Roswell 1947 - Investigations in the 1990's

Dear Editor:

Jaime Shandera's article about his interview with General Thomas J. DuBose (January 1990) actually creates more questions than it answers. Since our view is different than his, and General DuBose is quoted by both of us, there is obviously something wrong here. Can we both be accurate in our reporting of what DuBose said? And if we are, then how can our conclusion be so different?

The problem is probably centered on what exactly was on Brigadier General Roger Ramey's floor. We maintain that it was the remains of a balloon and a target device, while Shandera and Bill Moore claim it was the actual Roswell debris. Originally Moore had written that Marcel said if he was in the picture, it was the real debris and if it was anyone else, it was the weather device. We believe that none of the pictures, including those of Marcel, show the real debris. Therefore, there was not a switch of debris on the floor. It was always the weather device. The other problem is that Shandera has confused two separate events. In one, DuBose has real debris from Roswell brought to Fort Worth on July 6, 1947. That debris, taken by Brazel to the sheriffs office in Roswell, was sealed "in a suitable container" (the mail pouch) and then sent on to Washington, D.C. It was that debris that was hand-carried to General Clements McMullen by Colonel Alan D. Clark. The second flight, two days later which brought Marcel to Fort Worth, was when the weather balloon story evolved. (Contrary to Shandera's claim, DuBose told us that during the August 1990 interview.)

In his article, Shandera also suggests that Warrant Officer (later Major) Irving Newton has changed his story. He was so sure of this, he didn't bother to interview Major Newton. But, in a review of what Major Newton told Bill Moore in The Roswell Incident, it clearly shows that his story is virtually the same as that reported by us.

In fact, the differences between Moore's version and ours is the "spin" put on the words. Moore claims that Newton was briefed by a colonel who told him the general wanted him to identify the material as a balloon. Newton told us that he was briefed by a colonel who told him, "Some officers in Roswell think they found a flying disc. The general thinks it's a weather balloon and would like you to identify it." A slightly different interpretation of the colonel's briefing. And, when we first interviewed Newton, he was adamant about it. All he ever saw was the Rawin target device. That is the debris shown on the floor in Ramey's office. Shandera, in his enthusiasm to ridicule our work, attacks us again for saying there were only five photos taken in Ramey's office on July 8. We have explained that the number in our original article was changed, by the editors, without our knowledge. In our article in the November/December issue of the IUR, we corrected that to show the seven that have been discovered. And, in reviewing, with J. Bond Johnson, the sequence of events, Johnson, said that he'd taken four pictures, rather than two as he originally claimed.

Once again it comes down to who do you want to believe. Copies of our video taped interview with General DuBose are available at the J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies, the Fund for the UFO Research, and later, MUFON. Copies of our audio taped interviews with Major Newton are available at the Center, and will be made available to MUFON. Are Jaime Shandera and Bill Moore willing to make copies of their interviews available to the same places so that disinterested third parties can review them?

Maybe the best way to answer all the questions about what happened in Ramey's office is to simply ask, what do you think the pictures show: An interstellar craft that crashed, or the remnants of a rather flimsy target device? Doesn't the evidence, visible in the pictures, speak for itself? Doesn't that evidence, available for interpretation by all who are interested, suggest who is telling the most accurate version of the truth?

We will be preparing a complete response to Shandera's article to include General Dubose's comments about the situation, and on the articles published containing his earlier remarks. Maybe then we can finally lay this aspect of the events around the Roswell crash to rest. Additionally, in the course of our investigation, Shandera and Moore have accused us of "lifting" information from their published works with no credit given to them. Yet they refuse to acknowledge that we were the first to talk with Johnson, and that the Bettman Archives photo to which Shandera refers was obtained from us.

- Kevin D. Randle
Donald R. Schmitt