Hopefully i am not too late. I spent several hours on this. I have other things to do now and will leave you with where I stopped. Note:• The "a" s between "miranda" and "mail" are my least confident guesses so feel free to ignore those if needed. • Next least confident, but mire confident than those "a"s is the "mail" before an unknown char and @gmail.com. • third, but nearly confident is the "Miranda"• fourth, high confidence, i think everyone sees is the @gmail.comLink:https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01745372.pdfInteresting find that may or may not be related:https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01847932.pdf
>>527618439TLD of the email doesn't matter desu since there is only a select few email providers to guess anyway.Why you trying to figure out the email anyway what use will that be. They are all probably long deactivated anyway.
ask ai to solve it
>>527618439better question is, who are the censors and why are they censoring it?
>>527618787Idk, it was some other anons challenge or find, i just was working on it when the thread died. There seemed to be enough peeking chars to solve it. You can click the link to see why who may be of interest. Idk maybe its nothing?
>>527618876>>527618970So everyone just posts without checking the links people provide here?
> high end eyes wide shut partiesOkay, well sorry to have wasted everyones time.
For archival purposes. Heres screencap of interesting like, im unsure if related.
NIGGER
Bump
>>527618439Miranda <miranda___@gmail.com>I don't think it's mail again there, but her middle initial + lastname or so.
>>527620760Thank you anon for taking the time to read my thread. Unlike everyone else here. I believe i was blasted by three anons to sandwich my thread so it doesnt get any traction. Not really sure why the supression?Stepping back i think its "Miranda" then space or something as an alias, with the actual username miranda again. Possibly mirandamail_numberhere_@gmail.comThe name miranda is probably sufficient to follow up research of who that is. Im guessing its a hooker for one of his sex parties.
>>527620760>>527621206Yea i think its one of these:Miranda miranda.mail3@gmail.comMiranda miranda.mail5@gmail.comMiranda miranda.mail6@gmail.comMiranda miranda.mail8@gmail.comMiranda miranda.mail9@gmail.comMiranda miranda.mail0@gmail.comSome number with a curved bottom.
>>527621206Tbf Ididn't really read your thread. I just saw from the pic that the "likely a symbol or some character that does not touch the bottom line" is probably the <> from the way they format these things, which would make sense as to why Miranda gets repeated lowercase miranda (with "m" being the first character after the symbol). I'm not sure the "m" from "mail" before @gmail acually matches it, nor makes any sense (never saw someone's mail be "mynamemail@gmail.com"), hence I ___'d the whole thing after that. But good job on getting "Miranda", I'm sure some autismos can track her down.
>>527621626If you could get which font/size that is, you could generate several candidates and censor them like OP to compare the lower stems and kerning. Iwas thinking mirandalmail but "." seems to make more sense and match the spacing better?
>>527621826But I still the "m" in the "mail"is assymetrical: large-small spacing between the legs (indicating some other letter or letters combo), but I'm not sure.
>>527621670> probably the <> from the way they format these things,Absolutely! Great call! Makes sense with the hanging black space after @gmail.com too.
>>527619854Weird
>>527618439Not sure if it's the same Miranda, but this was on a contact list some anon requested be decipheredI could only make out that the last name began with an 'M' and ended in 's'.Looks like 3-4 letters between
>>527621206Miranda was Tony Blairs tranny name.
Potentially Marina Lacerda
>>527621826>>527621937I am OP and that is what I did. In my image you can see where I took the assumed known of "@gmail.com" and sample the peeking parts that indicate that character. I then tried to find matches in the rest of the peeking bar. I hit on "a" and "m". the lower case "m" in mail im pretty confident in as nothing else matches. The only alternatives to the suspected "a"s is "d" and "u" to have a similar curve with a tail. After several comparisons the a just made the most sense. Third censored bar in the pdf, also partially exposes the first character side, indicating its a capital letter with a straight side. Given the three sharp lower ridges, only "M" fits. Which is why I rated the first letter with high confidence, just below the @gmail.com.
>>527622113https://jsfiddle.net/u2b03dsp/Dunno if that's it, just for testing.
>>527622552Idk, from your own pic Idon't think it matches. The right and middle leg seem almost correct, but the left leg seems to be "bright pixel dark pixel" on the "m" and "dark pixel bright pixel"on the original, which would indicate that the leg on the "m" is less than a pixel to the right while the one on the original is less than a pixel to the left.Again, I might be wrong, but that's what it looks to me idk.
>>527622113i dont know what any of this is, but thats def not renee, there's a tall lowercase letter second rom the last. it's something like Ramada or Ramala or Remaha
>>527622724Yea sorry, the "m" i placed over it was just a placeholder. I erased the work I did under it, which probably explained it better. Not sure if there is enough resolution, but anyone with a desktop on hand should be able to reproduce what I did for proof. In paint, you can copy the sampled peeking portion that " = m" up top in tiny print. Its a more direct comparison. Zoom in to see the bottom three pixels and the "m" from the sample does match. It matches close with the capital M as well but other indicators i think prove the first letter as M. Im more confident with the lowercase m in mail then I am with the "a"s.Most confident to least:> @gmail.com> M > m> a> il> nthe rest I infered but the i and r in miranda just space too well.
>>527623044Renata? Too wide for "n", idk.https://jsfiddle.net/j2mnkc87/
>>527622572Oh interesting! I may try this later to be sure. That is possible. Maybe Miranda <Miranda.make@gmail.com>I think i remember trying a k, but the bottom parts done space right. Only two spender vertical char i think can fit where I added "il" though it could be "li" "ll" "ii" as well. In times new roman (the estimated font) those are the only squared off bottoms with that spaceing that are not symbols. I think even "1" i tried but the total char width was too large even if the bottom matched.
>>527624153Picrel for those who don't know jsfiddle, real time HTML/CSS/JS
>>527622113>>527622572Im gonna or someone will have to try "make" instead of mail in the OP. Even if it doesnt fit the email address, i wonder if its the same person
>>527624199>times new romanClearly not, times is serif, this one is sans serif. Arial, Verdana, whatever is system default on the glowie's machine.
>>527619854There are so many whores coming to him for advice. I found some stuff of a girl using him as a sounding board on whether she should become an escort lol.It seems he was in the literal sense, a pimp.
>>527622572ThanksTried that and "Miranda Moss" matches what's on the contact list pretty closely.Not sure what it might have to do with the name OP has since it lacks the length and 'a' at the end. Might be an abbreviation of a very long last name in OP's pic.Not sure how the blur makes the first 's' look somewhat like a 'k' but it does.>>527623044Thanks for the suggestionsI really had to strain hard to make an approximation on that one.
>>527619854>Clifford Chancehttps://www.cliffordchance.com/people_and_places/people/lawyers/gb/miranda-harrison.htmlThat appears to be a law firm, this is the only Miranda that comes up searching for that. Looks too young to have been a lawyer very long but maybe it's an old pic
>>527623044>i dont know what any of this is,Alleged pic of someone's phone screen visible in one of the files that an anon posted here and asked for help deciphering it.I made out "Lesley Groff or Lesley Groll" from that pic and the "Lesley Groff" name started showing up in some of the emails being posted here not long after.Epstein's name and what appears to be his number is visible toward the top of the pic. >>527622113
>>527625242>Not sure how the blur makes the first 's' look somewhat like a 'k' but it does./g/ magic. I don't know, it's weird shit.>Miranda Mossmirandamoss.com sounds like a sus "artist", although I didn't see anything openly baby killing satanic in a quick skim.
>>527624410Well regardless, my comparisons were done with the documents characters and highest confidence was placed with matches to peeking portions of the sampled assumed known string:> "@gmail.com" This gave me the lowercase "m" and my slightly less confident "a". It also resulted in a third least confident but near match with the first character of M, but the first character M was determined to have higher confidence using further evidence from a third redaction bar in the same pdf from same sender. This also explains why initially I missed the second capital M during direct sample comparisons.Next was sampling non-redacted letters of same document, to estimate spacing, width and bottom points of contact. With this second method greyscale pixel matches is much less precise, as zooming in, ghost pixels along edges of characters will show slight deviations between same characters, along with an additional redaction bar further distorts their greyscale. My conclusion:It is one of these:Miranda <Miranda.mail3@gmail.com>Miranda <Miranda.mail5@gmail.com>Miranda <Miranda.mail6@gmail.com>Miranda <Miranda.mail8@gmail.com>Miranda <Miranda.mail9@gmail.com>Miranda <Miranda.mail0@gmail.com>Miranda <Miranda.make@gmail.com>And shes probably just some whore.
>>527622113Third from the bottom looks like Susan something
>>527625993>second capital MI'm pretty sure the ones inside the <> are all lowercase. You're losing it, anon. Come back tomorrow with a fresher set of eyes.
>>527626328>>527621937>>527621670Just to cover my bases. Here is that lower case m, i copy pasted the exact sample portion over the placeholder lower case m in pic rel
>>527626009YeahSusan matches closely.The last name is illegible though.I can't even make a guess with any confidence>>527624211
>>527627045I couldn't make a good guess either, but I threw in Martian for teh lulz.>>527626935Yeah, bro. I'm not seeing it. Good luck, thoughbeit. I still think you need some rest before coming back to it.
>>527627045Oh I missed that that other post earlier.My first thought for surname was *stein, but with little confidence. Not to far from Martian actually kek
>Take your meds
One silverlining to this bread? Some glowie is going to get shit for fucking up censoring this shit.
>>527627439The programmer?>>527627045Susan would make sense as well given the ai aspect.
>>527627303The pasted portion over the "m" is the actual sample from the "@gmail.com" which matches the peeking portion beneath it. Also I am NOT against "make" being there instead of "mail" BUT here is my problem with "e" instead of a number. Again, im 50/50 on this opinion as there was no direct "e" from the assumed known portion to give a fair comparison.
>>527627923I see how it drops too low which could possibly indicate a rounded base number. But Idk man, I'm stating at pixls too long, I can't have the confidence you do, and it seems like you're too tired to notice you can't either. But maybe you can, in which case, carry on, bro.
i think the space might be because of how some of the data is organized, it's probably not part of the email but rather the actual name of the sender followed by the email. it seems too long anyway to be one email.pic rel is a sample one to show how it might be formatted, like John Doe <john.doe666@gmail.com>
>>527629633it could even be a username of some sort, personal or maybe even a company
>>527618439The first thing you should know is that because this is a scan of a printout on paper that once you go beyond a few words it's going to drift. That said, for something like an email it may be short enough (especially if you can assume it's a gmail address). If you look very closely at the redacted e-mail on the 17th at 9.23 AM in the reply body, you can see two very small lines jut out to the left of the redaction because they didn't cover it fully. A capital M for first name does fit that. But it could also be other letters (but it's not many that line up).She admits she's Austrian. Assuming the email starts with her first name then you should be looking for names that are more typical from the country.Also the font of her email at the top of the document (where it's indicating the main metadata from Epstein's email at the top of the document). It looks like it's Longhorn Regular (otf) type font that's used on Windows for the font. If it's not that, it's got to be one very similar to it (look at how E is displayed). Take a look at the font itself (type out some text and see).The email body, like Epstein's signature is Times New Roman, take a look at the E for example, see how the shape of it are quite specific and match the font. I was able to get it to line up exactly with with size 12 on the email body so now you can guess to your hearts content once you type out the existing letters (helps if you use a different color).Note the date time (likely from her email client) showing what Epstein wrote are formatted like:"16 janv. 2016" - which “janv.” is the standard French abbreviation for janvier (January). So her email client is set to French. This is also a hint. Given she mentioned Paris it would be fair to assume she actually speaks it naively (despite being Austrian). By the way Maxwell was born in France and speaks French fluently. We don't get the name of the girl she claims introduced her to Epstein but it's short. Pic related.
>>527629986im not entirely sure it is a she
>>527628417However, after you guys suggested "make" i thought about that "k" some more. Its width was inncorrect in my intial comparison, but it was because of a hanging ghost pixel that was consistent with all the "k"s. After your suggestions, i asked myself, do letters overlap in this font? I resampled a "k" with a previous letter, and YES! The lowercase "k" in this font does allow overlap with previous characters. Given that, the "k" fits PERFECTLY! I was on the fence about the "e" because its hard to determine how much the the redact bar effects a character with no example, but now im nearly confident that word really is "make" .... or idk maybe my eyes are fucked.
miranda marks who works in hollywoodMaybe maybe not idk
>>527629986The peeking pixels could be a lost cause if drift, like you said. However, they refined their tactics in this release as last time it was literally a black bar programmed over raw characters and dropped into a pdf editor, some redactions were removable. This time the whole pages appears to be an image. Given pdfs archival strengths, id guess drift as your suggesting is least likely. Also i was working with the raw pdf. Nothing was copied more than once.
>>527627892>>527627439>>527627303>>527626009Looks like it matches Susan Hamblin mentioned here >>527618210
>>527631562Holy fuck that one redaction was SO SLOPPY!!! Someone is getting fired... unless the feds are doing this on purpose for deniability?
>>527632093>>527618210https://www.carter-ruck.com/news/the-sun-apologises-to-susan-hamblin-over-serious-libels/top kek
>>527630327>do letters overlapIt's called kerning. I fucking mentioned it way back in >>527621826I can't believe you're attempting this (and getting this far) without understanding the basics of text.
>>527630705I think they must've redacted it with the black boxes on the PDF file itself and then scanned the redacted pages as images this time so there's no way people can then get the text via the method that happened before.>>527632093It's the government. If there are many hundreds of pages that need to be redacted a handful of times, someone is going to make a mistake and nobody is going to catch it. I'd say a lot of the people paid to do this likely struggled with even being able to edit PDFs in the first place. I'd like the believe that governments are actually secretly based and competent but my experience is the vast majority don't give a shit and just see it as a paycheck.>>527625242I don't think that image says "Moss" because the two last letters aren't the same height. It looks like Make or something with an outline like that.
>>527632374I think someone hates her. This has to be intentional?
>>527632093>unless the feds are doing this on purpose for deniability?I can't think of a motive for them doing so except maybe an altruistic act of exposing people who they are certain will never be convicted.On a sidenote, I just read that Daphne Wallace on the contact list procured a piece of the Kabaa cloth for Epstein and offered to deliver him "a slice of pizza" on a trip to the island.
>>527632374Speaking of The Sun, Karen Gordon (from the contact list) and her husband managed Epstein's Zorro Ranch, (near the Sunspot Observatory that was raided)Crazy shit how it all ties together
>>527633089No, its a triple bottom. It aligns closes with the lower case m from the known peeking char m, but slightly off. Perfect match with M only.
>>527632682>I don't think that image says "Moss" because the two last letters aren't the same height. It looks like Make or something with an outline like that.That image is actually the result of typing "Karen Moss" and blurring it on that live html site: https://jsfiddle.net/u2b03dsp/Can't be sure though. It's very close to looking like the name on the contact list, but not identical.I don't know why the tail sticks out of the top of the first 's' but not the second.
I thought this was solved yesterday, it's the austrian guy (kek not our austrian guy)
>>527633309yeah except the high stave doesn't make any sense for a lower case letter and double bottom makes way more sense for spacing. it's probably "Kris" seeing as he/she is austrian
>>527633524> doesn't make any sense for a lower case letter and double bottom makes way more sense for spacing.Its not a lowercase letter. I meant its BOTTOM bottom peeking edges aligns closes with the known lowercase m, not the entire character. Its a triple bottom. Your not zooming in enough or using your mobile to view or not using the raw pdf.
>>527633334At the level of Gaussian blur the font matters a great deal because even small differences in the letter styles make it look very different. The JS fiddle is going to use the browser default (which is going to vary across browsers and platforms).Since you're trying to solve this: >>527622113 Despite the blur it looks like a heavily weighted (i.e. "thick") font. If I had to guess I'd say it's Andale Sans, https://8font.com/andale-sans-font/ which was used in the older versions of Google's products (and since it looks like the old gmail chat interface I'd bet money that's the font). If you use that it would give you a much more accurate comparison. Since you already have existing names you can use trial and error to get the right size and verify the font.
>>527633480It was just posted today asking about it. I did the best I could. I just followed the what fit and it turned up that name, which does occur in other files, but im pretty sure its just a whore for some orgy.
>>527634152ThanksYou sound like you really know your shit
>>527622302No, second char have squared bottoms.
>>527622113
>>527625787Within the docs, I came across 2 phone numbers and emails for him, pic rel.>>527625242I think it says Miranda Mako.
What is this? https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00135302.pdf
>>527638418Associate Warden at top- probably indicating the office(person) receiving this summary or possibly releasing it. Otherwise, insignificant? Epstein obviously would have been being sarcastic in saying “being alive is fun” while holed up in a jail cell. Employee 19 would apparently beg to differ, they took it genuinely. Maybe they are more autistic than I.
>>527637914Lmao just noticed I’m retarded
>>527637248Who is Miranda Madio?
>>527619117
>>527639214No idea. Not even sure it is accurate. I had AI attempt to clarify the photo. This was the result. Most other letters and names seem to line up alright except for Madio? The name/word Madio does pop up in a select few documents though. It also seems like in one of the documents, Madio does not appear anywhere written in it, but the search shows there is a Madio text line associated with the document. So they're indexing Madio when associating it, but it does not appear anywhere. Maybe it's hidden text somewhere within the file that some data nerd anon can retrieve
>>527637248These names>>527624153On this.Compare: >>527622113
>>527629986>Times New Roman>>527630705>The peeking pixels could be a lost cause if drift, like you sai>>527632453>It's called kerning.I agree I was going to bring up kerning. TLDR the distance between adjacent letters is not fixed, it depends on the letters in question, for aesthetics -- ergo if you measure that distance you can reduce the space of possible letters it could be. Here, I have a pearl for you faggots, picked up on recent hacker news where people pulled more data from snowden leak pdfs - "It’s easy to extract the earlier versions (of a pdf), for example with a plain text editor. Just search for lines starting with “%%EOF”, and truncate the file after that line. Voila, the resulting file is the respective earlier PDF version."So open the pdf in notepad, ctrf-f, '%%EOF', delete everything after that, save, re-open in pdf reader
>>527640881Jeffrey EpsteinDaphne Wallace???Karyna Shuljak <- CONFIRMEDLesley Groff <- CONFIRMED(???) (possibly a Madeo)Renata <- plausible????Tom Melnick <- CONFIRMED???Tried an ai clarify pass but it kind of sucked. Look at the text in my post, not the photo. The photo is only a reference for what I was able to get. Confirmed names show up in full on a search on DoJ search. Renata does show up, but unsure if it was what was actually listed in the original photo
