The More one delves into this case, the more it appears to be a "mistaken" hoax.
The Figure in the background, is clearly the same person bending on the grass next to the young girl.
Now, if the mother was wearing a blue dress that day, and could say, yes Iam bending down next to my daughter, then there would be no further
investigation and the case would be closed. But it appears that she didnt come forward and admit that it is her bending down on the grass....so who is
that person? Why were'nt they identified?.
The "Firth" has CLEARLY been identified to have a tidal bank constructed in the 1800s as a defence to the sea.
This bank is approx 1 metre (1 yard) higher than the position of the young girl photo......The person in the background is therefore 1 metre higher
than the subject, and could easily be outside the old viewfinder to the cameraman.
There is a picture of the mother and Jim holding the photo. The mother looks a typical 60s 30+yo woman, but has Dark curlyish hair, whereas the female
in the blue dress, kneeling with the daughter appears to have blonde hair in a classic 60s girly bob cut.
So, is this the same person? Yes women did dye their hair then and use rollers for "Special Occasions"....but why didnt the mother say, oh yes thats
me kneeling next to my daughter? There seems to be no record of that.
Apparently Jim turned into a bit of a Cumbrian "UFO" celebrity. He "Apparently" photographed a UFO in this similar area not long after, and became
a minor tv star. Sort of the Cumbrian George Adamski.
Who knows what these people had in their brain for motivation.......does'nt matter really.
But from the evidence shown, you could be 99.9% certain that the "Spaceman" behind the girl, is the same person bending over and kneeling next to
It is ridiculous that this has gone on for as long as it has.
Real a fluke photo, misidentified, then it got out of hand and too big for them to deny. So the lies just kept going.
A bit like the US Govt. and Roswell/UFOs coverup.