photo lineup identification was also used during the investigation. The victim, who had no recollection of the attack, was shown a photo lineup in which she identified Jama. The identification was later found to be unreliable, and the DNA evidence was discredited due to contamination issues. Jama was exonerated in 2009.
• Source: "The Risks of Misidentification: Farah Jama’s Wrongful Conviction," Melbourne Law Journal, 2010.

5. Case Name: John Button

• Location: Perth, Western Australia
• Date of Incident: Convicted in 1963, exonerated in 2002
• Summary: John Button was wrongfully convicted of manslaughter in the death of his girlfriend, Rosemary Anderson. While the case primarily revolved around a coerced confession, photo lineup identification also played a role in corroborating the prosecution's case. Button was exonerated in 2002 after new evidence pointed to serial killer Eric Edgar Cooke as the true perpetrator.
• Source: "Eyewitness Misidentification and Its Impact: The John Button Case," Western Australia Legal Journal, 2003.
  
  The use of photo lineup evidence in Australia and elsewhere has played a role in numerous wrongful convictions.
  
  These examples underline the issues related to the current use of photographs in the Somerton Man case to suggest that the image of 'Charlie' in the 'group of 4' is totally different to a similarly dressed and blond-haired young man in the larger family and friends group:
  
  

Conclusion

So, where does this leave us? In the case of Carl Webb and the Somerton Man, the old family photographs are both a blessing and a curse. They give us interesting clues, but only if we can interpret them correctly—and that’s where the quality of the images becomes so crucial. High-quality photos make it easier to detect facial features and estimate age accurately, while poor-quality ones can lead us all astray. the family photographs are not particularly high-quality

Having gone through this exercise numerous times with a focus on the left ear, and having tried and tested various methods including the use of facial recognition software and for all of the reasons stated here,  my belief is that the Police and the Coroner will not be relying on any photographic evidence as a primary source of proof. 

I believe that they will be placing their faith in the evidence uncovered by the forensics team. Namely, it will rely on the dental chart taken by Doctor Dwyer at the autopsy to show whether the exhumed body was that of the Somerton Man and DNA to ascertain whether the body was or was not that of Carl Webb.

It’s essential to stay aware of the limitations of photographs as a means of identification. Every detail counts in investigations of this nature, and while photo enhancements and facial recognition tools can help, they're not definitive proof, they’re just one piece of the puzzle. 

Thanks for joining me on this deep dive into the world of photographic evidence as it applies to the Somerton Man mystery.