25/26 December 1980 - Incident Begins [Page Discussion]

[Observer]

Hi All

I have just received a reply from the prison governer at Hollesley Bay.

His reply was "Unfortunately the records we hold at this establishment do not go back as far as 1980 and we are unable to help you on this occasion".

My own knowledge of the civil service suggests that they will be 'archived' but not at Hollesley Bay.
I also suspect that the current staff would have known about the incident

Make of this what you will.

Observer

[DoRayEgon]

Any idea where they would be archived?

I should think everyone in the area will know of the incident by now, in fact i'd be surprised if anyone didn't

I assume there may be a list of staff who worked there at the time somewhere? Kew possably, does that sort of thing get released??

[Observer]

Hi

I suspect that any prison archives will be held by the Home Office (Prisons dept). As for obtaining them under the freedom of information act, i just don't know. I personally don't want to persue this any further.

If anybody else wishes to have a go good luck. As for giving information on employees of that period, i suspect that they would be un willing due to the current security problems. The freedom of information act is easily got round by employers.

Observer

[Guest]

Observer, you suprise me. Never mind, I shall do it. Did another walk with Brenda (Butler) in Rendlesham the other evening. She really is fascinating and i can see where some might consider her 'eccentric' but she is not. She just has such vast knowledge of the place and her own and others' personal experiences that she relays it all to those on her tours (but it does not necessarily mean to say it is her own personal belief(s), so that they on the tour can take what they want from it. However, recently been reading about a ranch in Utah. Really interesting to see so many similarities to Rendlesham, Utah and other places around the world.
Do a google search of Gormans ranch Utah. I find the similarities incredible. If further interested there is a book 'Hunt for the Skinwalker' by Helleher and Knapp. Observer, that book Hunt for Zero point, by the way would probably be right up your street. Very interesting. Andy (probably show up as 'guest'). Admin when are you going to sort this out?

[Observer]

Hi Andy

As i am a signatory to the official secrets act (Home Office/Met Police) i have decided not to procede further with requests for prison archives concerning Hollesley Bay prison. It would probably be better coming from some one who has not signed the act if you see my point.

Observer

[Guest]

Hi Observer, i guessed that was the case, and i can appreciate where you are coming from. Thanks for instigating the initial inquiry though. Regards, Andy

[Guest]

Observer, you might be able to help me here. However, beforehand, i must clarify something. I recently took my father to Rendlesham. As stated in a previous message he appeared to give the impression (over the telephone) that the site he had been pointed out was in Area 1. However, having driven him along the road and asked to point out the exact area that was pointed out to him in the immediate days following the incident(s) in 1980 he pointed to the exact point on the road that would be in direct line with the Halt area. Also my friend Maureen said that the area many people believe is the area, is incorrect. I have since clarified (and also mentioned in Skycrash) that many people mistook Tangham forest to be the site of the initial landing. Maureen was actually referring to Rendlesham as being the area of the initial landing site. Observer, my father seems to think that the runway (beacon?) lights actually extended into the forest proper, so that planes flying in from the coast (ie north sea, lighthouse, Orfordness area) could be guided onto the runway? Is this correct. If so, it could explain the 'beacon' lights Penniston refers to, and that he could have been in the forest proper when he encountered the craft.

[Guest]

Two more things i found of interest recently. My colleague who went out with the farm worker has until recently been very evasive of my questioning, seeming to realise i had more knowledge on the subject that was comfortable for her. The other evening though she saw Britain's Roswell on Sky. When i next saw her in the days after she was the one who approached me looking somewhat haunted, and relayed what she had viewed and Larry Warren's claims of Aliens. It seemed that her realisation that others have since spoken out (ie Warren) had loosened her tongue. Her exact words were 'That's what he (ie her ex-boyfriend) told me, he saw three aliens.' Apparently she refused to let him say anymore as he had told her about the official secrets document he had signed and she then feared for her own safety as well as his own. Interesting though that he had told her this back in 1980/81 and it didn't come out in the press until a few years after? I went for a meal the other evening and met up with a colleague of mine who i have known for many years but haven't seen for sometime. I questioned her on it (considering she had worked at St Audry's hospital at the time of the incidents). She too looked 'gobsmacked' and admitted she was suprised by how much knowledge i had on the subject. Her husband's family apparently lived in the area of the alleged landing site, and she advised me to talk to her husband (interesting). I also mentioned the name of the farm worker mentioned above, wondering if she knew him. Her facial expression and look of shock that i knew, alone said enough. She too knew the guy and that he had apparently seen 'Aliens'. (Andy)

[Observer]

Hi Andy

You have been busy and some of the reactions by your collegues on the subject is very interesting.

Firstly, The Americans usually refer to a light house as a 'Beacon' although in Penniston's case he may have been referring to the 'landing' lights?
Look at the aerial view of Woodbridge air base and you will see where the forest has an avenue cleared for the approach lights which are on poles. If you can orientate this avenue in relation to the UFO landing sites and light house, this may make things clearer and give a better perspective.

As for 'aliens' There are those who said there were definately no aliens and one or two who said there were. I suspect that those who said there were are the people we have to investigate to see if there is any truth in what they say. I have my doubts but as always i keep an open mind.

Observer

[Guest]

In her book 'You can't tell the people' Bruni ref: Larry Warren p89 and his trip to Ipswich, appears to be mistaken. If you read Larry's book 'Left at East gate' he states he went to Ipswich on 28th December. Bruni claims Christmas Day. Yes, the shops would be shut then, but not on the 28th December which is what Larry Warren clearly states (part 2, chapter 1). Private investigator?

[Smurf]

Hi to all,

I'm Andy's friend Sue. I thought I'd add my two pennies worth to the conversation as I have been spellbound by the wonderful tales of Rendlesham Forest. I used to love all the Roswell stories and I wanted to be there when the UFO landed in "Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind" - heck, I even made my mash potato to look like a mountian! So when I heard about our very own 'Roswell' on our doorstep, I couldn't refuse a trip to the Forest.
Andy, very kindly (and how he tracked her down I'll never know) arranged for us to take a trip with Brenda Butler and friends around Rendlesham Forest on a cold and very wet Wednesday evening. It wasn't looking good as we drove out to Woodbridge with the rain pounding on the car but being the two determined (fools!) that we are, we persisted (as did the rain) and turned up at East Gate to meet Brenda and crew.
I didn't know what to expect and was a little nervous at meeting complete strangers in a pitch black forest (well... I watch too much Crimewatch!) but as Andy has stated before, Brenda was lovely, very friendly and easy to talk too. She was incredibly open with her information, some of her own experiences and stories that others had told her.
Well, we set off on our walk in a completely different direction to which I knew was the Forestry UFO trail. After some walking (and stumbling!) we came to a clear area where tree stubs were pointed out to us and approximations made of where the landing marks were. I must say at this stage I was very unimpressed and although I was very thankful for the time spent in taking us out there, I wanted to go home! Well, after 10 or so minutes of talking we were shown a video clip of apparently the same site about 4-5 years ago before the area was felled. I was shocked, no I was stunned! I have seen so many times the famous black and white landing site photos with the policeman (and the other bloke!) and the 3 stakes and here I stood in the forest (rain had stopped!) looking at a colour video of the very same area, with what looked like the very same trees taken only a few years back. I could hear the commentary of the video was the same voice of the person now showing me the pictures - he panned the video up the tree recalling the Halt tapes as he did so and showed us at different heights the marks on the trees, just as Halt did on his tapes - It was kind of strange, it was like putting the pictures to Halts tapes and they matched up.
I didn't want to go home anymore, I wanted to find out more. The video was very compelling and if this guy says he shot this video at that spot then who am I to doubt him? It certainly seemed to match up with the black and white landing site photo very well and I tried to work out how hard it would be to find another spot like that in the forest with such an exact layout of trees and a clear area? The area was felled shortly after the film was taken and it's hard to tell what it looked like, although those tree stubs did seem in the right places and there was an area big enough for a 3 meter sized object. As Andy says, it's known as Area 1 and it's no where near the UFO trail. And to get there? Yes, you do turn left at Eastgate - Is Larry Warren telling more truth than we give him credit for? We still can't get our heads around little green men and we tend to smile and nod at the eccentrics whilst giving them a wide berth but one day, just one day they may turn around and say "Told you so!" Ohhhh... I do hope so!
Keep up the great posts - I've loved reading them.
Sue (Andy's Friend)

[Observer]

Hi Sue
Your friend Andy and myself have been posting on this site for some time and we are both keen investigators.

The subject of the Rendlesham forest UFO does 'grab' you and is extremely intriguing.

You must exercise some caution re 'entities' as there are (the majority) some witnesses who said catigorically that there were none. There are also one or two people who said there were. It is sorting out this question that is so hard to do. Its down to who you want to believe and how the evidence stacks up for both scenarios.

I have not met Brenda Butler but she sounds like an interesting person to talk to. Again you can only make your own mind up as to the validity of her stories.

Regards

Observer

[DoRayEgon (not signed in)]

BB is indded a very interesting person and i have to say she makes the tour a very interesting one.
If you get the chance go on a night walk in the summer but please go prepaired i really don't see the point of going to a forest at night without a torch or even better night vision.
You'll more interesting stuff with night vision

[Smurphy]

Thanks Observer and DoRayEgon,

Andy and I have had some great walks in Rendlesham and always keep an open mind to everyones stories/opinions.

Personally, I prefer the stories of the people who know they saw something mechanical but couldn't explain what it was, whether it be man made or whatever. The fact that something definatley happened should have been of military interest, whether it was something up with the men or something in our airspace, and the fact that it was "apparently" not investigated whiffs of a cover up but covering up what? Oh, the eternal triangle...

It was good to join your conversation and I'll keep reading the posts but I'll leave the detective work up to Andy as he's the best!!
Cheers
Sue

[Guest]

I propose that Halt's site (area 3 UFO trail) is not the site that Burroughs/Penniston initially encountered the craft on 25th/26th. I also believe Adrian Bustinza to be a reliable witness. He kept a low profile for many years; so therefore could not be accused of being attention seeking or a gold digger, and was suspiciously demoted. Do anyone know, for what reason? Although Halt initially denied Bustinza was with him (again suspicious), it seems to have been proven he was in fact there. So why deny it? Bustinza said that Halt becoming tired of waiting for replacement light-alls selected several officers to go with him and investigate the initial landing site. Whilst this was being done Bustinza recalls someone reporting a landed UFO. Where was it? They were apparently at the initial landing site at the time, which we're led to believe is area three of UFO trail (Penniston's map would also seem to indicate area three). This surely therefore doesn't make sense? If anything had landed in the immediate area at the time surely they would have seen it, and gone straight to it? Bustinza was then ordered to get more light-alls. On his return he mentions 'trying to catch up.' I therefore believe Halt must have been on the move and not still stationary in area three. At area three and towards the farmer's field however, there is very little forest left. So surely, Halt couldn't have been in area three in the first place? The initial landing site must have been somewhere else. When Bustinza caught up he alleges finding twenty to thirty personell surrounding a UFO parked in a clearing near the farmer's field (now this sounds more like area three as shown to Brenda Butler and confirmed by Bustinza). I might be wrong but i find it odd that an alleged UFO would park in exactly the same clearing on two nights running. I still find the evidence of area 1 hard to get out of my head, and i'm still tempted to think it is a possible initial landing site and bearing in mind the alleged damage to the landing lights. Also Halt said it 'came from the coast.' From there area three would then seem to fit into Bustinza's account, and from there, perhaps it then landed into the field which is where Larry Warren's account take place? I guess we'll never know, but nonetheless, the Rendlesham incident still intrigues me all these years on, and the more i read about it, the more fascinated i become.
Two other considerations. Lightalls as i understand are on trailers. At the alleged intial landing site (area 3) would it be possible to manoeuvre them through the trees? Also on the tape five beeps from a vehicle arriving on the scene can be heard? I've not heard it myself, but for those who have, does it sound near, or distant? If it is near i don't think that would be possible as area three is too far into the forest from the logging road. If it is distant, then yes, it is possible.

[Guest]

However, Penniston according to Buran stated that the lights appeared to be no further than 100 yds from the road east of the runway. Interesting that when filming, Penniston apparently led the film crew near to Foley house. Also when Halt initially showed Butler et al the alleged landing site on the map he apparently pondered the area within area 1 (see Skycrash), and not area three within the forest. Also the animals seemed to be reacting to something within that specific area (1). When filming a documentary (not sure which one) apparently Brenda was suprised that they were filming the alleged initial landing site at the picnic area on the road leading towards the road that you take on the right that takes you to East Gate (probably more to do with atmospherics than accuracy). Finally, and i have to say this. In Bruni's book Penniston allegedly tells her a slightly different version of his meeting with Brenda and Dot. Apparently it did not last long because ONE of the women (plural) persisted in asking questions about nuclear weapons. The account i was given was that Dot was hidden under a blanket in the back of the car and therefore apparently he was only aware of one woman (Brenda) in the car, (for reasons of safety) not two. Andy (not Guest).

[Guest]

Interesting. Just reviewed the part in Skycrash again regarding Archer (Jim Penniston). According to Skycrash, Mr Penniston WAS aware that there were two women in the car. I quote 'Dot began the questioning.' What, from underneath a blanket? No mention in Skycrash of Dot having social phobia! Apologies Mr Penniston. Perhaps i misheard? But then, i wonder if the other witnesses present misheard? I'm aware that i'm long sighted, but i'm not aware that i am deaf.

However, that seems to be the whole gist of this particular case. And although i can make apologies, that's not to say i/we forgive or excuse anyone. Something seemingly so simple, ie something definitely happened in Rendlesham forest, yet no-one (which were relatively numerous) involved can seemingly get their facts straight? And these are supposed to be intelligent people, many of which high ranking? I realise official secrets act stuff is involved here, but please, Joe Public are not idiots, so don't patronize us by thinking we are. I always say, if you're going to tell a lie, tell a good one. But, if you do, then make sure you have a good memory. At the end of the day, the only ones who have made themselves look like fools are all those who have been involved. Not us looking from the outside in. Andy (not Guest).

[Guest]

But then, perhaps the fools themselves, come much higher up in the hierarchy?

Presidents allegedly leaning over towards film producers saying 'If only they realised this was true.'

Others allegedly saying 'You can't tell the people.'

If insinuating other life forms; why not? It would challenge peoples' ideas of evolution, God, Religion etc, etc? It would cause mass panic?

On the contrary. If such truths are known and were divulged. Aside from mass panic and hysteria not probably being the expected outcome. Shock maybe, but then that's a relatively short lived state of being. Perhaps all the extremist slaughter we have had to endure over the centuries might come to an end? Andy