UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2000 > Jul > Jul 20

UpDate: Forward From Gary Hart

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 03:24:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 11:39:55 -0400
Subject: UpDate: Forward From Gary Hart

Hello All,

After I post these e-mails from Gary Hart I am going on vacation
for a month. I'll see you all again in September. If you have any
further inquiries about this Carpenter business you can direct
them _all_ to Gary.

I have said _everything_ I wanted to say on this issue at least
twice. Some things three times! I have absolutely nothing more
to add. It's all been said. My conscience is clear. I did what I could
and what I felt I had to. Beyond that there really isn't much more
that I can do.

Please, from now on, direct any and all inquiries to Gary.

* I send my deepest gratitude to all my friends and associates
that supported me and counselled me throughout this whole nasty
piece of business. I will continue to hope and pray that some
good comes out of all of this.

What follows is much more 'personal' and directed at John
Carpenter himself. I'm not comfortable with that which is
why I am extricating myself from the proceedings. All I
cared about was the abductees. Not "nailing" John Carpenter
or anybody else.

I'm out of it for now.

Enjoy the summer! See you guys in a few weeks.  :)

Warm regards to All,

John Velez


Ladies and gentlemen, may I present Gary Hart.

Gary: You're on your own!  :)  JV


Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 22:25:35 -0500
To: jvif@spacelab.net
From: geehart@frontiernet.net
Subject: Formal Complaint v1.2


Thank you very much for caring enough to make the John Carpenter
case and related ethical issues available to the members of the
UFO Updates mail list. I and the people I represent appreciate
your concern and determination to see that the truth is
available for everyone to see. Here is the first four pages of
what I presented to MUFON's John Schuessler. You may post it in
its entirety publicly or share with others as you see the need.

Comments or questions this generates can be directed to my
phone, mail or email address as I now can freely answer
questions and make statements based on the case evidence. We
must all discuss openly these ethical issues and can no longer
take them for granted. We must become informed!

~Gary Hart



Gary P. Hart
RR 4 Box 182
Bloomington IL 61704


John Scheuessler, new head of MUFON
Littleton CO

Walt Andrus, former head of MUFON
Seguin TX

Filing of a Formal Complaint with Specific Charges Against John
Steven Carpenter, MUFON Director of Abduction Investigations

John Schuessler, Walt Andrus:

As a member in good standing of the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON)
organization, I, Gary Hart wish to file a formal complaint
against MUFON's Director of Abduction Research John Carpenter
based on the investigative report and evidence attached. I
hereby charge John Carpenter with unprofessional conduct,
unethical conduct, conduct unbecoming a MUFON official and
negligent misrepresentation of himself as a health care
professional during activities that involve "abduction
research", hypnosis, contact with witnesses and the general
public. I charge John specifically with multiple violations of
both the spirit and the letter of MUFON's Code of Ethics.

Walt Andrus on several occasions and to several different people
has admitted that "MUFON is aware that John sold case files". He
has further stated that MUFON has not acted on this apparent
violation of abductee case confidentiality because "they were
John's personal files". Walt also acknowledged that John has not
supplied any cases or related documents to MUFON at any time so
that ALL John's case files could supposedly be called "personal"
and by inference uncovered by MUFON's extensive, detailed and
publicly distributed Code of Ethics. Any casual observer, using
common sense logic would see this to be a clear attempt to evade
the scope and coverage of any and all ethical controls over
John's professional investigative activities within the field of

Not only does this twist of words give John license to act in an
unethical manner by harvesting stories and denying proper care
to those persons in our society, abductees, who have been
identified as having genuine and in most cases exceptionally
traumatic experiences with UFO occupants, but other MUFON
investigators see John's lack of integrity and ethical guidance
in handling cases and feel they can act the same!

John holds one of the highest and most respected offices in all
of MUFON. John Carpenter should represent MUFON's highest
example of moral and ethical conduct among its investigators and
researchers. Unfortunately, tragically this has not been the
case. John should be striving to see that abductees can obtain
the continuing care, compassion and respect they and their
families deserve. Instead John's documented pattern of conduct
set the stage for the most heinous breech of trust that can
occur between generally uninformed, unsuspecting and trusting
abductees and the investigators researching their cases.

John stated his title as a MUFON official, presented his St.
John's Hospital business card and used his licensed medical
position to establish a special bond of trust and authority with
the witnesses who contacted him. They came under his care when
he performed hypnosis to unleash hidden or purposefully blocked
memories without proper assessment of various physical, medical
and psychological risk factors as required by MUFON's Code of
Ethics and this by his own admission. In many cases, John
obtained abductee's personal medical records, combined them with
transcripts of taped hypnosis sessions and sold these personal
case files for nothing more than his own financial gain. In many
or most cases no personal identification information was blacked

I have found John's actions to be a blot on the international
reputation of the MUFON organization as a whole. What is more
disturbing is that none of the MUFON officials I talked to would
try and verify ANY of the facts independent of communication
with John, when the charges went public in late March. Through
this investigation I have found these charges of official
misconduct to be real, substantive and represent an abuse of
power and position over many years. The MUFON organization has
an all encompassing Code of Ethics. MUFON also has a stated
expectation for the professional conduct of its members and
officials. MUFON now has an opportunity to show the Ufological
research community and the general public that their otherwise
excellent Code of Ethics means something. MUFON can restore it's
ethical and moral authority only by voting for John's removal
from his office of Director of Abduction Research and from
MUFON's Board of Directors. I hope that the Ethics Review Board
and the Board of Directors of MUFON can find the fortitude, guts
and courage to do what you have to do in a situation like this.

I expect, as a MUFON Field Investigator representing the
interests of the MUFON membership, abductees and the general
public, that the Ethics Review Board is ready to act in a timely
and decisive manner in this case, to investigate these charges
further and to render an appropriate verdict. I suggest John's
removal from office is the only appropriate course of action.
The evidence of John's guilt cannot be reconciled with any other
rational explanation for his conduct.

*** I expect MUFON to notify me in a timely fashion with a
registered letter as to what the results of the MUFON Ethics
Review Board investigation are. I want to be contacted directly,
to be clearly informed of the actions this Review Board does or
does not take regarding these charges formally directed at John
Carpenter. The entire membership expects action to be taken to
protect the integrity of the organization they are members of.
*** The Evidence

Since the case presented here is of a civil nature, I do not
need to prove this case beyond a shadow of a doubt as would be
done in a criminal case. I need only prove through a
preponderance of evidence that John is guilty as charged.

Included in this report is the 2/3 of the evidence in my
possession that best carries the case. Keep in mind that I could
have gotten many more signed statements but the present report
represents dozens of hours of investigative data collection,
phone calls, in-person interviews and painstaking paperwork.
This has taken me to the limit of my resources, not the limit of
the documentation or testimony possible!

All evidence contained in this report should be considered
confidential from MUFON's viewpoint. It would be libelous to
make the lawsuit document itself public as the specific charges
within were never proven in a court of law. Other materials may
at some time be released publically but I alone retain the right
to do so in cooperation and consideration of the abductees'
continuing rights and interests which I pledge THIS time will be

Contact with witnesses and abductees can be made through me
after their individual approval.

Walt asked in April if I would supply the list of 90 of the 140
names of abductees whose files were sold as I have a copy in my
possession. I have contacted several persons on the list, a copy
of which was picked off the floor of John's office as Elizabeth
moved out of their house in August '97, and these persons are
unwilling to trust Walt or MUFON under any proposed conditions
to keep the list confidential.

Documents have tracking numbers installed on every page. All
documents track to originals.

Suggestions for Change

May I suggest that in the future MUFON require: that all MUFON
officers and officials sign on to the MUFON Code of Ethics as a
specific requirement to hold office; that ALL abductees and/or
their files MUFON officials work with, whatever their source, be
required to have had explained clearly all risks to them from
hypnosis and other parts of the investigative process including
the potential loss of confidentiality and the potential lack of
emotional support they may have to endure.

More clearly worded Informed Consent forms should be designed
that specifically spell out issues that to-date have represented
loopholes for unethical activities. These new forms should be
required to be signed by abductees, investigators, researchers
AND mental health professionals MUFON requires to be involved
and then filed with the international office. These forms should
have a section that by signature specifically identifies what
part of the abductee's case file can be made publicly available
as might occur if their personal case file is sold to a third
party that has no Ethics Code controls in place.


John's unprofessional, unethical and fraudulent activities have
rendered his body of research worthless as we true investigative
and research professionals can no longer determine what is truth
or fiction within his abductee accounts or conclusions given the
exceptionally dysfunctional behavior this report documents as
having occurred between John and his abductee contacts.

If MUFON will not uphold the letter and intent of it's board
approved, adopted, published and sold Code of Ethics, then MUFON
and it's officers can be reasonably seen as acting in a
fraudulent manner. If MUFON or any other organization for that
matter, intentionally or otherwise defrauds the public, it
should not continue to exist as it is preying on the very public
it professes to serve.

I am taking this Ufological Code of Ethics discussion to a much
wider exposure. After talking at length with the abductee
victims involved in this case, I feel a moral obligation to do
so. Some of my communications about this case have been posted
to Internet discussion groups by individuals I have communicated

Some of the information and documentation contained within this
report may well need to be on public display such as: MUFON's
Code of Ethics, the several letters written by John Carpenter to
Robert Bigelow, John's lawyer's letter in response to the
lawsuit threat, John's recent email responses to the threat of
this investigation and the edited body of this report with some
names removed. The interests of MUFON's membership AND the
general public are NOT served by keeping this secret or out of
public view.

Most people in the field of Ufology (and surprisingly most
people in MUFON) apparently have not read and taken to heart the
tenets of MUFON's Code of Ethics so I am providing the text to
those who wish to read it. Our Code of Ethics must be our top
priority. We all need to be better informed so we can practice
the Code properly and can inform others of the proper behavior
expected between witnesses, observers, abductees, investigators,
hypnotherapists, mental health professionals of all kinds and
simple hobbyists like John professes to be.


Gary P. Hart/Illinois and Missouri MUFON Field Investigator


Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 22:40:36 -0500
To: jvif@spacelab.net
From: geehart@frontiernet.net
Subject: MUFON Guidelines/Code of Ethics v1.3


This is an updated version of the last code of ethics section I
sent you. This is another section of my report MUFON now has.

~Gary Hart


MUFON Guidelines and Code of Ethics

For those who have not ever read MUFON's Code of Ethics and
supporting articles, one of which was written by John Carpenter
himself, the relevant sections and statements are included
within this investigative report section.

John's plea is that the therapist/patient relationship never
existed, no continuing therapy was necessary and he was simply
a collector of information. He also states that he did not do
it for the money though he did (occasionally) get donations.

He does refer to Elizabeth as his patient in their love letters
in the fall of '93, just after they met in Florida. In another
letter, he says Denise (John's first wife and mother of their
three children) wondered why Elizabeth had to have a therapist
so far away from her home in Georgia. He was indeed, in his own
writing, presenting himself as Elizabeth's therapist at the
same time he was having an admitted affair with her.

I have talked to a person who was asked to pay $65 dollars for
a session done after hours at an office in one of the
hospital-owned buildings. No donation but payment for services

There are four articles in the $25 MUFON Field Investigator's
Manual, edition 4, associated with abductions and the Ethics
Code for Abduction Experience Investigations and Treatment (the
entire abduction section runs from pages 252 to 311). In one of
these articles which obviously reflect MUFON's official
published guideline process, "Hypnosis as an Adjunct to
Investigation" by Dan Overlade, it says "...the recall of a
traumatic abduction can be an emotionally upsetting,
life-disturbing experience which requires the attention of a
trained psychotherapist. A hypnotist that simply unlocks such
memories and then abandons the abductees to their own
consternation and anguish is irresponsible and insensitive."

"The abductee can be assured that disclosures to the
hypnotherapist will remain confidential until and unless the
abductee signs a release authorizing the hypnotherapist to
disclose information. This reassurance is necessary because
some memories recalled may be highly personal and embarrassing.
...(investigators should) resist the temptation to disclose
anything about a case to anyone until and unless you have clear
(and written) authorization to do so. Many abductees will be
willing to authorize such disclosure by stipulating to whom it
may be disclosed or by stipulating in what manner and to what
extent they want their identity concealed."

John S. Carpenter, M.S.W. wrote the second article, titled
"Partnership Between Investigation and Therapy" where he says:
"...the mental health professional is appropriately trained and
experienced in caring for the emotional well-being of the
individual, helping to guarantee that coping with his symptoms
takes precedence over any investigation for purposes of data

"There is also the possibility that a lack of respect for
confidentiality could occur with the involvement of a
non-professional person, bringing greater anxiety and
discomfort to the individual who is sharing disturbing or
highly-charged emotional material."

Of course these are articles and not the Ethics Code itself but
do certainly represent guidelines for behavior by MUFON members
involved with abduction investigations. The Ethics Code,
published in the same Field Investigator's Manual, ed. 4 was
voted on and approved by the MUFON board of directors on
7-10-94 and adopted for use starting on 2-95. The Code is a
guide for investigators and mental health professionals (MHPs)
working with the increasing population of individuals who have
reported "abduction experiences" and is quoted here:

Mental health professionals working with abduction experiencers
are not only ethically guided by the codes of their
professional organization, but also legally bound by the
ethical standards of their licensing bodies. Mainstream
researches working with human subjects are also bound by the
ethical standards of their professional organizations (and
MUFON). This code supplements and complements those existing

Relevant sections of the Ethics Code as applies to this case:


1. Protection of Experiencer. It is the primary purpose of this
document to protect the rights and welfare of the individuals
with whom abduction investigators and MHPs work. Ethical
investigation and treatment will serve to protect the
experiencer from unreasonable risk created by participation in
investigation or treatment.

3. Benefits to treatment. therapeutic outcome depends on the
ethical behavior of the MHP. Treatment fro the abduction
experience that follows ethical guidelines will best serve the


2. Definition of Terms

2.2 Investigator. An investigator is someone whose objective is
the collection, analysis and interpretation of data pertaining
to an abduction experience.

2.3 Mental Health Professional (MHP). A mental health
professional (MHP) is someone whose objective is the diagnosis
of, and treatment for, disorders of emotion, cognition,
behaviour, and adjustment associated with an abduction
experience. A MHP has licensing or certification reflecting
training appropriate for providing mental health services.

II. Guidelines

1. Competence and Responsibility "To maintain the integrity of
investigation or treatment in regard to the abduction
experience, investigators and MHPs have a responsibility to use
only those skills and techniques they have acquired through
training, education or experience and to maintain strict
supervision of the assistants with whom they work.
Investigators and MHPs should not misrepresent themselves in
terms of competencies or credentials they do not have. ...it is
important that investigators and MHPs are careful to practice
only the skills for which they are qualified and to practice
them in a way that goals and obligations are clear and

2. Minimal and Reasonable Risk Investigators and MHPs working
with abduction experiencers must strive to avoid causing them
any mental or physical harm and where such harm is foreseeable
or unavoidable, they should strive to minimize it. The concept
of "reasonable" and "minimal" risk is central to resolving
ethical dilemmas in this regard. As defined in the "Federal
Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects" (Federal Register
1992) "minimal risk means that the probability and magnitude of
harm or discomfort anticipated...are not greater in and of
themselves greater than those ordinarily encountered in daily
life or during the performance of routine physical or
psychological examinations or tests".

In deciding whether the critieria of minimal and reasonable
risk will be met, investigators and MHPs dealing with abduction
experiencers should bear in mind that the emergence of
disturbing or traumatic experiences, while not inevitable, must
always be anticipated... The eliciting of an abduction
experience or the bringing about of change in behavior or
attitude may be either harmful or beneficial. But they will
always represent a risk.

3.3 Assessment for Risk in Investigations. Prior to any
investigation with a subject of their known or suspected
abduction experiences, assessment should determine that no
organic, mental or behavioral disorder exists that would put
the experiencer beyond reasonable risk if an investigation were
to proceed. Because the administration and interpretation of
assessment tests or interviews requires special training, these
should be administered by an appropriately trained MHP or an
investigator or collaborator acting under the supervision of a

***John has to assess a possible abductee for physical and
psychological risk factors as an MHP before any hypnosis can
take place.

4.1 Nature of Informed Consent: As part of any ethical program
of investigation or treatment with abduction experiencers, the
experiencer's participation must be voluntary and must be based
on adequate knowledge of the investigation or treatment
protocol and possible consequences. The abduction experiencer
must receive, in understandable language, enough information
about the proposed study or course of treatment to enable them
to decide whether or not to participate.

4.3 Elements of Informed Consent in Investigations. A
description of procedures for confidentiality; anticipated
risks, discomforts and inconveniences and a description of fees
or expenses, if any, are to be included on a form signed by the
abduction experiencer to signify the experiencer's acceptance
of the protocol.

***Does John have these signed forms in his possession for all
the experiencers he performed hypnosis on and does the
information on the forms match witness statements regarding the
fees they were required to pay, the confidentiality the
experiencers were ultimately afforded and other relevant

7. Anonymity and Confidentiality Both the information from and
the identity of abduction experiencers are subject to the
principle of confidentiality. Investigators and MHPs have an
obligation to protect the confidentiality of the abduction
experiencers with whom they work. This means maintaining
confidentiality in data collection, record keeping, and data
dissemination whether by writing, lecture, through the media,
or conversation. The maintenance and limitations of
confidentiality should be provided to the abduction experiencer
as a matter of informed consent.

8. Dissemination

8.1 Access to Findings. Ethical reporting of investigations
will involve disseminaton of or availability of the methodology
and data from the investigation. Similarly, MHPs who feel that
they can advance knowledge through dissemination of the
outcomes or insights derived in the course of treatment for the
abduction experience are behoved to do so. Dissemination of
findings by both investigators and MHPs is subject to the
restrictions as outlined in section 7 above, Anonymity and

***The experiencer must be told how and why their information
is to be disseminated by BOTH investigators and MHPs through
the concept of Informed Consent.This protects both the
experiencer's physical and psychological health. For John to
say he was just an investigator (data collector) does NOT free
him of this obligation.

PART B: EXPLICATION (detailed explanation or implications) OF

II. Comments on Guidelines

1.C Hypnotists Individuals performing hypnosis for
investigation of the abduction experience should do so within a
protocol consistent with this Code. Such protocol must include
an assessment for risk before any investigation proceeds.

2. Minimal and Reasonable Risk The related notion of
"reasonable" risk goes further. It suggests that some risk,
even if minimal, may not be reasonable. Even minimal risk
should be avoided if it is not a necessary consequence of the
investigative protocol.

3.A Assessment as "Abduction Experiencer". Prior to conducting
an investigation with or providing treatment for an abduction
experiencer, it should first be determined that the individual
is an abduction experiencer. This prohibition on treatment and
investigation prior to assessment does not preclude the
collection of demographic data about an individual, obtaining a
psychological and medical history or administering
questionaires or interviews to gain a record of an individual's
conscious recall of significant life events and experiences. In
fact, such activity is required to make the assessment of
"abduction experiencer".

Investigation of or treatment for the abduction experience
should proceed only if consultation among the investigator, a
MHP and the subject or client suggests it is in the subject's
or client's best interest.

3.A.1 Determining "Best Interest" Determining what is "in the
best interest" of the subject/client is different from
assessing risk. The assessment for risk asks the question, "Is
there any way that the techniques of investigation or treatment
for the abduction experience would put the subject at
unreasonable or unnecessary risk or harm?" The determination of
"best interest" asks, "Will it benefit the subject/client to
engage in investigation or treatment for the abduction
experience?" Such a determination includes elements of
assessment for risk and informed consent, but goes further.

The determination of "best interest" provides the
subject/client an opportunity to express expectations and needs
and to obtain counseling, reassurance and information without
being subjected to a formal course of investigation or
treatment. Because diagnosis and the provision of counseling
are the purview of a MHP, the Code specifies that a MHP should
be included in any discussion to determine "best interest".

***As an MHP and MUFON Director of Abduction Research, John is
required to assess his clients before hypnosis. He cannot then
turn into a simple data collecting investigator for the
purposes of limiting his ethical ties to the information he
recovers through subsequent hypnosis without turning his
assessment of risk and what is ultimately in the best interest
of the abductee UPSIDE DOWN! It is unethical to do so without
informing the client of this. Just ask YOUR doctor!

3.A.2 Using Hypnosis for Assessment ...the concept of
"reasonable risk" precludes this Code from advocating the use
of hypnosis in the assessment phase.

3.B.2 Responsibilty for Assessment The Code specifies that a
MHP, or an associate working under the supervision of a MHP
(this person may be an "investigator") is required to make this
assessment because only the MHP has the qualifications to (a)
make the determination (diagnosis) of whether disorders exist,
and (b) make a professional judgement as to the extent to which
they represent a risk in investigation or treatment for the
abduction experience.

Investigators who have not established a collaborative
arrangement with a MHP should restrict their activities to data
collection... This is regrettable, but unavoidable. Minimizing
risk (and therefore assessing for risk) is a sine qua non of
ethical investigation and this is true regardless of the
availability of assessment resources. 4. Informed Consent The
concept of informed consent means much more than simply
obtaining an abduction experiencer's agreement to cooperate
with an investigation. It is critical that the experiencer
understand the nature of the procedures to be used and the
possible consequences of participation in the investigation.

6. Ethical Protocols

6.A Ethical Protocols in Investigations. By following the
ethical guidelines in this Code, investigators of the abduction
experience will not only be protecting the experiencers with
whom they work from harm, they will also be strengthening the
perception and reality of abduction research as a legitimate

***John has done the opposite: he has exposed his experiencers
to potential psychological harm and promoted an atmosphere of
distrust between experiencers and the research community.

7 Anonymity and Confidentiality Conducting investigation,
research or treatment with abduction experiencers will, as a
matter of course, collect sensitive personal information. Such
data should normally never be linked to or associated with any
identified individual when findings are discussed with or
disseminated to the media, the public or other colleagues. If
an experiencer has explicitly waived confidentiality, then this
restriction can be relaxed.

***One of John's arguments is that during hypnosis any other
persons in the room other than he and the  experiencer removes
confidentiality from the process and by extension as he
intends, his need for confidentiality. This is not true. It is
also untrue that, as John states, he is no longer bound to
handle a case confidentially when experiencers are interviewed
later and reveal aspects of their case to colleagues, the media
or, one can assume, anyone else.

MHPs are typically mandated by law not to disclose information
collected in their work with a client. Although this constraint
should not prevent MHPs from providing assessment services to
investigators, it should clearly be understood by investigators
that much information will not normally be disclosed by a MHP,
unless absolutely necessary or when consent has been given by
the experiencer.

8. Dissemination

8.A Access to Findings Findings (def: results of investigation)
should be reported fully and without omission of significant
data. Investigators should cooperate in efforts to make raw
data and associated documentation available to others, always
insuring that confidentiality not be violated.

***Confidentiality is violated when the experiencer is not
informed as to the transfer of their case file material to a
third party (Robert Bigelow and his NIDS organization) for
personal gain. This violation is more obvious when it is
realized that John's letter before the transaction indicates
his dire need for money and the letter after the "the contract"
letter simply thanks R. Bigelow for the financial assistance:
"Personally, I want to thank you, Bob, for your assistance
regarding the 140 cases I mailed to you. That helped pay some
bills." No mention of research or what the files were to be
used for other than to aid John financially.

9. Approaches to Ethical Issues In assessing one's day-to-day
practice, as well as in resoving ethical dilemmas,
investigators and MHPs should be guided by the spirit as well
as the letter of the Code. Do no harm. Make sure there are no
problems that will be made worse by what you do and try not to
create new problems.

END of the BODY of the Ethics Code


***We have no idea what the form John had some or all of his
clients sign but these relevant statements are taken from
MUFON's sample form included in the Field Investigator's

"To advance knowledge most effectively, it is important that
information learned in this investigation be shared with other
investigators. In so doing, unless otherwise authorized by you,
your identity will remain anonymous and any information that
would allow identification will be held in confidence."

"...I also understand that the results of this investigation
may be made available to other investigators and that my
identity will remain anonymous, unless agreed otherwise." END

***In the statement at the front of all MUFON Symposium
Proceedings, it is written: "In order that only qualified,
competent and sincere people may become involved, membership in
MUFON is by invitation only." This strongly implies a control
over the membership process to ensure all members follow
established organizational structures and guidelines.

The statement continues: "Field Investigators are trained and
high standards of professionalism are required by MUFON.
...Field Investigators uphold the confidentiality of witnesses
and case information." A common sense interpretation of these
statements implies this high standard of training,
professionalism and ability to uphold witness confidentiality
is best exemplified by the professionals invited to be members
of MUFON's Board of Directors. Given the fact that MUFON SELLS
it's Field Investigator's Manual, it can be reasonably assumed
that MUFON's Directors, international staff, country, region
and State Directors and their respective officers all would be
required to operate within the organizational structure and
Code of Ethics guidelines stated clearly within its pages
without an obvious attempt made to evade responsibility to do
so. In John's case MUFON has allowed a situation contrary to
this assumption.

It is unknown how far these inconsistent actions or structures
have spread. It has been stated by a well-known researcher that
"everyone does it" referring to selling files. This "everyone
does it" statement was also applied to having sexual relations
between researchers and abductees. John's situation may just be
the tip of the iceberg!

I know firsthand that some MUFON State Directors fail to follow
ANY of MUFON's organizational, structural or ethical guidelines
and the state structure is rendered totally unresponsive to the
wishes of the general membership in those states. Make no
mistake: this is a prescription for the unethical and
unprofessional treatment of witnesses, MUFON members and the
defrauding of the general public and the fact that this
provably already occurs because of the MUFON Board of
Directors' lack of control or guidance over situations
demanding such is not unexpected.

John opened a Pandora's box of problems for himself and the
abduction experiencers he has worked with when he sold case
files to pay his own bills. These problems cannot themselves be
undone. WE have a responsibility to see that this sort of
situation NEVER happens again!


                     A.I.C. - Abduction Information Center -
  "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."