The 'tent footage' was the first alleged 'Roswell' film which Ray Santilli released, sometime during December 1994, or early January 1995.
Amongst those who saw a copy of the film on video were 'crop circle' aficionados Reg Presley, Colin Andrews and George Wingfield. Santilli also provided a copy of the video to Philip Mantle from the British UFO Research Association (BUFORA).
Even at that early stage, there were some misgivings about the authenticity of this film, with reports that it had a 'green cast' and exhibited no signs of originating from old film stock.
A video showing part
of the 'tent footage' was received in the US by Robert Kiviat, producer of the
Fox network's "Alien Autopsy: Fact or
Fiction", a televised documentary which became a huge success when
later itself released on video.
Although Mantle had confirmed that Santilli had a copy of the film which was
"crystal clear", Kiviat's video was poor quality, with the faces of the 'medics'
being , 'blackened out'.
Aside from these early showings, Santilli never released the 'tent footage' and as the main 'alien autopsy' footage took centre stage, circa May 1995, began to distance himself from the first film, claiming that neither himself or the 80 year-old 'cameraman' he bought it from were satisfied with its authenticity.
Stills from the 'tent footage' can be seen on Neil Morris's web site, at URL:
http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tentft.htm
In July 1995, I asked Ray Santilli if he could explain the origins of the 'security marker', reported as being present on screen throughout the early video showings:
"The marker is dated 'July 30, 1947', where did this originate and what does it refer to"?
Santilli replied, "On part of the tent footage there is a date board which was added after (it continues after the footage is over) It could be the date of process (we don't know)".
In August 1995, I further asked of the 'tent footage', allegedly part of the archive 16mm film acquired in December 1994-January 1995:
"I was wondering how you were able to show some of the footage, already carefully transferred to video from the original 16mm reels, as early as the first week or so of January 1995".
Santilli explained: "Some of the footage needed little or no work".
In September 1995, Bob Shell, editor of the US photographic magazine 'Shutterbug' and who had offered to assist in dating the claimed archive 16mm film, responded to questions being raised about the late release of Santilli's own mail order video, 'Roswell: The Footage' stating:
"I'm assured that the delay was only because Ray was trying his best to get permission to include the first autopsy and the rest of the tent scene. These negotiations apparently were not successful".
Shell has just reaffirmed to me, "This is what I was told at the time".
Shortly afterwards, he confirmed again having spoken to Santilli's company:
"This morning I asked about the absence of the tent footage from the video. I am told this was just loose in the box and that the cameraman now says he can't recall what this is or when and where he shot it".
Shell, however, also stated at this time that he had been told:
"The tent footage, shot
at the crash site under light from emergency lanterns, shows technicians cutting
the 'space suit' off one of the bodies because, to quote the cameraman, it was
holding in heat and
hastening decomposition. The fabric was very tough, and they eventually had
to use sheet metal cutters to cut it".
A principal supporter of the 'Roswell' footage's authenticity was German 'ufologist' Michael Hesemann, who proclaimed in October 1995 that one of the "major revelations" at the forthcoming 'World UFO Congress Dialogue with the Universe' in Dusseldorf-Kaarst was that "Phil Mantle will show the complete tent footage".
Despite the fact that Hesemann, Mantle and Shell had become Santilli's 'ambassadors', with Hesemann and Mantle co-authoring an 'exclusive' book on the reality of the 'Roswell alien autopsy' claims, it seems none of them had been informed at this time that the footage was known to be bogus.
In January 1996, in reply to some queries I had raised, Bob Shell confirmed to me:
"Ray said to me that the complete tent footage was contained within the 'junk reel' when I was in his office in October. He motioned with his hands to indicate the diameter of the reel. He also mentioned at that time about the football game, family stuff, and other unidentifiable footage included in this reel".
Santilli himself seemed to uphold this claim when interviewed on 3 November, 1995:
Q: How much more footage
do you have in your hands which does not show on the Roswell video?
A: There is more footage but I am not in control of it. It is in the hands of
the collector.
Q: How clear is it?
A: There is one full autopsy film and some scrap.
Q: Is this the tent
footage?
A: No, the tent footage is scrap.
With no apparent warning that the footage was known to be fake, Mantle took the video across the Atlantic to be shown at the July 1996 Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) conference in Greensboro.
It wasn't until June, 1998, that there was published evidence indicating the 'tent footage' to be a definite hoax.
Mantle reported that on 30 March, l998, he had received information from an unnamed source, who claimed to have taken part in the filming.
Subsequently, Mantle revealed the names of "those alleged to have faked the tent footage", as Keith Bateman and Andy Price Watts, from Milton Keynes, England.
The story was picked up by Robert Kiviat and on 28 December, 1998, it featured in a new Fox network documentary 'World's Greatest Hoaxes: Secrets Finally Revealed'.
It was only in response
to the recent Fox broadcast that Santilli claimed to have been aware the footage
was a "practical joke" played on him, although maintaining it didn't affect
the authenticity of the
'alien autopsy' film.
Further information, including Santilli's rebuttals, can be found on Mark Center's informative web site, at URL:
Although the program
included an interview with one of the persons who had apparently participated
in the 'tent footage', he was not, as claimed in the Fox press release, "one
of the actors who took part in
staging the alien autopsy ruse".
The 'alien autopsy' footage which had been broadcast world-wide was a completely separate and vastly superior sequence of film. As a hoax, none of the participants involved had been identified.
Missing from the evidence was an interview with either Bateman or Watts, with Mantle stating that neither had responded to his letters, phone calls or faxes.
Nick Price a journalist with the UK national newspaper 'The Mail on Sunday', and who I had worked with previously, was familiar with the complex and by no means straightforward 'alien autopsy' affair. Following recent developments, Nick contacted me in an effort to finally resolve the many unanswered questions.
I'm pleased to announce that Keith Bateman has now agreed to tell the 'full story' of the 'tent footage' and it will be the subject of an article in tomorrow's edition of 'The Mail on Sunday'.
Having a detailed understanding of the background to the 'alien autopsy', I was fortunately in a position to hopefully identify some key questions which were put to Keith Bateman and which he answered in addition to the obvious ones, such as whether Ray Santilli know from the outset that the film was bogus.
After the article is published, a transcript will be available on my web site at:
http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/
Reactions and information
which may not be included in the article will be addressed in the next issue
of my 'Pulsar' newsletter, which will also be available on my web site before
the end of this month,
or can be requested by e-mail.
Even though the hoax footage was created in November 1994, almost a full year later, in correspondence with Hesemann, he chided:
"I saw the tent footage many times and just the speed of the movements and also the sharpness of the images indicates it was shot with a 16 mm camera and not with video. The only reason why Ray doesn't like it is that it is so bloody dark (dimly lit) and looks pathetically bad. I personally think it shows the being when the medics try to remove its spacesuit. A tent in the desert at night... with no electricity, that's why it is so dark. But all these sceptics will say again: Look, they have something to hide, looks, why is it so bad..".
Despite Hesemann's current insistence that the 'tent footage' was shot on 16mm film, according to Bateman it was in fact originally shot in colour, I understand using a Sony M3 video camera, and the colour video has just been made available. If time permitted, Nick intended to include some colour stills with the article.
Far from evidence of a 'being' having it's spacesuit removed within a tent in the desert, it's the tale of a 'being' based on a 'gray' alien t-shirt, some 'chicken innards', was filmed within a barn in rural Bedfordshire and one of the stars was the local butcher.
Hereafter it should presumably be designated the 'barn footage', or perhaps 'yarn footage'
The 'Mail on Sunday' article will I'm sure prove enlightening and entertaining.
James.
E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk