I need to think over some confidentiality issues...
This looks to be fine, in that respect.
One prominent aspect of revisiting so much earlier research material, some 20 years afterwards, is how little of it I recall.
This is a perfect example, as I note therein referring to writing a feature article for, 'Skeptic' magazine.
Presumably it was never actually published, as I would both clearly have remembered and kept a copy, neither of which apply.
The following should hopefully be self-explanatory:
Dear Dr Verano,
At the invitation of Prof. Chris French, I have written the lead article for a forthcoming edition of, 'The Skeptic' magazine (Volume 17 Number 2-3, Summer and Autumn 2004).
That edition will be entirely dedicated to the story of our infamous 'UFO' case...
My main interest and objective is to accurately document the quite complex sequence of events which occurred and gave rise to the 'UFO' legend.
In doing so, I hope you might please clarify some points which have arisen from your reply.
If it helps, one reason you might have believed the package contained film, is apparently being informed as such.
From the February, 1985, CNN broadcast transcript:
"...uh, we drove out and I asked him what was in the film, and he said we actually have pictures of the UFO here. And he got off the jeep, went over to the aircraft, handed the film to the pilot. The canopy closed and the plane took off, and I asked him where it was headed, and he said, 'Germany"'.
[END]
As noted, Col. Halt is adamant there was no video film taken, however, I see you actually say "pictures". Although there were some photographs taken, however, these were developed on base. From a related article:
"Copies of the Halt document and audio tapes of his microcassette notes of the investigation are both in circulation.
As for the photographs? "The pictures that were taken that night I was out did not come out," says Halt. "The film was personally developed by the photographer who was with us. He developed them in his own darkroom at home and the film came back all fogged".
(...)
Despite rumours, "No video or motion picture film was taken," says Halt.
[END]
Obviously, in February, 1995, you still believed the package delivered contained film/photographs.
What subsequently occurred to persuade you that the package contained an audio tape and a document?
Can you recall when you handed over the package and specifically, was it after the second incident, or beforehand and therefore presumably related to the first?
Are CNN correct in identifying the Base Commander, Col. Ted Conrad, as being with you?
My understanding is that because of the Solidarity crisis in Poland and amidst fears the Soviet Union might invade, A-10 'tankbuster' aircraft based at RAF Bentwaters were, in late December, 1980, already deployed to the 81st Tactical Fighter Wing at Alhorn, Germany.
Was an A-10 therefore despatched back to Bentwaters solely to pick up the package?
You might find the following of interest:
@http://www.forteantimes.com/articles/152_rendlesham.shtml
My online article for 'Fortean Times' magazine includes a photograph of the suspected 'landing site', taken by Ray
Gulyas on the morning of 27 December.
At the far right-hand-side is, or so I'm informed, a young Mike Verano.
(End)
