UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1999 > Jan > Jan 22

Santilli Knew 'Tent Footage' Was a Fraud?

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 21:41:31 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 01:16:26 -0500
Subject: Santilli Knew 'Tent Footage' Was a Fraud?

There seems to be further evidence which may substantiate Keith
Bateman and Alan Price-Watts' claims that Ray Santilli knew the
true origins of the 'tent footage'.

Researching the earliest claims and background to this film, I
have discovered an important commentary which appeared in Colin
Andrews' 'Winter 1995' issue of his 'Circles Phenomenon Research
International Newsletter'.

As I see the newsletter mentioned in discussions during June
1995, it had presumably been published by then.

Colin wrote:


Vol .III No.III Winter 1995

Colin Andrews




"During the first days of 1995, I received a telephone call in
the U.S. office from my close friend, Reg Presley in the U.K.
Many people know of Reg's interest in the crop circle phenomenon
and UFO's.  He is the lead singer of the popular 60's rock group
'The Troggs' ('Wild Thing', 'Love Is All Around', etc.).  Reg
told me that his manager had been talking with a business man in
London, Raymond Santilli, managing director and owner of Merlin
Productions, a mass media organization with close show biz
connections.  He and Reg had business dealings some years ago
and were tying up loose ends.  Santilli suggested to Reg's
manager that Reg should come to London and see some material Ray
thought he would be interested in.  Ray claimed the material was
the original U.S. army film of the crashed UFO at Roswell.  He
claimed the film had been offered to Stephen Speilburg (sic) for
a movie a short time ago, but was turned down.  Very excited,
Reg set up a meeting at the Merlin Offices in London just after
Christmas.  A 15 minute segment of the film was transferred onto
video from the 16mm original for Reg to view.

So where did this film come from and who is offering it?
According to Santilli, he was offered the film in the presence
of a Fox TV executive while procuring footage of Elvis Presley
for a biography Santilli was then producing.  The man he was
purchasing footage from was an elderly ex-military intelligence
photographer and camera man. Santilli was purchasing unpublished
footage of Elvis as a soldier which has since been included in a
video production on the life of Elvis.

The seller of the film apparently went on to offer Santilli 15
cans of undeveloped film, filmed by him while in the military,
of the Roswell crash scene from the ground and air, and of the
alien autopsies.  He claims he was the military intelligence
photographer recording events as they occurred.  Because of the
highly unusual nature of events, apparently proper channels were
not followed and when it came time for Washington to collect the
film, only two cans were developed and retrieved, the rest were
left with the camera man. For the next 46 years he had hidden
the film, afraid of reprisals from the government should he show
it.  Now, as an elderly man, he was looking for a substantial
sum of money to buy a house for his niece as a wedding present
and decided to sell the film.  The man dragged out the old cans
and permitted a small piece of film to be cut from the leader on
one film to be taken to London for analyses.   According to
Santilli, Kodac (sic) in London reported that the film was of
about 1948 vintage.  That was good enough for Santilli who
purchased all the cans for $100,000 (he has also mentioned

If this is all true, the American government should be nervous
about loosing (sic) material which IF authentic would prove to
the world that they have instigated one of the biggest lies and
deceptions to the American people and the world at large.

My involvement in these events came about through Reg Presley.
By the end of the first week in January, Reg had reviewed the 15
minute segment and included me in his research efforts.  Reg and
I asked for a meeting with Santilli which was arranged for
Friday the 3rd of February.  I flew from New York to meet with
Reg and Santilli in his London office, taking Synthia, my wife,
as witness to the proceedings. Santilli explained how he came to
purchase the film and how easy it had been to fly it out of the
States.  He was, however, having some difficulty developing the
aged film.  Some of the reels were worse than others, the greys
were merging with the blacks and images were nondescript. The
prestigious Royal Society in London agreed to assist with their
high-tech computer enhancement facility.  Apparently results
from computer enhancement were good and Santilli said they only
had a few more films to complete.  He said he had viewed all
that had been developed and was confident of its authenticity.
He stated that it showed the crash scene and the debris being
inspected and removed.  It also showed two autopsies with one of
the autopsy films showing very clearly President Truman watching
the procedures. Allegedly, Truman is standing with others behind
a glass screen and his face can be seen so clearly that you can
lip-read his words.  All the film is in black and white and
without a sound track. According to the photographer, the second
autopsy was undertaken in a military hospital in Dallas.  I
asked Santilli what was the most impressive thing he had seen on
the film.  What had convinced him that it was authentic - "I had
no doubts" he said, "when I saw President Truman". The first
so-called autopsy was contained on it's (sic) 15 minute film and
it was this that Reg and I viewed.  It showed what appeared to
be two medical personnel dressed in white coats working on the
left-hand side of a body which was laying horizontally on a
table of some kind. The "medical" personnel were not wearing
hats, gloves or masks.  The alleged E.T. was draped in a white
blanket with it's head, feet and right hand showing.  Because of
the angle of the stationary camera, positioned to the right-hand
side of the table and beyond the feet, it is difficult to
estimate the size of the body.  It could be as small as 4'1" or
as large as 6'.  My personal guess is 5'10".  The feet appear
slightly larger than human, as does the pear-shaped head which
seems hairless. They eyes appear very large and black.  It is
just about possible to make out a small nose and perhaps a tiny
mouth also.  It is difficult to be sure how many fingers are on
the right hand but I believe it has four finger and a thumb -
the thumb can be clearly seen.  I asked Santilli if he would
permit me to take a copy of the film back to America, where I
could obtain a medical opinion on the procedures being
undertaken. Santilli agreed under the condition that no one else
would be permitted to view it.

Bound by this agreement, I returned to the U.S.  and showed it
to Dr. Gale Ramsby, MD, professor of Radiology at the University
of Connecticut Health Center.  It is the opinion of Dr. Ramsby
that the film may show a medical procedure rather than an
autopsy. 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 film, two medical personnel
appear to be removing a dressing from a wound on the left hand
side of the torso or on the left arm. The exact spot is masked
by the body, which is between the camera and the wound. >From
time to time large wads of something assumed to be dressing or
tissue is inspected closely by both men and placed away from the

Through-out the film there is a square marker board in the
bottom right hand side of the screen, on which is marked the




JULY 30th 1947

There are three or four white flashes periodically during the
film which consultants suggest may be caused by splicing.
During these flashes, and with the film playing back frame by
frame, it can be seen that the marker board remains on the
screen, while all else is whited out. This indicates that the
marker board was not present during the filming of the procedure
but was superimposed afterwards, probably during development.

The significant confirmation from Colin is of course:

"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".


So how could Ray Santilli have known the film setting was a
barn? The default answer must be that he was fully aware of the
film's true origins.

Whether that is true, you must judge.

An alternative explanation would have to be that the 'cameraman'
did confirm he had shot the film in a barn and it documented an
emergency medical procedure on one of the 'aliens'.

Given what we no know about the true background, that doesn't
seem plausible.

The apparent certainty of the alleged 'cameraman' is in contrast
to later claims that the 'he' was unsure about the footage and
didn't recognise the filming style, etc.

Perhaps the overall conclusion is the one most evident; the
'barn footage'(which apparently it should always have been
designated!) was always known to be fake and originally promoted
as the 'medical procedure' on an 'alien', claiming the
'cameraman' confirmed details of its authenticity.

Subsequently, the 'tent footage' was dropped as it had become
surplus to requirements, became something of a problem and most
importantly, detracted from the far superior 'alien autopsy'

Part of the 'tent footage' which Bob Kiviat acquired and which
had faces digitally masked, might have been a result of
maintaining its presence as 'Roswell' evidence, whilst ensuring
none of the actors were identified.

Thus the 'cameraman' subsequently became 'uncertain' about this
sequence of film...and so on.

As previously noted, Keith Bateman also claims that when they
first showed the film to Ray, he said it should have a
'restricted notice' on it. They then superimposed the infamous
'security codes' and produced another version of the film.

This is the origin of the 'security coded' mentioned by Colin
Andrews and would explain why some reports of the 'tent footage'
noted there was no such 'coding' - that editing presumably being
missing from the earlier copy. There's further evidence to
support the point, however, that shouldn't be necessary.

Bateman claims that they filmed the 'alien autopsy/medical
procedure' in a barn and had the local farmer play the part of
President Truman, as this was a story they had found in their
own research into the Roswell case.

I can't recall where this was claimed in the Roswell literature
- does anyone know what the probable source is?

I have no doubt that the published 'debris' footage, depicting
those distinctive 'Roswell I-beams' with 'hieroglyphics',
similarly owes its origins to Roswell lore.

What inspired the 'alien' in the 'autopsy footage', however, is
a mystery, other than the obvious deduction that to be credible
and practicable from a SFX viewpoit, any 'autopsied alien' had
to be hairless and sexless, certainly devoid of any sexual

Some further comments re Colin's newsletter:

"He claimed the film had been offered to Stephen Speilburg (sic)
for a movie a short time ago, but was turned down".

There were first of all rumours that Spielberg was planning a
50th anniversary 'Roswell' film and later that he had acquired
some 'Roswell footage' from an elderly ex-military cameraman.
The story (apparently merely unfounded rumour and of no
consequence) is briefly documented in 'The Manikin Who Fell to
Earth' article on my web site, at:


"According to Santilli, he was offered the film in the presence
of a Fox TV executive...".

No known substance to this at all and I suspect that Colin is in
fact referring to Gary Shoefield who was in the US with Ray
Santilli during the 'Elvis memorabilia' trip. Gary was at that
time employed by a division of PolyGram.

"The prestigious Royal Society in London agreed to assist with
their high-tech computer enhancement facility".

It can only be noted that Colin reports this and that Paul
Fuller contacted the 'Royal Society', who confirmed they do not
have any such facilities and had no knowledge of these claims.

"What had convinced him that it was authentic - 'I had no
doubts' he said, 'when I saw President Truman'".

At the end of 1995, Ray explained, "I mentioned this to a
researcher in the early days, before we had completed the
processing of the reels. It was a mistake on my part. I repeated
what the cameraman had told me and expected no problem with the
development of the film. Unfortunately the film on this reel was
too badly damaged to retrieve an image".

"The first so-called autopsy was contained on it's (sic) 15
minute film and it was this that Reg and I viewed".

No, it was the 'barn footage', the 'first autopsy' is a film
which few people were shown and has never been released.

To reiterate, there's now an html'd version of the 'Mail on
Sunday' article with a 'tent footage' frame showing those
'security codes', on my web site at URL:


Images from the 'tent footage' which doesn't have the bogus,
superimposed 'notice', can be seen on Neil Morris's site, at


I anticipate there will be further developments, hopefully
encompassing all of the 'alien autopsy' footage.

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