UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19

Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper'

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 23:09:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:42:56 -0400
Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper'

To the 1 or 2 people following this discussion:  Here is my
latest respose to Barbara's criticism of the Ed Walters case.

> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 1)  Here is my comment on her paper:


> claimed her photos were taken long before the Gulf Breeze flap.)

> HERE IS BARBARA'S COMMENT  on what I said.
> None came forward before Walters.  Myself and others interested in


> danger of contamination of witness testimony the longer time goes on.

> HERE IS MY COMMENT ON HER PAPER:   I am aware that the GB skeptics
> have tried, unsuccessfully, to discredit all the other witnesses.
> There are about a dozen Gulf Breeze witnesses who say explicitly that
> they saw what was in Ed's photos.

**** BB: There were NONE that came forward before Ed and only
ONE, a man named Thompson, who  described and drew a picture
similar to Ed's.

>>>>>BSM, 10/17/97:  The following people stated they saw a UFO
like or the same as what appeared in  Ed's photos (list taken
from GULF BREEZE WITHOUT ED, a paper presented at the 1991 MUON
Symposium):   Billie Zammit (Ed-type UFO, bright bottom ring,
blue beam coming out; 2:30 AM, Nov 11, 1987; made sketch), Jeff
Thompson (ED-type UFO, 8:15 AM, Nov 11, 1987, hovering and then
departed rapidly as two jets came after it; made detailed
sketch), Charlie and Dori Somerby (Ed-type UFO,   moving slowly
through sky, about 5 PM Nov 11, 1987; made sketch),  Arthur and
Mary Hufford (Ed-type UFO, hovering, seen in Pensacola, probably
Nov 11, evening, but exact date not known for certain; made
sketch),  Lisette F. (name withheld at request of witness,
similar to Ed-type, first half of November, 1987, exact date not
known),  Voncile H. (name withheld at request of witness; similar
to Ed-type,Nov 21, 1987; in Alabama; made sketch); Hank Boland
(Dec. 27, 1987;Ed-type, seen behind Ed's house, made sketch),
Truman Holcomb (April 28, 1988, hovering,  ed-type with blue beam
coming out), Ray Pollack and two others (May 27, 1988, Ed-type),
Fenner and Shirley McConnell (July 8, 1988, Ed-type over water,
hovered and moved away; McConnell was doctor and county coronor),
 The "Two Jeff Sighting" (names withheld. Nov. 1990, Ed-type).
There were numerous witnesses who claimed to see only a bright
ring, like the "power ring" of the Ed-type craft.

> In UFOS ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (Avon. 1997) there are photos from
> people around the world who have seen the same thing.

>**** BB:  I have that book.  Maybe we are having a problem of
>semantics. SAME means being exactly alike, identical.  There are
>only three reproduced in that book that I would call identical.
>Oddly enough, they are from around Costa Rica, where Walters said
>he and his wife and children lived for a while...oddly enough
>again, Tommy Smith said that Walters told he and another friend
>that Ed had hoaxed UFO photos while he lived in Costa Rica. Go
>figure! :)

>>>>BSM 10/17/97:  everyone should have a copy of "that book"
which contains both verbal and pictorial descriptions.   Persons
who wrote to Ed in response to the publication of his first book,
THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS to say they saw the same or a similar
thing:  Clarence Barrons( "they are almost identical to the one I
saw on Nov. 14, 1971....in Mississippi), Cliff Baer ("I saw that
same object appear from behind some trees years ago...in the ack
woods of Pennsylvania),  Helen Brown (Crestview...30 miles from
gulf Breeze....in summer of 1954....there were three objects ust
like the one in your photo 19...) ,  John Duquette (I saw the
Gulf Breeze UFO back in 1976...felt I must have been
hallucinating), Randy Duke (...Nov.
1991....saw the UFO in photo 23...), Carol Parks (..I've seen
this thing too....craft seemed almost as wide as the road and
hovered two or three feet above it...),  Robert Fuller (I have
seen te Gulf BReeze UFO...in 1980 ...near Ogden, Utah...),
Michael Storm (I was incredibly shocked when I saw the cover of
your book because that is almost exactly what I saw while in
Zimbabwe),  Daniel Leshibis (Germany; ....The UFO looked exactly
like the one you have photographed...), Alex Stutzamen (Germany;
......I realized that the object you photographed is exactly what
I saw [in 1986]), Revis Vannistish(Switzerland;...I saw the
pictures about the UFO [in Ed's book] and I know that's it...).
There are  dozen or so other sightings reported in the book by
people who DID NOT say they saw the same thing, but they clearly
saw SOMETHING wierd.  As for the photos we have: Baker Watson
(June, 1976, "I know the detail I saw is exactly what's in your
book"; photo is very much like Ed-type);  Harry Bordersfield (Jan
1980, coming out of Carlsbad Caverns; photo looks like what Ed
got July 10, 1991), Susan Keiley (Jan 1980,UFO over the Grande
Canyon, somewhat resembles Ed-type), Gary Tomlinson( April 1986,
Monterrey, Mexico), James Warnerfred (March, 1989,El Progresso,
Guatemala, two photos, some resemblence to Ed-type), Ray Harcourt
(Canaima, Venezuela, January, 1990, looks like Ed-type UFO
hovering and sending down a beam), Bryan Hampton (July, 1990, Las
Vegas, somewhat like Ed-type),  Carlos Medoso (Campo Grande,
Brazil, December, 1991, similar to ed-type), James Parker (Fiji
Islands, March, 1992, similar to Ed-type).

Your comment that only three photos are similar is debatable (it
could be more, depending upon the degree of similarity).

Your comment, "Oddly enough, they are from around Costa Rica,
where Walters said he and his wife and children lived for a
while." is really a useless statement.  On two photos taken by
one man during one sighting are from the vicinity of Costa Rica,
and that sighting was in Guatemala.

Furthermore, Ed and family lived in Costa Rica in the 1970's and
the Guatemala photos were taken in 1989.  Perhaps you are
suggesing that Ed created a hoax UFO in Costa Rica in the middle
1970's and then it somehow got ino Guatemala and fooled people
ten or more years later?

Your reference to a Tommy Smith claim that Ed hoaxed UFO's while
in Costa Rica is another useless statement.  Tommy is hardly an
unbiased witness in this regard.

> In the case of Mary Hufford and the claim that they saw no windows,
> here is evidence of a witness not being contaminated! Nevertheless,
> the shape of the object the described and drew is very similar to the
> shape of the  Ed-type UFO. Perhaps the :"windows" (dark areas) were
> simply not showing when the Huffords saw it.

>**** BGB:  Gee, that's funny, Art says he saw EXACTLY (identical)
>the same UFO Ed saw.  And Mary said Art saw windows but she
>didn't except that later she said she too saw windows.

>>>>>I have copies of Arthur and Mary Hufford's reports and sketchs.
Neither one shows windows.  However, they both show the overall shape with
a bright bottom and a top light.   True, not identical to what is in Ed's
photos, but close enough.

> 2)  Here is another of my comments on her paper:
> Strictly speaking it is "impossible" to know how many
> released in the 1990 book (TGBS) and in the 1997 book (UARHTP).

>  **Here is Barbara's comment on my comment::
> Very true.  It looks like we agree here.  Not only was  Walters not
> shot?  Only one of  the  two  was used in the book.

> Here is my reponse: right and wrong.  Wrong because the photo which
> show the UFO.

> Barbara continues
> In addition... In July 1991 I wrote to Maccabee and asked about
<big snip>
> If photo 21 is the one Walters took in Cook's presence and used in GBS,
> then what is 21 A  that specifically names Cook?


> My (Bruce's) comment:   Shortly after the first (UFO) photo with Cook Ed
> took a second photo for comparison.

>**** BB: It is still impossible to know how many photgrpahs Ed
>Walters actually took.  Look at Oeschler's serial numbers. 20,
>21, 21A, 22, 23, 14A and 19A (and there were more) all have the
>same "serial numbers". There is no control here.

>>>>>>BSM: 10/17/97   Ed also used his camera to take photos of other
things, such as construction sites.   In retrospect it probably would have
been "better" if he had used it only to take UFO photos so that all
pictures could be placed in a continuous series.  However, he did have
other things to do with the camera besides tajing UFO photos.  SO, you are
right, there was "no control," which is not surprising.

> NOTE:   The GB investigators have been accused of sloppy work, etc.
> However, I would like to point  out that to make her argument about
> the photos Barbara has used the very diligent efforts of Bob Oechsler
> to catalogue every photo related to the UFO sightings that Ed took
> with that camera.   None of the skeptics undertook this effort.

>**** BB:  Anyone with the slimmest doubt was kept away from this case.
>No skeptics allowed...only believers.

>>>>>BSM: 10/17/97  Skeptics including Willy SMith, Bob Boyd, Ray
Stanford had access to data and their reports prove that the did.
 However, it is true that after they went public with their
positive claims of hoax before the investigation was completed,
and even before the sightings were over, they began to lose
contact with the main investigation.    HOwever, that did not
stop them from gathering their own data and loudly proclaiing
their conclusions.

> 3)  Here is another of my comments on her paper
> MACCABEE : Tommy Smith did not "come forward" publicly until June,
> 1990. His testimony about Ed faking photos is about as solid as a
> Swiss Cheese.  Ed told the UFO investigators in January 1988 that a
> young man had shown Ed UFO photos.

**** BB: AFTER Tommy spoke with his father and AFTER Tommy cutoff
his relationship with Walters Ed Walters told the MUFON
Investigators that he was Mr. Ed. It was then that he showed Ware
et al. the remaining photos to 18.

> The young man had told Ed that he was exploding firecrackers in Gulf
> Breeze when a UFO had appeared and he had photographed it.


>**** BB:   This is Ed's version.  This IS NOT Tommy Smith's

>>>>BSM: 10/17/97  I am not surprised that it is not Tommy
Smith's version, since his version is whatever he wants it to be.

> Ed's testimony was supported by another young friend of Tommy's who
>told me and other investigators that Tommy had told him, in late 1987,
> about exploding firecrackers and seeing and photographing a UFO.

>**** BB:  I have a copy of a statement taken by a certain memebr
>of CUFOS from a girl named "Carol" who was this "other" friends
>girlfriend and who attended Columbia College in Chicago with this
>"other" friend who claimed that this "other" friend had been
>offered money to help Ed in the hoax.  This "other" friend was
>promised money for film making (like video?) and school etc. I
>trust this person in CUFOS I have no reason to doubt the
>statement since the CUFOS person thought it was truthful and
>sincere. AS with evryhting in this case, this "carol" was afraid
>to come forward.

>>>>BSM: 10/17/97  Tsk, tsk.  People who are accusing Ed
areafraid to step forward....excetp Tommy Smith, of course,
So, we are to believe an anonymous ("Carol")  teenage girlfriend
of  Rob M. , the "other friend" of Tommy Smith (not a friend of
Ed), when she ostensibly (though an anonymous CUFOS investigator)
says Rob M. was also "bought off" by Ed?   I begin to wonder just
how many people ed has supposedly "bought off" in this "Grand
Conspiracy."   All the other witneses, too?

> The person Tommy "came forward" to with his story was his
> father. According to his father, lawyer Thomas Smith, at a press
> conference in June, 1990, Tommy told him in late 1987 of a UFO
> sighting with pictures.  According to Thomas Smith, a few days or
> weeks later Tommy told him the pictures had been faked by Ed.
> Neither Smith said anything in public about these allegations
> until June, 1990.  At the press conference Mr. Smith was careful
> to avoid criticizing any of the other Gulf Breeze witnesses,
> including those who claimed to have seen exactly the same thing
> that Ed photographed.  Tommy's photos were analyzed. Tommy
> had claimed that Ed had faked them by double exposure methods.

BSM: 10/17/97  Readers: note well the following paragraph:

> However, analysis revealed no evidence of double exposure and,
> in fact, the photos appeared to be just single exposures, not double
> exposures as Tommy had indicated. The shape and color of the
> depicted UFO was consistent with what Ed had photographed.
>   **  BB COMMENT: This is strictly disinformation damage control.
> In the first week of January 1988, Tommy Smith confessed his role in
> Walters hoax to his father, who then discussed it with his law
> partners, Mayor of Gulf Breeze, Ed Gray and Police Chief, Jerry Brown.
> So there is no lack of credible witnesses to what Tommy said and when.
> All of whom believed MUFON would discover the hoax and it would go
> away. It didn't.  At this time Tommy cut his ties to Walters.  This
> was when alters executed his own damage control.  He told Ware et al.,
> that he was definitely, "Mr. Ed." and showed the remaining 12 or so
> photographs  he had taken.  To my recollection it was Walters who came
> out with  the preposterous story about Tommy Smith.

> My comment on her comment:
> I have never heard of any testimony that in January 1988 Tommy Smith
> told  his father, who told his law partners, the Mayor of Gulf Breeze
> and the Police Chief. If it is true, that the Police Chief had a
> witness to a  hoax as early as January 1988, then I guess he could be
> guilty of nonfeasance of duty to inform the public, inasmuch as there
> was a lot of  interest in the sightings at the time.

>**** BB: I cant speak for any of these people but everyone makes
>a bad call once in while...even you Bruce.

>>>>>Yeah me.....and even You, Barbara.

> 4)  Here is my comment on her paper:
> This discussion about the copyright does not prove Ed
> created the Bill and Jane photos.  Hence Barbara's claim that
> "this demonstrates his ability...."  is also not proven.   In
> contradiction to Barbara's conclusion, many other factors in this
> case indicate that Ed told the truth because many of the photos
> he took were beyond his capability to fake.

>  ** BB COMMENT: You can make up any story you want to believe,
> whatever makes you feel better.  But the FACT of law is: IF ED WALTERS
> ____________

> My comment:   Can you prove the "Bill" and "Jane" didn't intend to
> abandon all rights to their photos?

>**** BB: Read my copyright paper. ASlo, copyright is inherited,
>Bill said:  "I'll keep the negs for my grandkids." (GBS p107)

>>>>>BSM: 10/17/97  When it comes to deciding who's right, you
grasp for legalities is you wish; I'll stick to the physical

> Barbara:
> And that DOES validate Tommy Smiths claims whether you like it or not.
> (Bruce) My comment:  quite independent of this argument,,Tommy's Smith's

> testimony is full of holes.
> Barbara":
> And that does demonstrate his ability to use other cameras.

>(Bruce) My comment:  No, it doesn't.

>**** BB:  Yes, it does!

>>>>>BSM 10/17/97)No it doesn't!!!
(Readers take note:  this could go on for ages!)

> Barbara:
> (As an additional remark regarding copyright.  Ed Walters claims that


> behavior for a man who is claiming he is being  stalked by aliens. But
> it is not odd behavior for a man pulling a hoax and hoping to
> capitalize on it.)

>(Bruce)  My comment:  he had been advised to copyright the
> photos by the UFO investigatotors so the photos wouldn't be
> circulating with no control at all.

>**** BB:  That's not the point. He had the crap (alegedly) scared
>out of him and the thing he thinks about doing is filling out his
>copyright application and getting it in the mail?  It makes
>perfect sense for someone pulling a hoax.  But it doesnt make
>sense for someone in fear for the life.

>>>>>Sometimes people do thinkgs that "don't make sense."

> ENDING COMMENT:   Barbara can argue legalities as long as she likes.
> I'll stick to the technical aspects combined with the numerous other
> sightings  (which include witnesses to the blue beam).   For example,
> stereo photos  and photos which can't be simple double exposure (like
> #1), etc. And then there is January 8, 1990 when Ed got photos in the
> presence of  other witnesses, two of whom took their own photos (see

>BB:  ENDING COMMENT:   Hey Bruce....Is Ed dead?????  If nothow about
>calling him on the phone (surely you have his number) and ask him
>why he doesnt have a transfer agreement and why he owns the
>copyright to the B&J photos?  Thats simple.  And please no BS
>about Duane giving him the photos.

BSM: (10.17/97)   (Ending  Comment)^2:   no transfer agreement
because Bill and Jane can't be contacted.   Had either one left a
return address or a phone number Ed would have called.   Bill and
Jane have had nearly 10 years to make contact and assert their
copyrights.   Presumably they are aware of the publication of
Ed's book in 1990.   Look's like a hung jury as far as Bill and
Jane are concerned.

Meanwhile back at the photo analysis, other witnesses,
etc.........(Now, how did Ed manage to fake the May 1 stereo
photos showing two UFOs that appear more than a hundred feet from
the shore over the Santa Rosa Sound;?  And, let's not forget the
more recent photos and videos........)

Search for other documents from or mentioning: brumac

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com