Rendlesham Forest 1980 Pt II - Will There Be An Answer?

Aren't there a few more MOD docs that are due to be released soon? Next few weeks? According to Nick Pope...

a reply to: pigsy2400

Heck Pig's, you make me want to
burst out in song!

I'm so excited......

a reply to: Baablacksheep

"nothing groundbreaking" apparently, timing is interesting...

a reply to: pigsy2400

Ok. Timing is always interesting in this stuff.

I also read there is a documentary out this year re Puharich and his life. The Nine bla bla.

a reply to: pigsy2400

I think the only ones (that we know about of course) that remain to be released are the copies that Dr. David Clarke managed to see in advance relating to Defence Policy Issues regarding UFOs. Dr. Clarke wrote up a very interesting blog about them a year ago.

See : Why Britain Closed the UFO Files

He's also spoke about the whole batches of files in more general time : British Online Archives

Has anyone (e.g. Nevilles) ever clarified or confirmed the radiation readings made during the Halt expedition? I see from elsewhere that the figures in Halt's statement-memo are wrong (decimal point error) and that others (storm/strom) have tried estimating, based on the tape recording and educated guesswork. Would be great if Nevilles could confirm/correct the levels. "Nevilles levels" (could even be a headline!)

a reply to: chinabull

I think you are asking the wrong question.

The question should be WHY they decided to take a Geiger counter out on the third night. From all accounts there had been multiple visits to the landing site by various personnel including British police officers in the previous two days.

So why did they finally decide on the third night that they needed a Geiger counter?

a reply to: mirageman

I've always questioned the logic behind that question; why take one at all?

a reply to: mirageman

so i have access to some very high up game developers for sony and they would love to make what these guys saw .


imagine a realistic 3d walk around-able object.


ETA: i think it might clear up alt as far as what people saw on the ground and in the forest that night. t

my guys have the best 3d rendering tools in the world basically.

a reply to: mirageman

The question should be WHY they decided to take a Geiger counter out on the third night. From all accounts there had been multiple visits to the landing site by various personnel including British police officers in the previous two days. So why did they finally decide on the third night that they needed a Geiger counter?

SSgt Monroe Nevels (also given as Nevilles (by Bruni) and Nevel (by Halt and Hanson)) has an interesting role in the RFI. In Halt and Hanson (2016) there is a passing mention to Nevels on 26th December in the context of the visit to the landing site by PC Creswell, Maj Drury, Cpt Verrano and MSgt Gulyas. Whilst SSgt Nevels is not specifically mentioned as present on that day, the comment is made that “the marks on the trees, as described by Monroe Nevel, were found to be five feet off the ground.” [sic]

This gives some credence to SSgt Nevels inspecting a site in the forest separate from the indecent of the later Halt patrol, even though his role is not clarified.

In a 20 July 2010 interview by Linda Moulton Howe on Earthfiles, SSgt Nevels claimed that, on Saturday 27th December 1980, at about 16:00 hours, he was visited at his home on the RAF Woodbridge base by Lt Bruce Englund. Englund is said to have stated that he was there on the Top-Secret orders of Col Conrad. Englund then began relating “all the instances of the UFO on December 25th through that timeframe.” Englund mentioned that SSgt Penniston and A1C Burroughs were involved, and that this was two nights previously. Englund said that someone had been abducted into the aircraft. A1C Burroughs name was not mentioned (no name was specifically mentioned) and he is said to have been taken into a craft on the night of Halt’s patrol (as witnessed by Bustinza).

SSgt Nevels and Lt Englund left at 16:30 hours for RAF Bentwaters, and then Lt Englund took SSgt Nevels to the alleged landing site in the forest. At this time it was dark. Lt Englund told SSgt Nevels that the landed craft did not break any limbs as it came down. SSgt Nevels witnessed the three indentations in the ground. He had a camera with him but did not state if he took any photographs. They left the site at about 19:00 to 20:00 hours, suggesting that they were on site for about one to two hours.

On the way back SSgt Nevels witnessed a bright flashing light through the forest and experienced static electricity. They both immediately reported back to Col Conrad who was in the officer’s club. Present also was Lt Col Halt, Col Williams and the Security Police Chief. This report allegedly led to Lt Col Halt assembling his patrol, with SSgt Nevels collecting his Geiger counter and accompanying the patrol.

This is clearly at odds with the currently accepted narrative. Bruni reported that Halt's recollection was that he and other officers, including Base Commander Colonel Ted Conrad, were attending a Combat Support Group awards dinner at Woody’s Bar on the Woodbridge base. During the evening Lt Bruce Englund turned up and told Conrad and Halt that there had been more sightings in the forest and that it was back. Bruni continues:

"‘What’s back?’ enquired Halt. ‘The UFO is back,’ replied Englund. Colonel Conrad then instructed Halt to assemble a group of personnel and investigate with the aim of debunking the saga once and for all. Apparently, the officers felt it was now getting out of control. Before leaving the party Halt made a call to the Disaster Preparedness and spoke to the chief of the department, Captain Sue Jones, who told him that the officer on stand-by was Sergeant Munroe Nevilles. When Halt reached Nevilles, a keen amateur photographer (although Halt claims he was a professional), he instructed him on what equipment to gather and reminded him to take along his camera."

Lt Col Halt stated in an interview with Open Minds Radio 30 November 2010, that he had been at the end of the year party. They had just finished the main course and were waiting for desert when Englund came in, the on-duty flight commander. He was as white as a sheet. He said to Lt Col Halt, “It’s back.”

So the timing of Englund's arrival would appear to be consistent with his and Nevels' return from the forest sometime after 20:00 hours.

Halt and Hanson’s omission of SSgt Nevels’ initial role is, therefore, very strange. Especially so given that SSgt Nevels went on the public record for the first time in 2003, and then again in 2010. Also, Pope in 2014 did not mention SSgt Nevels visit to the forest with Englund. Rather, he simply reiterates that after Lt Englund reported to the officer’s club, Lt Col Halt called the Disaster Preparedness Office and spoke to the chief who was on stand-by. This was identified only then as SSgt Nevels.

Jenny Randles in 1981 obtained information from an RAF Watton Source, who had been informed by USAF Intelligence officers that a metallic UFO had crash-landed in a forest near Ipswich, that patrols investigating had experienced difficulties with their vehicle lights and engines cutting out, thus having to continue on foot. The object had been on the ground for several hours, during which time entities were witnessed. Potts informed Randles that the base commander and several officers were called out to the forest from a party on the base and that the base commander was communicating with the alien entities. This of course suggest the Larry Warren incident more than the Halt Patrol.

Again quoting Bruni:

"Bustinza is not exactly sure what night he was involved in the incident, but thinks it was probably 29 December because he specifically remembers it was the last night of his midnight shift with D Flight before he went on his three-day break. Due to the Christmas holidays, there was a skeleton staff on duty and he was the only non-commissioned officer assigned to the Woodbridge base. When the report came in around midnight he was still in the alert area at Bentwaters, preparing to make his way over to Woodbridge. The airman on duty at the east-gate post did not describe exactly what he saw but thought it looked like a fire in the forest. Sergeant Bustinza immediately alerted his acting commander, Second Lieutenant Bruce Englund, who in turn contacted Lieutenant Colonel Halt. Englund was instructed to check out the situation and, with Bustinza acting as his driver, they collected Master Sergeant Bobby Ball."

There is no mention of Nevels (or Nevilles) and they meet up with Halt only later in the forest. As far as Bruni could ascertain, MSgt Ball collected Lt Col Halt and Sgt Nevels and drove them to Rendlesham Forest.

a reply to: Sutekh

I know none of this prior post is new, but it is worth dwelling on. Nevels may have been out inspecting the scenes of the landing or landings over a number of days. The reports of the landings involved the sensation of static electricity and extremely bright lights. These facts alone would have been sufficient for Nevels, in his role, to take along a Geiger counter.

Then we have the confusion of the interface between Halt and Nevels. Did Nevels go to the party with Englund or not? Well there are clearly two different timings of Halt being alerted to the UFO's return. After his main course but before desert (ca. 21:00 hours?) and sometime after midnight. Both reports seem to have come from Englund but the timings from different sources. So which one had Nevels being called? The midnight report sounds more likely, if Nevels had attended with Englund the first time around. If that was the case, then why the flim-flam about Halt having to phone up to only then find out Nevels was the person he was after?

The very early Jenny Randles source, which was completely independent from Larry Warren, suggest that the "alien contact" night described by Warren was on the night of the party. Elsewhere I have argued that this would have been the night of 27th/28th December (a Saturday night). So the sequence of Englund and Nevels going out to inspect previous landing sites, being witness to a return, and then their going to report it to Halt who is waiting for his pudding, all seems to fit. The Bustinza report would have been made to Halt by Englund 3 hours later. This timing and the reports which follow, are consistent with the timing of the Halt tape.

On the balance, I think there is clear evidence that Halt was involved on two nights, and that there have been deliberate efforts made to conflate these two. In one respect the suppression of Nevels' prior involvement has been needed to help with this. Of course why is there a need to pretend that there was only one significant night of activity? Well it discredits the Warren narrative.

I am keen to hear what others think of this evidence.

a reply to: Sutekh

I believe that holt was out in the Forrest on two nights as it would explain why bustinza was so confused and seemed to be mixing up two nights activities, also g bruni thought there might of been a 4th night but was night 2 the first contact and holt was out there then on the night of 26-27, the night that we know so little about or was there another night after the 3rd, my guess is that something big happened on second night.

a reply to: wobbs62

The link here (pages 56-57) give some details of the early hours of 27th.

issuu.com...[/url]

There was clearly activity that night but no Warren/Halt type contact incident. By my reckoning there was activity each night from 25th/26th to 28 28th/29th. Penniston's/Burroughs' contact would appear to have been the first night, Tamplin's the second, Warren's/Halt's the third and Halt's Tape Night the fourth and last. In some respects I think elements of Halt's Tape Night have been overstated (to put it mildly). It is the third night which appears to have been negated by the movement of Halt's dramatics back one day. And Warren's recent discrediting as a witness simply adds to that suspicion. What this incident needs is a proper archive of all statements (even recurrent statements by single witnesses), including transcripts of every podcast and documentary made. These then all need to be cross referenced for consistency and gaps. In the gaps lurks the truth.

Better hone your web programming and SQL skills and get working on an online archive then!

I can't see there being a 4th night without serious rewriting of the timeline.

1- Halt's tape confirms Burroughs is present on it.

2-Burroughs claims he was only out that night and the first night

3-Warren claims he saw Burroughs out there on his night. Even though he was in Germany that night according to his book.

4-The radar call to Watton was also confirmed around 3am on 28th December.

Yes, Halt's call to Eastern Radar at 0325 on 28th December is on record - undeniable proof that Halt's trek (accompanied by Bustinza, Ball, Englund and Nevels) and tape recording did NOT occur on a Fourth Night.

The only importance attached to a Fantasy Fourth Night stems from Larry Warren because it's an easier way to accommodate his version of events - and it could be the prime basis for his and Gary Heseltine's upcoming film. Which itself creates its own problems since Warren insists that Halt's trek was occurring simultaneous to his own experience. But Facts in the RFI don't seem to matter anymore in the rush for a quick buck.

As for Nevels' allegedly strange visit from Englund earlier on the third day (in which Englund made sure Nevels' young daughter could not understand his 'top secret' babble about a landed craft and an abducted airman on Night One), it's difficult to take seriously without Englund finally agreeing to a public interview. His evidence would be crucial to iron out a definitive timeline and whether or not Nevels is taking us for a ride.

But Englund won't speak. (Frankly, who can blame him?!)

a reply to: mirageman

All correct mm, the only question is, was warren out there on the third night.
Hoping capel green will give us the answer but not holding my breath.

a reply to: Sutekh

The only people we know were out on night 2 are tamplin and ball, I was just wondering if halt ended up out there after the incident with tamplin losing it, others would have gone out to help especially if it was being played out on the radios as we are led to believe.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

As far as I know warren is not a believer of a fourth night and has always insisted he was out on night 3, ( unless he as recently changed his mind ) returning from Germany on the morning of the 28th and going on shift later that night. .it was g. bruni that was wondering if the was a fourth night because bustinzas story was so mixed up and him being out on 2 nights would make more sense.

originally posted by: wobbs62
a reply to: mirageman

All correct mm, the only question is, was warren out there on the third night.

Since Warren's story is basically Bustinza's story (unique and uncorroborated), does it actually matter?

Bustinza is the eternal Rendlesham enigma, ever since he shared his WILD account with Warren in January 1981 and subsequently publicly repeated it to researchers Fawcett, Boeche and Bruni. Even Warren flinches at Bustinza's extraordinary claim that the USAF helped repair a landed craft (although it became a basis for local pub rumours in the early days before the story broke big). The alleged "Bullets are cheap" threat during later interrogation is another example of Bustinza being an airman who claimed what no airman has claimed before.

Yet Bustinza's quiet, shy, unassuming nature seems to shield him from the kind of mockery and mistrust Warren has received from USAF colleagues, despite Bustinza's own story being even MORE outrageous. Naturally, many of Warren's woes have been self-inflicted due to his enormous mouth and ego, but the point still stands.

Were it not for Bustinza, I honestly may have dismissed this case as much ado about nothing a long, long time ago.

originally posted by: wobbs62
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

As far as I know warren is not a believer of a fourth night and has always insisted he was out on night 3, ( unless he as recently changed his mind ) returning from Germany on the morning of the 28th and going on shift later that night. .it was g. bruni that was wondering if the was a fourth night because bustinzas story was so mixed up and him being out on 2 nights would make more sense.

You know how confusing and muddled the RFI can be. A Fourth Night (28th - 29th) was definitely mentioned in 'Left At East Gate' (1997), but perhaps Warren has back-tracked... and forward-tracked... and back-tracked since? Halt's initial denial that Bustinza was with him (until the tape proved otherwise) ironically helped Warren's story to become either: a separate incident in a neighbouring field on Night Three; or a Fourth Night. But that seems academic now.

Remember when Burroughs and Dugdale proposed a Fourth Night a year ago, despite Burroughs categorically denying such a possibility years previously. Talk about swings and roundabouts.

Is 'Capel Green' using a Fourth Night scenario? I'm not sure, I may have misheard, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit - and not just because they're not permitted to use Halt's memo and tape - even though Halt was the main player in this film at its inception ten years ago (when, as a giant plug, Halt made his infamous "ET" declaration), but now it's become The Larry Warren Story - Halt's nemesis. Madness.

What a Mess. (The RFI's top phrase)


PS: A Fourth Night (or Day) could also be extrapolated from Bustinza's strange story of vehicles and personnel entering the forest to 'collect' the 'craft' that Bustinza claimed had simply been left to stand in the field overnight (eh?!). Moreover, he stated he was in charge of security for that particular op. Indirectly supporting that notion is Burroughs' claim that a special aircraft flew in to 'collect something' whilst, as Bustinza had said, numerous vehicles and personnel were nosing around the forest.

If we assume, for the sake of argument, that the above claims are True, then we're most likely looking at a damaged, man-made experimental vehicle in the field - it would even account for Bustinza's bonkers "repairs" story. In fact, it makes more sense than anything else, frankly.

I've got a headache now...