I certainly don't want to step up here and speak for Miss Kean on your questions, but I happen to be on her FaceBook section where it looks like
she was addressing this exact question of yours. I'll just copy and paste a bit of her post and add a link to it in case you want to read the rest of
it. I personally feel that she approached the subject at hand in a clear and concise way (your perception may differ from mine of course).
Topic: The Petit Rechain photo, Belgium
Originally posted by Jack Jouett
*Question for Leslie Kean*
Leslie, your book places a lot of emphasis on the triangle photo from the 1990 Belgian UFO wave. In July of 2011 somebody came forward to say that
they hoaxed that photograph. How do you feel this impacts your research? Do you believe the photo was hoaxed? How does this impact the UFO community
and your work in particular? Will you stop using the photo as a prime example of an unidentified flying object?
"For those who have been posting about the Belgian photo, here’s the current situation: the photographer Patrick Marechal (PM) says he hoaxed it by
making a Styrofoam model. One friend of his from the factory has been interviewed by one investigator, who stated that he helped make the model. He
was not present when the picture was taken. This corroborating witness is the only evidence PM has produced to back up his claim of a hoax.
Working against him are the following points:
1) he refuses to give investigators the name and contact info of his girlfriend, now his ex-wife, who was there when he took the photo.
2) PM is trying to get money from the person he sold the copyright to, and is taking him to court to claim it. That person, Guy Mossay, a well-known
journalist who worked for a leading Belgian press agency, states they had a written agreement giving him ownership of the photo, as was standard; PM
claims there was no agreement. There are other contradictions in interviews with both of them. Mossay, who since moved to France, is trying to find
the agreement. This battle could give PM a motive for claiming the photo is a hoax – to get back at Mossay – but this is pure speculation.
3) PM says he has 12 photos of the original model hanging from a wire, and that he would look for them, but he hasn’t produced them.
4) PM said he would recreate the model and the photo. When he presented his recreated photo to investigator Patrick Ferryn, it did not look like the
Petit Rechain photo. PM says it’s because they no longer make the same bulbs he used at the time.
5) How was the ‘halo effect” as documented by Prof. Marion created by a Styrofoam model? Marion died a year ago, but this question needs to be
posed to other scientists. Also, could the unique characteristics of the corner lights and their rotations, with a very different central light, have
been created with light bulbs? If PM can’t recreate it, can someone else? "
(The remainder of her thoughts and comments can be accessed via the link above to her Facebook post)