- EXCLUSIVE - Peter Davenport
will present the latest data on this truly very strange case which has
possible UFO connections. Peter will also introduce a key witness who knows
some of the parties directly involved in the event and the subsequent investigation.
- Tonight, with Jeff, Tuesday, beginning at 7pm Pacific
- Note - The following update and response was posted by
Mr. Davenport to the 'Current Encounters' list:
- I was directed by several sources today to the statement
on Whitley Strieber's site regarding the Northumberland, Pennsylvania,
case. Noting several inaccuracies in the posted statement, I telephoned
Whitley and apprised him of what I felt were either errors, or statements
of partial fact.
- Predicated on our conversation, Whitley offered to prepare
a second, replacement statement, to correct some of the errors embodied
in the first.
- Whitley was kind enough to send me a copy of the replacement
statement for my inspection. In reading the second statement, I noted
factual errors in it, as well, and Whitley said he would work on it further.
- I do not know the status of the second statement may
be at this writing, but I would direct interested parties to Whitley's
- The Northumberland, PA, case appears to NUFORC to be
rather complex, and it becomes more and more complex as individuals, most
of whom have done little primary investigation into the case, write "summaries"
of what the "real" story there is. The recent statement on October
3rd, 2002, by the Point Township, PA, police department to the effect that
the decedent had perished from an overdose of cocaine may, or may not,
explain the cause of Mr. Sees' death. However, at first blush, that explanation
does not appear to satisfy all aspects of the case that are known to us.
NUFORC will wait to see any written report, e.g. the police report, the
death certificate, or a coroner's report, etc., before we issue a final
statement about the case.
- For details about the case, we would direct interested
parties to the preliminary statement of fact on the NUFORC website. We
probably will update that statement, if we are able to obtain more evidence.
- A party from Northumberland, PA, who knows some of the
parties involved in the event and in the subsequent investigation, will
appear on the Jeff Rense Radio Program, together with Peter Davenport,
at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday night, October 08, 2002. Details for listening
are available at <www.rense.com>. If the program is not broadcast
live, for any reason, it will be available approximately 3 hours later
in the radio program archives on that site.
- Peter Davenport
- Peter B. Davenport, Director
- National UFO Reporting Center
- P. O. Box 45623
- University Station
- Seattle, WA 98145
- E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Web: www.UFOCENTER.com
- Reporting Hotline: (206) 722-3000
- -----Original Message-----
- From: Discussions about UFOs and research for CURRENT
- [mailto:CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM]On Behalf
Of Kenny Young
- Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 9:45 PM
- To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
- Subject: Re: Pa. UFO murder a hoax?
- Donnie Blessing wrote:
- Dear list: Has anyone seen this article yet? The address
given below will take you to more of the story. Donnie
- I noticed that the website you reference posted an update
as per a phone call from Peter Davenport, and also made reference to several
of the Pennyslvania reports. I did follow up on a few of those reports,
and I believe you may have also tried to track down and verify the Sharon,
PA claim with no luck of authenticating either the location, the person
or the claim.
- But in their original report, Unknown Country.com seemed
particularly blunt with their criticism of the announcing and reporting
process regarding the unverified UFO claim involved with Sees death. We'll
wait to hear more from Peter on this one, but as a quick blurb here this
whole affair goes to show the general pitfalls of accepting and/or receiving
anonymous claims. Its extremely unfortunate the hardship of a family and
a man's death is a component of this situation.
- Perhaps as an investigative measure, witness confidentiality
should always be respected but anonymity should be rejected with respect
to UFO claimants. I know that from time to time N.U.F.O.R.C. has received
an anonymous claims that do pan out to be true (one case being the Maysville,
Kentucky anonymous UFO report from Feb., 2002 that was independently confirmed
after contact with a security guard at a local power plant), but sometimes
I wonder if the damage from receiving anonymous grub is greater than the
- I do not doubt, and know from experience, that there
may be some value in consideration of an anonymous claim, but if all the
UFO groups and independent investigators would implement a policing policy
of rejecting any and all anonymous reports, or at least authenticating
anonymous matters prior to undertaking public announcement, many ugly issues
could be potentially avoided.
- I did receive some input from a few folks and even questions
regarding this case, and there were a few who suggested that I investigate
the story. I am glad now that I did not begin any such process (perhaps
normally I would have made a call or two but having been busy the past
few weeks with the conference I was unable to even think about it). But
suddenly we hear that investigative folk have come out of the woodwork
here. It's amazing how few people actually contribute to discussion or
examination of things, but for select instances an investigative 'mob'
mentality will surface. Still, I don't know what the Sheriff's department
could really charge these people with, and excluding the family, the department
officially has to answer any public inquiry.
- Again, UFOlogical anonymity is totally uncool, but as
always, I'll disclaim my certainty in the above diatribe by saying "I
could be wrong" but I'll wait to hear if there might be any discussion
on the matter, and be on the lookout for any comments from Peter...
- thanks, Kenny Young
- ((END COPIED STATEMENT))