It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Oops I made a typo , the "it" in my post was supposed to be "if". There is no money. The $80,000 is the estimated value of what the camera would sell for at auction which Mitchell would receive (less auction expense). NASA intervened and the camera was pulled from the auction before it was sold.
Originally posted by SNAFU38
It is interesting they let him keep the money though, & is perhaps an admission they know they owe him for what he's done.
Could NASA be trying to set an example to other NASA employees, that stealing NASA property is not encouraged?
NASA lawsuit conclusion
It is interesting to note that Paul Willis was the recipient of the letter from the National
Records Center stating that the fragology files (68A2062) have been missing since
1987. The letter to him is dated 3/28/96, in response to his inquiry requesting the files.
His middle initial is M. (Paul M. Willis), and he was Headquarters Records/Forms
Manager for NASA. His phone at the time was 358-0621.
Would it be possible to conduct a further search for these missing boxes, retrieved by Mr.
Willis and not returned, by tracking down Mr. Willis? It would also be interesting to find
out if he conducted a further search for the fragology files at the time, or if he may know
anything more about their whereabouts.
I was told that since Mr. Willis was no longer a government employee, it was beyond what is
required by the FOIA or the settlement agreement to try to find him and see what he may or may
I'd be in favor of NASA recovering those files! So that's a good point.
Originally posted by Kandinsky
It'd be fine by me if that's the case and they chase down the guy who's been named and identified in the NASA lawsuit about the Kecksburg reports. He allegedly left NASA with a box-file of some three years (iirc) of reports related to the time-period of Kecksburg.