Rendlesham Forest…, A Christmas Story from 1980 - Can We ‘Let it Be’?

Thanks Adam for the above. All will be considered in time.

Moving on.....



I was going to hold this over as part of a much larger post. But it's something no one seems to have picked up on down the years. One thing that has come very apparent is Jim Penniston has a self promotional website.

On one specific page it lists the RFI witness statements : Link

Unsurprisingly Penniston's statement is discussed at the top of that page.

Here is Penniston's comment:

Jim Penniston discusses the witness statement that was prepared for him by the agents

"Yes there are things that are unraveled with this statement. Lets start with this is not my statement. This was the sanitized version I was given and told to say, after writing my statement to the agents. Some naging[sic] issues with this and points to show I did not write it. Some examples follow:

1) In the centre of the lighted area directly in the centre ground level

2) 30 metre area

3) 15-20 meters

4) metre area Colour of

If I was writing a U.S.A.F witness statement, I would use feet, yards, ect., Also I would not use the UK English to spell metre, Colour, centre. Also all official AF witness statements are on Air Force Witness Statement Forms. In addition, they are ALL signed by the witness, and usually witnessed by another.

Why would my statement be typed on plain paper (it was supposedly an official statement), not signed or dated, or why would I use UK English, spelling on words and also measurements in metrics? And lastly why would all the others statements of people involved would be done correctly on AF witness forms, and dated and signed by the witness. I am the ONLY exception."

"Now what is more interesting it also validate the two agents being discribe[sic] during hypnosis as one American and one British. Credence to the UK English......"


-Jim Penniston, USAF retired

Next comes a typed version of Penniston's statement (it isn't his actual statement) with lots of British spellings in them. Which is quite bizarre really.



Because after that a copy of the actual statement that has been released into the public domain is shown.

I have copied it below and highlighted the words Penniston thinks are spelled in British English.



They are all American spellings.

He also says that "If I was writing a U.S.A.F witness statement, I would use feet, yards, ect.,"

Well that's not entirely true is it either? Other witnesses used metres in their statements and it has been common for all NATO countries to use metric measurements since 1949. For many years Britain has used both Imperial measurements and metric measurements side by side and in 1980 Imperial measurements were probably the more common.

Here is an example taken from the 1980 USAF Handbook provided to personnel at the Twin bases concerning a common armament for all US servicemen, the M-16 rifle. It seems that both metric and imperial measures were in place then in the USAF.



Penniston’s accusation and points are lost amongst a sea of contradictory evidence.

However what is most troubling is this is an obviously incorrect assertion about the spellings on his statement and the fact that he has allowed it to be placed there for everyone to see on the internet. It has been there for a number of years. Yet none of these claims stand up to scrutiny. Don’t worry in case he alters this or takes it down in embarrassment after reading this. It’s archived elsewhere..

After his embarrassing interview on the Angelia Joiner show a few years back now it seems that he is having trouble comprehending this witness statement. I have no explanation for this at present.

But I can't thank Jim Penniston enough for making this statement on the web and illustrating the real problems he has with even keeping his own story together!

a reply to: mirageman

A great find MM. The devil is in the detail.

I wonder though, what are the odds of Jim ever having visited that web page, or having read it?

One explanation I can think of: a web master/editor has transcribed the statement from the original image into that of British English, and sent it on to Jim via e-mail (sans photograph?) and asked for his insight. Jim has then accepted this block of text verbatim with the mentality of picking it apart, to the exclusion of checking the original statement. Jim passes his thoughts back, perhaps even urging the web master to highlight the British English words? The web master then inserts Jim’s response and highlights the British English wording with foreground and background classes.

Clearly, in this scenario, the web master hasn’t actually consumed the content of the testimony or come to an understanding that’s there’s a contradiction. Jim to his credit has picked up on spelling differences, but has failed to check on the veracity of the web page and the content of the original statement!

If that’s a live website you would actually hope that’s addressed and some clarification is provided. Jim has gotten mixed up a little and will have to withdraw some of those accusations.

a reply to: Defragmentor

I wonder though, what are the odds of Jim ever having visited that web page, or having read it?

I would say if he didn't read what is supposedly HIS statement (it has been available for two decades) then it makes him even more unreliable and shows his total lack of any attention to the details of the case. Fact is that Penniston does claim he didn't write his statement in his own book in 2014 but makes no mention of the spellings or metric measurements used.

The rest of what you guessed at is exactly the kind of excuse Penniston would provide. Like he didn't know what binary code was in 1980. It meant nothing to him so he said..

If his webmaster is a complete idiot and Jim has never bothered to check out something he's alleged to have written then there is small amount of plausibility.

Jim has gotten mixed up a little and will have to withdraw some of those accusations.

Well he certainly plays dumb when it suits him. Taken as a single instance then maybe he would be allowed some slack. But given the binary codes (with manual errors) come from a sacred destinations website, the serious questions about his notebook and the lack of evidence from his Air Force colleagues that he really got close to a craft of unknown origin, I'd say he's really on the verge of ridiculing his own role in all of this. Maybe there's method in his madness??

Remove his testimony from the story and you still have a story. A much clearer one.

a reply to: mirageman

Argh yes. I assume the webmaster you
are referring to is Darren Deboy?

Keep digging....

RFI – 1st Night Recap

Sorry there is an awful lot of information here........some treading old ground. Jump straight to the 'Conclusion' if you can't be bothered reading it all.


We now know the first night of the Rendlesham incident occurred sometime during the early hours of Boxing Day (December 26th) 1980. But taking a closer look at the available evidence reveals a number of inconsistencies in what has been said down the years. The Halt memo was the first piece of ‘hard’ evidence to surface from the incident in the early 1980s. But this was typed up after the original witness statements were taken.

The Witness Statements
It is believed that the witness statements in the public domain were taken by Colonel Halt on 2nd January 1981 which is around a week after the incident happened. But not all of them are dated to confirm that. It is also notable that there are no witness statements available from the 2nd or 3rd nights that have come to light. It is unknown exactly which personnel were questioned and Halt himself has denied ever receiving a debriefing.

The only two witness statements recorded fully on official Air Force forms are from the two more senior personnel, MSgt. J. D. Chandler and Lt. Fred Buran. For the lower ranks it seems Air Force procedure was not followed.

For reference purposes all witness statements are displayed in full here :
Jim Penniston's Site

And here :
Ian Ridpath’s Site
I have edited them down to highlight certain points only.


Lt. Fred Buran’s Statement - 2nd Jan 1981

....At approximately 03:00 hrs, 26 December 1980, I was on duty at bldg. 679, Central Security Control, when I was notified that A1C Burroughs had sighted some strange lights in the wooded area east of the runway at RAF Woodbridge.....

After he had been joined by the Security Flight Chief, MSgt Chandler, and turned his weapon over to him, I directed them to go ahead. SSgt Penniston had previously informed me that the lights appeared to be no further than 100 yds from the road East Gate of the runway. I monitored their progress (Penniston, Burroughs and Cabansag) as they entered the wooded area.

They appeared to get very close to the lights, and at one point SSgt Penniston stated that it was a definite mechanical object....
At approximately 3:43 hrs, I terminated the investigation and ordered all units back to their normal duties....

So Buran’s involvement begins around 3:00 and the search is called off at 3:43. It is also notable that he mentions Penniston being “no further than 100 yds from the road, East Gate of the runway”.

We should note that Buran claims weapons were handed over to MSgt Chandler. This would have been in line with the NATO Status of Forces Agreement. However other statements have Chandler arriving AFTER the men had left the base. Did they secretly take their weapons out onto UK territory?

On the now defunct Rendlesham Forum back in 2010 Fred Buran made a brief appearance and said:

..I was the Security Police Shift Commander assigned to "C" Flight the very first night anything out of the ordinary was reported...
I do NOT believe there was ever a UFO involved in the incident. I do believe the witnesses I dispatched to the incident attempted to report factually what they had seen...

I am dismayed that the story seems to have taken on dimensions never initially reported and very often assumes facts not shown by all the investigations....

Skip Buran, Lt Col USAF (Retired)

And then later Buran also reinforced his view that there was nothing but lights and a few people ‘goofing around’.

OK, SSgt Penniston reported seeing what he thought was a mechanical object. He never said what it was. And MSgt J.D. Chandler, who was very close by, never saw or heard anything. And by his own admission, every time SSgt Penniston thought he was getting close to the "object", there was nothing there.

Folks, there was nothing in the forest that night but the lights (which have been explained) and maybe some SPs goofing around....

He also quizzed Jim Penniston on the same forum

In the statements furnished, (then) SSgt Penniston appears to have said in his or as reported by MSgt Chandler, that the closest he ever got to anything was 50 meters.

A little different from touching an object...

Penniston responded with an interesting accusation.

Yes Skip, that is the unsigned and undated statement from AFOSI. Not my statement. It is AFOSI, cover story and what they ordered.

Further explanations are given on : Penniston’s website

”Agents then give Penniston a typed statement, which is generic, and is limited on details. For example, observation of a metallic craft, and not getting within 50 yards of it. Penniston is instructed by the Agents that an official investigation is underway, and he is to tell all who asks, the cover story that was provided to him. He reads it several times and then agrees to do so. Penniston, Burroughs, Cabansag, are debriefed at the Deputy Base Commanders office, Colonel Halt. Statements written and then drawings made.

Penniston’s claim is very interesting. According to him, the spooks are telling him to say there was a metallic craft but he didn’t get within 50 yards of it. The fact that this is undated and unsigned does mean he has grounds for denying he ever made this statement.

Also on that same website Penniston makes some very strange claims about the spellings on his witness statement. He seems to think his statement was typed up in British English when it clearly wasn’t.

We’ve covered that previously here..

MSgt. Chandler’s Statement - 2nd Jan 1981

At approximately 3.00hrs, 26 December 1980, while conducting security checks on RAF Bentwaters, I monitored a radio transmission from A1C Burroughs, Law Enforcement patrol at RAF Woodbridge, stating that he was observing strange lights in the wooded area just beyond the access road, leading from the East Gate at RAF Woodbridge. SSgt Penniston, Security Supervisor, was contacted and directed to contact Burroughs at the East Gate. Upon arrival, SSgt Penniston immediately notified CSC that he too was observing these lights and requested to make a closer observation after several minutes, Penniston requested my presence.

I departed RAF Bentwaters through Butley Gate for RAF Woodbridge. When I arrived, SSgt Penniston, A1C Burroughs and Amn Cabansag had entered the wooded area just beyond the clearing at the access road. We set up radio relay between SSgt Penniston,myself and CSC. On one occasion Penniston relayed that he was close enough to the object to determine it was definitely a mechanical object. He stated that he was within 50 metres. He also stated that there was lots of noise in the area which seemed to be animals running around.

Each time Penniston gave me the indication that he was about to reach the area where the lights were he would give an extended estimated location. He eventually arrived at a ‘beacon light’; however, he stated that this was not the light or lights he had originally observed. He was instructed to return...

Chandler’s timing of 3:00 am as the beginning of the incident also agrees with the statement by Buran. But interestingly he is claiming they were already off base in the woods when he arrived at Woodbridge. So how could he have collected any weapons from them? Maybe it was placed into the Buran statement to avoid problems with the UK authorities further down the line?

Here we also see confirmation Penniston was within 50 metres of an object. Not only that we have an American using the term ‘meters’ (US spelling) that Penniston said elsewhere, as an American, he would not use.
 

Jim Penniston’s Statement – Undated and typed on blank paper

“Received dispatch from CSC to rendezvous with Police 4 AIC Burroughs, and Police 5 SSgt Steffens at east Gate Woodbridge.

Upon arriving at east gate directly to the east about 1 and a half miles in a large wooded area. A large yellow glowing light was emitting above the trees. In the centre of the lighted area directly in the centre ground level, there was red light blinking on and off 5 to 10 second intervals. And a blue light that was being for the most part steady. After receiving permission from CSC, we proceeded off base pass east gate, down an old logging road.

Left vehicle proceeded on foot. Burroughs and I were approx. 15-20 meters apart and proceeding on a true east direction from logging road. The area in front of us was lighting up a 30 metre area. When we got within a 50 metre distance, the object was producing red and blue light. The blue light was steady and projecting under the object. It was up the area directly extending a metre or two out.

At this point of positive identification I relayed to CSC, SSgt Coffey. Positive sighting of the object…1….Colour of lights and that it was definitely mechanical in nature. This is the closest point that I was near the object at any point. We then proceeded after it. It moved in a zig-zagging manner back through the woods, then lost sight of it. On the way back we encountered a blue streaking light to the left only lasting a few seconds. After 45 min walk, arrived at our vehicle.”

As mentioned earlier Penniston’s statement is not on official Air Force forms, is unsigned and undated. Did he have any involvement in its creation? He’s claimed he didn’t. So is it mere obfuscation?

There are no real indications of times of events other than it talks about 45 minutes before arriving back at the vehicle. This fits in with Buran’s statement as well. He claimed to have called the search off after around 45 mins. Penniston’s estimate of how far away the lights were away from the East Gate says one and a half miles as opposed to the report of 100 hundred yards that Buran reported he claimed. He did commit a sketch of the ‘object’ he claims to have touched. It looks like a box on legs. Did this influence Halt when writing his memo?



In Georgina Bruni’s book it says Penniston had been on duty since 18:00 and was “..enjoying a midnight snack when he received a call from SSgt Coffey at Central Security Control (CSC)...”

This is backed up in some respects by Tim Egercic (in charge of radio comms at CSC) who claims he received a call between 23:00 and midnight before finishing his shift.

In facing this conflict Nick Pope went with Penniston’s claim in the “Encounter in Rendlesham Forest” book that the incident was first reported just after midnight. However Buran, Burroughs and Chandler clearly mark the time as 3:00am.

Penniston also gave an interview to Sally Rayl in 1997
Again he commits to a time of just after midnight when the action began.

“About 12:02 am – I remember that distinctly – I was dispatched to the East Gate, which was sometimes referred to as the back gate at Woodbridge. There, I was told to contact Police 2, which was Airman First Class John Burroughs and Staff Sgt. Bud Steffans, and that I would be briefed when I got there.”

He claims that they found indentations while out in the forest and had lost radio contact. This discovery is not confirmed by others. If I recall correctly Burroughs mentions hoping nothing would be found next morning to confirm they saw something unusual in the “Unsolved Mysteries” TV special.

Penniston says HE decided they should head back. Lt. Buran made that decision 43 mins after the incident had been reported if you check Buran’s statement. Which assuming a similar time to return to base means the men should arrive back around 4:30am:

"We still had no radio contact, which I thought was strange. We weren’t even getting squelch. We went back to the clearing. There, Airman Burroughs noticed the impression, the indentations in the ground. We found three of them, all triangular in shape, each about three meters apart. Then I decided we should head back".

Penniston also mentions three hours where the CSC lost contact with the men. This seems to be yet another Penniston ‘factoid’ that doesn’t fit in with the other witnesses.

"When we arrived at CSC, we ran into Sgt. Chandler and two or three other security people. They had negative contact with us for almost three hours, and they had been concerned.

Penniston also is now isolating Cabansag as being back at the jeep to provide a radio relay. Earlier statements indicate that MSgt. Chandler provided the radio relay back at the jeep.

“Our radios — the standard Motorola type — were experiencing a dampening effect common with atmospheric conditions. Basically they were breaking up and I was not able to send or recover full transmissions. At that point, I decided to station Airman Cabansag there as a radio link, so he stayed by the Jeep to serve as a communications relay.”

In Leslie Kean’s 2010 book – UFOs, Generals, Pilots & Government, Penniston again says it was just after midnight when the incident first occurred.

“Shortly after midnight on Christmas night—the early morning of December 26,1980—Staff Sergeant Steffens briefed me that some lights had been seen in Rendlesham Forest, just outside the base.”

And here he’s again insisting Cabansag was the relay not Chandler. Not only is he relaying messages via Cabansag as he’s making a solo reconnaissance of a craft on the ground. Interesting because no one else recalls any of this. Only Penniston!!

“As the three of us got closer to the craft, we started experiencing problems with our radios. I then asked Cabansag to relay radio transmissions back to Central Security Control (CSC), and he stayed back while Burroughs and I proceeded toward the craft.”

He expands on this by claiming messages were relayed via Cabansag about his reconnaissance of a craft. But no one else remembers him doing this.

“After ten minutes without any apparent aggression, I determined the craft was non-hostile to my team and decided to approach further. Following security protocol, we completed a thorough on-site investigation, including a full physical examination of the craft. After my first walk-around of the craft, astonishment and awe overwhelmed me. All fear was gone. During this process, I took photographs, made notebook entries, and relayed messages through Airman Cabansag to the CSC, following required procedures. The feelings I had during this encounter were like nothing I had ever known before. On one side of the craft were symbols that measured about three inches high and two and a half feet across.”

In the mid 1980s book “Skycrash” by Jenny Randles, Brenda Butler and Dot Street, Penniston is given a pseudonym, James Archer. In this version he claims things started around 2:00 on a date of 27th December 1980. Note that Penniston is marginalising Cabansag here as well yet claims John Burroughs got close to touching an object. An object with triangular legs.

"The day before [7th October 1983] Brenda had received a call from James Archer. Archer said he was a security officer and had been one of the witnesses to the original event on the night of 27 December 1980 [it was in fact the night of 25/26 December]. He insisted that only he and John Burroughs were involved [Cabansag was involved too, but was left near the vehicle]......

Archer spoke very quietly about that night in 1980. He said it was about 2 A.M when things began to happen. ....Archer and Burroughs...drive out in a jeep...

At the end of the lane leading from the gate they left the jeep .. After walking several hundred feet further they became aware of red and blue lights ahead of them. The radio they had been using to keep in constant touch with base suddenly went dead. The security officer stopped for a moment and had to be urged onwards. He was asked to describe what they saw. He spoke very softly: 'It was a triangular thing. Yes, triangular - and it stood on three legs.'

Archer said the size of the object was about ten by twelve feet, and around eight feet in height. He was asked if he saw any people in it. He paused for long seconds and then replied, 'No - I didn't see any aliens. But there was definitely something inside it. I don't know what. But the shapes did not look human. Maybe they were like robots.' Burroughs went up to it and looked as if he were planning to touch it, he continued. But the craft responded. It drew in its legs, retracting them up into the main body - and then it began to move around the forest just above ground level. It moved slowly. They could follow it by walking, and keep up. It displayed amazing manoeuvrability, dodging in and out of trees. They saw that it had left holes in the ground at the spot where the legs had been lowered.

At closest approach they got within a few feet of it. They had a very good view. It was like nothing man-made. The colour was an off-white and it looked dirty. There was a blue light on top, with red lights and a white light in the middle and a brighter white light coming out of the bottom. Archer and Burroughs followed the craft as it moved from the forest into a small field, the on next to the Boast home. Here it made some cows run around in panic. It then let out a sudden, intense burst of white light and rose to a height of about 200 feet, before shooting away from view at tremendous speed."

 

John Burroughs Statement – Undated

“On the night of 25-26 Dec at around 3:00, while on patrol down at East Gate, myself and my partner saw lights coming from the woods due east of the gate. The lights were red and blue, the red one above the blue one, and they were flashing on and off...We asked permission to go and see what it was....

You could see the lights down by a farmer’s house. We climbed over the fence and started walking toward the red and blue lights and they just disappeared. Once we reached the farmer’s house we could see a beacon going around, so we went toward it. We followed it for about 2 miles before we could see it was coming from a lighthouse. We had just passed a creak and were told to come back when we saw a blue light to our left in the trees. It was only there for a minute and just streaked away. After that we didn’t see anything and returned to the truck.”

Burroughs statement is handwritten on loose leaf paper and is also undated. Notably his timings agree with the 3:00am of his superiors’ reports. Although in the book “Encounter in Rendlesham Forest" there is some doubt as to what happened after the airmen hit the ground as they got close to what they felt was the source of the lights.

In the same book Penniston is claiming there was some sort of distortion field around the craft.

“I suppose anything is possible with this time discrepancy. I believe it is more than likely that within the affected area around the craft there was a distortion of some kind, which based on the missing time from our watches, indicates this by them running forty-five minutes slow. We were definitely affected by this phenomenon in a physical way”

Burroughs also agrees there was some form of missing time affecting him.

“The fact is our watches were behind and the shift commander said we were missing for 45 minutes.”

There is no corroboration of this missing time given by their senior officers.

Ed Cabansag’s Statement

“On 26 Dec 80, SSgt Penningston and I were on Security #6 at Woodbridge Base. ... We notified CSC and we asked permission to investigate further.

They gave us the go-ahead. We left our weapons with SSgt Steffens who remained at the gate. Thus the three of us went out to investigate. We stopped the Security Police vehicle about 100 meters from the gate. Due to the terrain we had to go on by foot. We kept in constant contact with CSC. While we walked, each one of us would see the lights. Blue, red, white, and yellow....When we got about 75-50 meters, MSgt Chandler/Flight Chief, was on the scene. CSC was not reading our transmissions very well, so we used MSgt Chandler as a go-between. He remained back at our vehicle. As we entered the forest, the blue and red lights were not visible anymore. Only the beacon light, was still blinking...

... we ran and walked a good 2 miles past out the vehicle, until we got to a vantage point where we could determine that what we were chasing was only a beacon light off In the distance. Our route through the forest and field was a direct one, straight towards the light. We informed CSC that the light beacon was farther than we thought, so CSC terminated our Investigation...” ~A1C Edward Cabansag

Cabansag’s statement is typed but he later claimed he could not use a typewriter and simply signed the statement.

Note Cabansag also uses ‘meters’.

In Georgina Bruni’s book “You Can’t Tell the People” he said:

The only thing that I signed was for Colonel Halt. I didn’t type anything out. Maybe someone else did it and asked me to sign it. Besides, I couldn’t type, I had never used a typewriter before. I don’t even remember what I signed. I was so nervous, I just signed it. I don’t remember talking to Halt, I remember sitting in his office in fear of Halt. …….

I remember what I saw; it was to the right of the lighthouse. It was cone-shaped – egg-shaped, with lights running around its belt from left to right. They were blue, white and red lights, flashing, sometimes rapid, sometimes slow. Then we saw flakes of metal coming from it. It is difficult to describe. We were all trying to make sure what we’d seen . . . It wasn’t the lighthouse. I saw the lighthouse, this wasn’t it, it was to the right of the lighthouse.

……I’ve read all that stuff about me being a com-link, but I can’t remember any of that. I remember being with Penniston and Burroughs, there were only three of us, Sergeant Chandler stayed back with the jeep. We all saw something, and I kept thinking this was a joke, but as we got closer and closer we could see a light, and our radio transmissions were cutting out.

Whoever typed his statement spelt Penniston as Penningston on a number of occasions and also made a number of other spelling and grammatical errors. Again this statement was undated and not on official Air Force stationary but a blank piece of paper. Cabansag is also stating Chandler provided a radio relay back at the jeep in direct contradiction to Penniston.

If there is any correlation with the other statements then the date 26th December 1980 and the sighting of red, white, blue and yellow lights are consistent with the others. Cabansag also mentions the beacon that Burroughs did. Penniston does not mention the beacon in his statement. Cabansag confirms CSC terminated the search.

Cabansag’s statement also says:

A1C Burroughs and I took a road, while SSgt Penningston walked straight back from where we came...after making contact with the PC’s and informing them of what we saw.

This is very peculiar as Penniston and Burroughs never mention anything about the British police. Cabansag later agreed that they never made contact with any British PCs (Police Constables) whilst out in the forest in his interview with Georgina Bruni.

I’ve read all that stuff about me being a com-link, but I can’t remember any of that. I remember being with Penniston and Burroughs, there were only three of us, Sergeant Chandler stayed back with the jeep. We all saw something, and I kept thinking this was a joke, but as we got closer and closer we could see a light, and our radio transmissions were cutting out.

But Cabansag also mentions :

“I’m very confused. I may have been with Chandler, but then I can’t remember separating from Burroughs and Penniston. Why do I just recall? – I have a blank. I really don’t remember anything about the thing landing. The next day, or couple of days later, I heard Lt. Englund or someone had gone out with Geiger counters, and some people were saying. ‘How could it get in the small space between the trees?’ But this was all second-hand information. I wasn’t involved in any of the other nights and I didn’t know what else went on. I carried on with work as usual. It was discussed I remember that.”

 

The Halt Memo

"1. Early in the morning of 27 Dec 80 (approximately 0300L) two USAF security police patrolmen saw unusual lights outside the back gate at RAF Woodbridge...The object was described as being metallic in appearance and triangular in shape, approximately two to three meters across the base and approximately two meters high. It illuminated the entire forest with a white light. The object itself had a pulsing red light on top and a bank(s) of blue lights underneath. The object was hovering or on legs. ..

2. The next day, three depressions 1.5 inches deep and 7 inches in diameter were found where the object had been sighted on the ground. The following night (29 Dec 80) the area was checked for radiation. ....

(Signed)
Charles I. Halt, Lt Col, USAF
Deputy Base Commander

So Colonel Halt then writes up his official memo to the UK MoD on Jan 13th 1981. This is now some two weeks from the nights that made up what is now known as the RFI (Rendlesham Forest Incident) and 11 days after recording the witness statements.

Observations and Questions about the Halt memo:

1. Why did Halt say the incident happened “Early in the morning of 27 Dec 80 (approximately 0300L)”. He had the witness statements available and , presumably, the police ‘blotters’ with details when the incident happened. But he chose to date the incident on the early morning of the 27th Dec 1980. This would have been 24 hours after the original incident was reported. (Note: Halt claimed he wrote this from memory. But given this was an official memo and he’d interviewed the men involved then it seems unbelievable he could make such a mistake unless of course he had his own motives.)

2. The description, “..the object was described as being metallic in appearance and triangular in shape, approximately two to three meters across the base and approximately two meters high...”, does not appear in any of the three witness statements from Burroughs, Cabansag or Penniston. Penniston’s drawing hardly looks like a triangular craft either. Early local ‘gossip’ about the case was about a metallic craft. But why did Halt add this into his memo?

3. Why does Halt say the “The following night (29 Dec 80) the area was checked for radiation”? He isn’t even consistent within his own memo. The following night would have to have been the 28th December (or even the 27th Dec 1980 as that followed the day of the 27th!).

4. There is no mention of Burroughs and Bustinza’s experience in the memo and this also seems to follow the omission on his famous tape. Albeit these are from the third night this indicates a further problem.Strangely Jim Penniston’s notebook details the date of an “A/C crash” as 27 Dec 1980.



5. Ian Ridpath claims the time Penniston scribbled as 12:20 but I am not so sure. It appears to say 12:00 (which is noon) . You would expect a military Staff Sergeant to know this and record it in correctly in his notebook. But as we’ve seen earlier. Penniston was unclear over his statement to correctly perceive which type of English was used in it.

6. Halt gave a speech in England on 31st July 1994 in Leeds. He claimed that a type of craft was clearly visible to the three men on the first night and that Penniston had told him Burroughs tried to get on the object. An object that was 9ft tall and pyramid shaped on a tripod arrangement. He also stated that the three men were out there for 90 minutes. After that a search party was organised who found the three marks in the ground (source UFO Magazine – UK, Jan/Feb 1995).

Ted Conrad’s OMNI & Clarke Interviews


In 1983 Base Commander Ted Conrad gave a brief interview to OMNI magazine regarding the incident. Here Conrad confuses the issue even more stating the events began at 10:30. Which given that he mentions ‘night’ we can assume to be 22:30. But here he is mentioning that two (not three) men tracked the ‘object’ on foot and that it was a tripod mounted craft.

..... ‘ At 10 30 on that fateful night five Air Force policemen spotted lights from what they thought was a small plane descending into the forest.... Two of the men tracked the object on foot and came upon a large tripod-mounted craft It had no windows but was studded with brilliant red and blue lights.

Each time the men came within 50 yards of the ship it levitated six feet in the air and backed away/ They followed it for almost an hour through the woods and across a field until it took off at a "phenomenal speed '.

Acting on the reports made by his men Colonel Conrad began a brief investigation of the incident in the morning. He went into the forest and located a triangular pattern ostensibly made by the tripod legs. He claims that he never observed any aliens. But he did interview two of the eyewitnesses and concludes

"Those lads saw something but l don’t know what it was”. Conrad’s chat with his men was the only official probe ever mounted and it seems unlikely that we'll ever learn more. But when Dot Street of BUFORA was asked whether she believed this incredible tale she opined. "I'll stick me neck out and say yes ” Street’s colleague BUFORA director Jenny Randles ventured a theory of her own. However the alien spaceship she suggests is just a fiction leaked by the U S Air Force to cover up the crash of a plane carrying nuclear bombs.

In a 2010 interview to Folklore specialist Dr. David Clarke Conrad said.

“The incident was discovered, investigated, reported and finished all during an eighteen-day period from 27 December…through 13 January 1981 [when Halt’s memo was sent to the Ministry of Defence]. Claims of more sightings at different places and later times are unrelated to the Christmas 1980 event.
“All was normal for the [26 December 1980] security police [hereafter SP] night shift at Woodbridge until the very early hours. At that time the now famous lights were sighted on the ground in Rendlesham Forest. Three security SP’s were dispatched to investigate. They returned after more than an hour and went off duty at their shift change early that morning, at around 0700 [GMT].
“I can only speculate what went on in the SP squadron during the day [that followed, i.e. 26 December]. There must have been some concern over what to do about the sighting in terms of investigation and reporting. I believe the SP’s decided to keep everything low key, this being indicated by a change to the blotter entry concerning that early morning time frame. In any event, no notification or report was made to anyone above Major Malcolm Zickler, SP Squadron Commander, until late that evening.

On the old Rendlesham Forum...John Burroughs spoke about the discrepancies between Penniston’s recollections and those of his own.

Jim said right away as we were walking back that he felt it was some kind of object or craft. He was about 5-10 feet closer than I was. His statement also stated how close we got to it.....

I was farther away from it and did not feel it was a craft for sure. The lights around it were very bright and if you look at my statement I drew what the lights looked like.

As far as him touching something he was the closest but I did not see him touch anything. We did split up for a brief period of time but not for 45 min. I do not believe he had a different encounter than the one the 3 of us did.

Jim never brought it up after it happened and as a young airman I really did not know what to say. UFOs back then were something you did not talk about.

I did ask Jim in later years why he did not talk about it and his answer was it was an ongoing investigation because he kept getting called into OSI about it. He also stated he thought I was being called in and he never would talk about things that were in an ongoing investigation.


His story has changed and I am not sure why. He has told me since he went under hypnosis his memory of the event has changed.

More Questions

• Why was Halt left to write a memo? Surely the base commander should have added his support by at least adding a covering note to the UK MoD? A covering note was provided by the RAF Liaison Officer Don Moreland. But it suggests that the command structure on the base was somewhat dysfunctional.

• Is Halt’s story about Penniston telling him Burroughs attempted to climb on this ‘object’ true? Penniston mentions Burroughs getting close to the craft in Skycrash and Larry Warren even claims he was on top of a craft in one TV interview in the 90s. Burroughs to my knowledge remembers nothing . But once Penniston shed his James Archer alias he makes out he was the guy in front.

• The witness statements provided with the exception of Buran’s and Chandler’s were not take in accordance with standard Air Force procedures. Was Halt trying to conceal them for himself as an insurance policy. He has claimed he has a number of tapes that are secreted away in case ‘something’ happens.

• When did the Events of the first night actually start and end?

• Buran, Chandler and Burroughs all confirm the incident began around 3:00am on 26th December 1980. Cabansag’s does not state a time.
• The Halt memo confirms a 3:00am start but on the wrong day (27th December 1980).
• Ted Conrad claimed the incident started at 10:30pm. But my suspicion is that he had confused nights in the interview. He does however say ; “They returned after more than an hour”.
• Penniston’s statement is under some doubt as to its authenticity. But it says events started closer to midnight without referencing the date. His notebook dates the 27th December 1980.
• The Halt memo also says the incident began on the 27th December 1980.
• Buran said he called the search off after around 45 mins when Penniston “..eventually arrived at a ‘beacon light’”
• Penniston’s statement says “After 45 min walk, arrived at our vehicle”. Suggesting that the whole reconnaissance mission took less than an hour too. Of course he didn’t write it so should we ignore it?.
• Halt’s speech in Leeds stated the men were off base for around 90 mins. They would also have to return to base from their current positions so maybe that is more accurate? We know the British police were called out at 4:11am from official records. They found nothing of interest by the time they arrived.
• Penniston’s claim of “negative contact with us for almost three hours” does not fit in with the events starting at 3:00am. That would mean the British Police would have arrived while the men were still searching the forest. In fact his claim of a midnight start is exactly 3 hours difference from the others.

Why has Penniston continually claimed Cabansag was the radio relay when the witness statements obviously point to it being Chandler?

Why did Penniston claim Burroughs got near to the craft and Halt say he attempted to get on top of it? Was this the original ‘false’ story and something changed?

Although the senior officers involved present a fairly mundane story of 3 men chasing lights for 45 mins there is the nagging doubt about Penniston, Burroughs and Cabansag claims of missing time or blanks in their memory.

Conclusions
There is a pattern of divergence in the stories from the first night from a handful of witnesses and officers. Whereas Burroughs, Chandler, Buran and Cabansag’s statements form a reasonably coherent story, Halt and Penniston’s narrative are divergent from day one.

When exactly did the first sighting trigger an investigation off base? A consensus view would be 3:00am on Dec. 26th 1980 (even Halt’s time; if not date also agree). Then it would seem investigations ended completely on a return to base around 4:30am. It also ties in with the Suffolk Police reports.

Penniston’s story of 3 hours of missing time and his photo snapping, craft sketching, glyph touching , 45 minutes reconnaissance do not fit into this timeline. Nor do we know why he has a date of 27th December 1980 in his notebook above ‘A/C crash’ or why he gave the SkyCrash authors this same date. Did he see it in the Halt memo years later? Suggesting his notebook was not updated in a dark, cold forest on the night of the incident.. Was Penniston out there a second time on the 27th? It seems unlikely. But then how do we explain the errors in the Halt memo. Faulty memory seems to be a recurring theme with Penniston and Halt when they are caught out.

Cabansag mentions an egg or cone shaped object Burroughs mainly lights. Penniston’s story, in the 37 year aftermath, has become the most expansive one with a craft, glyphs, photographs, drawings, and even a binary machine-homosapien download to his brain that remained there until he wrote them all down in his infamous notebook.

Halt and Penniston are also the only ones to have claimed there was a triangular craft in the forest on night one (Conrad mentions it in 1983 but skated around it later). The description appears to have only come from Penniston. This also formed part of a story seeded into the local grapevine in the immediate aftermath. Halt’s dates are wrong on his memo and he chooses to use Penniston’s description of the craft. Penniston chooses to use Halt’s date.

Penniston’s story has been self-inflated at regular intervals and his attempts at marginalizing Cabansag’s role are obvious. Halt has adjusted his story a number of times. Especially over the involvement of Burroughs and Bustinza on the third night. He’s stated he has no interest in getting the witnesses together. For many years his most common tactic was to go after Larry Warren. Unfortunately for Halt, Warren has now been removed from the main narrative. Is it time Penniston was ‘Pennistopped’ and Halt was ‘Halted’?

Removing Halt’s, and Penniston’s, parts of the story that do not fit in with other witness seems to give a much clearer picture as to what happened. It seems like the two most highly ranked witnesses of the two separate nights have continued obfuscating the story down the years. For what purpose though?

a reply to: mirageman

is it just me or does anybody else think Mr Potato Head
was modeld on Richard Doty?

such familiar features!

MirageMan this truly is one of your greatest accomplishments, with help from other posters The RFI
has been dissected and theorised over and I expect THIS thread will be of great interest as a source
for anybody wishing to delve into the topic.

Yet it's so frustrating not being able to come up with a A + B = C scenario that makes it cut and clear
as to what actually took place over the base's in the 1980's

As many have pondered it may have been a collusion of many events interacting? But by design?

If one was to read the entire thread plus source material it would be hard pressed to rate it any less
significant than ROSWELL in my humble opinion.

Will the facts ever truly be verified by one of our government agency's? Very unlikely!
SO the hunt for truth goes on. worth every S & F possible sir!

a reply to: stealthyaroura


Above: Mr. Dotyhead and Richard C Potato

I think it's just a case of them doing their bit for Movember.

a reply to: mirageman
edit for a class act sir!

Now THAT is a great summary and very well highlighted/explained discrepancies involving the Halt and Penniston side of things.

Question.
Are Halt, Penniston and Larry the only 3 that mention ET/Aliens etc too?

(disregarding the phrase, under intelligent control, which would be referencing their (UAP) movement)

a reply to: AdamE

I think Bustinza also alluded to beings (certainly the appearance of the strange mist and the structure with the ‘bubbles coming off’) and seemed to back up a fair bit of Warren's story in a KGRA interview (with Burroughs and Warren).



He’s also alleged to have confirmed the presence of alien beings on the phone to Georgina Bruni which she announced at Graham Birdsall’s 2001 conference at Leeds, however there is no video or audio evidence of this as far as I know.

Bustinza since came out after the above interview and denied Warren was present ("I don't remember Larry being there at that time").

In a facebook posting/screenshot purporting to come from Bustinza, he has also stated:

“I keep getting these headache when I think about to much . I still have these dreams And try to sort things out and I have so much trouble doing it. ... I go into these trances and just start talking that my wife says she doesn’t understand what I’m saying.”

Tracy Farley has also alluded I think to being present when Jim Penniston went into a trance-like state, when he received some kind of code/automatic writing.

Is there something influencing some of the men?

a reply to: Defragmentor

When listening to the KGRA Cookie interview, it seemed she too may have been influenced by something, a voice inside her hed asking her to drive out to a particular location?

Cookie: The simple point was, when all this started happening, I thought ‘Bill’ was an officer, I assumed from Woodbridge. But then I couldn’t remember. Did I actually talk to this person, at work, did he call me or on the radio? By the third night I was—I don’t want to say scared—but I was weirded out because then I realised the radio’s not even working, so, was it in my head, and how is it in my head?

Even right now I don’t know. The voice was gentle, it was to the point, it was very professional, “I just a need you to do me a favour. Thanks so much.” So I never thought about not doing what he told me to do.
LMH: And Cookie, what was the favour?
Cookie: Just: “Don’t be scared. Your truck’s going to stop. But there’s a point to all this. You’re needed to be there because people are going to be in the area that need a ride back to motor pool. And when you drop them off at motor pool, they’ll be taken care of.”

[later in interview]
Cookie: ... I was walking around, trying to decide if ‘Bill’ was in my head or not ...

All rather curious ... there has been some dispute on Cookie's account, and whether or not she was out there, but there's some interesting things appearing on Burroughs' facebook page which might back her up.

a reply to: AdamE

Bustinza stops short of saying there were any alien beings in early interviews. (Go back to page 3 for a brief rundown of what he said and a link to a much more detailed interview.)

As our friend Defragmentor said Georgina Bruni supposedly spoke about a phone call to Adrian but that video has never surfaced to confirm her exact words.

Bustinza is yet another one who has changed his story in recent times. Adrian did not write Larry out of the story but he certainly downplayed his role in it on that radio show. I suspect in the immediate aftermath of the case Adrian was more than happy to let Larry take the case into the public domain and run with huge chunks of his own story. Perhaps in the past he felt he had to continue supporting Larry when needed through a sense of loyalty for getting it out there. Or maybe there has been other pressures? Those headaches could be a symptom of something a lot more sinister and may relate to the Cookie stuff as well.

Bustinza also had witnessed another UFO incident just before arriving at Bentwaters. It's somewhere in the thread so try searching. I haven't time to dig it out I have to go now!

A tip for those searching as suggested by MM is to use Google, like so:

site: ht tp://w w w. ufoupdateslist. com/ "Georgina Bruni"

site:ht tp://w w w. abovetopsecret. com/forum/thread989481 "Mary had a little lamb"

(Without the spaces) Very, very handy.

Archive.org is also very useful if you're checking up on the history of web pages: an example is checking Jim's website and seeing how the content of some of his has changed over the years.