It is estimated that over ten million people in the United States watched the first broadcast of Fox network's "Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction" last August. The highly skewed documentary featured the now famous "alien autopsy" film footage supposedly showing the autopsy of an alien by the U.S. military in 1947. The footage, which has been shown by television networks worldwide, is claimed to have been acquired from the official military cameraman who filmed the autopsy. Reportedly, the producers of the Fox program are talking about another broadcast, this time featuring an interview with an anonymous person purporting to be the cameraman.
International Roswell Initiative (IRI) Bulletin #5, "Santilli's Controversial Autopsy Movie" (SCAM), is the lead story in the March issue of the "Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) Journal." The article points out a myriad of discrepancies in the alleged alien autopsy film and brings to public attention two important offers of verification, which could settle the matter of the film's authenticity once and for all.
Leaders of UFO organizations around the world consider the film a hoax and are concerned about its potential damage to the credibility of serious UFO research. The comprehensive "MUFON Journal" article is being translated into a number of languages (including French, German, Spanish, Italian, Norwegian, Swedish, Danish, Dutch, and Japanese), and, at last count, will be published, either in part or in its entirety, by UFO organizations in at least 14 countries.
The article contains important information, not yet in the public domain, about the alleged alien autopsy film. Graham Birdsall, editor of "UFO Magazine" in the U.K., officially revealed the details of the article at a conference in Leeds, England, on March 2, 1996. Birdsall, interviewed recently by British television, expects continued media interest in the subject.
The International Roswell Initiative is a serious grassroots organization with the goal of getting to the truth about the 1947 Roswell UFO incident. The organization has already collected over 20,000 signed copies of a declaration requesting an executive order to declassify any government-held information on Roswell or the UFO phenomenon in general. The signatories include two retired Air Force generals and two former U.S. astronauts, one of whom walked on the moon.
Interested organizations or publications may obtain a copy of
the article and the four eight-by-ten-inch black and white photographs
meant to accompany the article. One of the photographs, "McGovern
at Nagasaki," is on the cover of the March "MUFON Journal."
The photographs, as well as other information about Roswell and
the International Roswell Initiative, will soon be available on
the IRI Web site at <http://www.roswell.org>.
The International Roswell Initiative can be reached by email at
<RoswellDec@aol.com>,
or by phone or fax at (404) 240-0655. The Mutual UFO Network
is located at 103 Oldtowne Road, Seguin, TX 78155, and can be
reached by phone at (210) 379-9216 or by fax at (210) 372-9439.
To paraphrase Sir Winston Churchill, Never in the history of human
deception have so many been fooled so much by so few. The claimed
1947 "alien autopsy" footage, acquired and marketed
by Merlin Productions, a small London video distribution company
owned by Ray Santilli, has now been seen, and in many cases believed,
by tens of millions of viewers in over 30 countries worldwide.
Through a selective presentation of the facts and selective editing,
programs like Fox network's "Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction"
have misled the public by giving the impression that a number
of interdisciplinary experts, including pathologists and film-makers,
feel that the Santilli footage might be genuine. The waters have
been further muddied by Fox's mingling of facts and witness testimony
from the actual Roswell case with scenes from the alleged alien
autopsy film.
Since the existence of alleged 1947 Roswell footage was first
announced in January 1995 on a British television talk show, there
has been an overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence in
the form of inconsistencies, contradictions, lies, and false claims
to indicate that the alien autopsy film is a hoax. Furthermore,
there has not been one shred of evidence to indicate that the
film is genuine. While volumes could be written on the subject,
the objective here is to outline some of the more significant
problems and discrepancies and to bring to public attention two
very reasonable and important offers of verification that could
quickly and conclusively settle the matter of the film's authenticity,
once and for all. Among the more significant discrepancies are
the following:
As I pointed out in a previous article on the film ("The
Purported 1947 Roswell Footage," MUFON Journal, June
1995) the anthropomorphic aspect of the alleged alien is implausible.
This contention has since been supported by a number of prominent
medical experts. In a July 23, 1995, article in a British newspaper,
The Observer, anatomist Dr. Paul O'Higgins, of University
College London, stated, "I would think the chances that an
alien which evolved on another world would look so like us would
be astronomically remote."
Beside the anthropomorphic aspect of the body, other serious problems
exist from a medical standpoint. Dr. O'Higgins also stated, "To
judge from the film, the autopsy was carried out in a couple of
hours. Yet these were alien creatures. They represented an unparalleled
opportunity to science. We are expected to believe we casually
cut them up in an afternoon? I would have taken weeks to do such
an autopsy." Houston pathologist Ed Uthman, quoted in the
November/December Skeptical Inquirer, states, "The
most implausible thing of all is that the `alien' just had amorphous
lumps of tissue in `her' body cavities. I cannot fathom that an
alien who had external organs so much like ours could not have
some sort of definitive structural organs internally."
Particular aspects of the alleged alien's external body shape,
such as the protrusions of certain underlying muscles and bones,
like the clavicle, imply a corresponding human internal structure.
Yet what was removed from the body cavity looks entirely nonhuman.
(This incongruity in itself is a serious flaw.) In effect, what
we have is a hybrid that is basically human on the outside and
nonhuman on the inside -- an entity that is half human, half something
else. While such creatures exist in mythology -- minotaurs, centaurs,
mermaids, werewolves, etc. -- they do not exist in reality.
The humanlike qualities of the supposed alien suggest that it
is either a doctored human corpse or a dummy patterned after a
human body. Movie special-effects experts who have examined the
alien autopsy video, however, feel that the scene was faked by
using a special-effects dummy. Special-effects artists, including
Trey Stokes, whose credits include The Abyss, The Blob, Batman
Returns, Robocop Two, etc., and Cliff Wallace of Creature
Effects, Pinewood Studios, London, have pointed out that the
posture and weighting of the corpse on the table in the film is
inconsistent for a body in the supine position and that it was
therefore apparently made from a body-cast taken in the upright
position. A multitude of special-effects techniques noticeable
in the film are described by Trey Stokes in an excellent article,
"How to Build an Alien," available on his Internet Web
page (http://www.trudang.com).
Trey Stokes has also published on his Web page the opinions of
15 of his movie industry colleagues about the claimed alien autopsy
footage. All 15 have either spoken directly to Stokes or gone
on record with their opinion about the footage. Among the group
are several Academy and Emmy award winners, including Stan Winston
(Jurassic Park), who after some misunderstanding following
his interview on Fox, clarified his position about the footage
in a recent Time magazine article -- "Do I think it's
a hoax? Absolutely." The result of Stoke's survey was unanimous
-- all 15 special-effects experts felt the film was a fake. Not
one felt that there was even the slightest possibility it was
real. Many, according to Stokes, found the footage so laughable
that they couldn't believe that anyone in the business would take
it seriously enough to even do a survey about it.
Another indication that something is very wrong with this entire
affair is the gross inconsistency between the scenes initially
described by Santilli and what was eventually delivered. Back
in January 1995, we were told that the footage included an autopsy
scene with President Truman. Truman was described as standing
with other individuals behind a glass window, his face so clearly
visible that it would be possible to lip-read his words. Author
and crop circle researcher Colin Andrews, one of those who has
been in direct contact with Ray Santilli, described the scene
in the winter 1995 issue of the Circle Phenomenon Research
International Newsletter. When Andrews asked Santilli what
impressed him most about the film -- "what had convinced
him that it was authentic" -- Santilli responded, "I
had no doubts when I saw President Truman." According to
the research director for the British UFO Research Association
(BUFORA), Philip Mantle (who has also been in close contact with
Santilli), Santilli told him that "if it wasn't Truman, it
was a damned good actor."
The most spectacular claim of all was that of the debris-site
footage. On January 20, 1995, I spoke to a movie producer, who
has a serious interest in the 1947 Roswell event, just hours after
he had spoken with Ray Santilli. Santilli had given a detailed
description of the debris site. According to Santilli, the terrain
was somewhat hilly. The craft was visible, not in one piece, but
in a number of large pieces, necessitating the use of a large
crane. Also, numerous soldiers in uniform were visible, in some
cases clearly enough for their faces to be seen. Santilli described
the debris site in detail to others, including Philip Mantle,
Colin Andrews, and Reg Presley, a friend of Colin Andrews' with
an interest in crop circles. Presley, who was the lead singer
of a popular 60s British rock group, the Troggs ("Wild Thing"),
and who has also been in close contact with Ray Santilli, made
the initial announcement of the Santilli film's existence on British
television.
Because such scenes as that of President Truman and the debris
site would be extremely difficult and expensive to hoax, there
seemed at first to be a real possibility that the footage might
be genuine. Unfortunately, the spectacular claims about these
scenes have turned out to be false, apparently blatant lies. No
one has ever seen anything of either scene. What has been seen
is rather unspectacular, and would have been relatively easy to
hoax. Special-effects expert Trey Stokes estimates that the entire
"alien autopsy" production could have been accomplished
for as little as $50,000.
Ray Santilli first claimed that he obtained "15 10-minute
reels" of film from the cameraman. Later he changed his story
to "22 3-minute reels." In his January 20, 1995, conversation
with the previously mentioned film producer, Santilli claimed
that the footage was "1947, 16mm nitrate" film. Kodak,
however, has never produced 16mm nitrate film. Santilli told Colin
Andrews that the prestigious Royal Society in London had
agreed to assist using their high-tech computer enhancement facility.
When officials at the Royal Society were questioned about
the matter, however, they knew nothing about it.
There have been other false and misleading claims regarding the
alleged "original film" and its authentication. For
example, Santilli has submitted film with the appropriate edge
code for 1947 (a square and a triangle), but it has been either
blank leader film or film with unidentifiable images -- both of
which are meaningless for verification purposes. The criterion
required by Kodak for a valid test is that the film submitted
have clearly identifiable images from the actual "alien autopsy"
footage that has been shown worldwide. This is a very reasonable
request since, otherwise, the sample provided could be any piece
of 1947 film.
In a pre-taped interview broadcast on Channel Four in Britain
on August 28, 1995, Santilli was asked, "Are you going to
provide proper film extract which can be properly tested by Kodak
which has proper images on it?" Santilli replied, "I'll
provide you with the film, I'll provide you with what I can, which
will be a film with image, and the only way that I can do that
is by securing some film from the collector that bought the first
autopsy, which is currently en route to us." The announcer
then went on to lament the fact that despite Santilli's assurance,
nothing had been provided since his interview.
A couple of months after the British broadcast, in a live interview
on the Seattle television program "Town Meeting" (November
10, 1995), Santilli was blatantly attempting to convey the false
impression that original film (with suitable images) from the
alien autopsy footage had been submitted worldwide. On the program
he stated, "Film with image and not leader tape has been
given, and...that film has been given to the English broadcasters,
the French broadcasters...." When asked specifically about
Kodak, he stated, "It has been submitted to Kodak by the
broadcasters."
Extensive checking, however, has revealed that no broadcaster,
either French, English, or any other nationality, or the Eastman
Kodak Company, has ever been given a single frame "with image"
of the alleged alien autopsy footage. Furthermore, the only way
that anyone has ever seen the alien autopsy sequence is on video.
So far as is known, no one has ever seen it projected from 16mm
film.
Eastman Kodak in Rochester, New York, has been standing by since
July 1995 with an open offer to authenticate the film's date of
manufacture. I confirmed this fact in a recent telephone conversation
with Tony Amato, the Kodak motion-picture product specialist who
would oversee the authentication process. Amato told me that Kodak
has received repeated promises during the last six months from
Santilli through an intermediary in the United States that film
meeting the required criteria was "on its way."
According to Tony Amato, while the short-term loan of a complete
reel of film would be desirable, Kodak would be willing to work
with as little as two or three frames. The only "damage"
to the film would be a small punch-hole in one frame -- not much
of a sacrifice, especially considering the increased value authentication
would bring. (With 16mm film, one frame represents 1/24th of a
second -- less than 1/25,000th of an 18-minute sequence.)
Amato explained that since the chemical composition of Kodak film
has changed through the years, the approximate date of manufacture
of a given piece of film can be determined by analyzing its exact
chemical makeup and matching it with records of the chemical formulas
for Kodak film from different years. Because Kodak never releases
the formulas for any of its film, authentication of the film's
date of manufacture by any other laboratory or institution would
be of questionable value. Any film received by Kodak for testing
would be returned intact (with the exception of the one small
punch-hole in one frame) within a couple of weeks.
In the August 28, 1995, British television interview (quoted previously), Santilli referred to "the collector that bought the first autopsy." The alien autopsy film's being in the possession of a wealthy collector has been given as a reason for its unavailability. Thanks to the admirable efforts of the investigative team at Television France One (TF1), the only network in the world to do a true investigation into the matter of the Santilli film, we now know not only the name of the mysterious, so-called collector, Volker Spielberg, but also some things about Spielberg's background and business activities. Spielberg, like Santilli, is in the video distribution business. He has a small office in Hamburg, Germany, but presently resides in Austria.
During a live interview on TF1's October 23, 1995, "Jacques
Pradel" special about the alien autopsy footage, Ray Santilli,
when pressed about providing the original film, danced around
the issue and reiterated that matters were out of his hands. TF1
then showed video clips of Volker Spielberg's business office
in a small cottage in Hamburg, Germany, and his apartment in Austria
with his name visible on a common doorbell marker. It was then
announced that TF1's background check revealed that Volker Spielberg
was in fact not a film collector. At this point, Santilli
became noticeably angry and accused TF1 of violating their agreement
to keep certain aspects of the film story confidential. The announcer,
Jacques Pradel, responded by pointing out that Santilli had failed
to live up to certain promises he had made (such as providing
the original film).
TF1 also played an excerpt from the recording of a September 28,
1995, phone conversation between TF1 investigator Nicolas Maillard
and Volker Spielberg. Maillard, whose demeanor was very courteous
throughout the conversation, noted the potential importance of
the supposed film that Spielberg possessed and asked for his cooperation
in submitting it for verification. A partial transcript of Volker
Spielberg's remarks follows.
"I want to be left alone. I'm a collector, I want to be
out, and I want to have no contact with nobody regarding this
matter because this is my personal thing....Simply I'm not interested.
You see, the whole matter is of no interest to me, I have made
up my mind. I have my belief and that's it. And I got what I want.
I'm happy and that's it. "
"What have I to do with this? As to my knowledge, I'll
keep all the cans, yes, as to my knowledge, that's all I can tell
you. Well, as to my knowledge I am, uh, possess all the film reels.
Whether this is true or not, that's not up to me to judge, but
that is my belief, yes."
"I don't want to support any f__kin' TV or radio station
in this particular matter, no!...Come on, I've done my job, and
all I can tell you is I'm happy, I got what I want, and that's
it. I haven't bartered for any broadcast of public, and for any
f__kin' papers and all that's going on worldwide. I'm not happy
about it anyway. But, that's a different story. I have to accept
that and I have to admit it's much too late to stop it, but no,
I just want to be, if I may say so to you, left alone, okay...."
When asked by Maillard if he didn't think this was something that
should be shared with all humanity, Spielberg's answer was resoundingly
clear!
"No, no, I don't think so, I have a totally different
opinion, f__k the world, I mean, the world is full of egoism and
so am I.... "
During the weekend of October 28, 1995 (a week after the "Jacques
Pradel" show), TF1 investigators learned of a confidential
meeting in Hamburg, Germany, between Ray Santilli, Volker Spielberg,
and one or two other individuals. As it turns out, Santilli and
Spielberg are apparently friends, as well as business partners,
and have worked together before. Reportedly, the primary topic
of discussion at the Hamburg meeting was a future CD-rom project
involving the music of Frank Sinatra.
One of the more bizarre aspects of the alien autopsy story is
the relatively short videotape that has come to be called the
"tent footage." Unlike the other alleged autopsy film,
the tent footage has not been publicly distributed or marketed.
Videotape copies, however, were reportedly given to Philip Mantle,
Reg Presley, and Colin Andrews in January 1995. The tent footage
depicts some kind of emergency medical procedure or autopsy being
carried out on an alleged alien in what appears to be a tent or
barn. The picture quality is very poor, supposedly due to poor
lighting, making it difficult, if not impossible, to accurately
distinguish features. The alleged alien is different from the
alien in the other autopsy footage in that it appears to have
skinny limbs and to be much taller. This discrepancy has not been
explained. With respect to the circumstances surrounding the scene,
Colin Andrews wrote in his newsletter, "Santilli verified
that the photographer does indeed claim that this was an emergency
procedure carried out in a barn at the crash site after discovering
that one of the two aliens was in fact still alive."
In the July 30, 1995, edition of the British newspaper Sunday Times, an article titled "Film that 'proves' aliens visited earth is a hoax," by investigative journalist Maurice Chittenden, described the tent scene and some unusual security markings that appeared on the bottom right-hand side of the screen throughout the film -- markings that disappeared after their authenticity was challenged:
RESTRICTED ACCESS
A01 CLASSIFICATION
SUBJECT 1 of 2
JULY 30th 1947
The Sunday Times article points out, however, that "restricted
access" is not a recognized U.S. military code and that the
A01 classification had been dismissed as "pure Hollywood."
Even more telling is the month-day-year format of the date. The
U.S. military always uses a day-month-year format. Therefore,
the date should have read "30 July 1947."
Chittenden revealed that "later, when film of the same autopsy
was shown to John Purdie of Union Pictures...the coding had disappeared."
Chittenden also reported that conflicting explanations were offered
for the discrepancy. A British business associate of Ray Santilli's,
Gary Shoefield, stated that no footage marked "Restricted
Access" had ever been released. However, when Santilli was
contacted, he claimed that he had found the markings on one of
the film canisters and had decided to run them on the film. Yet,
a month earlier in an email letter to researcher James Easton,
Santilli had indicated that the markings had been on the film
since before he obtained it from the cameraman. Santilli wrote
to Easton, "On part of the tent footage there is a date board...It
could be the date of process (developing), we don't know."
Last summer, a reception was held in movie producer John Purdie's
London office for the "commissioning editors" of Channel
Four television. Philip Mantle, who attended the reception, said
that Santilli and a business associate, Chris Carey, brought along
and showed a videotape copy of the "tent footage," which
was -- unlike copies of the tent scene shown before or since --
of very good quality. According to Mantle, the two supposed doctors
working on the alleged alien were not wearing surgical masks,
and their faces were clearly visible.
By way of contrast, the quality of the tent scene video delivered
to TF1 and other television networks that paid big money for the
broadcast rights was of such poor quality that it was considered
unusable. Unlike the copy shown in Purdie's office, the faces
of the medical personnel were no longer recognizable. This is
significant. If a time-period film is hoaxed, it is important
that there be no recognizable faces, especially if it's going
to be shown on worldwide television. If one actor were recognized,
it would all be over. (This is almost certainly why the observer
behind the glass partition in the other autopsy sequence was inappropriately
wearing a surgical mask.)
In addition to The Sunday Times, a number of other
mainstream British newspapers have run stories declaring the alien
autopsy film a hoax. Interestingly, one British paper, The
Mail on Sunday, made a rather curious discovery while researching
the film. Reportedly, a routine check of their database revealed
that Santilli had contacted the paper four years earlier claiming
to have information on the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Shroud of
Turin.
Instead of the originally described dramatic scene with hilly
terrain, a crane, a craft broken into large pieces, men in uniform,
military equipment etc., the Santilli film "debris site"
consists of the tops of two adjacent, small, wooden tables upon
which lies some very unimpressive-looking material -- not much
for the remains of an extraterrestrial spacecraft that would reflect
an unimaginable degree of technological sophistication and whose
remains were reportedly scattered over a three-quarter-mile-long
area. What's shown, is, in fact, laughable.
The camera focuses first on a couple of slabs of material (approximately
two by three feet and three inches thick) with embedded six-fingered
hand prints -- obviously to underscore the polydactyl quality
of the aliens. Billed by Fox as possible alien "control panels,"
the slabs look more like pieces from the pavement in front of
Mann's Chinese Theater (formerly Grauman's) in Hollywood.
Next we are shown an I-beam, complete with symbols. Although quite
different from the I-beam described by Jesse Marcel, Jr., it was
undoubtedly inspired by it. While a true I-beam is a structural
member with an I-like cross section designed to maximize strength,
it is obvious that the cross section of this I-beam does not meet
that criterion. Instead, the beam looks suspiciously like a prop
fashioned in a sheet metal shop.
Quite possibly, the most damning evidence against the Santilli
film yet comes from the symbols on the I-beam. Commenting on those
symbols, Cliff Wallace of Creature Effects at Pinewood
Studios, London, pointed out that special-effects people sometimes
leave a subtle clue as a kind of signature to their work. As could
be seen in the British documentary (though the point was ignored
by Fox), the clue in this case is hardly subtle. The symbols,
supposedly from an alien alphabet, spell out the words "VIDEO
O TV." Although the "E" and the "T" are
disguised (embedded in a hieroglyph), the outlines of the letters
are present.
In essence, six characters from the Roman alphabet, four readily
recognizable and two disguised, correctly spell out two words
in the English language -- words that are related to both the
subject at hand and to each other. This is hardly chance. The
difficulty in creating even a remote resemblance to an English
word -- any English word -- using characters from an alphabet
derived independently of the Roman alphabet, such as the Arabic
alphabet, illustrates that point.
With such convincing evidence for a hoax and so much money having
changed hands -- far more than with the hoaxed Hitler Diaries
-- one has to wonder why no police agency has investigated the
alien autopsy affair. On May 31, 1995, I faxed a letter and material
on the alien autopsy film to the "Serious Fraud Office"
of Scotland Yard, presumably the most appropriate agency to handle
such a case.
In response, I received a polite letter dated June 19, 1995, from
a Martin Pinfold at the Serious Fraud Office, stating that this
was not "a matter suitable for investigation by this office."
In a follow-up phone call, I was told that before they could act,
"there had to be a victim in the U.K." Astoundingly,
then, in the eyes of Scotland Yard, it's acceptable to run an
operation out of London, victimizing people in the United States
and elsewhere, as long as no British citizen is affected.
In the 1995 Fox documentary "Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction,"
the interview with Ray Santilli begins with the announcer stating,
"Ray Santilli owns a small music and video distribution
company in London. He was acquiring some 1950s rock and roll footage
when an elderly American cameraman he had been dealing with said,
`By the way, I have something else to show you.'" Santilli
then continues, "And, you know, we looked at it. It was
just the most incredible piece of film, and obviously my first
impression is this can't be real." The program continues
with the announcer telling about the purchase of the "alien
autopsy" film and Santilli recounting the cameraman's story.
In a July 1995 email exchange, Ray Santilli wrote researcher James
Easton, "I have spent some time with the cameraman and now
have a full and detailed statement which I am sure you will find
very interesting." The statement, reportedly transcribed
by Santilli's secretary from a recording, recounts the same basic
story Santilli has told in numerous interviews, but in more detail.
Santilli's "detailed statement," titled "The Cameraman's
Story," however, is inherently implausible. The cameraman
told of being stationed in Washington, D.C., and being flown by
way of Wright Patterson to Roswell (after having been told initially
that he was to film the crash of a Russian spy plane). Because
the trip was a distance of over 1600 miles -- an all-day trip,
even by air, in 1947 -- it would have therefore been impossible
for him to have arrived much sooner than 10 to 12 hours after
the crash was discovered. Yet the cameraman described filming
the initial approach of soldiers to the downed spacecraft and
the "screams of the freak creatures that were lying by the
vehicle," screams that got "even louder" as they
were approached. The idea is preposterous that the military would
have waited for a lone cameraman to fly more than halfway across
the country before they made a move or started filming.
One almost humorous aspect of the American cameraman's story is
that it was told in British English. While the nuances may not
be readily apparent to those who speak the "King's English"
(the language would, naturally, seem normal to them), they are
obvious to Americans. Certain expressions are a dead giveaway,
such as "I joined the forces," "I fast learnt,"
"Assistant Chief of Air Staff" (a Royal Air Force term),
"no messing," "the decision was taken," "a
flattop," "a further three weeks," etc.
Apparently, Santilli's cameraman really got around. Not only did
he film the monumental recovery operation at Roswell, he also
claimed to have filmed the first atomic bomb (Trinity) test. Also,
according to his statement, just prior to being called to Roswell,
he "had not long returned" (more British English) from
St. Louis, Missouri, where he had filmed the McDonnell Aircraft
Company's new ramjet helicopter, the XH-20, nicknamed "Little
Henry." Unfortunately, there's a major problem for the cameraman
here. On October 16, 1995, Nicolas Maillard of TF1 received a
faxed letter from the public relations department at McDonnell
Douglas (successor of the McDonnell Aircraft Company), confirming
that McDonnell used their own employees, not military cameramen,
to film all tests, including those of the XH-20 ramjet helicopter,
"Little Henry." The letter gave the names of the two
McDonnell employees who would have shot the Little Henry tests
-- Chester Turk, who shot motion, and Bill Schmitt, who shot stills.
Santilli has given the name of the cameraman as "Jack Barnett."
In January 1995, he confided the name to Philip Mantle, Reg Presley,
and Colin Andrews. On June 22, 1995, Philip Mantle, by prior arrangement
with Santilli, received a telephone call from the alleged cameraman,
who identified himself as Jack Barnett.
Ray Santilli promised TF1 that they would receive a call from
the cameraman, Jack Barnett, in early September 1995, but the
call never came. Santilli did, however, agree to relay a list
of questions from TF1 to the cameraman. On September 14, 1995,
approximately three days after the list was submitted, TF1 received
a fax from Ray Santilli with the answers from the supposed cameraman.
Two of the answers were of particular interest. TF1 asked, "What
tests of the ramjet `Little Henry' did you film in St. Louis in
May 1947?" The answer, "Initial experimental tests,"
reiterated the cameraman's claim that he had filmed McDonnell
Aircraft Company's testing of its "Little Henry" ramjet
helicopter -- a claim that we now know is impossible since McDonnell
used its own employees to film such tests.
The cameraman's answer to a question by TF1 as to "why the
army didn't use color film for such an event" was also very
telling. "I was given instructions to leave immediately
to film an aviation crash of a Russian spy plane. I did not have
time to order either colour film stock or special camera equipment.
I used standard issue film stock and a standard issue Bell and
Howell." Hypothetically, such an answer could explain
why the cameraman didn't use color film at the initial crash scene.
However, such an answer in no way explains why he didn't use color
film for the autopsies -- which he claims took place a month later
in July in Fort Worth, Texas.
It is important to keep in mind that in television interviews,
radio interviews, personal interviews, and Internet postings,
Ray Santilli has repeatedly told of how the cameraman, after having
shown Santilli the Elvis film, announced that he had "something
else" to show him -- the now-famous "alien autopsy"
footage. Santilli has repeatedly and unequivocally claimed that
the cameraman from whom he acquired the 1955 Elvis footage was
the same cameraman from whom he purchased the alien autopsy footage.
The big break in the investigation of the alien autopsy film came
at the end of September, 1995, when TF1 reporter Nicolas Maillard
located Cleveland, Ohio, disc jockey Bill Randle, the real source
of the early Elvis Presley footage -- footage which Santilli said
had been sold to him by the cameraman during a trip to the United
States in 1993. As it turns out, the purchase of the Elvis film
actually took place in Bill Randle's office on July 4, 1992, in
the presence of Gary Shoefield. In a November 28, 1995, phone
conversation, Bill Randle told me that as soon as Santilli purchased
the film (after hours of negotiations), he immediately turned
around and sold it to Gary Shoefield, who was representing the
British film company Polygram. The transaction took place right
in Randle's office.
The footage, to which Santilli purchased the rights, is the first-known
film of Elvis Presley live on stage and is part of a larger documentary
that was a joint effort between Bill Randle and Universal Pictures
in 1955. The footage sold to Santilli is relatively short and
includes segments from two concerts -- an afternoon performance
at a Cleveland high school and an evening show at a local Cleveland
auditorium. Both performances took place on Thursday, July 20,
1955, and featured the Four Lads, Bill Haley and the Comets, Pat
Boone, and the then-unknown Elvis Presley. Both performances were
filmed by a freelance photographer who had been hired by Bill
Randle -- a photographer named Jack Barnett.
We now know the origin of the name "Jack Barnett" --
the name Santilli told to Philip Mantle, Reg Presley, and others
as the name of his alleged cameraman. The real Jack Barnett
was born of Russian parents on January 1, 1906, and died in 1967.
Although he was a newsreel cameraman on the Italian front during
WWII, he was never in the U.S. military.
Armed with this new and very telling information, the plan of
TF1 was to confront Santilli during a live interview on the October
23, 1995, "Jacques Pradel" special. While every effort
was made to keep the discovery of Bill Randle confidential, Santilli
may have been tipped off prior to the show. He seemed relatively
poised after a pre-taped interview of Randle was played, and immediately
offered a new story -- fundamentally different from what he had
told previously. His initial remark was reminiscent of the classic
"I'm so glad you asked" response politicians give when
they are asked the question they least want to hear. Santilli
opened with, "Well, firstly, I'm very pleased that you have
found Bill Randle...." (If Santilli was so pleased, why did
Bill Randle have to be found in the first place?)
At that point, Santilli described a new and changed scenario in
which the person from whom he had purchased the Elvis footage
was not really the military cameraman after all. He now claimed
that he had met the real cameraman after he purchased the
rights to the Elvis footage from Bill Randle in Cleveland during
the summer of 1992 (previously Santilli had given the year as
1993). Everyone, including the host, Jacques Pradel, seemed incredulous.
With time running out, the show then went into its concluding
segment, playing the Volker Spielberg tape, at which point Santilli,
as previously mentioned, became noticeably upset.
Among the unsung heroes of the innumerable battles of this century
are the men who recorded those battles for posterity, the combat
cameramen. As the pictures they took reveal, whether at the front
lines with the soldiers or marines, on the decks of ships amidst
sailors manning guns, or in high-flying aircraft with the pilots
and bombardiers, they were right alongside those whose actions
they recorded -- often taking the same risks and suffering the
same high casualty rates. During the course of investigating this
film, I was fortunate enough to be put in touch with three such
men, Joe Longo, Bill Gibson, and Dan McGovern, all former WWII
combat cameramen, and all of whom have remained active in the
professional photography business to this day. Additionally, all
three have been extremely helpful and accommodating in the effort
to investigate the Santilli film.
An entire volume could be written about the exploits of these
three retired combat cameramen. Joe Longo is president of the
International Combat Camera Association, an organization consisting
of several hundred former combat cameramen from throughout the
world. He served as a combat cameraman for the Air Force in the
Pacific theater during WWII, then again during the Korean Conflict.
After leaving the military in 1956, he went to work as a cameraman
at the Lookout Mountain Air Force Station in Southern California.
In his job there, he worked on classified research projects with
the Atomic Energy Commission, as well as the X-15 project. In
the early 1960s, he shot the famous scene of test pilot Scott
Crossfield's X-15 falling away from under the wing of a B-52 bomber,
firing its rocket engine, on its way into space, 50 miles up.
Bill Gibson has the unusual background of having served as a combat
cameraman in all three branches of the armed services. In April
1942, he photographed the launching of 16 B-25s on their way to
the famous "Doolittle Raid" over Tokyo. The scene of
the heavily laden bombers lumbering off the deck of the aircraft
carrier Hornet, barely making it airborne, is one of the
more famous of WWII. Years later, he would photograph another
famous launching, that of Apollo 11 on its way to the moon.
Not long after the Doolittle Raid, Bill Gibson's ship, the Hornet,
was torpedoed and sunk. Gibson along with other survivors was
rescued by another American ship, the USS Hughes. After
the war, Gibson photographed the early American V-2 launches at
White Sands, as well as the balloon launches and recovery operations
of Project Mogul. In the late 1940s, he worked on two Air
Force classified UFO-related projects, Grudge and Twinkle.
In the late 1960s, he was a consultant to NASA for designing the
camera that brought us man's first steps on the moon. As if all
that were not enough, he was assigned to the White House for an
eight-month period during which he covered President Truman. No
stranger to world figures, Bill Gibson's assignments also included
Presidents Franklin Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, and George Bush,
as well as Winston Churchill, Albert Schweitzer, and Wernher von
Braun, with whom he became close personal friends.
Retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Daniel A. McGovern served
during WWII with the Eighth Air Force in the European theater,
where he was a combat cameraman on B-17 bombers flying highly
dangerous missions over Germany. He shot much of the footage used
in the famous wartime documentary Memphis Belle. On one
mission, flak (antiaircraft artillery) blew a hole in the B-17
at his station, only moments after he had stepped away. Another
time he survived a crash landing in southern England, after his
aircraft had been downed by flak.
After the Japanese surrender in August 1945, McGovern was the
first American military cameraman to photograph the devastation
on the ground at both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Just four weeks
after the atomic bombs had been dropped, McGovern was on the scene
at both cities, where he shot thousands of feet of 16mm color
film. The historical footage was classified shortly after it was
shot. Much of it has still never been seen by the public.
Like Bill Gibson, in the late 1940s, McGovern worked on the classified
projects Twinkle and Grudge, where he was the project
officer. For a six-month period, the Air Force, using cameras
on the ground and aboard jet aircraft, attempted to capture on
film the UFOs that were frequenting an area of New Mexico between
Kirtland AFB and the White Sands Missile Range. Although no UFOs
were successfully recorded on film, a number were sighted visually,
including several by McGovern. According to a written statement
by Colonel McGovern, "...the objects came from below the
horizon, at high speed, at an angle of some 45 degrees and at
an altitude of some 70,000 or 80,000 feet, changed their direction
from a vertical climb to horizontal, then the brilliant white
light emitted from the UFOs disappeared in the skies."
McGovern remained in "specialized photography" during
his 20-year career in the military. When he retired in 1961, he
was stationed at Vandenberg AFB, California, where he was the
commander of the Photographic Squadron. After his retirement from
the military, he became the civilian chief of the photographic
division for the Air Force Flight Test Center at Edwards AFB,
California.
Part of the modus operandi of the military is regimentation, discipline,
and strict adherence to prescribed procedures. That is the way
it has to be. The mission of the military demands it. Military
photographers are no exception. They receive much the same training
and are subject to the same rules and regulations as other soldiers.
Dan McGovern, Bill Gibson, and Joe Longo all viewed the alien
autopsy footage, as well as photocopies of film box labels furnished
by Santilli to TF1, supposedly supplied by his cameraman. The
three former military cameramen all noted a number of significant
discrepancies -- some of which are described below -- in both
the film itself and the story behind it.
From the standpoint of appropriate military procedures applicable
at the time and which would have definitely been followed, the
scenario recounted by Santilli's alleged cameraman makes no sense.
The cameraman claims that he was stationed in Washington, D.C.,
and flown on June 1, 1947, to Roswell, New Mexico. McGovern, Gibson,
and Longo point out, however, that there were qualified cameramen
with top-secret security clearances stationed at military installations
all over the country, including New Mexico. Cameramen, both "motion"
and "still," from a local military installation such
as Roswell or Alamagordo -- not from Washington, D.C. -- would
have been dispatched immediately to the scene.
According to Santilli, his cameraman claims that he processed
the film himself and that authorities in Washington did not bother
to collect all the reels. Our three cameramen consider this claim
total nonsense. On top-secret projects, a cameraman never,
under any circumstances, processed the film himself. Additionally,
military regulations required that all film, developed or undeveloped,
had to be accounted for -- not just every reel, but every frame
of every reel. To ensure compliance, either the length of the
film on a reel was physically measured (e.g., 99 feet, 10 frames)
or a machine called a "frame counter" was used. Furthermore,
according to Santilli's cameraman, there were only three autopsies.
The footage he allegedly kept covered a major part of one of those
autopsies. On that basis alone, it is inconceivable that the authorities
overseeing the operation would have overlooked so much missing
film.
Three basic types of film were used by the military in 1947, 16mm
color, 35mm black and white, and 16mm black and white. For very
special or important projects (as the autopsy of an alien would
have been) 16mm color film was used. Furthermore, McGovern, who
filmed a number of autopsies, was very positive that all
medical procedures were shot in color. He also stated that for
important medical procedures, two cameras were used, both in fixed
positions. The first camera was mounted on a tripod sitting on
a "riser" (for extra elevation) adjacent to the operating
or autopsy table. The second camera was overhead, mounted on the
ceiling.
Our three cameramen pointed out that a "motion" picture
cameraman would almost always be accompanied by a "still"
photographer. The two would work together as a team. During an
autopsy, every step of the procedure would be carefully photographed
by the "still" photographer, who would invariably be
visible in the "motion" picture. (Medical people have
also stated that still pictures definitely would have been taken.)
In the Santilli alien autopsy film, there is no evidence whatsoever
that stills were taken.
Even the technique of Santilli's cameraman, according to our three
cameramen, was inconsistent with the highly standardized procedures
and methods used by military cameramen at that time. McGovern,
Gibson, and Longo are in a position to know -- all three trained
other military cameramen. All three consider the quality of the
camera work in the Santilli film appalling and, for a myriad of
reasons, not even close to meeting military standards. As Joe
Longo put it, "If anybody in my unit shot film in that manner,
he'd be back scrubbing pots in the kitchen."
According to the box label submitted by Santilli, the film used
was Kodak "High Speed Super-XX Panchromatic Safety Film."
According to McGovern, Gibson, and Longo, with a Bell and Howell
Model 70 (the camera used by the alleged cameraman), the depth
of field should have been very good when using this film. Consequently,
even with the apparent mediocre lighting conditions in the Santilli
autopsy film, the picture quality should have been excellent.
Our cameramen all agreed that using the Bell and Howell Model
70 and Super-XX film, with the focus set at 25 feet and the aperture
at F-8, under normal indoor lighting, everything from about a
foot and a half to infinity would be in focus. This should have
been the case with the Santilli film, but it obviously was not.
McGovern concluded that the Santilli film was "deliberately
blurred so that no subject is visible in detail."
McGovern, Gibson, and Longo also noted problems with the labeling
on the film box. For example, the seal with the eagle -- probably
placed there to give it an official look -- was something none
of them had ever seen. In their experience, of the thousands of
boxes of film ordered by the military from Kodak, none were stamped
with seals. One of the Santilli labels reads "Reel # 52;
Truman; 85 Filter 2/3 stop; Force X 2 stop - Possible." All
three cameramen noted that an "85 filter" was used only
with color film. The "2/3 stop" indicates the amount
of light that would be blocked by the filter and "Force X
2 stop" indicates the amount of additional exposure time
required to compensate for the resultant loss of light. In effect,
it is a prescription for underexposing and then compensating by
overdeveloping the film -- a procedure that would unnecessarily
increase the graininess and lower the resolution of the picture.
An additional discrepancy concerning the labeling on the film
box was caught by McGovern. McGovern, who was born and received
his early education in Ireland, noticed immediately that the writing
on the box was in European-style handwriting -- something that
would have been most unusual for a cameraman who was supposedly
born and raised and had spent most of his life in Ohio.
Even if, despite all the previously mentioned discrepancies, business
partners Ray Santilli and Volker Spielberg submit a suitable sample
of film to Kodak and, against all expectations, the film is authenticated
as 1947 vintage, it would still be necessary to authenticate the
ultimate source of the film -- the cameraman. Without the cameraman,
this film is like a loose piece of celluloid floating in the wind,
not anchored to reality. No matter how convincing, no laboratory
test anywhere would in itself constitute complete authentication
of the film and what it purports to represent.
On the basis of the information that has been made available to
him, Dan McGovern, like his colleagues, Bill Gibson and Joe Longo,
feels the Santilli film is a fraud. However, McGovern is willing
to keep an open mind and to give Santilli the benefit of the doubt.
Just as Kodak has offered to authenticate the film, Colonel McGovern
has offered to authenticate the cameraman. McGovern would require
the cameraman's full name and serial number so that he could verify
his military service with the Air Force Records Center in St.
Louis, Missouri. Colonel McGovern, a man of his word and a man
who has held a top-secret security clearance, would reveal only
his conclusion. He would keep all other information, including
the cameraman's identity, strictly confidential, revealing it
to no one. The secret of the alleged cameraman's identity would
surely be safer with McGovern, who has no axe to grind, than it
would be with the two foreign businessmen who are now supposedly
aware of it and who would have much to gain by revealing the name,
since the value of their film would soar with confirmation of
the cameraman.
Aside from the cameraman's name and serial number, the only other
requirement of Colonel McGovern is that the cameraman make one
15-minute phone call to McGovern. At the time of his retirement,
McGovern was one of the highest ranking photographic managers
in the military. Considering his experience, he is probably the
most qualified person available to evaluate the alleged cameraman.
In short, authentication by him would be of extreme value because
no impostor in the world could fool Colonel Dan McGovern. Furthermore,
Santilli's alleged cameraman, who was stationed in Washington
D.C. in June 1947, would surely enjoy talking with McGovern because,
in addition to a common background and probable common acquaintances,
they have something else unique in common. In June 1947, Colonel
Dan McGovern was a "motion picture project officer"
for the Air Force -- stationed in Washington, D.C.
Many have now charged that the "alien autopsy" film
is a fraud and the marketing scheme surrounding it an absolute
scam. It is possible, however, to quickly and easily lay all doubt
to rest, once and for all. Two very reasonable offers of verification
have been made -- Eastman Kodak to verify the film, and Colonel
McGovern the cameraman. Verification by either would increase
the monetary value of the film exponentially. Both Mr. Santilli
and Mr. Spielberg have stated unequivocally that they believe
the film genuine. If that is truly the case, they would have nothing
to lose and everything to gain by submitting the film for verification.
As experienced businessmen, they are certainly fully aware of
that fact. Let them then stand behind their word and, as any reasonable
person or businessman would do under such circumstances, accept
either Kodak's offer or Colonel McGovern's, or, preferably, both.
Unfortunately, that is not likely to happen. We will almost certainly
never see the acceptance of either offer. If past actions are
any indication of future actions, as surely as the sun rises and
sets, Santilli and Spielberg will continue to make excuses, false
claims, and abundant promises with regard to authentication, but
they will never follow through. They unquestionably have
little choice. To prove an article genuine, in reality, it has
to be genuine. To prove you are telling the truth, in reality,
you have to be telling the truth. One cannot deliver what does
not exist. A pattern of continually maneuvering to conceal or
withhold critical evidence, as we have seen in this case, leads
only to one inescapable conclusion -- there is no cameraman
and there is no film.
According to a well-known story, it was once pointed out to nineteenth century showman and circus owner Phineas T. Barnum that customers were angry with him because they found out after having paid their admission that the "freaks" in his show were hoaxes. Barnum's legendary reply was that he was not concerned about losing business because "there's a sucker born every minute." Whether or not this particular anecdote is true, we should not forget that such a mentality is widespread in today's world. Trickery and deceit are abundant. We cannot always assume the same high standards of honesty and integrity in others that we may exhibit ourselves or find in those to whom we are close. The individuals who have created, marketed, and profited from the "alien autopsy" film are more than just aware of P. T. Barnum's philosophy. They have put it into practice on a grand scale. Barnum would be smiling.
A letter, including a copy of this article, has been sent to the
chief executive officer of the Fox Entertainment Group, Rupert
Murdoch. The letter requests that the Fox network, in the interest
of honest journalism, refrain from airing any future version of
"Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction," until Ray Santilli
has accepted both Eastman Kodak Corporation's offer to authenticate
the film and Colonel Dan A. McGovern's offer to authenticate the
cameraman. The chief executive officers of the other major television
networks in the United States, as well as several in Europe, have
also been sent a copy of this article and the letter to Rupert
Murdoch.
This article (IRI Bulletin #5) and the letter to Rupert Murdoch
are available on the International Roswell Initiative (IRI) Internet
Web page: <http://www.roswell.org>. Additionally, any meaningful
response from Fox will be posted on the Web page. Rupert Murdoch
can be reached at Fox Entertainment Group, P.O. Box 900, Beverly
Hills, CA 90213. The International Roswell Initiative can be reached
at 3105 Gables Drive, Atlanta, GA 30319 USA. (Phone/Fax: 404 240-0655
/ Email: Roswelldec@aol.com)
I would like to thank Bob Durant, Steve Gill, Gayle Nesom, Joanne
Pianka, and Rebecca Schatte for their input and many helpful suggestions.
All are excellent writers in their own right. Finally, I would
like to thank Bill Gibson, Joe Longo, and Dan McGovern. Because
of their help in this quest for the truth, we may all better see
the alien autopsy footage for what it is.
SUGGESTED CAPTIONS FOR PICTURES
1) First Lieutenant Dan McGovern on September 8, 1945, at ground
zero in Nagasaki, Japan, with Bell and Howell movie camera in
hand. At the scene just four weeks after the atomic bomb was dropped,
McGovern shot thousands of feet of 16mm color film.
2) Combat cameraman Dan McGovern on August 17, 1943, in front
of a B-17 bomber just after returning from a mission over Germany,
where he shot some of the footage used in the wartime documentary
Memphis Belle, and where his aircraft was almost shot down.
3) Lieutenant Colonel Dan McGovern at the time of his retirement
in October 1961 at Vandenberg AFB, where he was commander of the
photographic squadron.
4) Bill Gibson (left) and Joe Longo (right) as civilian cameramen
working for McDonnell Douglas in the late 1970s. This specially
modified B-25 bomber was used by McDonnell Douglas to photograph
other aircraft in flight.
Return To UFO Information Menu.