Inaccuracies from the Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Segment on the Linda Cortile UFO Abduction Case

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Inaccuracies from the Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Segment on the Linda Cortile UFO Abduction Case"

Joleen Hudson
5 years ago
Views:

1 Inaccuracies from the Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Segment on the Linda Cortile UFO Abduction Case By Sean F. Meers (First Published: May 14, 2014)

2 Introduction On March 21, 2014 the television show Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014), a show which presents itself as a MUFON-based 17, factual chronicler of UFO and abduction cases, aired an episode titled Crashes and Cover Ups. In that episode there was a segment on the Linda Cortile UFO abduction case. On reviewing the segment it became clear that the show s presentation of Linda s case was one of the most poorly researched and factually inaccurate to date. I have constructed this paper to compare the material presented (about Linda s case) in the show to the facts of Linda s case, and then document the results. Episode Information Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups Episode Runtime: 42:59 Linda Cortile UFO Abduction Case Segment Video Position 24:16 30:25 Page 1

3 Error #1 In 1989, Manhattan, New York, Linda Cortile awakens at 3:00 a.m. and is astonished to find herself hovering 12 storeys above the street outside her apartment window. Statement made by Narrator Video Position 25:47 26:02 Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups Fact #1 As indicated in Fact #1 of Inaccuracies from Jenny Randles Statements on the Linda Cortile Case 2, 12, 13, 14, 15 Linda was already awake, she hadn t gone to sleep yet. Fact #2 As indicated in Fact #1 of Inaccuracies from Jenny Randles Statements on the Linda Cortile Case Linda s November 30, 1989 UFO abduction didn t begin with an astonished Linda finding herself hovering 12 storeys above the street outside her apartment window. It began while she was awake and saying her prayers in her bedroom. Linda s husband, Steve, who usually worked nights, was serving on jury duty so he was at home on the night of the incident. He had gone to bed while Linda stayed up late doing the laundry. After Linda finished the laundry she prepared for bed. She got into bed, next to her sleeping husband, shortly after 3:00 a.m. and closed her eyes to say her prayers mentally to herself. As Linda did this she felt a strong presence in the room. She knew it wasn t her husband who was fast asleep and snoring beside her. She briefly thought it might have been one of her sons so she called out to them, she received no reply. Linda then began to feel a familiar sense of numbness creep up her body starting from her toes. She knew what was happening and began to get afraid. With her eyes still closed she vigorously tried to wake her husband, shaking him and yelling for him to wake up. Despite her efforts he would not wake up. Although Linda was afraid she forced herself to open her eyes and looked straight ahead. When she did she screamed and cried because she saw a single grey alien standing at the foot of her bed. By this time her legs were completely numb, but she still had use of her arms. She dragged herself into a sitting position, pulled a large decorative pillow out from behind her and threw it at the creature, hitting it. As soon as she did this her whole body became completely numb except for her head. Linda s fear increased and she worried that the creature was going to become mad and take, or harm, her children. She yelled out for her husband one final time but as before he would not rouse. Linda cried, promising [to the creature] to be good. After this point her conscious recollections stopped with the exception of seeing a white cloth pass over her face then recede, and the partial sensation of 2, 6, 12, 13, 14 sitting on a table while someone pounded lightly down the vertebrae of her spine. Page 2

4 Error #2 The witness Linda thinks she s dreaming, but this is no dream. Here she is floating over the New York skyline. Statement made by John Ventre Video Position 26:05 26:12 Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups Fact #3 Linda was conscious when her November 30, 1989 UFO abduction began. She reported consciously seeing a grey alien in her bedroom. She did not at any time report that she thought she was dreaming. 6 Page 3

5 Error #3 Screen Capture #1 Video Position 26:38 Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups Fact #4 Richard was sitting in the front passenger seat next to Dan who was driving. He wasn t sitting in the backseat with the third man. 1 Page 4

6 Error #4 Once onboard Linda falls into a dreamlike trance and then many hours later finds herself back in her apartment. Statement made by John Ventre Video Position 26:42 26:50 Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups Fact #5 Linda did not at any time report falling into a dreamlike trance once onboard the craft and then many hours later finding herself back in her apartment. To date, there is only one instance where Linda reported, in detail, that she experienced a memory disconnect between her being onboard the craft (during her November 30, 1989 UFO abduction) and then finding herself back in her apartment, and that was during her December 2, 1989 hypnotic regression session conducted by Budd Hopkins. During that session Linda described being escorted through a door and hearing a big bang before finding herself back in her apartment, not falling into a dreamlike trance. 7 More memories of the November 30, 1989 UFO abduction incident came back to Linda, and some of the other individuals directly affected by the incident, as time went on in the form of flashbacks. They did not remember everything that happened immediately. Their memories slowly worked their way back into their consciousness when sensory triggers (see, hear, taste, touch and smell) that reminded them of the incident were triggered. To a degree, the sensory triggers aided in reconnecting some of their consciously inaccessible memories back into their consciousness. Fact #6 Linda was not gone many hours. Her November 30, 1989 UFO abduction began at 3:15 a.m., when she was abducted, and it ended, for her, when she was returned to her bed at 4:45 a.m. In total Linda was only gone for an hour and a half. 8 Page 5

7 Error #5 In the days to come Linda is traumatised by her experience and seeks help. She eventually meets with famed abduction investigator Budd Hopkins. Statement made by Narrator Video Position 26:52 27:03 Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups Fact #7 As indicated in Fact #3 of Inaccuracies from Eve Lorgen s Chapter on the Linda Cortile Case Linda had been in contact with Budd Hopkins prior to her November 30, 1989 UFO abduction. She had been in 3, 4, 16 contact with him since early May of Page 6

Error #6 Budd found Linda s case extremely interesting. Particularly after doctors found a small metal object in her skull shortly after her abduction. Statement made by Jan C.

8 Error #6 Budd found Linda s case extremely interesting. Particularly after doctors found a small metal object in her skull shortly after her abduction. Statement made by Jan C. Harzan Video Position 27:20 27:32 Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups Screen Capture #2 Video Position 27:30 Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups Fact #8 On November 12, 1991, Dr. Lisa Bayer, Linda's niece and Podiatric surgeon, took an X-ray of Linda s skull. When it was developed it showed what appeared to be a metallic object in Linda s nose, an object with curled metallic flanges protruding from it. A week after the X-ray was taken Linda was abducted and the implant was removed. She woke up covered in blood the morning after. To summarise, doctors did not find a small metal object in Linda s skull shortly after her abduction. One doctor alone took an X-ray of Linda s skull. When that X-ray was developed it showed what appeared to be a metallic object in her nose, not in the base of her skull as shown in the Screen Capture #2. The X-ray wasn t taken shortly after the November 30, 1989 UFO abduction incident, it 5, 10, 11 was taken roughly 712 days later. Page 7

9 Error #7 This is an intriguing story, but there s not much to base our investigation on. Other than Linda s memory of the event, and there are no witnesses to corroborate it. Statement made by John Ventre Video Position 27:32 27:42 Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups Fact #9 To say that there are no witnesses to corroborate Linda Cortile s November 30, 1989 UFO abduction is completely false. Yancy Spence and Robert N. (two delivery workers at the New York Post) and Janet Kimball (the woman on the Brooklyn Bridge) are all independent firsthand eyewitnesses to the beginning of Linda s November 30, 1989 UFO abduction (where Linda was abducted by aliens from her apartment building into a UFO). Budd Hopkins personally met with each of them and he conducted in person tape recorded interviews with them. Richard, Dan and the third man were also independent firsthand eyewitnesses to the beginning of Linda s November 30, 1989 UFO abduction. Budd Hopkins never spoke to or personally met with Richard and Dan. Hopkins did manage to meet with and speak to the third man in person, however, the third man refused to acknowledge or discuss his involvement in the incident. However, the independent accounts given by firsthand eyewitnesses Yancy Spence, Robert N. and Janet Kimball independently corroborate the account that Richard, Dan and the third man provided of the beginning of the November 30, 1989 UFO abduction incident 100%. To summarise, that s three independent firsthand eyewitnesses to the beginning of Linda s November 30, 1989 UFO abduction, who Budd Hopkins met with and interviewed in person. Three witnesses independent of Richard, Dan and the third man who independently corroborated the account given by 18, 19, 20 Richard, Dan and the third man. Page 8

Error #8 Hangar 1 Letter Capture Video Position 27:53 Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups Transcript of Hangar 1 Letter Capture Dear Mr. Hopkins.

10 Error #8 Hangar 1 Letter Capture Video Position 27:53 Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups Transcript of Hangar 1 Letter Capture Dear Mr. Hopkins. In regards to your interest in an unexplained UFO incident of November 30, 1989, we believe that we can provide information that will be of use to your investigation. My partner and I are NYPD officers, who during the early morning hours of November 30 were working off-duty, providing security and driving services for a private client. At approximately 3:00 AM our vehicle stalled while driving on [censored]. At this same time, we noticed that lights in the surrounding buildings, as well as all nearby streetlights also went dead. In this blackout situation, we noticed a single light in the dark sky. On close inspection, it appeared as though a human figure was suspended in mid-air, high above the [censored] Fact #10 The Hangar 1 Letter Capture purporting to be Richard and Dan s first letter to Budd Hopkins is a complete fabrication in appearance and in contents. The contents of the real letter are contained in the Quotes, References and Appendices section of this paper. 1 Page 9

11 Error #8 Richard and Dan identify themselves as New York City police officers who were providing private security for a VIP client at the time of Linda s abduction. Statement made by Narrator Video Position 28:06 28:17 Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups Fact #11 The letter being referred to is Richard and Dan s first letter to Budd Hopkins which Hopkins received in early February That letter made no mention of the third man s existence, let alone any claims that Richard and Dan were providing security for him. The whole point of Richard and Dan initially presenting themselves under the pretense of being police officers was to relay the crux of their account to Hopkins without having to mention the third man s involvement. 1 The existence of the third man, and why Richard and Dan were with him, was not made known until Dan s April 10, 1991 letter to Budd Hopkins. The third man had at that point given Richard and Dan permission to let Hopkins know about him and his role in the November 30, 1989 UFO abduction incident. 9 Page 10

12 Conclusions Based on its treatment of the Linda Cortile UFO abduction case, the claim that the television show Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) is MUFON-based, and that its premise is to examine MUFON cases, is absurd. Their segment on Linda s case got numerous basic case facts wrong, errors which could have been easily avoided, ironically, had the show s fact checkers consulted some of the readily available past issues of MUFON UFO Journal (e.g. The Linda Cortile Abduction Case by Budd Hopkins, Sept. 1992, No. 293, MUFON UFO Journal, A Light at the End of the Tunnel by Linda Cortile, June 1993, No. 302, MUFON UFO Journal). That being said not all of the contributions to the segment were at fault. UFO researcher Richard Dolan s contributions to the segment were perfectly accurate. Dolan personally, and thoroughly, investigated Linda s case and he has met and spoken with two of the firsthand eyewitnesses to Linda s UFO abduction, Yancy Spence and Robert Bobby N.. When paranormal media, purporting to be documentary in nature, does not get their facts right it causes problems. Their errors confuse the audience, obfuscate case facts, and in some events lead to case detractors wrongly attributing and sourcing the paranormal media s errors to the people involved in the case. The more complicated a case, the more likely it is going to be misrepresented. When it comes to alien abduction cases Linda s is one of the most complicated on record. It is extremely difficult to casually appraise it, or condense it. The treatment that Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) gives Linda s case does, in my opinion, more harm than good. Its looseness with the facts, and in some cases outright fabrications, do the show s credibility no credit. If any of the other UFO abduction cases portrayed on Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) are as equally factually egregious as their treatment of Linda s case then the show is only going to contribute to the confusion surrounding these cases and ultimately only cause more problems for them. Page 11

13 Quotes, References and Appendices 1) Richard and Dan s First Letter to Budd Hopkins Page 3; line 10 21, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) Page 12

14 Page 4, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) Page 13

Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) 3) Page 6; line 35 38, Witnessed: The

15 Page 5; line 1 16, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) 2) Page 5; line 22 29, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) 3) Page 6; line 35 38, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) Page 14

16 4) Page 12; line 1 3, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) 5) Page 15

PLC, 1997) 7) Page 19; line 28 35, Witnessed: The True Story of the PLC, 1997)

17 6) Page 12; line 25 39, Page 13; line 1 4, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) 7) Page 19; line 28 35, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) Page 16

9) Page 47; line 18 35, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge

18 8) Page 20, Paragraph 5, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) 9) Page 47; line 18 35, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) Page 17

11) Page 145; line 9 22, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge

19 10) Page 144; line 4 13, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) 11) Page 145; line 9 22, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997) Page 18

12) Page 12, Left Column; line 16 37 (not including bold text lines), The Linda

20 12) Page 12, Left Column; line (not including bold text lines), The Linda Cortile Abduction Case by Budd Hopkins, September 1992, Number 293, MUFON UFO Journal Page 19

21 13) Page 13, Left Column; line 29 56, Right Column; line 1 10 (not including three bold lines), A Light at the End of the Tunnel by Linda Cortile, June 1993, Number 302, MUFON UFO Journal Page 20

22 14) Inaccuracies from Jenny Randles Statements on the Linda Cortile Case by Sean F. Meers URL: URL: 15) Inaccuracies from Chris A. Rutkowski s Chapter on the Linda Cortile Case by Sean F. Meers URL: URL: 16) Inaccuracies from Eve Lorgen s Chapter on the Linda Cortile Case by Sean F. Meers URL: URL: 17) Hangar 1 is MUFON s TV debut by Roger Marsh URL: 18) Firsthand Eyewitness Robert Bobby N. URL: URL: Page 21

23 19) Firsthand Eyewitness Yancy Spence URL: URL: URL: 20) Firsthand Eyewitness Janet Kimball (The Woman on the Brooklyn Bridge) URL: URL: Page 22

24 Fair Use The quotes and stills from Hangar 1: The UFO Files (2014) Season One, Episode Four Crashes and Cover Ups have been used here in accordance with the Fair Use doctrine contained within the United States copyright law. They are presented here to factually demonstrate their inaccuracy. The purpose and character of this use is non-profit education intended to increase public awareness about the validity of the Linda Cortile UFO abduction case and the invalidity of some of the claims and portrayals that have been publicly made about it. They have also been used here as a means of providing a free and accurate public information source about the case to aid those interested in learning more about it. URL: TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 1 > Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use Copyright Sean F. Meers claims copyright ownership of all information stored in this document, unless expressly stated otherwise. No information stored in this document may be used for commercial or other purposes (except as legally allowed for personal and educational use) unless Sean F. Meers gives his prior written consent to the intended use. Page 23

Inaccuracies from Peter Brookesmith s Article on the Linda Cortile Case

Inaccuracies from Peter Brookesmith s Article on the Linda Cortile Case By Sean F. Meers (First Published: November 20, 2012) (Updated and Expanded July 25, 2014) Introduction Peter Brookesmith, a British