It doesn’t even really matter who took the photo. I just don’t see any way that could be the same event. See my last post, explaining that for this aerial photo to be taken after the people got away from the plane, the tail would have had to get very, very heavy - enough to lift the rest of the plane up even behind its center of gravity - so that the 2 windows between the wing and the door came up out of the water, having already been submerged according to Puentes’ image.
There indeed might have been air trapped in the tail section that was leaking out as the weight of the fore section was inexorably bringing about the overall sinking. As the water increasingly invaded the tail, it would naturally be dragged lower into the water. The only question is how long. I'd say possibly several minutes to fifteen minutes.
I think the aerial view is deceptive. I think there is significantly more aircraft under water in the Josh Lang photo than the Fuddy-by-the-door, Puentes image(s). Some time before the Lang photo was taken, no one would've seen it advantageous to stay with the sinking ship, and thus abandoned it. All that seems quite reasonable to me and be devoid of foul play.
I'm further convinced that Lang provided photo(s) of the same aircraft sinking. The evidence for that is quite overwhelming without any significant counter-evidence.
HF