UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1999 > Jan > Jan 17

Santilli's ''Tent Footage': New Revelations

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:45:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 13:47:56 -0500
Subject: Santilli's ''Tent Footage': New Revelations


The 'tent footage' was the first alleged 'Roswell' film which
Ray Santilli released, sometime during December 1994, or early
January 1995.

Amongst those who saw a copy of the film on video were 'crop
circle' aficionados Reg Presley, Colin Andrews and George
Wingfield. Santilli also provided a copy of the video to Philip
Mantle from the British UFO Research Association (BUFORA).

Even at that early stage, there were some misgivings about the
authenticity of this film, with reports that it had a 'green
cast' and exhibited no signs of originating from old film stock.

A video showing part of the 'tent footage' was received in the
US by Robert Kiviat, producer of the Fox network's "Alien
Autopsy: Fact or Fiction", a televised documentary which became
a huge success when later itself released on video.

Although Mantle had confirmed that Santilli had a copy of the
film which was "crystal clear", Kiviat's video was poor quality,
with the faces of the 'medics' being , 'blackened out'.

Aside from these early showings, Santilli never released the
'tent footage' and as the main 'alien autopsy' footage took
centre stage, circa May 1995, began to distance himself from the
first film, claiming that neither himself or the 80 year-old
'cameraman' he bought it from were satisfied with its
authenticity.

Stills from the 'tent footage' can be seen on Neil Morris's web
site, at URL:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tentft.htm


In July 1995, I asked Ray Santilli if he could explain the
origins of the 'security marker', reported as being present on
screen throughout the early video showings:

"The marker is dated 'July 30, 1947', where did this originate
and what does it refer to"?

Santilli replied, "On part of the tent footage there is a date
board which was added after (it continues after the footage is
over) It could be the date of process (we don't know)".


In August 1995, I further asked of the 'tent footage', allegedly
part of the archive 16mm film acquired in December 1994-January
1995:

"I was wondering how you were able to show some of the footage,
already carefully transferred to video from the original 16mm
reels, as early as the first week or so of January 1995".

Santilli explained: "Some of the footage needed little or no
work".


In September 1995, Bob Shell, editor of the US photographic
magazine 'Shutterbug' and who had offered to assist in dating
the claimed archive 16mm film, responded to questions being
raised about the late release of Santilli's own mail order
video, 'Roswell: The Footage' stating:

"I'm assured that the delay was only because Ray was trying his
best to get permission to include the first autopsy and the rest
of the tent scene. These negotiations apparently were not
successful".

Shell has just reaffirmed to me, "This is what I was told at the
time".


Shortly afterwards, he confirmed again having spoken to
Santilli's company:

"This morning I asked about the absence of the tent footage from
the video. I am told this was just loose in the box and that the
cameraman now says he can't recall what this is or when and
where he shot it".

Shell, however, also stated at this time that he had been told:

"The tent footage, shot at the crash site under light from
emergency lanterns, shows technicians cutting the 'space suit'
off one of the bodies because, to quote the cameraman, it was
holding in heat and hastening decomposition. The fabric was very
tough, and they eventually had to use sheet metal cutters to cut
it".


A principal supporter of the 'Roswell' footage's authenticity
was German 'ufologist' Michael Hesemann, who proclaimed in
October 1995 that one of the "major revelations" at the
forthcoming 'World UFO Congress Dialogue with the Universe' in
Dusseldorf-Kaarst was that "Phil Mantle will show the complete
tent footage".

Despite the fact that Hesemann, Mantle and Shell had become
Santilli's 'ambassadors', with Hesemann and Mantle co-authoring
an 'exclusive' book on the reality of the 'Roswell alien
autopsy' claims, it seems none of them had been informed at this
time that the footage was known to be bogus.


In January 1996, in reply to some queries I had raised, Bob
Shell confirmed to me:

"Ray said to me that the complete tent footage was contained
within the 'junk reel' when I was in his office in October. He
motioned with his hands to indicate the diameter of the reel. He
also mentioned at that time about the football game, family
stuff, and other unidentifiable footage included in this reel".

Santilli himself seemed to uphold this claim when interviewed on
3 November, 1995:

Q: How much more footage do you have in your hands which does
not show on the Roswell video? A: There is more footage but I am
not in control of it. It is in the hands of the collector.

Q: How clear is it? A: There is one full autopsy film and some
scrap.

Q: Is this the tent footage? A: No, the tent footage is scrap.


With no apparent warning that the footage was known to be fake,
Mantle took the video across the Atlantic to be shown at the
July 1996 Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) conference in Greensboro.


It wasn't until June, 1998, that there was published evidence
indicating the 'tent footage' to be a definite hoax.

Mantle reported that on 30 March, l998, he had received
information from an unnamed source, who claimed to have taken
part in the filming.

Subsequently, Mantle revealed the names of "those alleged to
have faked the tent footage", as Keith Bateman and Andy Price
Watts, from Milton Keynes, England.

The story was picked up by Robert Kiviat and on 28 December,
1998, it featured in a new Fox network documentary 'World's
Greatest Hoaxes: Secrets Finally Revealed'.

It was only in response to the recent Fox broadcast that
Santilli claimed to have been aware the footage was a "practical
joke" played on him, although maintaining it didn't affect the
authenticity of the 'alien autopsy' film.

Further information, including Santilli's rebuttals, can be
found on Mark Center's informative web site, at URL:

http://www.uforeport.com/kiviat1.html


Although the program included an interview with one of the
persons who had apparently participated in the 'tent footage',
he was not, as claimed in the Fox press release, "one of the
actors who took part in staging the alien autopsy ruse".

The 'alien autopsy' footage which had been broadcast world-wide
was a completely separate and vastly superior sequence of film.
As a hoax, none of the participants involved had been
identified.


Missing from the evidence was an interview with either Bateman
or Watts, with Mantle stating that neither had responded to his
letters, phone calls or faxes.

Nick Price a journalist with the UK national newspaper 'The Mail
on Sunday', and who I had worked with previously, was familiar
with the complex and by no means straightforward 'alien autopsy'
affair. Following recent developments, Nick contacted me in an
effort to finally resolve the many unanswered questions.

I'm pleased to announce that Keith Bateman has now agreed to
tell the 'full story' of the 'tent footage' and it will be the
subject of an article in tomorrow's edition of 'The Mail on
Sunday'.


Having a detailed understanding of the background to the 'alien
autopsy', I was fortunately in a position to hopefully identify
some key questions which were put to Keith Bateman and which he
answered in addition to the obvious ones, such as whether Ray
Santilli know from the outset that the film was bogus.

After the article is published, a transcript will be available
on my web site at:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pulsar/


Reactions and information which may not be included in the
article will be addressed in the next issue of my 'Pulsar'
newsletter, which will also be available on my web site before
the end of this month, or can be requested by e-mail.


Even though the hoax footage was created in November 1994,
almost a full year later, in correspondence with Hesemann, he
chided:

"I saw the tent footage many times and just the speed of the
movements and also the sharpness of the images indicates it was
shot with a 16 mm camera and not with video. The only reason why
Ray doesn't like it is that it is so bloody dark (dimly lit) and
looks pathetically bad. I personally think it shows the being
when the medics try to remove its spacesuit. A tent in the
desert at night... with no electricity, that's why it is so
dark. But all these sceptics will say again: Look, they have
something to hide, looks, why is it so bad..".

Despite Hesemann's current insistence that the 'tent footage'
was shot on 16mm film, according to Bateman it was in fact
originally shot in colour, I understand using a Sony M3 video
camera, and the colour video has just been made available. If
time permitted, Nick intended to include some colour stills with
the article.

Far from evidence of a 'being' having it's spacesuit removed
within a tent in the desert, it's the tale of a 'being' based on
a 'gray' alien t-shirt, some 'chicken innards', was filmed
within a barn in rural Bedfordshire and one of the stars was the
local butcher.

Hereafter it should presumably be designated the 'barn footage',
or perhaps 'yarn footage'


The 'Mail on Sunday' article will I'm sure prove enlightening
and entertaining.



James.
E-mail: pulsar@compuserve.com

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com