UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Dec > Dec 30

Re: Oddity In Chandler & Buran's Rendlesham

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:50:22 EST
Archived: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 10:17:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Oddity In Chandler & Buran's Rendlesham

>From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 23:10:10 -0600
>Subject: Oddity In Chandler & Buran's Rendlesham Statements

>Another Seeming Oddity In Chandler & Buran's Rendlesham

>Although I know we're not supposed to question the credibility
>of anyone involved in the Rendlesham incidents except the
>witnesses who claim that something extraordinary occurred, I've
>already had the temerity to comment on the seemingly odd use of
>an identical phrase concerning the time of the incident in the
>official statements of J. D. Chandler and Fred Buran. So I might
>as well stick my neck out a bit further at the risk of getting
>my head bitten off by Mr. Shough and comment on something else I
>find rather odd about these two statements:

>The identical boilerplate legalese at the beginning of both
>their statements. Apparently photocopied onto the top of the
>blank statement form used by both men is the following sentence:

>"I do hereby voluntarily and of my own free will make the
>following statement without having been subjected to coercion,
>unlawful influence, or unlawful inducement."

It isn't "photocopied onto the top of the blank statement form"
as if it is some intrusive insertion or an extraneous
"boilerplate [that] was especially added to these two witnesses'
statements." It was not "highly suspicious[ly]" inserted into
Chandler's and Buran's statements. It is part of the official
USAF form AF 1170, printed by the US Government Printing Office
as form 1977-241-130/1323.

>Perhaps someone with knowledge of Air Force procedures can say
>whether adding such boilerplate to incident reports is routine?

It is part of the printed USGPO form! It wasn't "added" to the
form! It is the same typeface used throughout the form with the
same size, spacing, and print density. It is apparently printed
using an IBM Selectric typewriter print text so it would like
look like the entire statement was typewritten when new material
was typed on it using an IBM Selectric. You can say that was a
bit deceptive or misleading on the part of the form's designers
in 1977 but you can't claim that it was invented on the spot and
inserted into the Rendlesham witnesses' statements in 1980.

>If so, it is just plain silly and pointless. Clearly, if the
>testimony had been coerced or induced by bribery, the signatory
>would as willingly have lied about the lack of coercion or
>bribery as he would about the substance of his statement. This
>may just indicate the hand of an Air Force lawyer, and lawyers
>have been known to write things that seem silly and
>incomprehensible to mere mortals.

It is just standard legalese found in many places in the legal
world! It is apparently used by interrogators to 'prove' they
did not beat the confession out of a suspect, etc., because the
suspect states of his own 'free will' (skipping theological and
philosophical arguments over whether free will exists) that he
was not coerced, unlawfully induced or influenced, etc.

These were AF Military Police and these were obviously the
standard AF forms they used every day and had lying around in
some quantities so they used them to write up their UFO incident
narratives. I don't see what the big deal is here.

I have already proven in other posts that false statements had
been made about a fruitless "2 mile lighthouse chase" - not
physically possible for 1.9 miles of any 2-mile trek hence are
outright lies - most probably inserted or 'influenced' or coerced
into the Cabansag and Burroughs statements. This was proven on
the basis of absolutely conclusive physical facts, not
subjective opinions.

>But if, on the other hand, this boilerplate was especially
>added to these two witnesses' statements and not in accordance
>with any required Air Force procedure, then it would be a
>highly suspicious indication of "protesting too much" on the
>part of whoever added it.

See previous comments.

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ 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