UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2000 > Jul > Jul 27

UpDate: Re: Budd Hopkins on John Carpenter - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:42:18 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:00:46 -0400
Subject: UpDate: Re: Budd Hopkins on John Carpenter - Gates


 >Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 17:11:39 -0400
 >From: Ann Mulvey <annmulvey@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Budd Hopkins on John Carpenter
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 00:34:17 -0400 (EDT)
 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Budd Hopkins on John Carpenter
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 02:19:08 -0400
 >>>From: John Velez<jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Budd Hopkins on John Carpenter
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>I mentioned in my last post that I had a call in to Budd
 >>>inquiring about John Carpenters remark that Budd has supplied
 >>>him with "cases." Following is Budd's response. As you will see,
 >>>Budd misinterpreted my original question. He thinks I inquired
 >>>if he ever "referred" anyone to John C. which is not what I was
 >>>asking. My response to Budd follows his e-mail to me.

 ><snip>

 >>>My question was not whether you ever referred "abductees" to
 >>>John. My question related to a statement that John made on the
 >>>CompuServe UFO Forum about you having supplied him with abductee
 >>>-cases.- The quote from the posting is as follows:

Hi Ann,

Actually that quote from the posting (that is just below) was in
fact not made by John V (probably an error on Budd's part) but
was part of my original post to UpDates.  Compare the quote
below, with the third paragraph in my original posting which I
have appended to the bottom of this email for your convience.
Naturally, from my point of view you are welcome to post the
entire post at the CS forum.  Hope this clarifies my comment.

 >>>Allegedly with his work with the MUFON abduction transcription
 >>>project he presumably would have had full access to MUFON
 >>>abductee files (besides his own), not to mention copies of files
 >>>that other researchers may have sent him. For example in the
 >>>Alien Zoo interview he is alleged to have made the claim that
 >>>Budd Hopkins has sent "cases".

 >>This was from my original post on UpDates. I see it made it to
 >>the compuserve UFO forum. Out of curiousity did the entire post
 >>make it, or only this excerpt.

 >Hi Robert,

 >I just went into CS's UFO Forum and searched. I find no message
 >quoting you. Myself and another staffer have been posting entire
 >UpDates messages that are applicable to this issue [permission
 >to post since 1997] but I don't see anything posted from you.

 >The entire posts that are in UFO have either been from me or
 >John Velez. Your response to John Velez has not been posted to
 >my knowledge. I made reference to The Alien Zoo article in my
 >post entitled "Our Children" which I posted in both areas. If
 >we've missed something please let me know, but I just had
 >another staff member look through all those messages and we
 >can't find it.


Below is the original post.  See the third paragraph.

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 03:48:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Subject: Abductee Files, Carpenter & NIDS - Thus Far
To: updates@sympatico.ca


Forgive the repeat, but as I understand the whole scandal thus
far from the many and varied posts not to mention private ones
on this subject, it essentially boils down to the following.

John Carpenter is on the Board of Directors of MUFON and over
abduction research. Over the years of his research with
abductee's John Carpenter is alleged to have collected at least
140 files loaded with various personal and medical records of
abductee's including tapes and transcripts.

Allegedly with his work with the MUFON abduction transcription
project he presumably would have had full access to MUFON
abductee files (besides his own), not to mention copies of files
that other researchers may have sent him. For example in the
alien zoo interview he is alleged to have made the claim that
Budd Hopkins has sent "cases."

According to the same Alien Zoo interview he worked on
"collecting and analyzing details regarding more than 80 cases,
including the backgrounds of his subjects." So its also possible
that 80 cases were his "personally" with another 60 coming from
outside sources, i.e. MUFON, and or other researchers.

This kind of ties into another story being told privately that
there may have been quite a number additional files
sold/transferred to person/entity on the outside.

In the final analysis it is possible that the publicly mentioned
"140 files" may be the tip of the iceberg, or the entire iceberg
depending on the story.

It was alleged that JC had a cash flow problem and decided to
peddle said files to NIDS. After the public eruption and people
sent questions to NIDS we find out that it was Robert Bigelow
who bought them not NIDS.

Allegedly Walt Andrus received assurances from JC that the files
had been redacted (blacked out) of personal information before
they were sold. Supposedly after the public disclosure,
NIDS/Bigelow has returned at least 7, or there about, files to
the abductees, but allegedly, according to said abductees all
the personal information was in full view.

One would naturally conclude that if these stories are true, Walt
and by default the MUFON board got stroked. Walt should be given
credit for being forth right and honest about this, rather then
attempting to bury or cover it up.

It is likely that even though the original files got "returned"
after the disclosure its quite possible/likely that copies of
the files were made before returning them to the abductee's.

Understandably the abductees (whose files were leaked) are very
upset over all of this. Especially when they approached or were
referred to a supposedly 'reputable researcher', connected to
and a member of the board of a 'reputable UFO organization', in
confidence, provided highly personal information and later find
out that he allegedly had a cash flow problem, sold the files,
and never bothered to ask, notify or get permission of the
individuals involved.

  From the Bigelow/NIDS perspective I am sure they feel they made
a legal business transaction and purchased what they believed
(or was represented/alleged to them) to be JC's personal
abductee files from JC's years of research.

We are likely not going to get much more information, from
anybody unless the abductee's decide to sue, witness's are
deposed and documents are produced as part of a civil suit.

Some idle questions, with equally idle answers.

1) When did JC inform Walt and the rest of the board?

Likely answer: after the public eruption.


2) What is the MUFON board going to do, if anything at all?
Since the matter is likely to end up in court, I would suspect
we won't hear much more from the board probably on the advice
of the MUFON attorney. If it doesn't go to court, I suspect that
some of the party(s) involved may want to "forget" about the whole
thing and hope it blows over and goes away.


3) Is the MUFON board planning to conduct an investigation and
make a full and complete disclosure to the members?

Likely answer: I would hope so, but it will be dependant
on if it goes to court.


4) How many MUFON abductee case files did JC have access to as
part of his MUFON work?

Likely answer: probably the whole lot.


5) Do we have assurances that none of those were copied and
passed on to anybody, including NIDS?

Likely answer: Absolutely no official MUFON abductee files were
transferred to anybody through JC.

_But_ then again who knows what JC may have done with them if he
had them in his possession. He claimed to Walt Andrus that the
140 files were redacted before being passed on to NIDS and
allegedly they went out in full view.


6) What if anything will be said by the notables in Ufology and
the various UFO publications?

Likely answer: My suspicion (and I hope I am wrong) is many
people will not want to comment or discuss the matter. In the
UFO publications the story will be mentioned in passing, or not
at all and the excuse for not covering the story will be "well
it was all over the Internet, so it was old news..."

I do predict that it will gain front page coverage in Phil
Klass's news letter.

I am sure there will be many other questions asked as this
unfolds.

As to JC personally, I remember when Bill Moore was one of the
very public researchers on Roswell, addressing MUFON conferences
and such. Then came his 1989 story that he was allegedly
involved in a OSI/AF plot to discredit UFO researchers including
as I recall Linda Howe and Paul Bennowitz.

His "credibility" instantly plunged through the bottom (and he
didn't sell any private files and such) and other then what he
self-published, he was not doing the UFO lecture circuit
anymore. With that memory in mind, its quite likely (whether you
agreed with him or not) that JC's credibility has gone down a
notch or two in the minds of many people.

Cheers,

Robert





[ 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