During 1995 we informed Fox (Bob Kiviat) that the Tent Footage was not safe to use and may not be genuine. This was known to them. At that time Bob Kiviat was so desperate to use the film that he constructed a disclaimer stating that the Tent Footage may not be related to the AA film and may not be genuine. He was to run the disclaimer during the transmission . In the end I won and the Tent Film was pulled from the original transmission of the AA film.

 Now 1998, Bob needed material for his new show. Bob re-visited the Tent Film and decided to construct the story that will be shown on December 1998. Of course his main thrust will be the "shock horror" of just discovering the story surrounding the Tent Footage (maybe I should send him his hand written disclaimer of 1995).

 I have already gone on record with the full Tent Footage story, however for the benefit of doubt here it is again.:

 The Tent Footage was the first film material I collected from the cameraman, it was in the form of 16mm film and in very poor condition. I brought it back to England and asked a studio facility in Milton Keynes to retrieve whatever image they could from it. Approximately a week (maybe longer) after delivery the Studio in Milton Keynes presented me with the film which has become known as the ""Tent Footage" I was told that this was all that could be retrieved from the film.

 I had informed the cameraman by telephone that we were able to retrieve some image and indeed showed the film to Philip Mantel and other interested parties. I returned to the States later to collect the main film and showed the "Tent Footage" on VHS to the cameraman.

 At this point he stated that he did not remember either the image being portrayed or the style in which it had been filmed. I was concerned but continued to collect the remaining film and returned to the United Kingdom.

 Upon my return I contacted the studio in Milton Keynes to find out more about the images from the "Tent Footage". To my surprise Andy (my friend and owner of the studio) admitted to playing a joke on me. They were unable to retrieve anything of consequence from the film therefore he staged a spoof never thinking that I would want to use it. As a result part of the film (Tent Footage) returned was hoaxed by him as a practical Joke.

 This meant that with regard to the "Tent Footage" I was uncertain as to what was real and what was not, also I had fallen out with Andy. As a result I informed all parties that had come into contact with the Tent Footage that I was not confident with regard to the Tent Footage and further that it should not be used in conjunction with the autopsy film. It was the only thing I could do as I did not want it to compromise the main film.

 Later in the summer of 1995 Andy decided to use the abandoned "Tent Footage" in a video he was producing for a third party and upon notification of the project I bought the film from him and out of the market place.

 I believe I did the responsible thing and that my action's in removing the "Tent Footage" from circulation at the very beginning of the campaign was the right thing to do.

 Both Andy and Keith at the studio are long time friends of mine and have supported me many times in the past, it was because of this relationship they instigated the joke. I am certain that no malice was intended by Andy or his company which is why the matter never went any further.

 My position regarding the Autopsy film and the reels recovered remains unchanged. Any discussion regarding the Tent Footage is completely irrelevant. Neither Andy, The Studio in Milton Keynes or anyone associated with them have anything whatsoever to do with the Autopsy film.

 Ray Santilli