ALSACAT:

GENDARMERIE NATIONALE Company: [Deleted] Unit: [Deleted] C.U. 03470 - PV 00052/99

REPORT OF ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

FRAME FOR THE RECIPIENT DOCUMENT Nr: 01 SHEET Nr: 1

ANALYSIS AND REFERENCES:

-o- Observation of an unidentified aerospace phenomenon.

-o- December 22, 1998 à

-o- Case. E C

We the undersigned: Gendarme F[Deleted] J[Deleted], in residence in [Deleted],

Given the articles: 59 and 298 of the decree of May 20, 1903, about the rules for the organization of the gendarmerie service.

Report the following operations:

---

-o- PREAMBLE -o-

-o- The 15th of January, nineteen hundred and ninety-nine, at fourteen o'clock and twenty minutes, appears at the office of our unit, Miss E[Deleted] C[Deleted], 19-year-old, residing [Deleted]

This person wishes to inform us that she observed at [Deleted], on December 22, 1998, at 06:05 p.m., an unidentified aerospace phenomenon.

We collect her testimony.

-o- EXPOSE OF THE FACTS -o-

-o- Miss E[Deleted] makes a two-day retreat at the Benedictine convent, [Deleted]

On December 22, 1998 at 06:00 p.m., she leaves the convent to walk in the park surrounding this place of prayer.

While walking in this park, she sees at 06:05 p.m. in a direction defined as North-West an unidentified aerospace phenomenon.

She observes this phenomenon for about a minute.

- Of this observation, Miss [Deleted] did not tell anyone until late December 1998, when she confided to a friend in the person of B[Deleted] L[Deleted], investigator for the region [Deleted] at the l'observatoire national de discernement des énigmes scientifiques. [National Observatory of Discernment of Scientific Enigmas, O.N.D.E.S].

- On the advice of this friend, Miss E[Deleted] comes to our unit on January 15, 1999 and brings these facts to our attention.

The investigator

Mr the prefect of [Deleted] à ... Mr the General, commander of the arial region at ... D.G.G.N - Defese operation Intelligence Section at ... Archives

Date of closure 01/17/1999 Signed

Transmitted on Signed

Company: [Deleted] Unit: [Deleted] C.U. 03470 - PV 00052/99

REPORT OF ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

01 2

-o- INVESTIGATION -o-

- o - On January 15, 1999 at 02:20 p,m,, we proceed to the hearing of E[Deleted] C[Deleted]. She states that she observed an aerospace phenomenon on December 22, 1998, at 06:05 p.m. while she was in the convent of [Deleted] at [Deleted]. She states that she observed a shape resembling a luminous snake formed of luminescent discs of red and white colors. This phenomenon emitted no noise, moving relatively quickly. E[Deleted] C[Deleted] estimates the altitude of this phenomenon to about twenty meters.

She observed this flying object for about a minute, which disappeared in a north / northeast direction after making two loops in the sky.

At the time of the observation, the sky was clear and the witness could see the stars.

She concludes by stating that she presents herself to our services on the advice of B[Deleted] L[Deleted]. She was unaware that it was necessary to make such observations known to the attention of the various civilian and military administrations.

(see Hearing - Exhibit 02).

Following the collection of this information, we bring to the attention of the various authorities made responsible for the present proceedings that the date and time of the observation correspond to the period of Christmas, a religious holiday particularly attended in [Deleted].

On the occasion of the Christmas holidays, all the municipalities of the region put in place many more or less powerful lighting systems.

-o- It should also be noted that no other testimony more or less resembling the observation of E[Deleted] C[Deleted] has been brought to our attention. We contacted the administrative authorities and municipal police services of the municipality of [Deleted] and neighboring municipalities. No evidence related to the phenomenon observed on December 22, 1998 was brought to our attention.

-o- We made contact with B[Deleted] L[Deleted], friend of the declarant, who sent us his card which we attach to the present proceedings. This person let us know that he had on his initiative, carried out an investigation in the region of [Deleted]. B[Deleted] L[Deleted] told us that his investigation was not definitively closed, but that already it appears that the phenomenon observed by E[Deleted] C[Deleted] did not correspond to any known natural phenomenon.

The investigator

Company: [Deleted] Unit: [Deleted] C.U. 03470 - PV 00052/99

REPORT OF ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

-o- CLOSURE -o-

- o - from the investigation conducted and investigations undertaken, it appears that the aerospace phenomenon observed at [Deleted] on December 22, 1998 at 06:05 p.m. by the named E[Deleted] C[Deleted], is of unknown origin.

- o - As a result, we close the present proceedings and forward them to the various authorities indicated for the purpose of dispatch.

done and Closed at [Deleted]
January 17, 1999

The investigator

GENDARMERIE NATIONALE Company: [Deleted] Unit: [Deleted] C.U. 03470 - PV 00052/99

REPORT OF ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION ---------- AUDITION

FRAME FOR THE USE OF THE RECEIPIEN DOCUMENT Nr: 02 SHEET Nr: 1

We the undersigned: gendarme F[] J[], Officier of Judicial Police, on residence at [Deleted]
Given the articles 20 and 21-1 of the CPP
Report the following operations:

---

Being at [Deleted], at the office of our unit, we hear:

E[Deleted] C[Deleted], aged 19.
residing [Deleted]
daughter of [Deleted]
single, student, French nationality,

who declares the fifteenth day of January, nineteen hundred and ninety-nine, at quarter past eleven, fifteen minutes,

"I bring to your attention the following facts: On Tuesday, December 22, 1998, at 6:05 pm, I was in the Convent Park of the [Deleted]. I specify that I had spent a fortnight in that convent. Indeed I had come for a retreat.

At 6:05 p.m., this December 22nd, 1998, after having left the convent and having made a tour in the park of this same convent, I had, I do not know why, the desire to look up, and it is then that I saw in the sky, facing me, in a northwest direction, a kind of snake formed of balls of red and white color. In fact, I specifiy that it was not really balls but rather discs. Some were red, some were white. The position of these discs was not regular. In fact, there could be three white disks and then one red. But I specify that never two red discs were next to each other.

The snake formed by these disks did not flutter, but moved en masse.

"When I first saw this thing, I thought it might be a light in the nightclub, and the following days I saw pictures of rays of light from the discotheques and what I had seen the evening of December 22, 1998 at [] did not fit at all with that.

"From where I was, I was hearing a dog barking, I did not hear any other particular noises.

"The phenomenon I was observing in the sky was not noisy.

"The luminous snake in the sky filled an imaginary rectangle. According to me it might have measured a good ten meters long by two or three meters wide, and I estimate the distance from this snake at about a hundred steps. As for the altitude of this phenomenon, it seems to me that it was equivalent to the height of a two-storey house surmounted by a person, about fifteen to twenty meters.

"I was able to observe this phenomenon arounds [sic] a minute, the serpent made a first loop on itself and then I saw it start a second loop, I turned my head, I took another tour of the park and then back to my initial point, I saw this phenomenon again loop in the sky, (it was a jerky move) and finally disappear in an east / northeast direction.

"The phenomenon was bright, as when one sees a red light in the night and we are two or three meters from that fire.

The person heard

[Signed.]

The Officer of Judicial Police

[Signed.]

Rosheim (67) on December 22, 1998

General features

Num Base:	3099
Département:	Bas Rhin (67)
Place of observation:	Rosheim
Latitude:	48.5
Longitude:	+7.466
Date of observation:	22 décembre 1998
Hour:	18:05 hours
Duration (HH:MM:SS):	00:00:20
Weather:	Nice weather, clear sky
Type of observation:	Visual: Distant
Nbr of witness(es):	1
Official investigation:	No

Features of the object

Nbr of object:	1
Type of object:	Boat with two chimneys
Size:	Not specified
Color:	Several colors
Luminosity:	Not specified
Visual characteristics:	Numerous lights
Speed:	slow then fast
Movement/Displacement:	boucles
Object on the ground:	No
Instantaneous disappearance:	No

Observation

A young woman discovers in the sky a group of light which approaches. It was a kind of ondulement made of several lights. The whole makes a loop and a half in the sky. The witness does a tour in the park where she is and re-examines the phenomenon they are luminous circles white or pink each light is composed of a clear circle and of an attenuated circle the whole forms a sinusoid of made up of 4 maxima or minima. The phenomenon (i.e. the whole of the sinusoid) made two loops in a jerked way with an acceleration in the loops. It is rather low. It finishes its loop slightly changes direction and after a short moment where it conntinues its race it accelerates at a phaenomenal speed and disappears in the night. Durations of the observation 20 seconds in all.

Sources

Lumières dans la Nuit numéro 352

cnes
geipan

Direction Adjointe de la direction des systèmes orbitaux
Groupe d'Etudes et d'Information sur les Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non identifies

Toulouse, le 14/11/2017
DSO/DA//GP

COMPTE RENDU D'ENQUÊTE

ROSHEIM (67) 22.12.1998

CAS D'OBSERVATION

1 – CONTEXTE

Le GEIPAN continue à publier l'ensemble de ses archives sur son site public www.geipan.fr. Dans ses publications, figurent des cas anciens classés à l'époque (A, B, C ou D) et qui font aujourd'hui l'objet d'un réexamen, dans le seul but d'être plus pertinent dans les conclusions. Grâce à de nouveaux moyens techniques (logiciels) et à l'expérience d'enquête acquise depuis toutes ces dernières années, ce réexamen aboutit quelquefois à de nouvelles remarques voire à un changement de classification.

Ce cas d'observation précédemment classé D et nommé ROSHEIM (67) 22.12.1998 fait partie d'un ensemble de cas réexaminés récemment.

Le seul document en la possession du GEIPAN relatif à ce cas d'observation est le procès-verbal de Gendarmerie daté du 15.01.1999.

Il concerne l'observation depuis la commune de ROSHEIM (67) par un témoin d'un PAN.

2- DESCRIPTION DU CAS

Voici la description du cas, extraite du procès-verbal:

Témoin n°1:

"Je porte à votre connaissance les faits suivants: le mardi 22 décembre à 18h05, je me trouvais dans le parc du couvent des bénédictines à Rosheim. Je précise que je venais de passer quinze jours dans ce couvent. En effet, j'y étais venue pour effectuer une retraite.

[Pied de page standard]

2/15

At 6:05 p.m., on December 22, 1998, after leaving the convent and having taken a walk in the park of this same convent, I had, I don't know why, the urge to look up, and it was then that I saw in the sky, in front of me, in a north-westerly direction, a kind of snake formed of balls of red and white color. In fact, I specify that they were not really balls but rather discs. Some were red, others white. The position of these colored discs was not regular. In fact, there could be three white discs, then a red one, then two white discs then a red one. But I specify that never two red discs were next to each other.

The serpent formed by these discs did not undulate but moved en masse.

When I first saw this thing, I thought it might be a nightclub light. In the following days I saw photos showing rays of light emitted by discos and what I saw on the evening of December 22, 1998 in Rosheim did not correspond to this at all.

From where I was, I could hear a dog barking, I couldn't hear any other particular noises.

The phenomenon I observed in the sky made no noise.

The luminous serpent in the sky filled an imaginary rectangle. According to me, it could measure a good ten meters wide. I estimate the distance that separated me from this serpent at about a hundred paces. As for the altitude of this phenomenon, it seems to me that it was equivalent to the height of a two-storey house surmounted by a person, or about fifteen to twenty meters.

I was able to observe this phenomenon for about a minute. The snake made a first loop on itself then I saw it start a second one. I turned my head, I went around the park again then returning to my initial point, I saw this phenomenon repeat two loops in the sky, (it was a jerky moment) then disappear definitively in a east/northeast direction.

The phenomenon was luminous, like when you see a red light in the night and you are two or three meters from this light.

During my observation, the sky was clear, cloudless, I could see the stars, it was dark.

At first, I didn't tell anyone about it, then about ten days later, I met a friend Mr xxx, who is interested in this kind of phenomena. I explained to him what I had seen. He then advised me to go tell these facts to your services. I was unaware that it was necessary to bring these kinds of observations to your attention.

This is the first time I have observed this kind of phenomenon. Never in my life have I seen anything like this in the sky, other than nightclub "lasers".

The phenomenon I observed remains in my memory and I would certainly be able to recognize it on a photograph."

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

3/15

3- INVESTIGATION PROCESS

The geographical location is summarized on the map below.

[Map.]

[Map legend:] WITNESS POSITION AND INITIAL (GREEN) AND FINAL (BLUE) DIRECTIONS OF OBSERVATION

The meteorological data: these are those for the city of Strasbourg (67), located about 23 km in straight line east-northeast of the witness's position.

On December 22, 1998, at 5 p.m., the weather was very cloudy:

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

4/15

[Table.]

The public hourly data from Météo-France further details this cloudiness:

[Table.]

Between 5 p.m. and 6 p.m., the sky was covered at 7/8 oktas, on two ceilings (950/1100 m and 2700 m) by stratocumulus (code 6) and altocumulus (code 3) type clouds respectively.

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

5/15

Analysis

It is always very important to start from the interpretation of the witness and to take into account the objections that the witness may formulate.

• He spontaneously thought of disco projector lights and the objection comes next when he compares with photos representing these lights. "When I first saw this thing, I thought it might be a nightclub light. Over the next few days, I saw pictures of rays of light emitted from nightclubs and what I I saw on the evening of December 22, 1998 in Rosheim did not correspond to this at all."
• The witness ends his statement with "This is the first time I have observed this kind of phenomenon. Never in my life have I seen this kind of thing in the sky, except for nightclub "lasers".

Laser outdoor projectors were indeed already well used in discotheques at that time and were at the origin of UAP's (see ILE BOUCHARD (37) 11.12.1993 http://www.cnes-geipan.fr/index.php?id=202&cas=1993-12-01340).

The effects of these rays of light in the sky are very variable. The rising beams can be visible alone and get lost in the sky without making a spot on a sky screen, just as the latter can be visible alone without rising beams, or both can be visible simultaneously. Most often the photos represent the rising rays with or without the spots on the screen. As in the examples below. If the witness found only this type of photos (at the time, there is little or no internet) it is normal that he rejected his own initial hypothesis, since he only sees luminous discs in the sky. He would have met other certainly less spectacular photos where we only see the spots in the sky, see example below, his objection might not have taken place.

We therefore retain that:

• The luminous discs in the sky could have been perceived by the witness as lights from disco projectors
• The witness's objection to his own idea can be explained by the variability (unknown to him at the time) of the effects in the sky of these searchlights, in particular the presence or not of the rising beams.

It is therefore appropriate to retain this hypothesis and compare it with the other elements of the observation.

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

6/15

[Photos, captionned:]

Pictures of "skytracer" with rising beams.

[Photo, captionned:]

Photos of "skytracer" with spots in the sky without rising beams

Presence or absence of a beam.

The projection up beam may or may not be visible, depending on local weather conditions, with pollution also most likely playing a role, as well as the light output of this beam.

The presence of fine particles in suspension in the atmosphere is an essential and crucial factor in the formation of a light beam. These particles can be water droplets, microparticles of pollutants, etc.

At the time of the observation, the sky was covered at 7/8 oktas, on two ceilings (950/1100 m and 2700 m) by respectively stratocumulus and altocumulus clouds. The conditions were therefore ideal for the impacts of the searchlights to be projected onto this cloud layer and to be visible. There was no rain in the hours which preceded the observation, which is in favor of non-visibility of the beams, without however guaranteeing it for lack of additional data on the presence or not of fine particles in suspended in the air.

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

7/15

Note the statement of the witness concerning the cloud cover: "during my observation, the sky was clear, cloudless, I could see the stars". It is possible that passages of low clouds alternate at this time with significant clearings, depending on the light environment, the observation distance, this cloud layer may not have been detected by the witness.

UAP Movements

They are described as follows:

• "The serpent formed by these discs did not undulate but moved en masse."
• "The luminous serpent in the sky filled an imaginary rectangle."
• "The snake made a first loop on itself then I saw it start a second one. [...] I saw this phenomenon repeat two loops in the sky, (it was jerky for a moment) then definitely disappear in an east/northeast direction."

These movements are reminiscent of those produced by certain motorized and automated projectors producing discotheque beams, or during various events (sporting, cultural, festive, etc.).

It would therefore be a set of small projectors positioned in a circle and mounted on a motorized support allowing the translation and rotation of the whole, "in one block". The rotation giving the visual impression that the "snake loops" always in the same space ("in an imaginary rectangle") and the translation producing its disappearance.

Appearance and color of UAP

Disco projectors whose beams are projected at the base of low clouds often look like this:

[Photo.]

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

8/15

[Photo.]

[Photo.]

It may be noted that the "ball" or "disk" shaped appearance, as described by the witness, is clearly visible in this last example, just like in the examples shown at the beginning of the analysis.

Also note this video taken in Marseille in February 2011.

The color is usually bluish, but white is also quite common. Red is more rare, but does not pose any particular problems to implement with a simple red filter to be affixed in front of the projector. However, for this precise case of observation, it seems more probable and more economical that the projectors possibly at the origin of the confusion already have their own fixed individual filter, alternately red and white (at the time the LED projectors did not did not yet exist or had barely arrived in France). We couldn't find any examples of such projectors being used in 1998, but without the motorized part it might look like this:

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

9/15

A word on the luminosity as described by the witness, similar to that of "a red traffic light in the night located two three meters away". Compared to the luminosity produced by the impact of beams on the base of the clouds, it seems much too strong. Indeed, these light spots are generally described as being pale or diffuse. On the other hand, this perception of the witness is to be put into perspective and can hardly be accepted against the hypothesis because it does not prevent him from concluding his statement with "This is the first time that I Never in my life have I seen anything like this in the sky, other than nightclub "lasers"."

Observation azimuth

The witness mentions a sighting in the direction of the northwest and a disappearance towards the east or the northeast. In this direction, and more broadly towards the north, no structure likely to have used searchlights is present, apart from:

• a Baccarat discotheque (le canotier) located to the north, in the town of Mutzig, but it does not seem to use projectors in its evenings and it is not certain that it existed in 1998.
• the village hall of Gresswiller, but which was built after 2000.

We could also consider the existence of another structure that used floodlights in 1998 but has since disappeared; in an area delimited by a wide semi-circle extending from the suburbs of Strasbourg to the east-north-east to the villages located to the north and northwest of the position of the witnesses. Unfortunately, almost 20 years having passed since this observation until now, the data relating to these possible structures (discotheques, halls of festivals, parks...) are very difficult to find. Thus, despite all our research, no concrete information could be found.

Date

The date of the observation being a Tuesday evening, the hypothesis of the nightclub having been able to use a laser is to be excluded, these establishments being open only on weekends. A local event

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

10/15

(commercial, sports, cultural, etc.) could very well have taken place during the week and used this equipment.

On the other hand, we are a few days away from Christmas, and preparations for the end-of-year celebrations are in full swing in Alsace. It is possible that a private individual or that the city of Rosheim carried out some tests of light effects with projectors near where the witness was, in anticipation of a local festivity on Christmas Day and/or the week next.

The analysis makes it possible to establish the correct probability of confusion with spots of impact in the sky of ground projectors of lights (discotheque laser type):

• At the time of the observation, the phenomenon was new for the GEIPAN, but the large number of testimonies explained since (see the www.geipan.fr website, search for cases with Laser or Skyrose phenomenon) makes it possible to affirm that the appearance and movement such as that described by the witness is consistent with the impact spots of these ray projectors on low clouds.
• The weather conditions are compatible with the production of spots on a sky screen (clouds) without visibility of rising beams
• Discotheques already used projectors, the pattern and movement of spots in the sky was achievable by the projector technology of the time.
• Key element confirming the hypothesis, the witness did it himself, and we can explain what made him reject this hypothesis (and ultimately testify): the first photos available at the time (and internet did not exist or almost did not exist) had to show the effects of laser in the sky in the most spectacular version with rising beams, while rising beams are not always visible, and this was probably the case that night.

Although testimony is relatively complete with a good description of the UAP and the existence of azimuth readings, it is old (almost 20 years) and it seems difficult to find elements to confirm the hypothesis so long after. It also lacks readings of the apparent angular size of the UAP as well as estimates of its angular height on the horizon. An on-site investigation at the time would have made it possible to deepen these items and make certain checks relating to the existence of a structure (discotheque, village hall, park, etc.) able of using projectors within the framework of festive activities on Christmas Eve.

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

11/15

3.1. SYNTHESIS OF THE COLLECTED INFORMATION

TEMOIN N°1

#	QUESTION	ANSWER (AFTER INVESTIGATION)
A1	Commune and department of observation of the witness (ex: Paris (75))	ROSHEIM (67)
A2	(opt) if unknown commune (during a trip): Commune of the start of the displacement; Commune of the End of the displacement
A3	(opt) if during a trip: name of the boat, of the Road or Flight / plane number
Conditions of observation of the phenomenon (for each witness)
B1	Occupation of the witness before the observation	WANDERED IN A PARK
B2	Precise address of the place of observation	48.4929/7.4633
B3	Description of the place of observation	CONVENT PARK
B4	Date of observation (JJ/MM/AAAA)	22/12/1998
B5	Hour of the start of the observation (HH:MM:SS)	18:05:00
B6	Duration of the observation(s) or Hour of end (HH:MM:SS)	APPROXIMATELY ONE MINUTE
B7	Other witnesses? If yes, how many?	NO
B8	(opt) If yes, what link with the other witnesses?	/
B9	Observation continuous or discontinuous?	CONTINUOUS
B10	If discontinuous, why was the observation interrupted?	/
B11	What caused the end of the observation?	/
B12	Phenomene observed directly?	YES
B13	UAP observed with an instrument? (which one?)	NO
B14	Weather conditions	CLOUDED SKY 7/8 OKTAS AT LEVEL 950/1100 M
B15	Astronomical conditions	/
B16	Active or switched on equipments	/
B17	Known sources od external noises	BARKING DOG
Description of the perceived phenomenon
C1	Number of observed phenomena?	1
C2	Shape	"SNAKE" MADE OF DISCS
C3	Color	RED AND WHITE
C4	Luminosity	SIMILAR TO A "RED TRAFFIC LIGHT IN THE NIGHT LOCATED AT TWO

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

12/15

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

		OR THREE METERS"
C5	Trail or halo?	/
C6	Apparent size (maximal)	/
C7	Noise coming from the phenomenon?	NO
C8	Estimated distance (if possible)	/
C9	Azimuth of appearance of the UAP (°)	315°
C10	Height of appearance of the UAP (°)	/
C11	Azimuth of disappearance of the UAP (°)	BETWEEN 45° AND 90°
C12	Height of disappearance of the UAP (°)	/
C13	Trajectory of the phenomenon	MAKES LOOPS IN THE SKY
C14	Portion of the sky crossed by the UAP	/
C15	Effect(s) on the environment	/
For the following items, juste indicate whether the witness answered these questions
E1	Reconstitution on map and photo/sketches of the observation?	/
E2	Emotions felt by the witness during and after the observation?	/
E3	What did the witness do after the observation?	/
E4	What interpretation does he give to what he observed?	/
E5	Interest for UAP before the observation?	/
E6	Origine of the interest for UAP?	/
E7	Did the witness opinion about UAP change?	/
E8	Does the witness think science will give an explication to UAP?	/

13/15

4- CONSIDERED HYPOTHESIS

The only hypothesis considered is that of confusion with a set of motorized searchlights on the ground and forming impact spots on the cloud layer located at low altitude.

4.1. SYNTHESIS OF THE HYPOTHESIS

HYPOTHESIS			EVALUATION*
1. Skytrackers			70%
ITEM	ARGUMENTS PRO	ARGUMENTS AGAINST ou ERROR MARGIN	PRO/AGAINST
- Absence or présence of beams	- no rain earlier	- No precise weather information, possible but not proven	0.3
- Moves	- Description similar to the moves that can be made by motorized and automated projectors	-	1.00
- Shape of each element	- Ball or disc - hypothesis formulated by the witness	-	1.00
- Global shape	- "Serpent" like formed by a set of projecters delimitating a circle	- Uncertainty on the shape of the snake as a whole: always a circle or sometimes unfolded?	0.50
- Color	- hypothesis formulated by the witness - White more frequent	- Red less frequent - No information on the projectors of that time	0.50
- Luminosity	hypothesis formulated by the witness	- Red light aspect that seemed too strong	0.00
- Structures in the proximity using projectors	- No solid info, observation too old	- No information, possible but cannot be proven	0.00
- Date	- Proximity of the Xmas feasts, tests of light shows?	- In working days (hypothesis discotheque projectors)	0.50

*Reliability of the hypothesis estimated by the interviewer: certain (100%); strong (>80%); significant (60% to 80%); medium (40% to 60%); low (20% to 40%); very low (<20%); null (0%)

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

14/15

4.2. SYNTHESIS OF THE CONSISTENCY

The consistency is rather weak, despite a good description of the UAP, some angular data is missing

An on-site investigation at the time would have made it possible to deepen certain points and to make certain checks relating to the existence of a structure (discotheque, village hall, park, etc.) capable of using projectors in part of festive activities on Christmas Eve.

5- CONCLUSION

It is always very important to start from the interpretation of the witness and to take into account the objections that he may formulate.

• He spontaneously thought of disco projector lights and the objection comes next when he compares with photos representing these lights. "When I first saw this thing, I thought it might be a nightclub light. Over the next few days, I saw pictures of rays of light emitted from nightclubs and what I saw on the evening of December 22, 1998 in Rosheim did not correspond to this at all."
• The witness ends his statement with "This is the first time I observed this kind of phenomenon. Never in my life have I seen this kind of thing in the sky, except for nightclub "lasers."

The analysis makes it possible to establish the correct probability of confusion with spots of impact in the sky of ground projectors of lights (discotheque laser type):

• At the time of the observation, the phenomenon was new for the GEIPAN, but the large number of testimonies explained since (see www.geipan.fr website, search for cases with Laser or Skyrose phenomenon) makes it possible to affirm that the appearance and movement such as that described by the witness is consistent with the impact spots of these ray projectors on low clouds.
• The weather conditions are compatible with the production of spots on a sky screen (clouds) without visibility of rising beams. The witness reports a starry sky which remains compatible with the presence of clouds in a large part of this sky.
• Discotheques already used projectors then, the pattern and movement of spots in the sky was achievable by the projector technology of the time.
• Key element confirming the hypothesis, the witness did it himself, and we can explain what made him reject this hypothesis (and ultimately testify): the first photos available at the time (and internet did not exist) were to show the laser effects in the sky in the most spectacular version with rising beams, while rising beams are not always visible, and that was probably the case that evening.

Although the testimony is relatively complete with a good description of the UAP and the existence of azimuth readings, it is old (almost 20 years) and it seems difficult to find elements to confirm the hypothesis so late. It also lacks readings of the apparent angular size of the UAP as well as estimates of its angular height on the horizon. An on-site investigation at the time would have made it possible to deepen these points and make certain

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017

15/15

verifications relating to the existence of a structure (discotheque, village hall, park, etc.) capable of using projectors for festive activities on Christmas Eve.

Consequently the GEIPAN classifies the case in B: probable observation of laser.

5.1. RATING

CONSISTENCE(1) (IxF) STRANGENESS(2) (E)

(1) Consistency (C): between 0 and 1. Quantity of reliable (F) information (I) collected on a testimony (C = IxF)

(2) Strangeness (E): between 0 and 1. Distance in terms of information to all known phenomena

Model of default document CNES version 2.0 January 2010 investigation report V7 – April 2017