Santill's Controversial Autopsy Movie
Comprehensive Reivew
by Kent Jeffrey
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 i 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 impo tant 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:
- * Problems with the alleged body and autopsy procedures are noted by
leading medical experts.
- * When polled, special-effects artists unanimously believed the body
to be a special-effects dummy.
- * False claims have been made by Santilli concerning authentication
of the alleged original film.
- * A mysterious 'collector' cited by Santilli as the reason for the
film's unavailability is a business partner of Santilli's.
- * 'Security markings' disappeared from the film after being labeled
phony by military experts.
- * 'Hieroglyphics' on the supposed debris spell out two slightly
disguised English words.
- * Santilli changed his story about how he acquired the film after he
was caught in a gross 'inconsistency' on a French TV program.
- * Three highly qualified former WWII military cameramen have pointed
out major flaws in both the film itself and the story surrounding
it.
A Questionable Autopsy
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.
A Not-So-Special Effect
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 winner, 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.
Spectacular Claims
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 sit 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.
The Nonexistent Film
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 equence is on video. So far as is known, no one has ever
seen it projected from 16mm film.
Kodak's Unaccepted Offer
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 pr cess. 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.
The 'Collector'
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 o 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 busines 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 posse sed 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.
The Missing Security Markings
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.
Debris Reflecting Super (Un)Advanced Technology
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 piece 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 outline 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.
The Cameraman
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 ead 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.
The Sting
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 camerama 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 negotiation), 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.
Three Real Military Cameramen
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 throughout the world. He served as a combat
cameraman for he 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 (anti-aircraft
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 Ne 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 a 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.
A Professional Assessment
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 Roswel 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 imself. 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.
An Offer by Colonel McGovern
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 other all
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 Jun 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.
The Kodak-McGovern Challenge
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.
_______________________________________
Addendum
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: . 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 fo the truth, we might all better see the alien
autopsy footage for what it is.
