free-for-all: the assassination of budd hopkins and linda...

Free-For-All: The Assassination of Budd Hopkins and Linda Cortile

v1.3

By Sean F. Meers

(First Published: March 2011) (Updated and Expanded July 5, 2017)

“He who has laughter on his side has no need of proof.” 6, 125

Theodor Adorno

List of Complete Updates

April 26, 2013

Foreword added.

Page 1 – Introduction – Grammar, typos, paragraphing and casing have been corrected.

Page 2, 3 – Heading casing has been corrected.

Page 5, 9 – Spelling corrected (“cacheing” to “caching”).

Page 7, 8 – Punctuation, article name italicised, casing corrected.

Page 8 – Date format corrected (26th

of April to April 26), typos fixed, [Mortellaro] added to quote.

Page 10 – Typos, date format corrected (29th

of April to April 29).

Page 11 – Article name italicised, casing corrected.

Page 12 – Punctuation, article name italicised, casing corrected, typos fixed, [Mortellaro] added to quote.

Page 22 – Factual Error, detailed acknowledgement and correction provided on page 22.

Page 23 – [Cortile] added to “critique” document title.

Page 25 – On the final line changed “two pages” to “three pages” due to newly added text over the following three pages.

Page 26 – 28 – Added and expanded on each of the case’s witnesses. Removed the brackets and added dashes instead for an effect of uniformity. Factual error on page 27 corrected.

Page 29 – Paragraphs condensed so they are on point. Corrected typos, removed bad grammar “irregardless”.

3 – Punctuation, article name italicised, typos corrected.

Page 34, 36 – Typos and punctuation corrected.

Page 35 – Typos, punctuation and paragraphing corrected.

Page 38 – Punctuation, article name italicised, typos corrected.

Page 39 – The word “retrievability” replaced with “retrieval”.

Page 40 – Quotations removed from Richard and Dan.

Page 44, 45 – All instances of critique and “critique” made lower case.

Page 48 – Quotations removed from Richard and Dan.

Page 50 – Removed the word “did” from sentence “did took place”.

Page 53 – Paragraphing bottom two points, removed the word “from” from the sentence fragment “transcript form”.

Page 56 – Grammar corrected and sentences condensed and distributed properly. The spelling of Dr. Rima Laibow’s name in the contracted transcription quote has been corrected. Transcription company responsible for error.

Page 59 – Expanded the paragraph with new text.

Page 60 – Corrected grammar.

Page 61 – Corrected grammar and punctuation.

Page 64 – Article names and quotes italicised.

Page 65 – 68, Text expanded and updated with new information. Grammar and punctuation corrected

September 3, 2015

Quotes, formatting and conclusion expanded. Grammar corrected.

July 5, 2017

Expanded publishing information. Changed paper title font to Cambria. Compressed line size.

Updated Quote #80 with an identical copy of it as it appears in its original source The Anomalist: 7.

-- Sean F. Meers First Updated: April 26, 2013

Last Updated: July 5, 2017

Foreword

i

In early March 2011 I publicly released my paper “Free-For-All: The Assassination of Budd Hopkins and Linda Cortile”. It was 166 pages in length and written as a rebuttal to Carol Rainey’s article “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon”” which was published on January 15, 2011. Among other things, Rainey’s article levelled a series of provocative, yet wholly unsubstantiated, allegations against UFO and alien abduction researcher Budd Hopkins, the quality of his work, as well as some of the individuals from the cases he worked on. Linda Cortile, whose groundbreaking case of an independently witnessed alien abduction in New York City, which was the subject for Hopkins’ third book Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions (1996), was one of these individuals. A little over a month prior to the release of Rainey’s article I had personally met with Budd Hopkins and Linda Cortile in New York City and delivered to each of them a 421 page paper I’d completed called “Critique Rejected”. “Critique Rejected”, which took approximately one year to write, was crafted as a rebuttal and an in depth dismantling of the 25 page paper “A Critique of Budd Hopkins’ case of the UFO Abduction of Linda [Cortile] *” by Joseph J. Stefula, Richard D. Butler and George P. Hansen which was published on January 8, 1993. The Hansen/Stefula/Butler “critique”, and its authors, claimed to have demonstrated that the Linda Cortile UFO abduction case was a hoax. However, instead of providing evidence to prove that Linda’s case was a hoax, the claims in their 25 page paper were comprised of a combination of errors, lies, omissions and hearsay. Their paper, like Rainey’s article, was provocative yet baseless. Despite this, for over twenty years their paper has been widely distributed online, and the contents of it have been quoted by anyone with an interest in discrediting Linda’s case. It was for this reason that I decided to write “Critique Rejected” and finally set the record straight regarding the facts of Linda’s case and the demonstrably false nature of each and every one of the claims made against it by its subjective detractors Hansen, Stefula and Butler. “Critique Rejected” was painstaking, pedantic work, but upon its completion all of the false claims from the Hansen/Stefula/Butler critique were finally refuted in fully referenced detail and I was very pleased to provide solid documentation of that refutation to Budd and Linda. In writing “Critique Rejected” I learned a lot about Linda’s case, I am still learning about Linda’s case to this day. In checking each of the claims made against Linda’s case by Hansen, Stefula and Butler I was both amazed and shocked at just how much of what they claimed was provably false and how much of what they claimed was unproven hearsay. What was most unsettling to me was just how many individuals, UFO researchers, journalists and authors, uncritically accepted and publicly ran with Hansen, Stefula and Butler’s fallacious claims. It made me wonder, if they were so uncritically accepting of one claim, how many others were they uncritically accepting of. It also made me realise that it was imperative that I do my own research before I accepted or rejected material. In late January 2011, when I learned about and read Rainey’s article “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””, I decided to personally research and investigate the claims made in the article and see what turned up. Ultimately, what I found was a series of unsubstantiated claims originating from a biased and irrational source. Upon learning this I decided to

ii

construct a rebuttal to Rainey’s article, focusing primarily on what was levelled against Budd Hopkins, his work, Linda Cortile and her case. When I met Budd Hopkins in person in December 2010 I was of mixed emotions. I was very happy and excited to finally meet him in person and provide him with substantiated documentation for one of his cases, but I was also deeply saddened because prior to meeting him I had no idea of the extent of just how much his health was suffering, and the devastating toll it was taking on him physically. He was extremely thin and extremely frail, but mentally he was as sharp as a razor. He picked up and thumbed through “Critique Rejected”, as he sat on the couch in his living room, asking me questions and critiquing it as Linda and I sat there with him in his living room. Our meeting was one of my happiest memories of my life. The only sadness I felt was knowing that, in all likelihood because of his health, I would never see him in person again. Unfortunately, I was right because almost 9 months later, on August 21, 2011, Budd Hopkins died from a combination of liver cancer and pneumonia. When I began writing my rebuttal to Rainey’s article in early 2011, I was of two mindsets. I knew that a decent at length rebuttal would normally be allotted much more time to write, three to five months at a minimum. I also knew, however, that Budd did not have long to live and needed a solid, public defense as soon as possible. With that in mind I did my best and finished my rebuttal to Rainey in less than a month, and had it posted online at Kay Wilson’s www.alienjigsaw.com website shortly after. A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow. In addition to the rebuttal I provided Budd Hopkins with documentary evidence that ultimately assisted him in the construction of his rebuttals to Rainey’s claims. I was stunned that in his state of health that he was actually working on writing rebuttals to his latest critic. It was a herculean effort, in my opinion, and he ultimately produced two separate rebuttals which were published just months before his death. In the months leading up to Budd’s death I did what I could to be of assistance to him. I managed to speak with him a handful of times on the phone and conveyed everything I wanted him to know should anything happen to him. I got the call from Linda when he died. I wanted to be in New York for his funeral but it was simply not possible, Linda however was there and let me know how everything went. Budd was a gentle, intelligent, honest and convivial man. He was a consummate professional in his work and had an open mind and heart. In looking back on my rebuttal to Rainey, reviewing it and rereading it, there are many things I would like to add, perfect and indeed correct. In my research and writing on Linda’s case I’ve dealt with and written about the inaccuracies of other people’s claims about her case. I firmly believe that when one goes about applying external criticism to someone else’s work one that they also have to be ready and willing to apply internal criticism to their own work. Locating, acknowledging and correcting any and all inaccuracies within my own work, whether they be typos, grammatical or matters of fact, is essential and something that I’m implementing in my revision and updating of this paper. After Budd Hopkins’ death in August 2011, his website (http://www.intrudersfoundation.org) was taken down. When I released my rebuttal to Rainey (“Free-For-All: The Assassination of Budd Hopkins and Linda Cortile”) in March 2011 his website was still up. The only way his website can be viewed now is by accessing it through Internet Archive Wayback Machine http://archive.org/web/web.php , a website record and archival service of dead websites. The reason I mention this is because some of the facts in my paper reference information from Budd’s website before it was taken down. Luckily,

http://www.alienjigsaw.com/

http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/

http://archive.org/web/web.php

iii

even with Hopkins’ website now gone, the evidence referenced in this paper is still obtainable through those records kept at Wayback. Links and copies of those specific records have also been provided in this paper at the appropriate points. Kay Wilson’s website www.alienjigsaw.com was taken down by Kay in early 2013 due to problems stemming from an individual who was, and is (as of April 26, 2013), cyber stalking her and making threats against her life. In March 2011 her website was still up and information within this paper references data that was once at Kay’s website. That data has also been captured within this paper. Her website, due to her personal security situation, is not available through Wayback. However, the information from her website presented here does not detriment her situation as it is quotations from individuals regarding Budd Hopkins. The details of those quotes have been provided. Paratopia Magazine, where Carol Rainey published her article, had a short life (one issue) and no longer exists. The links to the issue of that magazine in which her article was published are dead. All quotes from her article are provided with accompanying details, page numbers, line numbers etc. The website http://www.paratopia.org in its original form no longer exists either. I hope that the readers of this revised and updated version of “Free-For-All: The Assassination of Budd Hopkins and Linda Cortile” find it informative and helpful in their research and understanding of the inaccuracies within Rainey’s article and the unfortunate situation surrounding it.

-- Sean F. Meers April 26, 2013

* Linda’s real last name has been substituted with her pseudonym Cortile by me. Within days of Carol’s article being published, Kay Wilson at her website www.alienjigsaw.com , appealed to those who’ve worked with Budd and knew him firsthand to write in with tributes dedicated to him. More than fifty people wrote in, including psychologists, scientists, psychiatrists and abductees, with their experiences in dealing with Budd. 89 These people attested not only to his good character but to the professional and caring treatment of the individuals he works with. Is this all a big conspiracy too, fifty or more of them lying for Budd for the sole purpose of discrediting Carol’s article? Proof trumps a theory no matter what line of work one is in. Much has been said, much has been accused, nothing of consequence has been proven.


http://www.paratopia.org/


Introduction

Page 1

Carol Rainey’s recent article “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””9, as well as certain episodes of Jeremy Vaeni’s and Jeff Ritzmann’s internet based paranormal podcast “Paratopia” 164, 123 have enthusiastically and repeatedly called in to question the credibility of Budd Hopkins, his work and methodologies, as well as some of the individuals from his cases. The purpose of this paper is to examine and test the evidential veracity of the multitude of claims and accusations, being levelled from a variety of sources, against Budd Hopkins, his work as well as Linda Cortile and her case. UFO and alien abduction researcher Dr. David Jacobs is currently at the heart of a scandal regarding purported ethical and professional abuses on his part towards purported alien abductee “Emma Woods” (pseudonym). Dr. Jacobs is both a longtime friend and colleague of Budd Hopkins and someone who Hopkins supports and is standing by. In regards to the “Emma Woods” case Hopkins has spoken to her by phone and corresponded with her by mail, he has never met her. Many people want to know definitively whether there has been any wrong doing on Dr. Jacobs’ part in relation to the “Emma Woods” case, and if Hopkins’ support of Jacobs makes him as professionally and ethically culpable. The Jacobs/Woods scandal may ultimately have its day in court, with each party presenting their evidence and version of events. Only at the end of those proceedings, or until the complete evidence pertaining to this matter is released by both parties, will objective and definitive conclusions be able to be reached. If there has been abuse it needs to be penalised, if there has not there needs to be vindication. What is important is that justice is achieved and that people base their conclusions on all of the evidence, not parts of it. I will employ fact checking as well as careful pedantic scrutiny to the multitude of details involved in this matter. The results of these techniques will be what I base my conclusions on. The evidence I’ve used to arrive at these conclusions will be referenced and available for empirical examination in the appendix of this paper.

Author’s Note

Page 2

One cannot dismiss a person’s claims outright simply because the claimant had a prior relationship to the person they were making claims about. All claims require consideration and verification. Claims can only be dismissed if they are unable to be verified.

FACT

Budd Hopkins’ autobiography Art, Life and UFO’s was publicly released on June 24th, 2009.124

Carol Rainey’s article “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon”” was publicly released on January 15th 2011. 122

Below is the only statement in Hopkins’ autobiography in which he addresses his former relationship and marriage to Carol Rainey. This statement was publicly released in Hopkins’ autobiography a year and a half before Rainey began to publicly level claims and allegations against Hopkins, his work and the individuals from his cases. This statement was made long before there was any need for Hopkins to publicly defend himself, his work and the individuals from his cases against Rainey’s claims and allegations and is therefore an unmotivated statement.

113

Art, Life and UFO’s by

Budd Hopkins Kindle Edition (*.MOBI Format)

Location 6351 – 6363 (Kindle for PC 4) ISBN: 1933665793

Evidence of Carol Rainey’s Bias

Page 3

63

Page 12, Left Column; line 13 – 16, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””

by Carol Rainey, Preview Issue of Paratopia Magazine

January 2011

URL: www.paratopia.org/paratopia_magazine/mag_preview_final.pdf

FACT

A derogatory comment about her husband’s art career that served no purpose and did not advance or solidify her main arguments against Hopkins in any way.

49

Page 5, Right Column; line 14 – 15, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011


FACT

An admission that she had arguments with Hopkins. Everyone argues of course, but when one is making scandalous allegations about someone, a little fact like whether or not they argued with each other in the past can add an angle to take onboard in considering the potential validity of their claims. (See Chapter Three: THE INSULTS for more examples of bias on the part of Carol Rainey).

http://www.paratopia.org/paratopia_magazine/mag_preview_final.pdf


CHAPTER ONE

The Lies

LIE #1

61

, Right Column; line 51 – 53, Page 12, Left Column; line 1 – 5, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011


FACT

The webpage was never pulled down and is still there (see the following pages for proof).

The webpage is located at the following URL:

URL: http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_release.html 66


http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_release.html

FACT

URL: http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_release.html The webpage that the above URL leads to has been online and cacheable since 2004. A website has to be online and available in order for it to be cacheable. The caching of the webpage that the above URL leads to began on May 08, 2004 and ended on June 25, 2008. The webpage was not altered and nothing was added or removed when the caching ended in 2008 as the next fact (see following page) will prove.

68

URL: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_release.html

(Classic Interface)


http://web.archive.org/web/*/http:/www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_release.html

FACT

URL: http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_release.html The webpage that the above URL leads to has not been modified since the 26th of April 2008 13:01:10. This means that it was not altered and nothing was added or removed.

66

In order to find out the last time the following webpage was modified I followed the 2 steps below. URL: http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_release.html

1. Type the webpage URL into the browser and press enter 2. Type the following javascript code into the browser and press enter:

javascript:alert(document.lastModified)

The webpage answered with a popup box that indicated the last time the webpage had been modified.

The article “For Public Release: The James Mortellaro Case” first appears in these cache records as early as May 08, 2004.



72

URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20040508070121/http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_rele

ase.html

(Classic Interface)

http://web.archive.org/web/20040508070121/http:/www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_release.html


The article “For Public Release: The James Mortellaro Case” is still there in these cache records as late as June 25, 2008.

73

URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20080625033057/http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_rele

ase.html

(Classic Interface)

FACT

With the webpage cache records beginning on May 08, 2004 and ending on June 25, 2008 and since the webpage has not been modified (files added, removed etc.) since April 26, 2008 at 13:01:10 it would be a deliberate falsity to state that: “The [Mortellaro] page on Hopkins Intruders Foundation website was quickly pulled down and there seems to be little evidence that anything went wrong.” 61 The webpage was added in 2004, cached repeatedly over four years, then in 2008 the webpage cacheing activity ceased and the webpage remained unmodified with nothing being added or removed. This proves that the webpage was never removed and is still there today.



FACT

URL: http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/if_readings.html

The webpage that the above URL leads to has been online and cacheable since 2001. A website has to be online and available in order for it to be cacheable. The caching of the webpage that the above URL leads to began on February 07, 2001 and ended on June 25, 2008. The webpage was not altered and nothing was added or removed when the caching ended in 2008 as the next fact (see following page) will prove.

69

URL: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/if_readings.html

(Classic Interface)

http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/if_readings.html

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http:/www.intrudersfoundation.org/if_readings.html

FACT


The webpage that the above URL leads to has not been modified since the April 29, 2008 at 12:49:54. This means that it was not altered and nothing was added or removed.

67

In order to find out the last time the following webpage was modified I followed the 2 steps below.


1. Type the webpage URL into the browser and press enter

2. Type the following javascript code into the browser and press enter:


The webpage answered with a popup box that indicated the last time the webpage had been

modified.



FACT

The article “For Public Release: The James Mortellaro Case” first appears in these cache records as early as August 5 2004.

70

URL:

http://web.archive.org/web/20040805233624/http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/if_readings.html

(Classic Interface)

http://web.archive.org/web/20040805233624/http:/www.intrudersfoundation.org/if_readings.html

The article “For Public Release: The James Mortellaro Case” is still there in these cache records as late as June 25 2008.

71

URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20080625030830/http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/if_readings.html


With the webpage cache records showing a copy of the article “For Public Release: The James Mortellaro Case” being available at the webpage, that the above URL leads to, as early as August 5, 2004 and as late as June 25, 2008, and since the webpage has not been modified (files added, removed etc.) since April 29, 2008, the article is, and always has been, available online since at least August 5, 2004. It has never been removed or changed at any point after this date. These facts prove that the webpage that the above URL leads to was added in 2004, cached repeatedly over four years, then in 2008 when the webpage caching activity ceased, the webpage remained unmodified with nothing being added or removed. Therefore it would be a deliberate falsity to state that: “The [Mortellaro] page on Hopkins Intruders Foundation website was quickly pulled down and there seems to be little evidence that anything went wrong.” 61



LIE #2

45



January 2011


58



January 2011




46

Page 4, Middle Column; line 40 – 44, Right Column; line 1, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011


FACT

To claim that Budd Hopkins works almost exclusively alone, without supervision, and is unwilling to accept any is demonstrably false. During Hopkins’ first seven years of investigation of abduction reports, before he personally used hypnosis, multiple psychologists and hypnotherapists carried out the hypnotic regressions. Hopkins brought the individuals from the abduction accounts he was studying to these specialists. These psychologists and hypnotherapists included Dr. Girard Franklin, Dr. Robert M. Naiman and Dr. Aphrodite Clamar. 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 134 Some of the people who have observed Budd Hopkins firsthand conducting hypnotic regression sessions are listed over the following pages.


1) French Journalist, Author and Researcher Marie-Therese de Brosses 79, 102

"I have been able to observe several of [Budd Hopkins'] regressions, and I remember being favorably impressed by the extreme prudence with which he conducts them, so as not to influence his subjects."

Marie-Thérèse de Brosses, Enquête sur les enlèvements extraterrestres [An Inquiry into Alien Abductions].

Paris: Éditions J'ai lu, 1995.

URL: http://www.gregsandow.com/ufo/Contents/Abduction_Conundrum/abduction_conundrum.htm

URL: http://www.gregsandow.com/ufo/Contents/Abduction_Conundrum/footnotes/footnotes.htm#5

2

“I have witnessed his work and I have been impressed by his behaviour, and I know that he is very careful when he works with abductees. This is not just a compliment from a friend: I have had the opportunity to validate this in many cases. I also say this as someone who has spent seven years studying at Paris University and who has also spent many years studying this disturbing phenomenon. Budd not only spent hours and hours discussing the subject with me, but he also allowed me to join him in his support group. He showed me videos of his regression sessions and I was able to see - firsthand -- how he carefully avoided leading questions. He also allowed me to speak directly with some of his abductees without being present so they were able to feel comfortable in their conversations with me.”

-- Marie-Therese de Brosses, Author and Researcher

“Colleagues and Abductees Give Thanks and Pay Tribute to Budd Hopkins”

URL: http://www.alienjigsaw.com/Articles/PioneerOfAbductionResearch.htm#Tribute

http://www.gregsandow.com/ufo/Contents/Abduction_Conundrum/abduction_conundrum.htm

http://www.gregsandow.com/ufo/Contents/Abduction_Conundrum/footnotes/footnotes.htm#52


http://www.alienjigsaw.com/Articles/PioneerOfAbductionResearch.htm#Tribute

2) American Journalist Greg Sandow 80

Page 47, Paragraph 5, “The Abduction Conundrum”

by Greg Sandow, The Anomalist: 7, Winter 1998/99

(Edited and published by Patrick Huyghe and Dennis Stacy)

3) New York Journalist Harold Egeln 100

“Reading Missing Time in the early 1980s aroused my curiosity about my own experiences. When his book titled Intruders came out in 1987, I wrote Budd about them. Being a fellow New Yorker, I approached Budd at a couple events afterwards and in mid-1988 I was referred by him to Dr. Jean Mundy, a NYC psychologist and hypnotherapist who was working with Budd. My two dozen sessions with her opened up my own explorations and helped lead me into finding my own experiencer-run group, S.P.A.C.E. - the Search Project for Aspects of Close Encounters in March of 1992. Budd was a guest at two of our monthly support group meetings in 1993 and in 1995. I've had dinner with Budd a few times over the years and was a guest on a few occasions at his support meetings. I was also invited to sit in on two hypnosis sessions with friends who requested I do so, and was able to observe firsthand how Budd conducts a session.”

-- Harold Egeln, S.P.A.C.E. Founder and Facilitator




4) New York Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist Gibbs Williams 90

“I have met with Budd on a number of occasions. I have observed him regressing a few abductees. There was never a time where there was the slightest hint of him not being a consummate professional. He is ultra sensitive to psychological pain, confusion, trauma and goes out of his way to be kind, unconditionally accepting, and adhere to the highest of ethical standards.

Budd never tried to lead the abductee into an abduction scenario; in fact Budd both told and showed me how he would purposely introduce fantasy "facts" that if validated by the abductee would suggest they are responding to his leading inquiry. When he did this I observed no confirmation of his purposefully misleading statements.”

-- Gibbs Williams, Ph.D., Clinical Psychologist



5) Researcher, investigator and author Peter Robbins 87

“I was asked to witness a number of hypnotic regressions during the years I worked for Budd, either by him or the subject or by both of them, but always with the subject's full approval. I cannot say how many times I was called upon to do this, but can safely say I did so between ten and twenty times. As a beginning practitioner, Budd worked under the watchful eye of the respected hypnotherapist Aphrodite Clamar for seven long years, then under the guidance of other professional hypnotherapists as well. His patience, sensitivity and concern for his subjects is extraordinary and it was not unusual for him to take up to half an hour to make sure that the subject was as relaxed as possible before asking them a first question. Transcripts of some of these sessions are included in his books and are very worth reading. Additionally, the complete transcript (including both questions and answers) of the long and memorable session he conducted with Larry Warren, my co-author of Left At East Gate is included in that book and is exemplary of the manner in which Hopkins conducts this aspect of his work.”

“Some Thoughts on Budd Hopkins” By Peter Robbins

URL: http://www.alienjigsaw.com/Articles/Thoughts0nBudd.html


http://www.alienjigsaw.com/Articles/Thoughts0nBudd.html

6) American Journalist and Author C.D.B. Bryan 114, 115

C.D.B. Bryan witnessed Budd conduct five separate hypnosis sessions firsthand on two female subjects. Details of what C.D.B. Bryan witnessed during these sessions is covered by him in the following five chapters of his book Close encounters of the Fourth Kind: Alien Abduction and UFOs Witnesses and Scientists Report.

“Chapter XIV Post conference Interview Carol and Alice - First Hypnosis Session at Budd Hopkins’ Studio”

Page 315 – 333

“Chapter XVI Post conference Interview Carol and Alice - Second Hypnosis Session at Budd Hopkins' Studio”

Page 339 – 357

“Chapter XVII Post conference Interview Carol and Alice - Third Hypnosis Session at Budd Hopkins’ Studio”

Page 358 – 382

“Chapter XVIII Post conference interview Carol and Alice - Fourth Hypnosis session at Budd Hopkins' Studio”

Page 383 – 401

“Chapter XIX Post conference Interview Carol and Alice - Fifth Hypnosis Session at Budd Hopkins’ Studio”

Page 402 – 415

Close encounters of the Fourth Kind: Alien Abduction and UFOs Witnesses and Scientists Report by C.D.B. Bryan

(Hardcover, Wiedenfeld & Nicolson, 2001)

FACT

Some members of the medical community that Hopkins has worked closely with in his work include:

1) Psychiatric Hypnotherapist John S. Carpenter MSW, LCSW 95, 96

“Thank you for this opportunity to express my deepest appreciation to Budd Hopkins, a true friend and pioneer in a field of research that nobody knew how to approach. As a mental health professional I respect and appreciate his involving and working closely with psychiatric professionals like John Mack and myself. We could see how deeply he felt about the emotions and mental health of every client.”

-- John S. Carpenter MSW, LCSW, Psychiatric Hypnotherapist and UFO Abductions

Researcher



“Personally, Budd shared many clever, insightful, and very helpful techniques and ideas that jumpstarted my research in a wise direction. He was very careful to not reveal info that could bias, contaminate, or suggest certain responses. In fact, he and I often discussed paradoxical questioning that would try to lead subjects toward logical responses to see if they could be swayed or led. The amazing thing is that subjects would stick adamantly to bizarre and irrational details -- like floating through a solid wall -- rather than led by us toward realistic answers -- like leaving through a doorway. I utilized one of his clever questions frequently -- in which I asked what the subject notices in any of the corners of the new room he/she finds himself in. This again is a logical but leading question to see if confabulation or imagination could be triggered. NOT ONCE has any subject reported what he sees in any corner --- simply because the room appears to be round -- no room on board a UFO ever seems to have corners! In other words, logical questions could not influence a witness toward logical answers because they are determined to report what they have experienced no matter how bizarre it seems. So these are good examples of the clever research wisdom that Budd shared as he tried to carve some kind of sane path through understanding and approaching a totally bizarre field of weird yet consistent data -- coming from sincere yet traumatized people.”


Researcher





2) New York City Psychologist and Hypnotherapist Dr. Jean Mundy 100, 117, 118, 119

“Being a fellow New Yorker, I approached Budd at a couple events afterwards and in mid-1988 I was referred by him to Dr. Jean Mundy, a NYC psychologist and hypnotherapist who was working with Budd.”




“A certified psychologist in New York State, she was a senior staff psychologist working with a diagnostic team at St. Vincent's Hospital in Greenwich Village for 10 years and also an psychology professor for 30 years at Long Island University. She specialized in hypnotherapy and projective techniques, which came into play when she first learned about the alien abduction phenomena.”

CLOSE ENCOUNTERS NYC NEWS --JANUARY-FEBRUARY 2009 DR. JEAN MUNDY, A LEADING N.Y. UFO ALIEN ABDUCTION RESEARCHER, DIES JAN. 14

URL: http://community-2.webtv.net/ASTROHAL/CLOSEENCOUNTERSNYC/page13.html

“This led her into hypnotherapy work. But it was not until the mid-1980s when Budd Hopkins got in touch with her (he lives in nearby Chelsea) and asked her help responding to possible contact experiencers answering an "Omni Magazine" survey. "About 80 percent indicated they had close encounters and I began working with some of them," Dr. Mundy said at a UFO conference.”

CLOSE ENCOUNTERS NYC NEWS --JANUARY-FEBRUARY 2009

DR. JEAN MUNDY, A LEADING N.Y. UFO ALIEN ABDUCTION RESEARCHER, DIES JAN. 14


“This reporter, who first met her on referral by Budd Hopkins in July 1988, greatly benefitted from the 25 sessions he had with her between 1988 and 1993, and from her support, encouragement and friendship then and over the years.”




http://community-2.webtv.net/ASTROHAL/CLOSEENCOUNTERSNYC/page13.html



3) The late American Psychiatrist, Pulitzer Prize-winning biographer and

Harvard Medical School Professor Dr. John E. Mack 103

"Nothing in my then nearly forty years of familiarity with the field of psychiatry prepared me for what Hopkins had to say. I was impressed with his warmth, sincerity, intelligence, and caring for the people with whom he had been working. But more important than that were the stories he told me from people all over the United States who had come forth to tell him about their experiences after reading one of his books or articles or hearing him on television....I have a great debt and profound respect for the pioneers in this field, like Budd Hopkins, who have had the courage to investigate and report information that runs in the face of our culture's consensus reality..."

-- (The Late) John E. Mack, M.D., Pulitzer Prize Winner: From Abduction: Human

Encounters With Aliens (1994)



4) Psychologist Dr. Don Donderi Ph.D. 97

“In the absence of any professional recognition of the abduction phenomenon, Budd was among the first competent people to investigate abductions and among the first to organize what amount to support groups for abductees. Budd took it upon himself to report what was happening to abductees and to listen sympathetically to the abductees themselves. He sought professional expertise for the difficult job of interviewing abductees and then developed his own interviewing skills because there were so few credentialed experts who could fit abduction cases into their professional lives.”

-- Don Donderi, Ph.D. Psychology





5) Experimental Psychologist Stuart Appelle Ph.D. 92

“Budd Hopkins is recognized as a pioneer in UFO abduction research and investigation. His work, which focused upon an extensive investigation of suspected abductees and his collaboration with mental health professionals in recovering events for which victims had only partial conscious memories must be commended. His participation in the very important academic study on "Alien Symbols" reportedly observed by abductees with Stuart Appelle (SUNY Brockport), and Tamara Lagrandeur/Don Donderi (McGill) demonstrates that he has carefully collected evidence from suspected abductees that could be evaluated scientifically. The multi-dimensional analysis clearly demonstrated that the experimental group's findings were significantly different than that of the control group. The team concluded that the consistency of symbols seen inside alien craft could possibly mean that the reports are true.”

-- Kathleen Marden, UFO & Abduction Researcher, Author and Lecturer



FACT

Psychologist and Hypnotherapist Dr. Jean Mundy referred her patient Harold Egeln to Budd Hopkins. If Hopkins worked alone, without supervision and was unwilling to accept any, how is it that Dr. Jean Mundy knew enough about his work, specifically his hypnosis techniques that she was comfortable enough to refer one of her patients to him? The only way she could have known was if she had consulted with him which according to Harold Egeln is exactly what she did.

Update April 26, 2013

CORRECTION

The above statement I wrote is inaccurate. Psychologist and hypnotherapist Dr. Jean Mundy did not refer Harold Egeln to Budd Hopkins, Budd Hopkins referred Harold Egeln to Dr. Jean Mundy. The fact that Hopkins was consulting, and referring abductees to psychologists still proves the point that he did not, as Rainey indicated, work almost exclusively alone, without supervision, and being unwilling to accept any. Budd Hopkins had contacted Dr. Jean Mundy to ask for her help in responding to abductees, from then on they consulted with one another. In their consultations she learned about his work and his hypnosis technique and became comfortable enough with him and his work to refer one of her patients to him. 100, 117, 118, 119


LIE #3

50

Page 5, Right Column; line 30 – 43, Page 6, Left Column, line 1 – 2, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011


FACT

Carol claims that: "Linda falsely told other investigators of the case that she and Budd would be splitting it, 50/50" 50 Her evidence to back up this claim is a statement made by Richard Butler and Joseph Stefula in the 1993 document “A Critique of Budd Hopkins’ case of the UFO Abduction of Linda [Cortile]” by George Hansen, Richard Butler and Joseph Stefula. 8 In that document Richard Butler and Joseph Stefula indicate that they met with Linda on February 1, 1992 and that during that meeting "Linda also told us that she had an agreement with Budd Hopkins to split equally any profits from a book on the case” 40 I contacted the primary author of the “critique” document George Hansen and asked him whether Richard Butler and Joseph Stefula had tape recorded their February 1, 1992 meeting with Linda. George Hansen replied “To best of my recollection, they did not tape record the meeting.” 41


Since they didn’t tape record the meeting, they have no empirical evidence to prove that Linda ever made such a statement. Essentially what they have is unsubstantiated hearsay. Nonetheless, the statement they purported Linda to have made was published in their document despite no evidence whatsoever existing to substantiate it.

41

Email from George Hansen to Sean F. Meers Dated Wednesday, October 14, 2009 11:38 AM

(The original *.eml format copies of both the sent and received emails between Mr. Hansen and

myself are electronically available for empirical examination. Email address blacked out.)

Carol Rainey made the following two claims: "Budd and Linda had shared in the advance money for the book" 50 "If Witnessed did well and sold to hollywood, that's where the real money would come from-and both researcher and subject would share in that money, too (just not 50/50)." 50 These claims are not substantiated by any evidence provided in her article. She presents nothing to corroborate the validity of her assertions. Whether the statement is true or not what more do we have than her word that it is so? Were she able to substantiate it what would it prove? In Peter Robbins’ recent article “Some Thoughts on Budd Hopkins” he relates: “Almost every author of a book which has the potential to be made into a film would like to see this outcome, myself very much included, and at a certain point in the development of Witnessed Budd and Linda sat down and drew up an agreement which would govern her sharing in the profits of such a venture, should it ever come to pass. That was it. To suggest that this somehow be interpreted as the basis of a concocted abduction history is just not true and I am surprised that Carol resorts to such an underhanded suggestion.” 88 When Linda Cortile was asked about the matter of money at UFO Updates she stated: “Yes, in fact, my financial stake in Budd's book, "Witnessed," enabled me to fill a cavity at the dentist's office. The rest of the dental work I had to pay for with my husbands' paycheck. Pretty good, after 8 years of my watching everyone else make money on MY case, huh? It was good of Budd to offer me (which I did not want to accept) a fraction of what he was given. He felt guilty about making money on my misery. He felt better when I accepted the token he offered. However, whatever monies he's received, he made from his own sufferings regarding the unfolding and the investigations of my case. It took Hopkins 5 years of hard work, to complete his book. I hope he makes a MILLION!! I appreciated his feelings more than I appreciated the token he offered, representing an expression of his feelings. He has a heart and that's what matters to me.” 120 There are more than a dozen articles, pro, con and debunker, concerning the Linda Cortile case listed in the appendix of this paper. They are all worth perusing to get a better and more complete understanding of the case, the individuals involved, as well as the antics of the initial three individuals who “critiqued” the case. 146, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162 For the Linda Cortile case to be a hoax here is an approximate list of the individuals who would have had to be in on it as collaborators and who would have to be paid in perpetuity by Linda for their efforts and silence in order to maintain the hoax. (See the following three pages.)

1) Johnny Cortile – Linda's son who was nine years old at the height of her case. He provided complex videotaped testimony regarding his being approached by the third man and the third man arranging to give him an antique diver’s helmet. He also identified the third man from a random photo lineup that Hopkins arranged and videotaped with the forethought for empirical examination. Johnny was also present and personally affected when the whole family, and friends staying over, woke up in the middle of the night bleeding from the right nostril over the Memorial Day weekend in May 1992. For anyone who believes a child can be in on a successful hoax, even a simple one, remember the Balloon boy hoax. 1

2) Steven Cortile – Linda's husband who gave testimony to meeting and speaking with Richard in person outside of St. Joseph’s church on Sunday February 24, 1991. Steven was also present and personally affected when the whole family, and friends staying over, woke up in the middle of the night bleeding from the right nostril over the Memorial Day weekend in May 1992.

1

3) Stephen Cortile – Linda's other son who was a teenager at the time. He testified to meeting and speaking with a man who was on the bus he took home from school. The man turned out to be Richard in disguise. Richard wanted to speak with one of Linda’s children to inquire if there was anything special about his family. He disguised himself to get the information in a subtle fashion. The information Stephen gave this man turned up in one of Richard’s letter to Budd Hopkins later on. Stephen was also present and a participant when the whole family, and friends staying over, woke up in the middle of the night bleeding from the right nostril over the Memorial Day weekend. 1

4) "Janet Kimball" – The woman on the Brooklyn bridge who witnessed the beginning of Linda's November 30, 1989 UFO abduction. Budd Hopkins received letters from her, spoke with her by phone and later met and spoke with her in person. He conducted a tape recorded interview with her when he met with her in a restaurant.

1

5) Yancy Spence – New York Post worker who witnessed Linda's November 30, 1989 UFO abduction. He did not come forward until after 2000.

160, 161

6) Robert “Bobby” N. – Yancy Spence's fellow New York Post worker who also witnessed the abduction and the Rolls Royce and the procession of limousines parked along South Street underneath the elevated FDR Drive during the November 30, 1989 UFO abduction. 160, 161

7) Steven Dunleavy – A reporter and witness to the procession of limousines parked along South Street under the elevated FDR Drive during the November 30, 1989 UFO abduction. 161

8) Carmela – Linda's childhood friend who met and spoke at Richard on February 22, 1992. 1

9) Joseph – An outside law enforcement agent brought in by Robert Bigelow to guard Linda from Richard and Dan. Joseph was a witness to the surveillance being conducted on Linda. If Linda was hoaxing her case she would have to risk convincing an outsider to join her grand hoax scheme, despite it possibly being a trap by the investigators to see if she was indeed a hoaxer. 1

10) Lisa Bayer – Linda's niece and podiatric surgeon who took the X-ray of her head in November 1991. 1

11) "Erica" – An abductee who witnessed the UFO at the time of Linda's November 30, 1989 UFO abduction. If Linda was hoaxing her case wouldn’t she want more independent witnesses, rather than a fellow abductee? 1

12) Ear, Nose and Throat Specialist – The doctor who examined Linda 14 years prior to her abduction and

concluded that the inside of her nose had a scar made by a surgical scalpel. If she was hoaxing her case this means she would wait 14 years, for no reason at all, before she continued with other aspects of her grand hoax scheme. Why? 1

13) "Marilyn Kilmer" – A fellow abductee who shared an abduction experience with Linda, the third man and Linda's son Johnny. Under hypnosis she corroborated what Linda was wearing at the time of this abduction incident despite never meeting Linda before.

1

Update April 26, 2013

CORRECTION

The above statement I wrote is inaccurate. Marilyn and Linda independently described what each other were wearing during their shared abduction experience despite each other having no knowledge of the other’s account at the time. Two independent, privately given accounts that corroborated elements of the other’s account.

14) Cathy Turner – A witness to the UFO who was driving South over the FDR Drive at the approximate time of Linda’s November 30, 1989 UFO abduction, along with her boyfriend. 1

15) Frank Turner – Cathy Turner's nephew who by mere chance related an anecdote about what his aunt

saw. He related the anecdote on a computer forum with Budd Hopkins’ professor friend. This was how Hopkins found Cathy Turner. 1

16) "Francesca" – Fellow resident of Linda's building who was witness to the huge amount of lights in the

courtyard of the building at the approximate date (a several day window) and time of Linda’s November 30, 1989 UFO abduction.

1

17) "Brian" – Stephen Cortile's friend who was staying over and who woke up bleeding from the right nostril along with Linda’s entire family over the Memorial Day weekend in May 1992. 1

18) "Sue" – "Brian's" mother who found "Brian's" shirt soaked with blood after the Memorial Day

weekend in May 1992. 1

19) If Linda was hoaxing her case she would need a contact to obtain letters from the third man, so that Linda would know exactly how he formats his letters, paragraphing, spacing, spelling, grammar, use of language etc. 1

20) If Linda was hoaxing her case she would need a well connected, highly skilled forger to fake the

multitude of letters that Budd received from Richard, Dan and the third man. 1

21) If Linda was hoaxing her case she would need an actor to play the voice of Richard on the audio recording obtained of him. 1

22) If Linda was hoaxing her case she would need an actor to play the voice of Dan on the audio recording obtained of him. 1

23) Cardinal John O’ Connor – He personally met and spoke with Linda about her experiences and

developed a friendship with her. He was in contact with Richard and the third man who shared their abduction experiences with him by confessional. If Linda was hoaxing her case how likely is it that she would be able to get repeated private audiences with the Cardinal?

24) Jay Sapir – The reporter who met with the third man along with Budd Hopkins on November 12, 1993

at Chicago’s O’Hare airport. He conducted a tape recorded interview with the third man and came away convinced that the third man was indeed involved in Linda’s case. If Linda was hoaxing her case we’re supposed to believe she is now getting independent reporters to go along with her grand hoax scheme? 154 To orchestrate a hoax with say 22 witnesses over a period of 21 years Linda would need to have money to begin with. 22 people paid say $20 a week every week in perpetuity so that the hoax is maintained would currently have cost Linda, at 21 years since 1989, $480,480. This is assuming of course that her collaborators, who were committing the hoax presumably for quick profit, would be willing to settle for $20 a week for their efforts. Not one of the detractors of Linda’s case have ever attempted to explore exactly what it would entail, or more to the point what it would cost for the Linda Cortile case to be a hoax. The amount of money, which would be required initially and in the long run, to pay off multiple collaborators in perpetuity alone is staggeringly improbable. Even with the money, 22 conspirators would make any conspiracy prone to rapidly unraveling. The irony with the Linda Cortile case is that because it is so vast and complicated were someone to come forward and claim to have hoaxed it, or been in on the hoaxing it, the burden of proving exactly how it was done would be on their shoulders alone. They would have to prove and tie up all of the unexplained and unorthodox aspects and details of Linda’s case. It would indeed be a fascinating thing to see someone come forward and try to explain and prove how it was all done if they professed it to be a hoax, reminiscent of the hearsay laden and hole ridden Tommy Smith testimony in the Ed Walters Gulf Breeze UFO case. 149 The reason the Linda Cortile case is made the UFOlogical whipping boy of UFO abduction cases is because it is extremely complicated, confronting and next to Travis Walton’s UFO case, one of the most overt UFO abduction cases in history. The late Philip J. Klass gave his all trying to perpetuate the myth that Travis Walton had hoaxed his case because they wanted to enact an Act of God clause in their logging contract. Klass never proved it, and Travis Walton’s Forest Service Contracting Officer Maurice Marchbanks signed an affidavit to the effect of how ridiculous and inapplicable a UFO incident would be in trying to utilise an Act of God clause. 147 Determining the validity of an attack on a UFO case requires one to ask only one question “What can they prove?”A favourite, repeated, and overall effective, UFO case smearing tool is when the attackers claim to have personally overheard devastatingly incriminating statements uttered by the targets of their attacks that weren’t independently witnessed or empirically recorded by any means, in other words hearsay. These hearsay statements luckily just happen to affirm the position of the attacker. Once the hearsay statement is out there and presented as “evidence” the attacker references their hearsay statement in the future. Repeated often enough an unproven hearsay statement can embed itself into the middle of a topic. An example of this was a valiant effort by the

late Philip J. Klass to perpetuate the myth that Mayor Bursum of Socorro owned the land where a UFO landing was purported to have occurred and that the Mayor had made up the whole story to increase the value of the land. This was not the case as Delia Harris was the legal owner of the land at the time. Nonetheless, forty years on the baseless myth has limped along with the rest of the event. 148 In the UFO field, on the basis of unproven gossip alone, large numbers of individuals find themselves ready to dump anything related to the whole area of the application of hypnosis and ready to dump anyone and everyone who has had something bad stated about them. The question, since these actions are done on the foundation of gossip alone, is why. One factor that does not help the accused in these instances is that they are working in areas that are difficult for people to accept and put stock in initially before anything bad has been circulated. It does not take a lot for the wary to become suspicious and it does not take a lot for a scared person to become terrified. The pros and cons of hypnosis is largely divided in the scientific community. The overall trend from recent scientific journal articles is that individuals are no more susceptible to confabulation under hypnosis than they are unhypnotised. 137, 138, 139, 140 Dr. Benjamin Simon used hypnosis successfully to treat soldiers suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, in one case curing a man of hysterical paralysis. The therapeutic value of hypnosis in the treatment of PTSD is well known. The dangers of hypnosis cannot be ignored, in untrained or immoral hands there is potential for abuse and long term damage. What’s most important in appraising the issue of hypnosis is that it is neither black or white, there are negatives but there are positives and in the correct hands the positives outweigh the negatives, just as the opposite is true. 182 Budd Hopkins taped all of his hypnosis sessions for empirical examination, he has had multiple outsiders including, individuals from the medical community, sit in and witness him conducting a hypnosis session. They did not find abuses or incompetence on his part. In Carol Rainey’s article she mentions a purported abductee “Dora” that Hopkins spoke to and regressed on more than one occasion. She categorises this person as someone who Hopkins abused, if that is true then why is Carol alone in her allegation? Where is “Dora”? Why is she not speaking up and making allegations against Hopkins and corroborating the effect of Carol Rainey’s charges? Minimal evidence, maximum judgement.

LIE #4

“CAROL RAINEY: And Budd is not even interested in science, he doesn't even read science, nor does he read psychology.”

Spectrum Podcast: Carol Rainey & Tyler Kokjohn

URL: http://www.spectrumradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=78&It

emid=211 179

FACT

“Chapter Eight – Hypnosis and the investigation of UFO Abduction Accounts”, is a chapter that Budd Hopkins wrote for David Jacobs’ book UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the borders of knowledge. In this chapter Budd quotes the following statement from “Alleged Alien Abductions: False Memories, Hypnosis, and Fantasy Proneness,” by Steven Lynn and Irving Kirsch which was published in the peer reviewed journal Psychological Inquiry Vol. 7 (1996). 7, 74, 163

76

Page 218; line 23 – 30, UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the borders of knowledge

by David Jacobs (Hardcover, University Press of Kansas, 2000)

Hopkins then goes on to indicate that Steven Lynn and Irving Kirsch’s statement is supported by the conclusions of a multiple recent experiments cited in reference 14. The peer-reviewed journal papers that details these experiments are cited in reference number 14 in the quote on the following page.

http://www.spectrumradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=78&Itemid=211


78

Page 342; line 27 – 40 (including chapter title line, not including heading text), UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the borders of knowledge


Firstly, to determine if Hopkins was correct, and that the studies he cited from peer-reviewed journals concurred with Steven Lynn’s and Irving Kirsch’s statement, I examined each of the articles. The first article that Hopkins cited concurred with Steven Lynn and Irving Kirsch’s statement.

137

9, Paragraph 1 (not including bold title text), “Use of Hypnosis as an Aid to Eyewitness Memory”

by John C. Yuille and N. Hope McEwan, Page 389 – 400,

Journal of Applied Psychology, Volume 70, Number 2, 1985

The second article that Hopkins cited did not concur with Steven Lynn’s and Irving Kirsch’s statement.

138 Page 1139, Paragraph 1 (not including bold title lines),

“Evaluating Hypnotic Memory Enhancement (Hypermnesia and Reminiscence) Using Multitrial Forced Recall,”

by David F. Dinges, Wayne G. Whitehouse, Emily Carota Orne, John W. Powell, and Martin T. Orne, Matthew H. Erdelyi,

Page 1139 – 1147, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,

Volume 18, Number 5, 1992 The third article that Hopkins cited concurred with Steven Lynn’s and Irving Kirsch’s statement.

139

Page 271, Paragraph 1 (not including bold title lines), "Are Hypnotically Induced Pseudomemories Resistant to Cross-Examination?"

by N.Spanos, M.Gwynn, S.Comer, W.Baltruweit, and M.deGroh, Page 271 – 289,

Law and Human Behavior, Volume 13, Number 3, 1989

The fourth article that Hopkins cited concurred with Steven Lynn and Irving Kirsch’s statement.

140

Page 1, Paragraph 1 (not including bold title lines), "Hypnotic Hypermnesia: Enhanced Memory Accessibility or Report Bias?"

by W.Whitehouse, D.Dinges, E.Orne, and M.Orne, Page 289 – 295,

Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Volume 97, Number 3, 1988 Three out of four of Hopkins’ citations concurred with Steven Lynn and Irving Kirsch’s statement. In Lynn and Kirsch’s peer reviewed journal article “Alleged Alien Abductions: False Memories, Hypnosis, and Fantasy Proneness” they made their statement, that Hopkins quoted, to cover the trend of the findings of multiple hypnosis experiments. They evaluated a series of hypnosis experiments rather than focusing on the individual successes or failures of any singular experiment as the overall trend is more valuable. One of the hypnosis experiments that they evaluated and built their statement on was “Evaluating Hypnotic Memory Enhancement (Hypermnesia and Reminiscence) Using Multitrial Forced Recall” by David F. Dinges, Wayne G. Whitehouse, Emily Carota Orne, John W. Powell, Martin T. Orne and Matthew H. Erdelyi 138. This experiment was the one that did not concur with Lynn and Kirsch’s statement that Hopkins quoted. Taking into consideration that Lynn and Kirsch’s statement was made to cover the trend of the findings of multiple hypnosis experiments it is an understandable to think that it applied to the experiments in all four articles, especially since all four of those articles were cited as deliberating factors in the creation of Lynn and Kirsch’s statement and article. In the chapter that Hopkins wrote he quoted data from multiple peer reviewed journals that included Psychological Inquiry, the Journal of Applied Psychology, Law and Human Behavior, the Journal of Abnormal Psychology and the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 78. An example of one of the many articles that Hopkins quoted data from is “Alleged Alien Abductions: False Memories, Hypnosis, and Fantasy Proneness,” by Steven Lynn and Irving Kirsch, Psychological Inquiry Vol. 7 (1996). While it’s possible a researcher may have drawn his attention to it Hopkins would have had to read it himself before he decided to quote it and publish it in his work. In short, Hopkins could not have written and published a chapter of work that quotes from multiple peer reviewed psychology journals without at some point, on purpose or by accident, reading the

material he was quoting from. Hopkins read multiple peer reviewed psychology journals, which makes Carol Rainey’s statement a lie.

LIE #5

CAROL RAINEY: Yes. And I did a bit more detective work on my own as well. MALE SPEAKER#1: Oh, did you find out anything interesting. CAROL RAINEY: Yes, but you'll have to wait until the documentary comes out to hear it. MALE SPEAKER#1: There you go. But whatever, whatever investigation that he had done, uh like in footwork um, the information that he had gotten was it ever backed up anybody else? CAROL RAINEY: Um depends what you mean I, you know um. Uh if he actually, if you're asking, if he actually met the Richard, the Dan, the, the two government agents or if he met the third man um no he didn't. He got letters, typed letters from all of those people. He did meet with the um I have the audio recording the pretty remarkable meeting with the woman, he calls the woman on the bridge. And he did meet with her at a restaurant. MALE SPEAKER#1: Okay. Was she connected to Linda at all? CAROL RAINEY: Well, that's what you'll have to find out? MALE SPEAKER#1: Okay. Or she was Linda? CAROL RAINEY: No, no. Actually she wasn't.

Spectrum Podcast: Carol Rainey & Tyler Kokjohn URL:

http://www.spectrumradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=78&Itemid=211 75

FACT

Budd Hopkins met with the third man at Chicago’s O’Hare airport along with reporter Jay Sapir on November 12, 1993. Hopkins’ meeting with the third man took up an entire chapter in his book Witnessed, “Chapter 32 – The Meeting at O'Hare” (Page 367 – 375). It is puzzling that Carol would state that Budd had never met the third man given that fact. It is especially puzzling given that she was the one who claimed to have edited Hopkins’s book Witnessed. 1, 18, 19, 20, 21, 154



LIE #6

CAROL RAINEY: I'm trying to think, I think that was happening while we were writing it, while I was writing my part which took two years longer than Budd took. He is a quite pro at writing the stuff, he's very fast. And I'm not quite as fast, and I do a lot more research. So I took a lot longer and I think this was going on that more…lot of things going on while I was still doing some writing.

Paratopia Episode 101: Carol Rainey & Dr. Tyler Kokjohn

URL: http://www.paratopia.org 168

FACT

Carol demonstrated that she was not familiar with basic aspects of Linda Cortile’s case which Budd Hopkins detailed in Witnessed. An example of this is her not knowing that Hopkins met with the third man in person, despite a whole chapter in Witnessed (“Chapter 32 – The Meeting at O'Hare” (Page 367 – 375) ) being dedicated to that encounter. She also demonstrated on two occasions that she wasn’t precisely sure how many years Hopkins observed and studied hypnosis before he began practicing it himself. She insisted that Hopkins did not read anything about psychology despite Hopkins writing a chapter for David Jacobs’ book ("Chapter Eight – Hypnosis and the investigation of UFO Abduction Accounts" by Budd Hopkins, Page 215 – 240 UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the borders of knowledge by David Jacobs) in which Hopkins quoted data on hypnosis from multiple peer-reviewed psychology journals. For Carol to purport herself as someone who is thorough in their research she missed some obvious, easily accessible facts about the matters she is discussing. 1, 18, 19, 20, 21, 154, 76, 78


LIE #7

MALE SPEAKER#1: Well, let's just think, I think people do, I mean, it seems like…now again, well most of the sort of reaction to this has been really positive at least behind the scenes, but when I visit forums where they decide to sort of pile, none of their criticisms make sense. And one of them is that well, we…we've got it out for Jacobs and Hopkins. We’ve got it out for these guys and it’s like no, we have it out for the bad research, we have it out for that there they’re hurting other human beings and everyone seems to be trying to protect and ideology over humans like, what do you…yes, go ahead, I’m sorry.



FACT What evidence have Carol Rainey, Jeff Ritzmann and Jeremy Vaeni presented to indicate that Budd Hopkins has been hurting people? Rainey speaks of an abductee called “Dora” who Carol personally perceived as being hurt by Hopkins’ work with her. Rainey did not present any evidence of “Dora” making any statements or allegations against Hopkins. “Dora” is absent from Carol’s allegations in this matter and has provided no corroborative evidence to substantiate the claims that Carol is levelling against Hopkins. The complete facts in the Emma Woods case, as stated earlier, are not all in yet, only premature judgements founded on the findings of incomplete evidence. Even Tyler Kokjohn, the professor of Microbiology that released an article alongside Carol Rainey, admits that Hopkins “engaged in no physically invasive medical procedures and worked with consenting adults.” 126 What is clear from the Paratopia podcasts concerning Emma Woods, Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs 164, is that they have already passed judgement, despite all the facts not being in yet, and that judgement is that Emma Woods is telling the truth and is a victim of David Jacobs, and that since Budd Hopkins is a friend of and supporting David Jacobs, that Hopkins and his work is invalid. Had the individuals at Paratopia reached these conclusions and judgements on the basis of all the evidence then I would have no problem. Were all the facts in I would respect their decision because at the very least they had arrived at their decision from a solid and complete foundation of evidence. Since they have leapt to their conclusion (Hopkins bad, Jacobs bad, Emma right, Carol right) so prematurely it indicates an enthusiasm and desire for one specific conclusion over another. The conclusion that they are enthusiastic about just happens to be more scandalous and controversial, two factors that are very welcome in a fledgling entertainment program. Since Rainey is making the allegation that Budd Hopkins has abused the alien abductees who he’s worked with it is on her shoulders alone to produce such an alien abductee who was abused by Budd Hopkins. Someone who can attest to and corroborate Rainey’s allegations of abuse.


LIE #8

JEFF: Yeah. That's exactly. You know one other things that I think I had mentioned on the last show is that, we're not only going up against this notion of hypnosis, alien abduction in the common scenario that has been put forth over decades now. You're also talking about… and Tyler, I'm going to assume this probably happened in science as well as that, we're actually pointing out a corner stone because this is just above alien abduction in that scenario. It's about everything has been built on top of that foundation that we’re finding out is built on sand. And so the building is not stable to begin with. So it's not only going against the belief’s something like Carol said, and the commonality of the notion of, okay, here what's going on because we got all these data compiled from hypnosis, but also everything has been built upon that for years now. I mean go out there, read the message board. So I mean that's exactly what the problem is.



FACT

Allegations and hearsay don’t amount to finding out facts. What single fact have they presented to prove that as a whole hypnosis has no value? What single fact have they presented to prove that everything the alien abduction phenomenon has been built upon has no value? Antonio Villas Boas, a Brazilian farmer who was riding a tractor at the time of his October 16, 1957 alien abduction reported a lurid sexually reproductive based encounter during his abduction. His abduction first became public knowledge in 1958. APRO (a defunct American UFO group) received a report about this incident as early as 1958. 181 The sexual reproduction aspect of the alien abduction phenomenon (evident in the Antonio Villas Boas’ case of 1957) and the pregnancy experimentation aspect (evident in the Barney and Betty Hill case 135) were two documented and established features of the alien abduction phenomenon long before Hopkins began his work investigating alien abduction, they were not details conjured up by him. The missing time element of abduction appeared as early as the Barney and Betty Hill case. As for the media culture being alleged to be responsible in crafting the alien abduction cases, where was a TV show or film that had a missing time element due to alien abduction prior to the Barney and Betty Hill case? 36 Where was the TV show or film that showed aliens giving abductees rectal probes prior to the Barney and Betty Hill case? 27 Scott O. Lilienfeld, a professor of psychology, was a guest on Paratopia and shared his qualified views on the subject of hypnosis. Professor Lilienfeld acknowledges that hypnosis can produce false memories but he also acknowledges that accurate memories can be retrieved also. With the potential for the retrieval of accurate memories through hypnosis being acknowledged, but not endorsed, by Professor Lilienfeld there is every reason to continue using and further refining the study and use of hypnosis in the field of memory retrieval. Professor Lilienfeld’s conclusions on hypnosis were objective, informed, scientific and respectable and he had a healthy curiosity for any new data that might become available on the subject. Professor


Lilienfeld has not personally witnessed firsthand Budd Hopkins conduct a hypnotic regression with an abductee. 183

LIE #9

MALE SPEAKER#1: But what happened in cases that they turned out to be fakes or not... MALE SPEAKER#2: Are you asking about a specific case, Tom? MALE SPEAKER#1: No, no just in general. Like when they would -- with something and they would find out or maybe wasn't what it was supposed to be or what they thought it would? CAROL RAINEY: It depends how far in. And the Jim Mortellaro case for example and the Linda case, Budd went out on and was presenting these cases at conferences very early on in to the research. And once you stand up in front of field class and various other people and say that this is what you believe, this is what has happened, it's not just what you believe. This is what the data shows you. It seems to me for certain people as very, very hard to back down. And that's very much...


URL: http://www.spectrumradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=78&Itemi

d=211 178

FACT

Carol indicates that the Linda Cortile case is a fake, on what evidence? In Carol’s article “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon”” she indicated that Budd told her after he finished a phone conversation with Linda that “That was Linda pretending to be her cousin Connie”55 (See HEARSAY #2), Carol also indicated that Linda received a phone call from an admirer while at Carol’s house and that Linda made up a family related excuse so she didn’t have to go and have coffee with this individual. A hearsay quip regarding a conversation that Carol herself did not listen to and Linda trying to politely get out of going out for coffee with someone. On these pieces of trivia we’re expected to classify Linda’s case a hoax? We’re supposed to put her in the same category as Jim Mortellaro? (See LIE #3 for some facts about Linda’s case and some examples of what it would require for her case to be a hoax.)



CHAPTER TWO

The Assumptions

Assumptions

Page 41

ASSUMPTION #1

48

Page 5, Middle Column; line 22 – 32, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011


FACT

The assumption that it is simple for an abductee to discretely bring something back from one of their experiences does not take into account three reported factors of alien abduction experiences that hinder the retrieval of forensic evidence from an alien abduction.

1) The lack of personal, bodily control, in some cases outright physical paralysis, that abductees report experiencing during their abductions. 11, 12, 34, 38, 39

2) Abductees report being undressed and redressed by their captors during their abductions. 11, 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35

3) Abductees not always being immediately aware afterwards that an abduction incident has even taken place. 10, 17, 36, 37, 33

Of these three factors the third is the one that most hinders the ability to retrieve forensic evidence from an alien abduction experience. The abductee’s body after an abduction incident is a crime scene, if they are not aware that an abduction has even taken place they continue on with their lives. Not being immediately aware opens up potentially retrievable forensic evidence to contamination factors such as showering, house cleaning, car cleaning, moving. A day, even a few hours, can make all the difference in what can be potentially retrieved as uncontaminated forensic evidence.


Three UFO abduction cases that demonstrate these three factors are reported below as follows:

1) In the Barney and Betty Hill abduction case both Barney and Betty reported being undressed and redressed, being under control and unable to resist their captors and immediately after the abduction neither Barney or Betty were aware that an abduction had even taken place. 22,

23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 36, 39

2) In the Allagash abduction case all four men reported being undressed and redressed, being under control and unable to resist their captors and immediately after the abduction all four men were unaware that an abduction had even taken place. 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35

3) In the Linda Cortile abduction case Linda reported being undressed and redressed, being

under control and unable to resist her captors. Richard, Dan and the third man did not initially remember their November 30, 1989 abduction. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17

These three factors are reported and documented features of alien abduction cases, they are not baseless excuses conjured up by researchers to deflect the issue of obtaining physical evidence from abduction scenarios. If physical, forensic and genetic evidence is to be obtained from alien abduction experiences these three factors need to be understood and taken into the equation. There is nothing simple about obtaining evidence from these cases.

CHAPTER THREE

The Insults

Insults Contained in Rainey’s Article

Page 43

Insult One

63



January 2011


Note How does Carol Rainey’s statement about Budd Hopkins’ art career relate to the body of her allegations against him? How does it advance the legitimacy of her arguments? What point does her statement serve except to belittle his art career?

Insult Two

52

Page 6, Left Column; line 45 – 49,

“The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon”” by Carol Rainey,

Preview Issue of Paratopia Magazine January 2011


Note Carol describes her perceptions of Linda’s lifestyle, which is fine to set a context, but then Carol proceeds to pass judgement on it in a derogatory fashion indicating that were she to live a life such as Linda’s it would drive her to suicide. What purpose do such personal, nasty judgements serve in a purported insider’s objective appraisal of the alien abduction phenomenon?



Insult Three

56 Page 7, Left Column; line 10 – 13,

“The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon”” by Carol Rainey,

Preview Issue of Paratopia Magazine January 2011


Note Another judgement and opinion passed. Where is the objective empirical evidence to establish that the ufologists in question possess the egos she purports them to have? What does the baseless statement provide other than an opinion that the ufologists in question have egos which are dependent on providing the goods in their work?

Insult Four

43



January 2011


Note An appeal from the author about how the audience should perceive the statements and allegations contained in their work. Why not provide the evidence to demonstrate that Hopkins and Jacobs offer nothing but proclamations? Why insist the audience believe instead of proving it to them?



Insult Five

62



January 2011


Note

Since Carol Rainey considers and couches the alien abduction phenomenon as a genre of performance art how sincere can her concerns be for the purported alien abductee Emma Woods? Her statement indicates that she perceives alien abductees to be acting, in essence lying, with dramatic flair, about what they are reporting. How is Emma supposed to feel about that, being perceived as an actor? Not all the facts are in on the Emma Woods matter, therefore there can be no accurate judgement at this point. Why would Carol have concerns about an individual who she essentially did not believe or trust in regards to the individual’s claims about alien abduction? Since Carol defines the alien abduction phenomenon as a genre of performance art how are we to believe that she is genuinely interested in assisting those affected by the phenomenon? How are we to believe that she wants to do anything but discredit it?


CHAPTER FOUR

The Hearsay

The Hearsay

Page 46

HEARSAY #1

50

Page 5, Right Column; line 30 – 43, Page 6, Left Column; line 1 – 2, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011


FACT

This is a regurgitation of a hearsay argument from the Hansen/Stefula/Butler “critique” of the Linda Cortile case. They were unable to prove Linda had ever made such a statement because Stefula and Butler did not tape record their February 1, 1992 interview with Linda where they alleged she stated it (See “The February 1, 1992 Meeting Between Linda, Stefula and Butler”). Rainey makes no attempt to prove this assertion, she does not reference any empirical evidence to prove that any of what she stated in the above quote took place. The accusation is as much hearsay now as when it was first unjustly hurled against Linda in the Hansen/Stefula/Butler “critique” of the Linda Cortile case.


40

Page 8; line 30 – 45 (including titles), “A Critique of Budd Hopkins’ Case of the UFO Abduction of Linda [Cortile]”

by Joseph J. Stefula, Richard D. Butler, and George P. Hansen

THE FEBRUARY 1, 1992 MEETING BETWEEN LINDA, STEFULA AND BUTLER

An important fact concerning the February 1, 1992 meeting between Linda, Stefula and Butler needs to be addressed. Substantiation of Linda’s statements to Stefula and Butler during the February 1, 1992 meeting depends entirely upon whether an independent, empirical record (e.g. audio or video tape recording) was kept of that meeting. No indication, by statement or implication, is provided anywhere in the “critique” document if an independent, empirical record was kept of that meeting. I was able to contact George Hansen (primary author of the “critique” document) through email and ask him some questions about the “critique” document and the investigation that led to its comprisal. The issue of whether the February 1, 1992 meeting between Linda, Stefula and Butler was tape recorded was the subject of one such email between Mr. Hansen and myself (see the following page). When asked whether the February 1, 1992 meeting between Linda, Stefula and Butler was tape recorded Mr. Hansen stated:

“To the best of my recollection, they did not tape record the meeting.” 41

Without some form of empirical evidence (e.g. audio or video tape recording) to provide independent corroboration of Linda’s statements during her February 1, 1992 meeting with Butler and Stefula, any claims made in the “critique” document about what Linda said during that meeting cannot be proven and fall into the information category of hearsay.

41




HEARSAY #2

55



January 2011


FACT

Budd answered the phone, Carol did not. Budd had the phone conversation with Linda, Carol did not. Depending on precisely what was said during Budd and Linda’s phone conversation, the conversation that Carol did not hear, what Budd remarked to Carol after the phone call is open to interpretation. Carol did not personally witness Linda trying to trick Budd into thinking he was talking with Linda’s cousin Connie. Carol only witnessed what Budd remarked to her after the phone call and without empirical evidence to substantiate and verify what was stated during that phone call Budd’s remark is without a context. Essentially what Carol is saying is that she heard that Budd said he heard that Linda was pretending to be her cousin during a phone call. Without empirical evidence to substantiate and verify what was stated during the phone conversation between Linda and Budd, Carol’s claim only constitutes hearsay.


FACT

Dan disappeared in an unknown but presumed severe fashion in February 1992. Richard was one of the many men who took him down. Richard did this to protect Linda. Keeping Dan out of Linda’s life was Richard’s priority. Richard was in love with Linda and had rescued her from Dan after Dan kidnapped and nearly killed her on one occasion. Were Dan to have survived after being taken down by Richard and the other agents, at the very least he and Richard were no longer friends. Given that the whole purpose of Richard and the agents taking Dan down was to keep Linda safe from him, there is no way that Richard would ever let Dan get anywhere near Linda again after February 22, 1992, let alone help Dan to kidnap her. 1 If Carol has footage of Linda stating that Richard and Dan came to kidnap her again in 1996 then I say provide the unedited piece of footage for public empirical examination, it’s a compelling piece of evidence against Linda and her case if it does exist. Its absence amongst the other evidence absent to substantiate Carol Rainey’s allegations against Linda Cortile and Budd Hopkins is indicative of Carol appealing to the appearances of duplicity rather than demonstrating the existence of it. That and Carol’s avoidance of acknowledging and satisfactorily tying up the multitudes of difficult and anomalous loose ends required to demonstrate and prove exactly how Linda’s case could have been hoaxed. Some examples of these mysterious and anomalous loose end questions that would need to be addressed and answered would include the following: 1) Where did all the money come from to finance and pay all the people involved the hoax? 1 2) How did Linda obtain the 100% complicity and collaboration from over twenty people in the case,

some who were brought into the case by outsiders to test its veracity? 1 3) Why wasn’t the hoax simpler to avoid possible slip ups?1 4) Why would Linda risk being found a hoaxer by identifying Dan from a photo obtained from

footage taken in the United Nations? He could have been found and identified and spoken to.1 5) Why would Linda make her children, one under the age of ten, memorise complicated scenarios

to convey to researchers, this includes Linda’s son Johnny being given the Diver’s helmet by the third man as a gift and her other son Stephen describing being interrogated by what appeared to be Richard in disguise on the bus.1

6) Why didn’t Linda get more value from her collaborators? She would have to pay Frank Turner in perpetuity just for him to accidentally relay a second hand account of his aunt’s sighting to a friend of Budd Hopkins over the computer. Why wouldn’t Linda get the most value for her money and make Frank Turner say a firsthand witness himself? 1

7) If Linda was the orchestrator how did she pass the multiple psychological exams given to her by skeptical outsiders? 1

8) How come not one of the people Linda involved in her hoax has blown the whistle? 1 9) How did Linda obtain the complicity of outsiders brought into the case, such as the late Cardinal

John O’ Connor, reporter Jay Sapir, “Joseph” the bodyguard hired by Robert Bigelow? 1 10) Why didn’t Linda employ all of her witnesses at the height of her case? Yancy Spence and Bobby

did not come forward till after 2000, roughly 10 years after the main events of Linda’s case.1

HEARSAY #3

“MALE SPEAKER#1: Now what do you think was the major motivation on either one of them between Budd and Dr. Jacobs, ultimately what was their motivation? CAROL RAINEY: Oh, I don't really like to go into that territory. It means I can read their minds, but I guess if you've been married to someone for 10 years, you have a pretty good idea of what moves them. I think they are both and I do know David. I think they are both have gotten to the point the involvement in this paranormal research, where they are completely convinced that the reality that in my opinion, they've partially constructed. There is horrific alien invasion, the secret alien invasion via the hybridization. They are really convinced this is happening. I was on the cape with Jacobs' family had rented a house, several doors down from the place where we usually stay in the summer. And over dinner one night, just I suddenly in a pause in the conversation with Dave's wife I heard Dave Jacobs say, Budd, you and I are the only people on the planet who know what's going on. And my mouth dropped open and I sort of blurted out, David, that's a little bit of a dangerous way to think, isn't it? You are the only people on the planet and that was not well received. MALE SPEAKER#1: Right. Little scary really. And that was talking behind the scenes, there was no interviewer, there's no crowd, there's no... CAROL RAINEY: No, no. MALE SPEAKER#1: This is personally at the dinner table just... CAROL RAINEY: Absolutely. MALE SPEAKER#1: So they believed it, 100%. CAROL RAINEY: They do. MALE SPEAKER#1: They both believe it CAROL RAINEY: Yes, they do. Yeah. Somebody asked me that once. So when they get off the podium and turn away, are these guys' fakes and they start laughing at these people. No, not at all. They do believe what they are doing.”


http://www.spectrumradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=78&Itemid=211 173



FACT

Carol presents no evidence to substantiate the substance of this conversation. No corroborating witnesses, no tape recording, no documentation. Nothing but her word that it took place. The purpose of this hearsay statement? To attempt to demonstrate that Jacobs and Hopkins are in sync on their views regarding alien abduction despite documentation existing to demonstrate that just the opposite is true. For example:

136

Page 10, Right Column; line 54 – 55 (including bold text), Page 11, Left Column; line 1 – 16,

July 1998, Number 363, MUFON UFO Journal

(Many thanks to Gildas Bourdais for pointing out the location of the above statement at his post at UFOUpdates.)

URL: http://www.ufoupdateslist.com/2011/feb/m17-007.shtml

http://www.ufoupdateslist.com/2011/feb/m17-007.shtml

HEARSAY #4

MALE SPEAKER#1: What do you think that Jacobs and Hopkins often say that you need to be hypnotized or that people don't remember a lot outright that's why they need to hypnotized. They don't trust people who haven't been hypnotized. That sort of thing if the letters don't reflect that. CAROL RAINEY: I don't think they say that actually. That -- MALE SPEAKER#1: I’ve heard them say that. MALE SPEAKER#3: Yeah. CAROL RAINEY: I haven't heard Budd say he doesn't trust someone who hasn't been hypnotized. MALE SPEAKER#1: Yeah. Maybe that's more Jacobs than Budd.



FACT

Elicitation and perpetration of hearsay statements by Paratopia. To Carol’s credit she did not respond or participate in their elicitation.

HEARSAY #5


60

Page 9, Right Column, Paragraph 3, Page 10, Left Column,

Page 10, Middle Column, Paragraph 1, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011


FACT Carol has not presented any evidence to confirm and corroborate any aspects of the above incident. She does not present the answering machine recordings, she does not present a witness who was there to corroborate what occurred. At least four answering machine messages are discussed yet no indication is given whether Carol has any of them in her possession and is willing to present them publicly to solidify her account nor are any of the messages presented here in transcript form. What we have to go on in regards to this whole sequence of text is Carol’s word that it occurred this way so unfortunately, in terms of evidence, this whole sequence of text from Carol’s article constitutes hearsay nothing more. Carol knew that in publicly releasing her article there was a good chance that her detractors would call her credibility into question. To avoid that problem all she needed to do was to present empirical evidence of her arguments, that way her credibility would play no part in her arguments. The predominance of hearsay in the majority of her work does not bode well for the credibility of her arguments because: 1) We are relying on her word alone to accept her version of events. 2) Quality of character is a factor in determining whether one individual believes another individual’s story. In short if she can prove these things, then fine, release the evidence and let the world definitively know. If she cannot prove it then acknowledge that people will be reluctant to believe her.


CHAPTER FIVE

The Contradictions

CONTRADICTION #1

45



January 2011


58



January 2011




59



January 2011


44



January 2011


FACT

Carol indicates that Budd Hopkins works alone, without supervision and is unwilling to accept any. She then indicates that she found a letter to Budd from a therapist and consulting psychiatrist who performed the MMPI-2 tests on “Dora”. If Hopkins works alone, without supervision and is unwilling to accept any then why is he, by Carol’s own admission, consulting with a psychiatrist about the mental wellbeing of one of his possible abductees? Carol also indicates that "A bit of comparative religion, anthropology, and folklore under the belt wouldn't hurt, either, in dealing with these difficult-to-interpret human experiences." 45 If she is truly conscious of the need to protect human subjects, specifically the ones working with Hopkins about their alien abduction experiences, then how is introducing religion, anthropology and folklore into the situation going to help the individual? Introducing information to an individual you are trying to retrieve accurate information from gives them material, directly or indirectly, to build with. This constitutes contamination. Introducing information from such topics into a hypnotic regression session would greatly exacerbate the potential for confabulation and the creation of false memories, hurting the human subject.



CONTRADICTION #2

MALE SPEAKER#1: But how was he performing in hypnotherapy or hypnosis I should say to these individuals without at least understanding what hypnosis is supposed to be?

CAROL RAINEY: He observed, I think, for the first five years, he worked under three different psychiatrists who did hypnosis, and Budd was a person sitting in, often asking questions and he learned from observing. And I actually think he is very good at getting people into that state. I think he even goes into a very relaxed state himself.


URL:

http://www.spectrumradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=78&It

emid=211 174

CAROL RAINEY: He worked with two different psychotherapists, Bob Naiman and Matt and a really strange woman Rima Laibow, they're all psychiatrists I believe all three of them are. And he observed them, they did all of the hypnosis with the people he brought to them in the beginning. The first, I don't even remember how many years, but it might have been seven, eight. I think people can. I mean I know how to make films, I never took a film of course, you can make, you can do, you can learn these things.



FACT

In her first interview “Paratopia Episode 101: Carol Rainey & Dr. Tyler Kokjohn”, which aired on January 29, 2011, Carol was questioned regarding Hopkins and hypnosis. In regards to how long she thought Budd Hopkins observed hypnosis without practicing it she stated “I don't even remember how many years, but it might have been seven, eight.” 164, 167

In her second interview “Spectrum Podcast: Carol Rainey & Tyler Kokjohn”, which aired on February 8, 2011, she was questioned again on the matter. In regards to how long she thought Budd Hopkins observed hypnosis without practicing it she stated “He observed, I think, for the first five years, he worked under three different psychiatrists who did hypnosis, and Budd was a person sitting in, often asking questions and he learned from observing.” 172, 174

Not a particularly damning contradiction because, as Carol indicated in her initial interview “Paratopia Episode 101: Carol Rainey & Dr. Tyler Kokjohn”, she did not remember how many years it was. What is telling about this is that in the ten days between her first interview and her second interview, despite being uncertain about a key piece of information (how long did Budd Hopkins observe and study hypnosis before he practiced it himself) she didn’t try to find out for sure exactly how long Budd Hopkins observed and studied hypnosis before practicing it himself. My conclusion, she didn’t care.




CHAPTER SIX

The Suggestions

According to Ralph D. Casey, Professor, School of Journalism, University of Minnesota and author of the “G.I. Roundtable – What is Propaganda” pamphlet published and approved by the American Historical Association in 1944, an important tool of propaganda is suggestion. In his words: “The propagandist tries to stimulate others to accept without challenge his own assertions, or to act as he wants them to do. The idea of using suggestion or stimulation as a propaganda device is that it will lead a public to accept a proposition even though there are not logical grounds for accepting it.” 133 Suggestion has the ability to, directly or indirectly, distort an individual’s capacity to accurately determine what has occurred in a given set of circumstances. Inject a suggestion into a collection of facts and one of two things occurs, the suggestion leads you towards the truth or it leads you directly away from it. Were an individual to use suggestion as their compass they would have as much chance of reaching the truth as they would if they navigated by flipping a coin. Suggestions add no facts to a given set of circumstances. Nonetheless consideration is required before agreeing or disagreeing with the direction they point an individual in. Below is a hypothetical example of how suggestion has the ability to distort an individual’s capacity to accurately determine what has a occurred in a given set of circumstances.

HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE

The set of circumstances Two Homicide detectives arrive at a house and inside they find “Person A” lying dead at the bottom of a staircase. At the top of the staircase there is a broken mirror, scratch marks on the walls and framed pictures that have fallen off the walls. “Person A” has a dark substance under their fingernails and a facial contusion that is unlikely to have been caused by the fall on the staircase. “Person B” is the only other person in the house and they are intoxicated with alcohol and smoking cigarettes while sitting quietly in the basement. “Person B” has a small, fresh, sharp cut between the thumb and index finger on their right hand and is staring vacantly at the floor.

Inject a suggestion into that set of circumstances

One Homicide detective quietly suggests to the other detective that there must have been a break in.

The other Homicide detective quietly suggests that “Person B” killed “Person A”. Two suggestions formed on identical circumstances that lead to two different places. The suggestions themselves prove nothing, they only provide possible directions in which to work along. The end of either suggestion is either a solution or a problem. While suggestions can lead the way, the facts will take you there.

SUGGESTION #1

MALE SPEAKER#2: All right. I have a question for Carol. Carol, do you think that the abduction researchers would be open to this sort of information or what are you feeling on that? CAROL RAINEY: Well, I think they would love to have that. But I would tell you right now, what they will say is, that's all very well and good, but the aliens have a way of overwriting all of our impulses, our instincts they control telepathically, what these women will be able to do when they come back and what they'll be able to bring back with them, which means nothing. MALE SPEAKER#2: So whether that's true or not, it closes the loop. CAROL RAINEY: Yeah, well. MALE SPEAKER#2: It means okay, well, sorry, you can't do that. That won't work. CAROL RAINEY: Yes. Yes. DR. TYLER KOKJOHN: Be careful with that argument though. MALE SPEAKER#1: Yeah. But these were the type of excuses that we've had all along was in that? DR. TYLER KOKJOHN: Oh, yeah. Yeah. CAROL RAINEY: You'll still get that. DR. TYLER KOKJOHN: I don't doubt that at all. But if you want to sort of do recursion back on that, then you'd say, well, hey, what's the deal with the screen memory and how come they're permeable sometimes and how can some people recall without prompting. You can kind of wipe yourself out of your position of any knowledge. If you get too radical about what they won't allow, I think we have to start with the supervision that this is an interesting phenomenon, okay, don't deny the phenomenon, I do have grave questions about some of the hypothesis and explanations.



d=211 176

FACT

The suggestion and inference in this quote is that UFO researchers are responsible for the difficulties in obtaining physical and forensic evidence from alien abduction experiences and make excuses rather than provide evidenced reasons for the problems associated with physical and forensic evidence retrieval (SEE ASSUMPTION #1 to evaluate the truth of their position on this).



SUGGESTION #2

51

Page 5, Right Column; line 43, Page 6, Left Column; line 1 – 2, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011


FACT

Carol’s suggestion here is that given Linda’s case could potentially become a profitable movie that might influence Linda. I’ve stated it before and I’ll state it again, Linda would need money to fake her case, roughly $480,000 to begin with and further funds onward depending on how long she wished to perpetuate it. If all the participants involved agreed to being paid $20 a week in perpetuity for their roles, a ridiculously low amount to demonstrate that even if her alleged collaborators were paid tiny amounts for their parts it would still cost an enormous amount of money (SEE LIE #3).


CHAPTER SEVEN

Miscellaneous Facts

45



January 2011


FACT

The policy that details and determine whether an IRB review is required for research is the Code of Federal Regulations Title 45 Public Welfare Department of Health and Human Services Part 46 Protection of Human Subjects Revised January 15 2009 Effective July 14 2009. According to this policy an IRB review is only required when human subject research is supported or regulated by any federal department or agency which takes appropriate administrative action to make the policy applicable to such research inside or outside of the United States of America, or if an institution has voluntarily agreed to apply the regulations to all research, regardless of the source of funding. For research that is not required to be regulated by this policy, exemptions are not required because the policy is not required. Budd Hopkins’ research is not federally supported or regulated so it does not need to apply for an IRB. Were a federal department or agency to support or regulate alien abduction research, as well as taking appropriate administrative action to make the CFR Title 45 apply to this research then Hopkins would have to apply for and abide by the rules of an IRB. Simply put, were a federal department or agency to support or regulate alien abduction research then IRB review criteria would need to be fulfilled and the research conducted would need to be reviewed. The fault in this problem therefore lies within the inactions of federal departments and agencies to support and regulate alien abduction research, not with Budd Hopkins. 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132


47



January 2011


FACT

Carol has not presented one fact, or item of empirical evidence to confirm that Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs are in agreement that hybrids are going to take over the planet and the species. She has referred to the above statement as proof of Hopkins’ and Jacobs’ synchronicity in their views. Not only is the above statement open to interpretation, there is no specificity in it that would allow an individual to draw the conclusion that Carol has drawn from that statement. Her formula appears to be assert and repeat, an effective and persuasive technique utilised commonly in the construction of propaganda.

MALE SPEAKER#1: Yeah. But again, Carol, that kind of stuff doesn’t – I mean, when you’re talking about Ted Phillips, he does great work. But when you look at, can you actually say any of that could apply to what the enigmatic other is? And I don't think any amount of physical evidence burn grass, broken tree limbs. It says something happened. But I don't think that any of those things you can conclusively say, this is the other. That's the problem that I'm trying to get at with all of this. And that's where you keep hitting this wall, it’s like, yes, these things have been documented, and it's great work. But even Ted came on this program and said, my thought pattern and how I view this has changed dramatically over one case, one case.



FACT

In one of Ted Phillips’ earliest cases, the Delphos, Kansas UFO case, three witnesses saw the UFO. Ron Johnson saw it hovering over the land where Ted Phillips later obtained soil samples from, while Durel and Erma Johnson saw the UFO in the sky after Ron informed them of his sighting. In physical trace cases it is generally the witnesses that tie A (the UFO) to B (the evidence left behind). 180



“I have never undertaken any work involving abductees at my institution or elsewhere.”

Tyler Kokjohn

URL: http://www.ufoupdateslist.com/2011/feb/m16-016.shtml 121

FACT

Professor of Microbiology Tyler Kokjohn admits he has never undertaken any work involving abductees yet he is critiquing the methods of individuals who do work with abductees. It is a good thing that he is interested in obtaining and working with genetic evidence from alien abduction cases. The field can use every decent person of science it can get its hands on. Is Tyler Kokjohn ready to get his hands dirty and begin devoting his time and abilities to helping abductees? I hope so. An individual such as himself in the medical community could make research proposals and try to get others in his field interested and active in working on the alien abduction problem. If he is genuinely interested in this I hope such actions will be forthcoming on his part, the field of alien abduction, especially with Budd Hopkins’ declining health, can use as many sincere and able bodied individuals as possible.


MALE SPEAKER#1: Yeah. Well, the problem is back from the time that I sort of been involved in this field, I always found people had an excuse for every circumstance. They... when you give them the opportunity to come up with some kind of a result, they'll always come up and say, well, the aliens took it, the government is going to come and kill me, or some kind of ridiculous excuse. Towards the early 90s, I was starting to get really fed up with a lot of the stuff and I thought to myself, if we put together some good people that have the same sort of approach and ideas, we may be able to get possibly someone. And I put a call out to every group and every individual that I can come up across Canada from every province and we managed to put together actually from coast to coast, a number of groups and individuals to come together and work sort on their one heading and under the same auspices of ideas and we manage to pull out some reasonable information. And at the same time, during the days when I used to approach people like Budd and Dr. Jacobs and numerous other individuals that were involved in the abduction phenomenon and when they used to tell us that they had implants and different other types of material. We offer them the opportunity to send them a peer and we will get all the technical would done through our local university. And within that.



emid=211 177

FACT

Matt Moniz is an Analytical Chemist and Soil Analyst who has, among others, worked with Budd Hopkins and the evidence from Budd Hopkins’ cases. Hopkins has an obligation to protect the privacy, safety and security of the abductees he works with, to that end he has to be very careful with who he shares the raw evidence from his work with. In some cases, abductees are willing in time to let facts about their cases become publicly known, in articles and even books. Unless the abductees give their consent, Hopkins has an obligation to keep the information safeguarded so that it is not stolen, misused or distorted for cheap scandalous publicity. Not everyone has the best interest of the abductee at the forefront of their minds were they to obtain evidence from their cases. For this reason Hopkins is cautious in who he trusts with evidence. What is important is that he is indeed, contrary to assertions of Carol Rainey, working in conjunction with scientists in assessing and analysing the evidence obtained from alien abduction cases. 94



42



January 2011


FACT

Alfred Lehmberg and John Velez, in addition to Budd Hopkins have publicly admitted to being fooled by Jim Mortellaro. 184, 185, 81, 82, 83 In Budd Hopkins’ rebuttal to Carol Rainey’s article “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon”” Hopkins acknowledges that he was duped and made no attempt to deny or hide that fact. Carol quotes UFO Magazine writer and UFO researcher Ray Fowler in her article, Fowler states: “I wonder how many other Emma’s there are out there?” 42 I sent an email to Ray Fowler and asked him about his statement. My question: "In Carol Rainey's article, "The priests of high strangeness", in regards to the Emma Woods case, you're quoted as stating "I wonder how many other Emmas there are out there?" When you stated this were you indicating that you wondered how many other abductees out there were being subjected to ethical and professional improprieties by the individuals who were supposed to be helping them?” 84 Ray Fowler replied "Yes, that is exactly what I meant." 84


Carol then goes on to state in her article that she will “begin to name them” (the other Emmas) “because they are most definitely there” and that “in their naming, it will become clear…that the marshy ground of alien abductions is afloat in hoaxes and partial hoaxes.” 42 Emma is someone who is alleged to have been abused by the individual they were seeking help from. To name the other Emmas out there as Carol stated she was doing means that she would be naming the individuals who had been abused by the person they were seeking help from. The role of the abuser in the Jim Mortellaro case was perpetrated by Jim Mortellaro himself. Mortellaro abused Budd Hopkins’, John Velez’s and Alfred Lehmberg’s trust by playing on their sympathies and lying to them over long periods of time. Hopkins was manipulated by Mortellaro into feeling sorry for him, Hopkins gave him the benefit of the doubt and paid the price for it. All that the Mortellaro case proves is that Hopkins, like all of us, is fallible and, like all of us, capable of being deceived by psychopaths, and Mortellaro proved that he could fool a great deal of people. Carol does not establish with evidence, or even make the suggestion that Budd Hopkins abused Jim Mortellaro. Ray Fowler’s definition of an Emma indicates that at the very least an Emma is a victim. Mortellaro is not, and has not been proven by Carol or anyone else to be, a victim. 84 In regards to the Emma Woods case as I’ve stated before, not all the facts are in, nor is the complete evidence, to make judgements without empirical examination and consideration of these things would be premature and unstably founded. In regards to Dora’s case, Carol presents excerpts from the letter of a consulting psychiatrist who indicated that Dora had tremendous anger inside of her and that they doubted the veracity of Dora’s abduction material. The therapist referred Dora to a more qualified psychiatrist and indicated that they didn’t want Dora to use the scenario of alien abduction to bleed out a lifetime of her abuse. Dora has not come forward or provided any statements alleging abuse by her from Budd Hopkins. Carol perceived that Dora was abused by Budd Hopkins because she indicated that Hopkins continued to speak to and hypnotically regress Dora after receiving that letter from the consulting psychiatrist dated January 27, 1995. Carol’s article does not indicate whether Hopkins consulted with the new psychiatrist that Dora was referred to, it’s feasible given that he was consulting with her old one. Dora’s interview and regressions were taped, by Carol herself in some instances. If there has been abuse on Hopkins part towards Dora then those tapes hold the evidence of such, if the abuse took place and Carol was filming it Carol did not do anything about it for a long time. Without recorded evidence of abuse or Dora herself to, at the very least, make a claim of abuse against Hopkins, we only have Carol’s perceptions and suspicions to go on. 9

In regards to the Beanie case regarding a possible UFO retrieval in 1963 all that is evident from Carol’s article is that there were few witnesses and minimal evidence to substantiate the event, and that after thirty years there were discrepancies in Beanie’s story which she gave to three separate interviewers. In the final paragraph of Carol’s article on the Beanie case she indicates that Beanie’s story “had all the hallmarks of tale co-created by a lonely old woman hungry for attention”. Budd Hopkins, Walter Webb and Carol Rainey have three varying accounts. It should be pointed out that Beanie’s case is an alleged UFO retrieval case not an alien abduction case, so that if it were a hoax technically it wouldn’t be an alien abduction hoax. It should also be noted that if the Beanie case was a hoax and she was taking Hopkins and other investigators for a ride then, like the Mortellaro case, the abuse of trust would be on Beanie’s part, not Hopkins. Carol attempts to convey that the list of people she’s naming in her article were abused by Hopkins in a similar fashion to the way Emma Woods was alleged to have been abused. Since she also attempts to convey that these people are hoaxers on top of being victims she trips over her own argument because on the one hand she’s naming them as victims, and then on the other hand she indicates that they abused Budd’s trust and lied to him. Victims, abusers, abusers, victims? 9 In regards to the Linda case, as I’ve stated earlier, Carol has essentially presented a hearsay anecdote and Linda making an excuse not to meet someone for coffee. The overall sentiment she imparts in her article and allegations in regards to Linda and her case is that Linda is a hoaxer, who duped Budd for financial gain. Again Carol cannot decide, on the one hand she tries to make out that Hopkins abused his abductees and yet on the other she tries to make out that the abductees took advantage of Hopkins trust and good nature. In a recent excerpt from her Carol’s upcoming documentary she uses the findings of one individual’s handwriting analysis to assert that “Janet Kimball” the woman on the bridge was a hoaxer and that Linda in fact wrote the letter and did the drawings that Hopkins received from “Janet Kimball”. Rather than taking into account the acknowledged and accepted subjectivity associated with hand writing analysis, and that an objective hand writing appraisal requires multiple hand writing analyses performed by a cross section of hand writing analysts to obtain and establish a trend or pattern of the findings, Carol champions the results of one hand writing analyst. One result alone proves nothing given the subjective nature of humans performing and interpreting hand writing analysis. It’s a good start but hardly definitive, not nearly enough to form a conclusion upon. 53, 54, 55 It should also be noted that Carol’s “Forensic Document Examiner” Roger Rubin is not a Forensic Document Examiner, he is a Graphologist. Graphology is not science, it is pseudoscience. It has nothing to do with the procedures required for a legitimate forensic handwriting analysis. Rubin, consequently, is not even qualified to conduct a legitimate Forensic Document Examination. I have since contacted a real Forensic Document Examiner by the name of Steve Dubedat and contracted an analysis of the documents in question. The results of that analysis refuted the allegations of Rainey and Rubin. The report is available at the below URL.

URL: http://www.lindacortilecase.com/results-from-a-legitimate-forensic-document-

examination.html

http://www.lindacortilecase.com/results-from-a-legitimate-forensic-document-examination.html

http://www.lindacortilecase.com/results-from-a-legitimate-forensic-document-examination.html

Graphologist Roger Rubin’s findings have also been tossed out in court, specifically in the case of 476 F. 3d 144 - United States v. Tin Yat Chin.

(See Roger Rubin's "examinations" have been rejected in court at the below URL for more

information)

URL: http://www.lindacortilecase.com/subjective-critics-of-the-case.html

http://www.lindacortilecase.com/subjective-critics-of-the-case.html

Conclusions

In summation, Carol has failed to produce even one abductee who was abused by Budd Hopkins. Hearsay, lies, assumptions, contradictions, confusion, omission and a dangerous low level of academic thoroughness are demonstrated in the contents of her extremely personal article. If her concern for abductees is genuine, and she doesn’t think of the alien abduction phenomenon as a whole genre of performance art, as she indicates she thinks it is 62, then we can expect to see Carol putting her time and resources into personally helping abductees in her future. Given her preference for elaborate conspiracy theories (SEE LIE#3) and her theory regarding alien abductees as lonely or psychopathic hoaxers 9, I would not be seeking her out if I were affected by the alien abduction phenomenon. There are unfortunately far too few people who abductees can seek out for assistance and understanding. Carol Rainey’s article, the content from certain podcasts produced and released by the individuals from Paratopia, as well as other UFO radio shows in the “UFOtainment” industry are, in my personal opinion, prime examples of what is wrong with the UFO field at large and a prime hindrance to the advancement of legitimate scientific interest in the UFO and alien abduction phenomenon as a whole. Sensational presentation of arguments, looseness with the facts to sharpen the edge of a story, running with a story before the substance of it has been verified, and the unabashed use of hearsay to impugn the characters of others, regardless of what the truth may be. That being said what I find more off putting and reasonably offensive than Carol Rainey’s article, and the baseless, uninformed material being peddled on Paratopia to besmirch Hopkins and his work, is that there is unfortunately a large, considerably uninformed, emotionally driven base of individuals who accept and support whatever inaccurate and inflammatory pieces of information that are conveyed to them. These individuals do themselves an injustice and wittingly or unwittingly contribute to the steady construction and distribution of ridicule that people affected by the UFO phenomenon are still forced to endure. I also find it offensive to see certain individuals in the UFO field, who I had a level of respect for prior to this persecution of Budd Hopkins and his work, willing to join the ranks of those levelling the allegations and claims. Especially given Hopkins’ state of health. I can only conclude that the participation of certain UFO researchers in attacking Hopkins now is that in the event of Hopkins’ demise there will be a power vacuum in the alien abduction field, with many seasoned researchers potentially vying for Hopkins’ position, I hope this is an incorrect conclusion. In my personal opinion, I find it is puzzling that Jeremy Vaeni, a purported abductee himself, would play such a part in wittingly or unwittingly promoting and furthering the isolation and ridicule of alien abductees. However it is not the first instance of abductees promoting damage. Richard D. Butler, investigator and co-author of the Hansen/Stefula/Butler critique was a purported abductee and attended Hopkins support group meetings. Richard brought Joseph Stefula into the support group meeting without permission and Stefula proceeded to interrogate certain abductees, in one instance bringing a young girl to tears. When Hopkins found out about this he banned Stefula from the support group meetings. Joseph Stefula later tried to get Linda Cortile to hand her case over to him so that he could manage it, Linda refused. Joseph Stefula and Richard Butler hooked up with George Hansen, a parapsychologist and critique writer, and the debunking of Linda’s case commenced.

Richard Butler’s complicity in the construction of the critique of Linda’s case led to the perpetration of further ignorance and doubt in regards to the public’s appraisal of the alien abduction phenomenon. Those who were familiar with the case, with Linda and who took the time to examine the crux of the arguments and accusations levelled against Linda, her case and Budd Hopkins realised and acknowledged the baseless hatchet job for what it was. Linda Cortile and Budd Hopkins both possess large amounts of well documented evidence that irrefutably disproves the entire contents and substance of the Hansen/Stefula/Butler critique. What they do with that evidence is their decision. 159 One would think that individuals such as Jeremy Vaeni and Richard Butler would want to help and do good for other abductees, reduce the ridicule, promote objectivity, work with and acknowledge the inconvenient facts. Unfortunately the alien abduction phenomenon is indiscriminate in who it affects. This factor explains why there is in some cases a lack of unity among those affected. Richard Butler himself has since gone on to unsafely practice hypnosis and among other things has founded a cult known as “The Way”, beyond that I do not know what has become of him. George Hansen’s prior critique efforts in the parapsychology field offer evidence of his unique methodologies and are available in the appendix of this paper (See URL below to read the rebuttals to his prior efforts). 141, 142, 143, 144, 145 URL: http://www.lindacortilecase.com/five-rebuttals-to-george-hansen-contained-in-the-journal-of-

parapsychology.html

I do not discourage the examination of the Hansen/Stefula/Butler critique of the Linda Cortile case. I’ve read it many times and hope others will read it too. Read it and see for yourself just how little of it can be proven. I apply this same sentiment to Carol’s article. Read it all, read it again and again. It needs to be understood that in the field of UFOs and alien abductions it is not everyone’s prerogative to tell the truth or help those in need. It also needs to be understood that only a fool thinks that they can’t be fooled. We are all fallible to deception and putting our trust in people who are hurting us. There has been no evidence produced in Carol Rainey’s article or the assertions floated through Paratopia radio that Budd Hopkins is an abuser of abductees or that the majority of his abductees are hoaxers as asserted by Rainey. Jim Mortellaro was a hoaxer, that constitutes one case in the field of alien abduction where the purported abductee turned out to be a hoaxer. One case does not constitute a field afloat with hoaxes as Carol asserts. Budd Hopkins has had hundreds of cases over the years, the law of probability alone dictates that not all of them will be genuine. Is that his personal failing, being a flawed and fallible human like the rest of us? Budd Hopkins did what few other people in this world have done, he helped alien abductees.

http://www.lindacortilecase.com/five-rebuttals-to-george-hansen-contained-in-the-journal-of-parapsychology.html

http://www.lindacortilecase.com/five-rebuttals-to-george-hansen-contained-in-the-journal-of-parapsychology.html

Quotes, References and

Appendices

Quotes, References and Appendices

Page 72

1) All of the quotes that I am listing from Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions by Budd Hopkins are quoted from the following version of that book:

2) All of the quotes that I am listing from The Allagash Abductions by Raymond E. Fowler are quoted from the following version of that book:

3) All of the quotes that I am listing from Captured: The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience by Stanton T. Friedman and Kathleen Marden are quoted from the following version of that book:

4) All of the quotes that I am listing from Art, Life and UFOs by Budd Hopkins are quoted from the following Kindle version of that book:

5) All the quotes that I am listing from Close encounters of the Fourth Kind: Alien Abduction and UFOs Witnesses and Scientists Report by C.D.B. Bryan are from the following version of the book:

6) The quote I am listing from Minima moralia: reflections on a damaged life by Theodor W. Adorno

is from the following version of the book:

7) The quotes that I am listing from UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the borders of knowledge by David Jacobs are from the following version of the book:

8)

Is available at the following URL:

http://www.tricksterbook.com/ArticlesOnline/LindaCase.pdf

9) “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011


10)

Page 3, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions

by Budd Hopkins (Paperback, Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 1997)



Page 4, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions


Page 5; line 1 – 16, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions


11)



12)



13)



14)

Page 104; line 39 – 41, Page 105; line 1 – 7, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions


15)



16)

Page 111; line 39 – 42, Page 112; line 1 – 18, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions


17)



18)



19)



20)



21)

Page 371; line 19 - 24, Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions


22)

Page 1; line 1 – 5, Betty Hill Hypnosis Session,

March 7, 1964 by Dr Benjamin Simon Transcript, MC 197, Hill Box 4, Folder 3.

Transcript obtained from “Milne Special Collections and Archives,

University of New Hampshire, Durham NH 03824.”

23)





24)





25)





26)

Page 1; line 1 – 7, Barney Hill Hypnosis Session,




27)

Page 3; line 10 – 19, Barney Hill Hypnosis Session,




28)

Page 53; line 1 – 2, The Allagash Abductions

by Raymond E. Fowler (Third Edition, The Granite Publishing Group, Wild Flower Press, 2005)

29)



30)



31)



32)



33)



34)

Page 302 line 24 – 40 (not including bold title text), Page 303 line 1 – 13,

The Allagash Abductions by Raymond E. Fowler

(Third Edition, The Granite Publishing Group, Wild Flower Press, 2005)

35)

Page 308; line 2 – 13 (not including bold title line), The Allagash Abductions


36)

Page 78; line 16 – 37, Captured: The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience

by Stanton T. Friedman and Kathleen Marden (New Page Books, Career Press, 2007)

37)



38)



39)



40)

Page 8; line 30 – 45 (including titles), “A Critique of Budd Hopkins’ Case of the UFO Abduction of Linda [Cortile]”

by Joseph J. Stefula, Richard D. Butler, and George P. Hansen

Is available at the following URL: http://www.tricksterbook.com/ArticlesOnline/LindaCase.pdf


41)



myself are electronically available for empirical examination. Email Address blacked out.)

42)



January 2011


43)



January 2011




44)



January 2011


45)



January 2011




46)

Page 4, Middle Column; line 40 – 44, Right Column; line 1, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011


47)



January 2011




48)

Page 5, Middle Column, line 22 – 32, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011


49)



January 2011




50)



January 2011


51)

Page 5, Right Column; line 43; Page 6, Left Column; line 1 – 2, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011




52)



January 2011


53)

Page 6, Left Column; line 55, Middle Column; line 1 – 13, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011




54)



January 2011


55)



January 2011




56)



January 2011


57)



January 2011


58)



January 2011





59)



January 2011


60)

Page 9, Right Column; Paragraph 3, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011




Page 10, Left Column, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011



Page 10, Middle Column, Paragraph 1, “The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon””


January 2011


61)



January 2011


62)



January 2011





63)



January 2011


64)



January 2011

URL: www.paratopia.org/paratopia_magazine/mag_preview_final.pdf 65)



January 2011





66)


URL: http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_release.html





modified.


67)







modified.


68)

URL: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_release.html

(Classic Interface)

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http:/www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_release.html

69)

URL: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/if_readings.html

(Classic Interface)

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http:/www.intrudersfoundation.org/if_readings.html

70)


Cache record of the webpage that the above URL leads to from August 5 2004

URL:


(Classic Interface)



71)


Cache record of the webpage that the above URL leads to from June 25, 2008

URL:


(Classic Interface)



72)


Cache record of the webpage that the above URL leads to from May 08, 2004

URL:

http://web.archive.org/web/20040508070121/http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_rele

ase.html

(Classic Interface)




73)


Cache record of the webpage that the above URL leads to from June 25, 2008

URL:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080625033057/http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/mortellaro_rele

ase.html

(Classic Interface)

74) "Chapter Eight – Hypnosis and the investigation of UFO Abduction Accounts"

by Budd Hopkins, Page 215 – 240,

UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the borders of knowledge by David Jacobs,

(Hardcover, University Press of Kansas, 2000)




75)

Page 217; line 20 – 37, Page 218; line 1 – 11, UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the borders of knowledge

by David Jacobs, (Hardcover, University Press of Kansas, 2000)

76)

Page 218; line 23 – 30, UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the borders of knowledge


77)

Page 238; line 33 – 39, Page 239; line 1 – 23, UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the borders of knowledge


78)

Page 342 line 27 – 40 (including chapter title line, not including heading text), UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the borders of knowledge


79)

"I have been able to observe several of [Budd Hopkins'] regressions, and I remember being favorably

impressed by the extreme prudence with which he conducts them, so as not to influence his subjects."

Marie-Thérèse de Brosses,

Enquête sur les enlèvements extraterrestres [An Inquiry into Alien Abductions].

Paris: Éditions J'ai lu, 1995.

URL:


URL:




80)

Page 47, Paragraph 5, “The Abduction Conundrum”

by Greg Sandow, The Anomalist: 7, Winter 1998/99

(Edited and published by Patrick Huyghe and Dennis Stacy) 81)

“The only thing that kept ~me~ going with regard to Dr. Mortellaro and his "perceived abduction" for as long as I did was Dr. Mortellaro himself. I believed the "man." He was that sincerely convincing...”

“...One Man's Opinion On The Mortellaro Affair...”

by Alfred Lehmberg

URL: http://www.alienview.net/morty.html

82)

“I'm astonished I was ever taken in. I'm more than a little ~ashamed~, actually.”

“...One Man's Opinion On The Mortellaro Affair...” by Alfred Lehmberg


83)

“...And there seemed to be a whole medical community willing to stand behind him with regard to his general sanity and to the high-strangeness of his physical claims... Well, no, as it turns out. Like some others, many of them significantly smarter, more experienced and more educated than I (Budd Hopkins among them), I bought in.”

“...One Man's Opinion On The Mortellaro Affair...”

by Alfred Lehmberg


http://www.alienview.net/morty.html



84)

Email from Raymond E. Fowler to Sean F. Meers Dated Wednesday, February 16, 2011 12:18 AM

(The original *.eml format copies of both the sent and received emails between Mr. Fowler and

myself are electronically available for empirical examination.)

85)



86)

“I began working for Budd in the early 1970s to 1980s. My assignments changed from visit to visit depending on what needed attention and included straightening up in the studio, fielding calls, taking messages and running errands, filing and logging in recorded interviews as well as the endless audiocassettes he continues to employ in recording every hypnotic regression he has conducted. My responsibilities expanded to ultimately include fact checking, proof reading, investigation, reading and responding to letters, meeting and interviewing possible abductees, attending most support group meetings and witnessing hypnotic regressions.”

“Some Thoughts on Budd Hopkins”

By Peter Robbins


87)

“I was asked to witness a number of hypnotic regressions during the years I worked for Budd, either by him or the subject or by both of them, but always with the subject's full approval. I cannot say how many times I was called upon to do this, but can safely say I did so between ten and twenty times. As a beginning practitioner, Budd worked under the watchful eye of the respected hypnotherapist Aphrodite Clamar for seven long years, then under the guidance of other professional hypnotherapists as well. His patience, sensitivity and concern for his subjects is extraordinary and it was not unusual for him to take up to half an hour to make sure that the subject was as relaxed as possible before asking them a first question. Transcripts of some of these sessions are included in his books and are very worth reading. Additionally, the complete transcript (including both questions and answers) of the long and memorable session he conducted with Larry Warren, my co-author of Left At East Gate is included in that book and is exemplary of the manner in which Hopkins conducts this aspect of his work.”

“Some Thoughts on Budd Hopkins”

By Peter Robbins





88)

“Almost every author of a book which has the potential to be made into a film would like to see this outcome, myself very much included, and at a certain point in the development of Witnessed Budd and Linda sat down and drew up an agreement which would govern her sharing in the profits of such a venture, should it ever come to pass. That was it. To suggest that this somehow be interpreted as the basis of a concocted abduction history is just not true and I am surprised that Carol resorts to such an underhanded suggestion.”



89)



90)

“I have met with Budd on a number of occasions. I have observed him regressing a few abductees. There was never a time where there was the slightest hint of him not being a consummate professional. He is ultra sensitive to psychological pain, confusion, trauma and goes out of his way to be kind, unconditionally accepting, and adhere to the highest of ethical standards.

Budd never tried to lead the abductee into an abduction scenario; in fact Budd both told and showed me how he would purposely introduce fantasy "facts" that if validated by the abductee would suggest they are responding to his leading inquiry. When he did this I observed no confirmation of his purposefully misleading statements.”

-- Gibbs Williams, Ph.D., Clinical Psychologist






91)

“There are only a few people on Earth who have earned my respect as top-notch ET abduction investigators, and Budd Hopkins is one of them. He is also one of only two people with hypnotic regression skills and expertise who I consider professional and completely trust.”

-- Jim Weiner Abductee, Allagash Four case, 1976



92)

“Budd Hopkins is recognized as a pioneer in UFO abduction research and investigation. His work, which focused upon an extensive investigation of suspected abductees and his collaboration with mental health professionals in recovering events for which victims had only partial conscious memories must be commended. His participation in the very important academic study on "Alien Symbols" reportedly observed by abductees with Stuart Appelle (SUNY Brockport), and Tamara Lagrandeur/Don Donderi (McGill) demonstrates that he has carefully collected evidence from suspected abductees that could be evaluated scientifically. The multi-dimensional analysis clearly demonstrated that the experimental group's findings were significantly different than that of the control group. The team concluded that the consistency of symbols seen inside alien craft could possibly mean that the reports are true.”




93)

“My personal experience with Budd has been fruitful. In 2009, I visited his home and had the opportunity to experience his hypnotic induction and memory retrieval techniques. I am a certified hypnotherapist, abduction investigator and researcher, and generally don't employ hypnotic regression in the absence of substantial evidence; however, I was interested in learning more about Budd's technique. I was satisfied that he is not only compassionate and caring, but very careful not to ask leading questions.”




http://ufos.about.com/od/aliensalienabduction/p/allagash.htm

http://www.amazon.com/Allagash-Abductions-Undeniable-Evidence-Intervention/dp/0926524224




94)

There are certain people throughout history whom have made great contributions to humanity and how we see the world we all ride on. Those folks have names that long outlive them and when are spoken are synonymous with the cause they championed. Names like, Pasture, Einstein, the Wright brothers and many others fill the halls of history because of a personal passion. Each of them was an "Outsider" to their fields in one form or another, but yet the shiniest stars.

There is a man whom I have had the pleasure to know for almost 20 years, and is in my humble opinion, a true pioneer in a greatly maligned and misunderstood subject known as "Alien Abductions". This man had two decades of first rate research under his belt before I even met him, and is the mentor to almost every serious person who has looked at the topic with an open mind as well as heart. Just like the other pioneers I have mentioned, Budd has had and still has his detractors, and just like those brave souls who stood for their beliefs, his name will be the one remembered by the future as I doubt anyone can recall the names of the ones who said all those pioneers had been wrong. Empty minds may make the most noise as they are only able to be echoes of each other, and like echoes, the noise fades into the nothing from whence it came, only to be thankfully forgotten.

Truth, like that which is spoken by sages such as Budd, is the whisper of wisdom that is carried from ear to ear throughout time to come. We will only understand something we do not have all the answers for, once we allow those with the passion for finding the truth to continue unfettered, rather than listening to those who would rather manufacture their own "truth" out of convenience, despite what the evidence shows. No matter what -- time is the one who will wend forth truth -- and we are the ones who will reap its benefits.

-- Matt Moniz, Analytical Chemist, Author, and Soil Analyst for the Intruders Foundation



95)

“Thank you for this opportunity to express my deepest appreciation to Budd Hopkins, a true friend and pioneer in a field of research that nobody knew how to approach. As a mental health professional I respect and appreciate his involving and working closely with psychiatric professionals like John Mack and myself. We could see how deeply he felt about the emotions and mental health of every client.”


Researcher





96)

“Personally, Budd shared many clever, insightful, and very helpful techniques and ideas that jumpstarted my research in a wise direction. He was very careful to not reveal info that could bias, contaminate, or suggest certain responses. In fact, he and I often discussed paradoxical questioning that would try to lead subjects toward logical responses to see if they could be swayed or led. The amazing thing is that subjects would stick adamantly to bizarre and irrational details -- like floating through a solid wall -- rather than led by us toward realistic answers -- like leaving through a doorway. I utilized one of his clever questions frequently -- in which I asked what the subject notices in any of the corners of the new room he/she finds himself in. This again is a logical but leading question to see if confabulation or imagination could be triggered. NOT ONCE has any subject reported what he sees in any corner --- simply because the room appears to be round -- no room on board a UFO ever seems to have corners! In other words, logical questions could not influence a witness toward logical answers because they are determined to report what they have experienced no matter how bizarre it seems. So these are good examples of the clever research wisdom that Budd shared as he tried to carve some kind of sane path through understanding and approaching a totally bizarre field of weird yet consistent data -- coming from sincere yet traumatized people.”


Researcher



97)

“In the absence of any professional recognition of the abduction phenomenon, Budd was among the first competent people to investigate abductions and among the first to organize what amount to support groups for abductees. Budd took it upon himself to report what was happening to abductees and to listen sympathetically to the abductees themselves. He sought professional expertise for the difficult job of interviewing abductees and then developed his own interviewing skills because there were so few credentialed experts who could fit abduction cases into their professional lives.”

-- Don Donderi, Ph.D. Psychology





98)

“What I can say is that I once attended a meeting of his abduction group. I have spoken with medical professionals whom Budd brought into his researches. They supported his efforts even if not all agreed with Budd's conclusions about the overall meaning of the phenomenon. No abductee with whom Budd worked has come to me with allegations of misconduct. Complaints from abductees with whom he's worked have been relatively few, and even these generally muted.”

-- Jerry Clark, UFO Historian and Author

[Permission to publish has been granted by Errol Bruce-Knapp, moderator of UFO Updates]



99)

“With all the posts about Budd Hopkins, I would like to say the following in his defense. Budd worked with me about 7 years ago. We had lengthy phone discussions on several occasions in the years before I went to New York to meet with him. I had been hypnotized by the State Police in order to help in an investigation back in the 1960s, and Budd used similar methods. At no time did Budd try to influence me, plant ideas or lead the session in any direction. He was always very careful in the questions he asked and everything was recorded and notes were taken (including the phone conversations) prior to our meeting several years before.”

-- John Kubish





100)

“Reading Missing Time in the early 1980s aroused my curiosity about my own experiences. When his book titled Intruders came out in 1987, I wrote Budd about them. Being a fellow New Yorker, I approached Budd at a couple events afterwards and in mid-1988 I was referred by him to Dr. Jean Mundy, a NYC psychologist and hypnotherapist who was working with Budd. My two dozen sessions with her opened up my own explorations and helped lead me into finding my own experiencer-run group, S.P.A.C.E. - the Search Project for Aspects of Close Encounters in March of 1992. Budd was a guest at two of our monthly support group meetings in 1993 and in 1995. I've had dinner with Budd a few times over the years and was a guest on a few occasions at his support meetings. I was also invited to sit in on two hypnosis sessions with friends who requested I do so, and was able to observe firsthand how Budd conducts a session.”




101)

“My experience with Budd demonstrated that he conducted himself in a professional manner with me and he was kind. During my session with him, he just allowed what I was experiencing to surface. There were times he purposely tried to suggest other things to lead me away from what I was experiencing and recounting to him, but in each case, I returned to what I was re-experiencing under the hypnosis. He said he did this as a truth test - if I was somehow fabricating what was coming I might have followed his suggestions. I was not susceptible to suggestions trying to lead me away from what I was remembering and recounting.”

-- Niara Terela Isley, Abductee, Blogger and Author





102)

“I have witnessed his work and I have been impressed by his behaviour, and I know that he is very careful when he works with abductees. This is not just a compliment from a friend: I have had the opportunity to validate this in many cases. I also say this as someone who has spent seven years studying at Paris University and who has also spent many years studying this disturbing phenomenon. Budd not only spent hours and hours discussing the subject with me, but he also allowed me to join him in his support group. He showed me videos of his regression sessions and I was able to see - firsthand -- how he carefully avoided leading questions. He also allowed me to speak directly with some of his abductees without being present so they were able to feel comfortable in their conversations with me.”

-- Marie-Therese de Brosses, Author and Researcher



103)

"Nothing in my then nearly forty years of familiarity with the field of psychiatry prepared me for what Hopkins had to say. I was impressed with his warmth, sincerity, intelligence, and caring for the people with whom he had been working. But more important than that were the stories he told me from people all over the United States who had come forth to tell him about their experiences after reading one of his books or articles or hearing him on television....I have a great debt and profound respect for the pioneers in this field, like Budd Hopkins, who have had the courage to investigate and report information that runs in the face of our culture's consensus reality..."

-- (The Late) John E. Mack, M.D., Pulitzer Prize Winner: From Abduction: Human Encounters

With Aliens (1994)





104)

Art, Life and UFOs by



105)




106)




107)




108)




109)




110)




111)




112)



Location 6164 - 6167 (Kindle for PC 4) ISBN: 1933665793

113)




114)

“ As Mr. Bryan reports, he attended the five-day conference, took extensive notes, talked to the

participants during breaks and over meals, and followed up with "post conference interviews," some

of which involved sitting in on hypnosis sessions with witnesses who claim to have been abducted by

aliens.”

BOOKS OF THE TIMES; Giving the U.F.O. Group A Shot at Persuasion By CHRISTOPHER LEHMANN-HAUPT

Published: June 5, 1995

URL: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE3DD113AF936A35755C0A963958260&scp=2&sq=BOOKS%20OF%20THE%20TIMES:%20Giving%20the%20U.F.O.%20Group%20A%20Shot%20at%20Persuasion&st=cse

115)

“Chapter XIV Post conference Interview Carol and Alice

- First Hypnosis Session at Budd Hopkins’ Studio”

Page 315 – 333

“Chapter XVI Post conference Interview Carol and Alice

- Second Hypnosis Session at Budd Hopkins' Studio”

Page 339 – 357

“Chapter XVII Post conference Interview Carol and Alice

- Third Hypnosis Session at Budd Hopkins’ Studio”

Page 358 – 382

“Chapter XVIII Post conference interview Carol and Alice

- Fourth Hypnosis session at Budd Hopkins' Studio”

Page 383 – 401

“Chapter XIX Post conference Interview Carol and Alice

- Fifth Hypnosis Session at Budd Hopkins’ Studio”

Page 402 – 415

Close encounters of the Fourth Kind: Alien Abduction and UFOs Witnesses and Scientists Report

by C.D.B. Bryan

(Hardcover, Wiedenfeld & Nicolson, 2001)

116)



http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE3DD113AF936A35755C0A963958260&scp=2&sq=BOOKS%20OF%20THE%20TIMES:%20Giving%20the%20U.F.O.%20Group%20A%20Shot%20at%20Persuasion&st=cse




117)

“A certified psychologist in New York State, she was a senior staff psychologist working with a diagnostic team at St. Vincent's Hospital in Greenwich Village for 10 years and also an psychology professor for 30 years at Long Island University. She specialized in hypnotherapy and projective techniques, which came into play when she first learned about the alien abduction phenomena.”



118)

“This led her into hypnotherapy work. But it was not until the mid-1980s when Budd Hopkins got in touch with her (he lives in nearby Chelsea) and asked her help responding to possible contact experiencers answering an "Omni Magazine" survey. "About 80 percent indicated they had close encounters and I began working with some of them," Dr. Mundy said at a UFO conference.”



119)

“This reporter, who first met her on referral by Budd Hopkins in July 1988, greatly benefitted from the 25 sessions he had with her between 1988 and 1993, and from her support, encouragement and friendship then and over the years.”






120)

“Yes, in fact, my financial stake in Budd's book, "Witnessed," enabled me to fill a cavity at the dentist's office. The rest of the dental work I had to pay for with my husbands' paycheck. Pretty good, after 8 years of my watching everyone else make money on MY case, huh? It was good of Budd to offer me (which I did not want to accept) a fraction of what he was given. He felt guilty about making money on my misery. He felt better when I accepted the token he offered. However, whatever monies he's received, he made from his own sufferings regarding the unfolding and the investigations of my case. It took Hopkins 5 years of hard work, to complete his book. I hope he makes a MILLION!! I appreciated his feelings more than I appreciated the token he offered, representing an expression of his feelings. He has a heart and that's what matters to me.”

Linda Cortile

URL: http://www.ufoupdateslist.com/1997/sep/m06-007.shtml

121)

“I have never undertaken any work involving abductees at my institution or elsewhere.”

Tyler Kokjohn


122)

“Carol Rainey’s article, Priests of High Strangeness, will be appearing in the new Paratopia webzine at

www.paratopia.net on January 15th, 2011.”

URL: http://www.carolrainey.com/progress.html

http://www.ufoupdateslist.com/1997/sep/m06-007.shtml


http://www.paratopia.net/

http://www.carolrainey.com/progress.html

123)

Paratopia 104 Dr.Tyler Kokjohn

URL: http://www.paratopia.org

124)

“Publisher: Anomalist Books (June 24, 2009)”

URL: http://www.amazon.com/ART-LIFE-UFOs-Budd-Hopkins/dp/1933665416

125)

Page 210; line 10 – 11, Minima moralia: reflections on a damaged life

by Theodor W. Adorno (Verso, 2005)

126)

“Although I question how he safeguarded his subjects well-being, he engaged in no physically invasive medical procedures and worked with consenting adults. ”

Tyler Kokjohn



http://www.amazon.com/ART-LIFE-UFOs-Budd-Hopkins/dp/1933665416


127)

Page 1; Title Space; line 1 – 9 (including bold text, asterixes and date lines)

URL: http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/ohrpregulations.pdf

128)

Page 1; Left Column; line 1 – 7 (including bold text)


http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/ohrpregulations.pdf


129)

Code of Federal Regulations Title 45 Public Welfare Department of Health and Human Services Part 46 Protection of Human Subjects Revised January 15 2009 Effective July 14 2009 SUBPART A –

Basic HHS Policy for Protection of Human Research Subjects Section 46.101 Paragraph A Page 3, Left Column; line 8 – 39 (including bold title text)




Basic HHS Policy for Protection of Human Research Subjects Section 46.101 Paragraph B Unless otherwise required by department or agency heads, research activities in which the only involvement

of human subjects will be in one or more of the following categories are exempt from this policy Page 3, Left Column; line 40 – 54 (including bold title text), Middle Column, Right Column; line 1 – 2



131)


Basic HHS Policy for Protection of Human Research Subjects Section 46.102 Paragraph E Page 4, Left Column; line 44 – 47 (including bold title text), Middle Column; line 1 – 12


132)


Basic HHS Policy for Protection of Human Research Subjects Section 46.109 Paragraph A Page 6, Middle Column; line 17 – 21 (including bold title text)




133)

Page 23; line 1 – 7, “G.I. Roundtable – What is Propaganda” by Ralph D. Casey.

134)

Page 10, Left Column, Paragraph 3, July 1998, Number 363, MUFON UFO Journal

135)

Page 10, Right Column; line 8 – 16, July 1998, Number 363, MUFON UFO Journal

136)

Page 10, Right Column; line 54 – 55 (including bold text), Page 11; Left Column, line 1 – 16,

July 1998, Number 363, MUFON UFO Journal

(Many thanks to Gildas Bourdais for pointing out the location of the above statement at his post at UFOUpdates)


137)

Page 389, Paragraph 1 (not including bold title text), “Use of Hypnosis as an Aid to Eyewitness Memory”

by John C. Yuille and N. Hope McEwan, Page 389 – 400,

Journal of Applied Psychology, Volume 70, Number 2, 1985


138)

Page 1139, Paragraph 1 (not including bold title lines), “Evaluating Hypnotic Memory Enhancement (Hypermnesia and Reminiscence)

Using Multitrial Forced Recall,” by David F. Dinges, Wayne G. Whitehouse, Emily Carota Orne,

John W. Powell, and Martin T. Orne, Matthew H. Erdelyi, Page 1139 – 1147,

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, Volume 18, Number 5, 1992

139)

Page 271, Paragraph 1 (not including bold title lines), "Are Hypnotically Induced Pseudomemories Resistant to Cross-Examination?"

by N.Spanos, M.Gwynn, S.Comer, W.Baltruweit, and M.deGroh, Page 271 – 289,

Law and Human Behavior, Volume 13, Number 3, 1989

140)

Page 1, Paragraph 1 (not including bold title lines), "Hypnotic Hypermnesia: Enhanced Memory Accessibility or Report Bias?"

by W.Whitehouse, D.Dinges, E.Orne, and M.Orne, Page 289 – 295,

Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Volume 97, Number 3, 1988 141)

“Contra George Hansen's flawed critique of the work with B.D”

by Edward F. Kelly

Published in the Journal of Parapsychology, December 1992

by Edward F. Kelly

Page 1 URL: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2320/is_n4_v56/ai_14558004/

Page 2 URL: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2320/is_n4_v56/ai_14558004/pg_2/







142) “Response to Hansen: background, corrections, and amplifications”

by Gertrude R. Schmeidler


by Gertrude R. Schmeidler



http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2320/is_n4_v56/ai_14558004/

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2320/is_n4_v56/ai_14558004/pg_2/









143) “A response to George Hansen's critique:

some supplementary notes on the research with B.D” by H. Kanthamani


by H. Kanthamani













144)

“The research with B.D.: a reply to George Hansen” by John Beloff


by John Beloff



145) Background on John Beloff

URL: http://www.parapsych.org/members/j_beloff.html

Background on Edward Francis Kelly

URL: http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/personalitystudies/edbio.cfm

Background on Gertrude Schmeidler

URL: http://www.parapsych.org/members/g_schmeidler.html















http://www.parapsych.org/members/j_beloff.html

http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/personalitystudies/edbio.cfm

http://www.parapsych.org/members/g_schmeidler.html

146) The Linda Cortile Case Analyzed: Part 1 by Greg Sandow

Originally Published in:

Pages 18 – 23, International UFO Reporter,

Spring 1997, Vol. 22, No. 1

The Linda Cortile Case Analyzed: Part 2 by Greg Sandow

Originally Published in: Pages 3 – 10, 35 – 36,

International UFO Reporter, Summer 1997 Vol. 22, No. 2

URL: http://www.lindacortilecase.com/greg-sandow---the-linda-cortile-case.html

URL: http://www.lindacortilecase.com/uploads/3/4/2/0/34208873/gstlcc.pdf

147) Fire in the sky

by Travis Walton (2010 edition)

148)

UFO Socorro evidence

URL: www.caminorealheritage.org/PH/0808_socorro_ufo.pdf

149)

ANALYSIS OF THE TESTIMONY OF THOMAS SMITH, JR. REGARDING THE GULF BREEZE UFO PHOTOS

by Bruce Maccabee

URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20041024095123/http://www.skiesare.demon.co.uk/t-smith.html 150)

“The Linda Cortile Abduction Case” by Budd Hopkins,

Page 12 – 16, September 1992, Number 293, MUFON UFO Journal

URL:

http://www.theblackvault.com/encyclopedia/documents/MUFON/Journals/1992/September_1992.p

df

http://www.lindacortilecase.com/greg-sandow---the-linda-cortile-case.html

http://www.lindacortilecase.com/uploads/3/4/2/0/34208873/gstlcc.pdf

http://www.caminorealheritage.org/PH/0808_socorro_ufo.pdf

http://web.archive.org/web/20041024095123/http:/www.skiesare.demon.co.uk/t-smith.html

http://www.theblackvault.com/encyclopedia/documents/MUFON/Journals/1992/September_1992.pdf

http://www.theblackvault.com/encyclopedia/documents/MUFON/Journals/1992/September_1992.pdf

151) “The Linda Cortile Abduction Case Part II: The woman on the bridge”

by Budd Hopkins, Page 5 – 9, December 1992,

Number 296, MUFON UFO Journal

URL:

http://www.theblackvault.com/encyclopedia/documents/MUFON/Journals/1992/December_1992.p

df

152) “Rejoinder to the critique of Budd Hopkins”

by Walter H. Andrus Jr, Page 8 – 9, April 1993,

Number 300, MUFON UFO Journal

URL:

http://www.theblackvault.com/encyclopedia/documents/MUFON/Journals/1993/April_1993.pdf

153) “A light at the end of the tunnel”

by Linda Cortile, June 1993, Number 302, MUFON UFO Journal

URL:

http://www.theblackvault.com/encyclopedia/documents/MUFON/Journals/1993/June_1993.pdf

154) “They're coming to take us away: Can space aliens really have abducted the former Secretary-General of the United Nations? It sounds absurd, but thousands of Americans seem convinced by a rumour which has become a cause celebre even outside the mad world of modern 'Ufology'”

by Jim Schnabel Sunday, 2 January 1994

URL: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theyre-coming-to-take-us-away-can-space-aliens-really-have-abducted-the-former-secretarygeneral-of-the-united-nations-it-sounds-absurd-but-

thousands-of-americans-seem-convinced-by-a-rumour-which-has-become-a-cause-celebre-even-outside-the-mad-world-of-modern-ufology-1397440.html

http://www.theblackvault.com/encyclopedia/documents/MUFON/Journals/1992/December_1992.pdf

http://www.theblackvault.com/encyclopedia/documents/MUFON/Journals/1992/December_1992.pdf

http://www.theblackvault.com/encyclopedia/documents/MUFON/Journals/1993/April_1993.pdf

http://www.theblackvault.com/encyclopedia/documents/MUFON/Journals/1993/June_1993.pdf

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theyre-coming-to-take-us-away-can-space-aliens-really-have-abducted-the-former-secretarygeneral-of-the-united-nations-it-sounds-absurd-but-thousands-of-americans-seem-convinced-by-a-rumour-which-has-become-a-cause-celebre-even-outside-the-mad-world-of-modern-ufology-1397440.html




155) “Attempted Murder vs. The Politics of Ufology:

A Question of Priorities in the Linda “Cortile” Case” by George P. Hansen

URL: www.mnmufon.org/mmj/mmj37.pdf

156)

“Politics of Torquemada; or, Earth Calling Hansen’s Planet” by Jerome Clark


157) “Torquemada” Responds to Jerome Clark

by George P. Hansen

URL: www.mnmufon.org/mmj/mmj38.pdf 158)

“ Wasting away in Torquemadaville” by Jerome Clark


159)

“House Of Cards The Butler / Hansen / Stefula Critique Of The Cortile Case” by Budd Hopkins, Pages 8 – 14, 21,

International UFO Reporter, March/April 1993, Vol. 18, No. 2

160)

“Open Letter from Richard Dolan / Alien Abduction”

URL: http://www.ufocasebook.com/dolanletter.html

161) “The Daze After Manhattan Stood Still”

by Yancy Spence

URL: http://www.ufocasebook.com/daze.html

http://www.mnmufon.org/mmj/mmj37.pdf




http://www.ufocasebook.com/dolanletter.html

http://www.ufocasebook.com/daze.html

162) Intruders Foundation Seminar Series Farah Yurdozu reports from New York City - Intruders

Foundation Seminar Series, June 2006 LINDA CORTILE AND THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE ABDUCTION CASE - LATEST DEVELOPMENTS, NEWEST DISCLOSURES, AND AN UPDATE TO THE BOOK, "WITNESSED"

URL: http://www.jerrypippin.com/UFO_Files_budd_hopkins.htm

163)

“Alleged Alien Abductions: False Memories, Hypnosis, and Fantasy Proneness” by Steven Lynn and Irving Kirsch,

Page 151 – 155, Psychological Inquiry,

Volume 7, Number 2, 1996

URL:

http://www.michaelsheiser.com/UFOReligions/Alleged%20Alien%20Abductions%20False%20Memories%20Hypnosis%20and%20Fantasy%20Proneness.pdf

164)

Paratopia Episode 101: Carol Rainey & Dr. Tyler Kokjohn – JANUARY 29, 2011


165)

MALE SPEAKER#1: What do you think that Jacobs and Hopkins often say that you need to be hypnotized or that people don't remember a lot outright that's why they need to hypnotized. They don't trust people who haven't been hypnotized. That sort of thing if the letters don't reflect that. CAROL RAINEY: I don't think they say that actually. That -- MALE SPEAKER#1: I’ve heard them say that. MALE SPEAKER#3: Yeah. CAROL RAINEY: I haven't heard Budd say he doesn't trust someone who hasn't been hypnotized. MALE SPEAKER#1: Yeah. Maybe that's more Jacobs than Budd.



http://www.jerrypippin.com/UFO_Files_budd_hopkins.htm





166)

MALE SPEAKER#1: You can learn hypnosis, but you can't, but you still need to know about the patient client relationship. CAROL RAINEY: Absolutely. And that's where I think both of our primary abduction researchers, they are lacking in those skills and they are crucial for the safety of the subject.



167)

CAROL RAINEY: He worked with two different psychotherapists, Bob Naiman and Matt and a really strange woman Remy Lebeau, they're all psychiatrists I believe all three of them are. And he observed them, they did all of the hypnosis with the people he brought to them in the beginning. The first, I don't even remember how many years, but it might have been seven, eight. I think people can. I mean I know how to make films, I never took a film of course, you can make, you can do, you can learn these things.



168)

CAROL RAINEY: I'm trying to think, I think that was happening while we were writing it, while I was writing my part which took two years longer than Budd took. He is a quite pro at writing the stuff, he's very fast. And I'm not quite as fast, and I do a lot more research. So I took a lot longer and I think this was going on that more…lot of things going on while I was still doing some writing.






169)

MALE SPEAKER#1: Well, let's just think, I think people do, I mean, it seems like…now again, well most of the sort of reaction to this has been really positive at least behind the scenes, but when I visit forums where they decide to sort of pile, none of their criticisms make sense. And one of them is that well, we…we've got it out for Jacobs and Hopkins. We’ve got it out for these guys and it’s like no, we have it out for the bad research, we have it out for that there they’re hurting other human beings and everyone seems to be trying to protect and ideology over humans like, what do you…yes, go ahead, I’m sorry.



170)

JEFF: Yeah. That's exactly. You know one other things that I think I had mentioned on the last show is that, we're not only going up against this notion of hypnosis, alien abduction in the common scenario that has been put forth over decades now. You're also talking about… and Tyler, I'm going to assume this probably happened in science as well as that, we're actually pointing out a corner stone because this is just above alien abduction in that scenario. It's about everything has been built on top of that foundation that we’re finding out is built on sand. And so the building is not stable to begin with. So it's not only going against the belief’s something like Carol said, and the commonality of the notion of, okay, here what's going on because we got all these data compiled from hypnosis, but also everything has been built upon that for years now. I mean go out there, read the message board. So I mean that's exactly what the problem is.



171)

MALE SPEAKER#1: Yeah. But again, Carol, that kind of stuff doesn’t – I mean, when you’re talking about Ted Phillips, he does great work. But when you look at, can you actually say any of that could apply to what the enigmatic other is? And I don't think any amount of physical evidence burn grass, broken tree limbs. It says something happened. But I don't think that any of those things you can conclusively say, this is the other. That's the problem that I'm trying to get at with all of this. And that's where you keep hitting this wall, it’s like, yes, these things have been documented, and it's great work. But even Ted came on this program and said, my thought pattern and how I view this has changed dramatically over one case, one case.






172) Spectrum Podcast: Carol Rainey & Tyler Kokjohn – FEBRUARY 8TH 2011

URL:

http://www.spectrumradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=78&Itemi

d=211

173)

“MALE SPEAKER#1: Now what do you think was the major motivation on either one of them between Budd and Dr. Jacobs, ultimately what was their motivation?

CAROL RAINEY: Oh, I don't really like to go into that territory. It means I can read their minds, but I guess if you've been married to someone for 10 years, you have a pretty good idea of what moves them. I think they are both and I do know David. I think they are both have gotten to the point the involvement in this paranormal research, where they are completely convinced that the reality that in my opinion, they've partially constructed. There is horrific alien invasion, the secret alien invasion via the hybridization. They are really convinced this is happening. I was on the cape with Jacobs' family had rented a house, several doors down from the place where we usually stay in the summer. And over dinner one night, just I suddenly in a pause in the conversation with Dave's wife I heard. Dave Jacobs say, Budd, you and I are the only people on the planet who know what's going on. And my mouth dropped open and I sort of blurted out, David, that's a little bit of a dangerous way to think, isn't it? You are the only people on the planet and that was not well received.

MALE SPEAKER#1: Right. Little scary really. And that was talking behind the scenes, there was no interviewer, there's no crowd, there's no...

CAROL RAINEY: No, no.

MALE SPEAKER#1: This is personally at the dinner table just...

CAROL RAINEY: Absolutely.

MALE SPEAKER#1: So they believed it, 100%.

CAROL RAINEY: They do.

MALE SPEAKER#1: They both believe it

CAROL RAINEY: Yes, they do. Yeah. Somebody asked me that once. So when they get off the podium and turn away, are these guys' fakes and they start laughing at these people. No, not at all. They do believe what they are doing.”


URL:


emid=211





174)

MALE SPEAKER#1: But how was he performing in hypnotherapy or hypnosis I should say to these

individuals without at least understanding what hypnosis is supposed to be?

CAROL RAINEY: He observed, I think, for the first five years, he worked under three different

psychiatrists who did hypnosis, and Budd was a person sitting in, often asking questions and he

learned from observing. And I actually think he is very good at getting people into that state. I

think he even goes into a very relaxed state himself.


URL:


emid=211

175)

CAROL RAINEY: Yes. And I did a bit more detective work on my own as well. MALE SPEAKER#1: Oh, did you find out anything interesting. CAROL RAINEY: Yes, but you'll have to wait until the documentary comes out to hear it. MALE SPEAKER#1: There you go. But whatever investigation that he had done, footwork, the information that he had gotten, was it ever backed up anybody else? CAROL RAINEY: Depends what you need. If you're asking, if you actually met the Richard, the Dan, the two government agents or if he met the third man, no, he didn't, he got letters, typed letters from all of those people. He did meet with the -- I've the audio recording were pretty remarkable meeting with the woman, he calls the woman on the bridge. And he did meet with her at the restaurant. MALE SPEAKER#1: Okay. Was she connected to Linda at all? CAROL RAINEY: Well, that's what you'll have to find out? MALE SPEAKER#1: Okay. Or she was Linda? CAROL RAINEY: No, no. Actually she wasn't.


URL: http://www.spectrumradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=78

&Itemid=211





176)

MALE SPEAKER#2: All right. I have a question for Carol. Carol, do you think that the abduction researchers would be open to this sort of information or what are you feeling on that? CAROL RAINEY: Well, I think they would love to have that. But I would tell you right now, what they will say is, that's all very well and good, but the aliens have a way of overwriting all of our impulses, our instincts they control telepathically, what these women will be able to do when they come back and what they'll be able to bring back with them, which means nothing. MALE SPEAKER#2: So whether that's true or not, it closes the loop. CAROL RAINEY: Yeah, well. MALE SPEAKER#2: It means okay, well, sorry, you can't do that. That won't work. CAROL RAINEY: Yes. Yes. DR. TYLER KOKJOHN: Be careful with that argument though. MALE SPEAKER#1: Yeah. But these were the type of excuses that we've had all along was in that? DR. TYLER KOKJOHN: Oh, yeah. Yeah. CAROL RAINEY: You'll still get that. DR. TYLER KOKJOHN: I don't doubt that at all. But if you want to sort of do recursion back on that, then you'd say, well, hey, what's the deal with the screen memory and how come they're permeable sometimes and how can some people recall without prompting. You can kind of wipe yourself out of your position of any knowledge. If you get too radical about what they won't allow, I think we have to start with the supervision that this is an interesting phenomenon, okay, don't deny the phenomenon, I do have grave questions about some of the hypothesis and explanations.



d=211



177)

MALE SPEAKER#1: Yeah. Well, the problem is back from the time that I sort of been involved in this field, I always found people had an excuse for every circumstance. They... when you give them the opportunity to come up with some kind of a result, they'll always come up and say, well, the aliens took it, the government is going to come and kill me, or some kind of ridiculous excuse. Towards the early 90s, I was starting to get really fed up with a lot of the stuff and I thought to myself, if we put together some good people that have the same sort of approach and ideas, we may be able to get possibly someone. And I put a call out to every group and every individual that I can come up across Canada from every province and we managed to put together actually from coast to coast, a number of groups and individuals to come together and work sort on their one heading and under the same auspices of ideas and we manage to pull out some reasonable information. And at the same time, during the days when I used to approach people like Budd and Dr. Jacobs and numerous other individuals that were involved in the abduction phenomenon and when they used to tell us that they had implants and different other types of material. We offer them the opportunity to send them a peer and we will get all the technical would done through our local university. And within that.



emid=211

178)

MALE SPEAKER#1: But what happened in cases that they turned out to be fakes or not... MALE SPEAKER#2: Are you asking about a specific case, Tom? MALE SPEAKER#1: No, no just in general. Like when they would -- with something and they would find out or maybe wasn't what it was supposed to be or what they thought it would? CAROL RAINEY: It depends how far in. And the Jim Mortellaro case for example and the Linda case, Budd went out on and was presenting these cases at conferences very early on in to the research. And once you stand up in front of field class and various other people and say that this is what you believe, this is what has happened, it's not just what you believe. This is what the data shows you. It seems to me for certain people as very, very hard to back down. And that's very much...







179)

“CAROL RAINEY: And Budd is not even interested in science, he doesn't even read science, nor does he read psychology.”



emid=211

180) Page 1 – 2,

Delphos a close encounter of the second kind by Ted Phillips

181)

“Notes towards a revisionist history of abductions - Part One FAIRYLAND'S HUNTERS PART ONE”

“Magonia” 46, June 1993, by Peter Rogerson

URL:

http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20070217005222/http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk/arc/90/revis01.html

182)

Paragraph 4 and 5, “Hypnosis” by Betty Hill. Obtained from “Milne Special Collections and Archives,




http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20070217005222/http:/www.magonia.demon.co.uk/arc/90/revis01.html

http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20070217005222/http:/www.magonia.demon.co.uk/arc/90/revis01.html

183)

Email from Scott O. Lillienfeld to Sean F. Meers Dated Wednesday, February 24, 2011 12:10 AM

(The original *.eml format copies of both the sent and received emails between Dr. Lilienfeld and


184)

“Mortellaro fooled me. He 'fooled' a lot of people. I was the one who introduced him to both Budd Hopkins and to this List.”

John Velez

URL: http://ufoupdateslist.com/2004/feb/m10-003.shtml

185)

“Deconstructing the Debunkers: A Response”

by Budd Hopkins

URL: http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/Deconstruct.html

Fair Use

The quotes from copyrighted material in this paper have been used here in accordance with the Fair Use doctrine contained within the United States copyright law. They have been presented here to assist in factually demonstrating the inaccuracy of a number of false and disparaging claims made about the Linda Cortile UFO abduction case. 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 attacks launched against 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: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html

TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 1 > § 107

§ 107. 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.

http://ufoupdateslist.com/2004/feb/m10-003.shtml

http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/Deconstruct.html

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html

free-for-all: the assassination of budd hopkins and linda...

Documents