The videographer shows himself to be in charge of passenger activity far more effectively than the pilot. Despite claimed high winds, strong currents and white caps, he was at several junctures able to compose his video’s participants in scenes that included all of them in the cameras’ field of view, even 45 minutes apart. =A= The videographer claimed that within a minute of releasing the plane, the current of the ocean caused passengers to drift quickly away from the crash site, but the video shows at least three plane occupants treaded water or stood on the ocean floor for over fifteen minutes, apparently without moving away from the crash site at all! That’s most curious, since the aircraft, ostensibly floating in the open ocean just as the occupants claimed for themselves, essentially hadn’t moved, even two hours post-ditching.
As the videographer reaches a spot where he can stand shortly before being extracted from the water (upper right =L=), he kicks up his heels in the video, showing, contrary to his later claims: 1) his laces had not loosened at all. 2) his work boots’ and clothing’s weight didn’t overcome the buoyancy of his life jacket, even with only one of his lifejacket’s two chambers filled with air. and 3) he’s not particularly exhausted, or as he would later say, “just trying to survive”
On the ABC video, Puentes shows a GoPro stick with a single camera, but there is proof there were two cameras on the staff and the picture lower left, 2nd from left, shows a staff that casts a decidedly different shadow than the one he’s holding. In the lower right picture, note the straps and flotation gear for his camera equipment that Puentes coincidentally had with him at his seat for the short trip!
So despite his mis-directions, exaggerations, and falsehoods, none of this is to suggest anything was pre-planned. No, of course not!
