Well done to Shaun Copple for capturing a genuinely intriguing photograph. What interests me most about it is that the distance between (what Shaun describes as) the "bright red eyes" is about the same as the distance between the eyes of his friend peering out from the bushes. This means that whatever these "eyes" are attached to was roughly the same distance from the camera as his friend. So, why isn't the owner of these "eyes" illuminated by the camera's flash, like his friend is illuminated?
The answer might be that the "eyes" are not eyes at all, but perhaps the headlights of a car. However (since I don't know exactly where the photograph was taken and which way it faces), it's difficult to say for sure. I tend to think that they're not headlights because they're not bright enough, although maybe car side lights are a possibility? It might be two separate cars a long way off; but what are the chances of the two of them being on the same level (as in the photograph)? Slim, I think. Nevertheless, I guess it just might be pure coincidence that they are both on roughly the same level and that they are the right distance apart to give the impression of "eyes" at about the same distance from the camera as Shaun's friend.
However, as Shaun says, there appears to be a red tinge to the "eyes" and I don't think this is something one would expect from head lights or side lights (a blue tinge or even a green tinge, yes, but a red tinge, no). The "red eye" phenomena seen in photographs is the result of light from a camera's flash passing through a person's pupil and iris and reflecting off the myriad of blood vessels at the back of the eyes. This means there has to be the suggestion that the "eyes" in the photograph maybe just that, a pair of eyes! If this is the case, it is puzzling that the camera's flash has caused the "red eye" effect but has not illuminated any other part of that "person".
If there is a logical explanation for this photograph, I have yet to fathom what it is, but that doesn't mean to say that the answer lies in the supernatural. Nevertheless, it is, as I have already said, a most intriguing photograph, and one that may well be another of Borley's mysteries.