Project Blue Book: Exposed

September 4, 1964: Is a Bent Arrow Physical Evidence?

The Air Force received some very strange cases while Project Blue Book was in operation. They investigated some of them offering explanations that were less than accurate. Others they avoided by suggesting psychological problems had manifested themselves. In nearly every case involving the sighting of occupants, or aliens, or creatures from the interior of the craft, the preferred answer was a suggestion of psychological aberration.

The witness in this case, who wishes that his name not be used (though I have been able to find it by searching the files carefully), said that he, with two friends, headed into the mountains in the Cisco Grove area of California to do some hunting with bow and arrow. They set up their camp, and then, late in the evening, split up. The witness lost his way, and realizing that he would not be able to find the camp that night, decided that he would have to remain where he was overnight.

Like many hunters who have found themselves alone in the wilderness at night, he decided that he would sleep in a tree. It raised him off the ground where the animals of the night scurried. Sitting in the tree, he noticed a white light in the distance. Believing it to be a searchlight from a helicopter, possibly flown by rescuers, the witness climbed from his perch, and started three fires on the large rocks near him. He hoped to draw attention of whoever was piloting the aircraft and apparently he was successful. The light turned and began flying toward him. Only after it neared did he realize there was no sound from it. That was when he began to get scared, according to the story he told later.

The light hovered between two trees, some fifty or sixty yards away. He could see three glowing, rectangular panels, set on the vertical in a stepping down pattern. The lights seemed to circle around until they were no more than fifty feet away. There was a flash from the middle panel, and something came out of it. It fell down the hill, landing on a bush. The witness believed that whatever had fallen was now on the ground, down the hill a short distance from him.

There was a scrambling around, a crashing, that came from the bushes, and a humanoid figure emerged from the darkness. It wore a light-colored, silver, or whitish uniform with bellows at the elbows and knees. The eyes were large and dark and looked like welder's goggles. It seemed to be doing something on the ground, and before long was joined by a second, similar appearing creature. The two entities worked their way toward the tree and were soon standing at the base, looking up at the witness.

While the first object, or rather the lights, continued to hover, the thrashing noise began in another part of the forest. Along the ridge he could see big glowing spots that reminded him of two flashlights hooked together. Finally he could see it was another being of some kind because those lights were bright enough for him to see the face. He described it as square and metallic with a hinged mouth that hung open. This alien was about five feet tall, just slightly taller than the humanoids that the witness had seen earlier at the base of his tree.

The metallic being, a robot of some kind, joined the two humanoids at the base of the tree and stood staring up at him. Eventually the robot walked over to one of the fires, swept an arm through it and then walked back to the humanoids. It put its hand to its mouth and a white vapor came out, drifting upward, toward the witness. He gasped for breath, and then lost consciousness, falling across his bow, which kept him in the tree.

When he regained consciousness, he believed just minutes later, he was sick to his stomach. Convinced that the beings wanted to capture him, he decided he was going to fight. First he lit a book of matches and tossed it down. When the entities backed up, he set his hat on fire and threw it down. This forced them back farther, but when the fires began to die, the beings came forward again.

Now he started lighting everything he could and throwing it down, hoping to set the ground cover on fire. He eventually burned everything in his pockets and the camouflage clothes he wore until he was left in a T-shirt, jeans, and his shoes. But the fires only kept the beings away from him for a few minutes.

With nothing left to do, the witness resorted his bow. He pulled it back as far as he could and let an arrow fly at the metallic creature. The tip hit with a flash like an arc of electricity. The witness fired all three of the arrows he had with him. Each time he hit the robot, it was pushed back, with a flash of bluish light.

But he had quickly run out of arrows. He climbed higher in the tree, and tied himself to the trunk with his belt. The robot let loose with another cloud of vapor and the witness passed out again. When he came to, the two humanoids were trying to climb the tree. When one of them began to make any progress, the witness would shake the tree as violently as he could. They would scramble down, apparently unaware of what had happened.

This pattern went on for a period of time. The robotic creature would emit a mist, the witness would lose consciousness and then awaken to find the humanoids trying to climb to him. He'd then shake the tree, and they'd get down.

Finally he began breaking branches from the tree to throw at them. He tossed the change in his pocket, his canteen, and anything else he could find, trying to distract them. The pattern kept up thought the night with the witness once howling like the coyotes, hoping the creatures would think there was more of him around.

A second robot had joined the group during the night, and just before dawn, stood face to face with the other robot. "Arc flashes" passed between them, lighting up the area. A fog was generated by the "conversation," which rose slowly. The witness blacked out again and when he awakened, he was hanging by his belt and all the creatures, both metallic and humanoid had disappeared.

With the creatures gone, and no sign of the lights that seemed to have brought them, the witness climbed down from the tree. He recovered the things he'd thrown in the night and found the arrows he'd shot at the robot. Only the coins from his pockets were missing. (Though I confess I don't know what kind of hunter travels into the bush with coins in his pocket.)

One of the witness' friends eventually wrote, to NICAP investigator Paul Cerny who did the best work on this case, that, "I was the one that found [the witness] as he was heading towards camp. The night have been very cold, and all he had on at the time… was a thin cotton tee shirt and his pants. He was weak and exhausted… I helped him to camp, fixed some soup for him and put him to sleep. He kept on saying that he would have been all right if they had left him alone. I didn't know what he meant so we let him sleep. He slept for about six hours. When he awoke, we asked him how he felt. He said fine. Then he said, 'Turn on the radio… there may be something on the news about the spaceship I saw.' The news did say something about a light in the sky. I also saw the light as I was working my way thru the canyon to camp. (I got lost too that night.) We asked him what had happened to his clothes and then he told us his experiences… "

There were a number of investigations of the case by both official organizations and private groups. APRO researchers were among the first to interview the witness. According to Coral Lorenzen, writing in Flying Saucer Occupants, "We learned about this particular incident quite by chance through rumors in the Sacramento area, and notified Dr. James Harder, one of APRO's advisors."

The first account of the witness' tale appeared in the July/August 1966 issue of The APRO Bulletin. The witness received a copy of that report and noted many inaccuracies in it.

The day after the events, the witness' mother-in-law phoned Victor W. Killick, an astronomer, and told him the extraordinary tale. The story didn't seem all that interesting to Killick, but he asked for additional details. At that point the witness was put on the phone and outlined what had happened. Killick decided that the story was interesting enough that he wanted to meet the man and arranged an interview for September 8.

Impressed with the story, and the sincerity of the witness, Killick wrote to Mather Air Force Base, telling officers there, "As far as my contact with them goes, these people all appear to be in good health and rational. The family believes the man's story. They told me that when he got home he was 'as pale as a sheet,' and badly shaken up. I did a little probing to try to find an ulterior motive without success."

On September 25, according to the tale, a colonel and a master sergeant from the intelligence office at McClellan Air Force Base interviewed the witness. In reality, it seems, according to the Blue Book file, that it was a captain named McCloud and a Senior Master Sergeant R. Barnes, who conducted the interview. The real point is not the ranks of the individuals, but that someone with an official standing from the Air Force did, in fact, interview the witness.

In their report, they wrote, "Mr. [name blanked in original] is a local resident and… married and recently employed at a local missile production plant. He appears stable and consistent in telling his story and believes that the [events] occurred as described."

Before the Air Force personnel left, the witness provided them with a map of the area and one of the arrowheads which they promised to return. It should be noted that he never received the arrowhead back, and it should also be noted that the Air Force had forwarded it to the University of Colorado UFO project, that is, the Condon Committee, for analysis.

The Air Force eventually solved this case, at least to their satisfaction. According to them, after abandoning their attempts to convince the witness he had seen either Japanese tourists or teenage pranksters, the witness had seen "owls and/or other mundane creatures of the woods" and let his imagination supply the rest of the details. It was, in effect, a retreat to the "psychological" category.

Yet there seems to be evidence that the Air Force took a more active interest in the case than they let on. According to the witness, about a month after the sighting, he, along with his brother and his two hunting companions returned to the scene of the stand-off. It appeared to them that someone had "raked over" the area. They found cigarette butts from many different brands, along with cigar butts scattered. Other than that, the area appeared to have been cleared, although the site was remote and inaccessible.

Paul Cerny, the NICAP field investigator, was brought in when the witness' wife wrote to the organization's national headquarters. Cerny interviewed the witness in July 1965 and was given the remaining two arrowheads. Analysis, however, revealed nothing. It had been hoped that metal from the robot might have become embedded on the arrowhead, but nothing was found. Cerny said that there had been a platinum colored smear on one of the blades, but it was possible that it had been worn off or dislodged during transit.

Cerny, who stayed in contact with the witness and his family long after the event was over, was impressed with his sincerity and sanity. In fact, in November 1995, Cerny added an "epilogue" to the case. In a boxed addition to an article in the International UFO Reporter, Cerny wrote, "Having just reviewed the case files on this fascinating and unusual encounter, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that this incident is factual and authentic. I have spent considerable time and many visits with the main witness, and along with the testimony of the other witnesses, I can rule out any possibility of a hoax. This also includes the involvement of the USAF investigation team.

"The psychological effects on [the witness] were extremely convincing and traumatic due to the aftereffects of his experience. Also noteworthy were the unusual detail, proximity, and reactions of the Alien Crew."

What is most surprising in this case is the fact that the Air Force actually investigated. For the most part, they managed to stay away from reports involving the occupants from the craft. In the Barney and Betty Hill case, Blue Book almost refused to acknowledge its existence. Then, in the file, noted that officers at Pease Air Force Base conducted the investigation which was a telephone call to Barney Hill, or rather, the results of a call from Hill. The entire file is made up of little other than magazine articles and newspaper clippings.

In August 1955, the Sutton family in the Kelly-Hopkinsville area of southern Kentucky, reported that their farm house had been assaulted by small alien creatures. The siege lasted through the night with the men shooting at the small beings with shotguns. Eventually the family deserted the farm house and drove the sheriff's office to tell the tale. Because a UFO had been seen, and because the creatures were apparently alien, there were those who believed that Project Blue Book would be involved in the investigation.

But, according to the case file, Project Blue Book did not investigate. They had no real interest in the sighting, although the Blue Book files do contain documents that suggest one active duty officer, and possibly more, did some sort of investigation. This one was "unofficial."

Without any sort of physical evidence, or proof that the Kelly-Hopkinsville tale was true, most of the people were quite skeptical. The media reflected that attitude. The Air Force, though still claiming there was no investigation, issued two statements. The Air Force told all that they were not investigating the case and that there was no basis for investigating it. In other words, the case was so unimportant that the Air Force wasn't going to waste its time or limited resources on a family of "hicks" who thought that alien beings had landed near their farm house and attacked them through the night.

Although it seems that military personnel, from Fort Campbell, Kentucky did visit the house, and interviews with the Sutton family were conducted in 1955, an investigation by the Air Force didn't take place until two years later. According to Project Blue Book files apparently, in August 1957, prior to the publication of a magazine article that would review the case, someone decided they should "investigate."

In a letter from the ATIC at Wright-Patterson, to the commander of Campbell Air Force Base, Wallace W. Elwood wrote, "1. This Center requests any factual data, together with pertinent comments regarding an unusual incident reported to have taken place six miles north of Hopkinsville, Kentucky on subject date [21 August 1955]. Briefly, the incident involved an all night attack on a family named Sutton by goblin-like creatures reported to have emerged from a so-called 'flying saucer.'"

Later in the letter, Elwood wrote, "3. Lacking factual, confirming data, no credence can be given this almost fantastic report. As the incident has never been officially reported to the Air Force, it has not taken official cognizance of the matter."

The matter was apparently assigned to First Lieutenant Charles N. Kirk, an Air Force officer at Campbell Air Force Base. He apparently spent about six weeks investigating the case before sending the material on to ATIC on October 1, 1957. He researched the story using the Hopkinsville newspaper from August 22, 1955 and September 11, 1955. He also had a letter from Captain Robert J. Hertell, a statement from Glennie Lankford [the matriarch of the Sutton family] and a statement given to Kirk by Major John E. Albert [who unofficially investigated the case in 1955] and a copy of an article written by Glennie Lankford.

Albert's statement provides some interesting information. Remember, the Air Force was claiming that the case had not been officially reported and therefore the Air Force had not investigated. It seems that here we get lost in the semantics of the situation and the question that begs to be asked is, "What the hell does all that mean?"

It sounds suspiciously like a police officer who, seeing a robbery in progress, then ignores it because it hadn't been reported to the station and he wasn't dispatched by headquarters. A police officer can't ignore the crime and it seems reasonable to assume that the Air Force shouldn't have ignored this case. The sighting was reported in the media including on the radio. Newspapers from various locations around the country were reporting what had happened on that hot August night. Although the Air Force officers at Blue Book or ATIC must have known that the sighting had been made, they chose to ignore it. If the sighting wasn't reported through official channels, then it didn't exist. Since no one reported this case through official channels, the sighting never happened.

Or is that the case? Lieutenant Kirk, in his report in 1957, sent a copy of the statement made by Major John E. Albert on September 26, 1957 on to ATIC. The very first paragraph seems to suggest that notification was made to Campbell Air Force Base which should have, according to regulations in effect at that time (1955), reported it in official channels. The regulation is quite clear on the point and it doesn't matter if everyone in the military believed the sighting to be a hoax, a hallucination, or the real thing, it should have been investigated.

That investigation would not have been conducted by ATIC and Project Blue Book but by the 4602d Air Intelligence Service Squadron. The version of AFR 200-2 in effect at the time, tells us exactly what should have happened to the report. It should have been passed on to the 4602d. If that is the case, it apparently disappeared there.

In the statement, Albert said, "On about August 22, 1955, about 8 A.M., I heard a news broadcast concerning an incident at Kelly Station, approximately six miles North of Hopkinsville. At the time I heard this news broadcast, I was at Gracey, Kentucky on my way to Campbell Air Force Base, where I am assigned for reserve training. I called the Air Base and asked them if they had heard anything about an alleged flying saucer report. They stated that they had not and it was suggested that as long as I was close to the area, that I should determine if there was anything to this report. I immediately drove to the scene at Kelly [for some reason the word was blacked out, but it seems reasonable to assume the word is Kelly] Station and located the home belonging to a Mrs. Glennie Lankford [again the name is blacked out], who is the one who first reported the incident. (A copy of Mrs. Lankford's statement is attached to this report)."

Albert's statement continued, "Deputy Sheriff Batts was at the scene where this supposed flying saucer had landed and he could not show any evidence that any object had landed in the vicinity. There was nothing to show that there was anything to prove this incident.

"Mrs. Lankford was an impoverished widow woman who had grown up in this small community just outside of Hopkinsville, with very little education. She belonged to the Holly Roller Church and the night and evening of this occurrence, had gone to a religious meeting and she indicated that the members of the congregation and her two sons and their wives and some friends of her sons', were also at this religious meeting and were worked up into a frenzy, becoming emotionally unbalanced and that after the religious meeting, they had discussed this article which she had heard about over the radio and had sent for them from the Kingdom Publishers, Fort Worth, Texas and they had sent her this article with a picture which appeared to be a little man when it actually was a monkey, painted silver. This article had to be returned to Mrs. Lankford as she stated it was her property. However, a copy of the writing is attached to this statement and if it is necessary, a photograph can be obtained from the above mentioned publishers."

There are a number of problems with the first couple of paragraphs of Albert's statement, but those are trivial. As an example, it wasn't Glennie Lankford who first reported the incident, but the whole family who had traveled into town to alert the police.

The third paragraph, however, is filled with things that bear no resemblance to reality. Lankford was not a member of the Holly Rollers, but was, in fact a member of the Trinity Pentecostal. Neither she, nor any of the family had been to any religious services the night of the "attack." She couldn't have heard about any article on the radio because there was no radio in the farm house. And there was no evidence that Lankford ever sent anywhere for any kind of article about flying saucers and little creatures. In other words, Albert had written the case off, almost before he began his "investigation" began because of his false impressions. Apparently he was only interested in facts that would allow him to debunk the case and not learning what had happened during the night.

Further evidence of this is provided in the next paragraph of his statement. "It is my opinion that the report from Mrs. Lankford or her son, Elmer Sutton, was caused by one of two reasons. Either they actually did see what they thought was a little man and at the time, there was a circus in the area and a monkey might have escaped, giving the appearance of a small man. Two, being emotionally upset, and discussing the article and showing pictures of this little monkey, that appeared like a man, their imaginations ran away with them and they really did believe what they saw, which they thought was a little man."

It is interesting to note that Albert is not suggesting that the witnesses were engaged in inventing a hoax. Instead, with absolutely no evidence, Albert invented the tale of a monkey that fooled the people. That does not explain how the monkey was able to survive the shots fired at it by the terrified people in the house, especially if it was as close to the house as the witnesses suggested. In other words, with shotguns and rifles being fired at the little man, someone should have hit it and there should have been broken bits of monkey all over the farm land.

But Albert wasn't through with the little monkey theory. "The home that Mrs. Lankford lived in was in a very run down condition and there were about eight people sleeping in two rooms. The window that was pointed out to be the one that she saw the small silver shining object about two and a half feet tall, that had its hands on the screen looking in, was a very low window and a small monkey could put his hands on the top of it while standing on the ground."

The final sentence of Albert's account said, "It is felt that the report cannot be substantiated as far as any actual object appearing in the vicinity at that time." It was then signed by Kirk, who was reviewing everything for the Air Force.

What is interesting is that Albert, and then Kirk, were willing to ignore the report of the object because there was nothing to substantiate it. But, they were willing to buy the monkey theory, though there was nothing to substantiate it either. They needed a little man for the family to see and they created one because a "monkey might have escaped."

Glennie Lankford might have inspired the little monkey story with her own statement. In a handwritten statement signed on August 22, 1955, she wrote, "My name is Glennie Lankford age 50 and I live at Kelly Station, Hopkinsville Route 6, Kentucky.

"On Sunday night Aug 21, 55 about 10:30 P.M. I was walking through the hallway which is located in the middle of my house and I looked out the back door (south) and saw a bright silver object about two and a half feet tall appearing round. I became excited and did not look at it long enough to see if it had any eyes or move. I was about 15 or 20 feet from it. I fell backward, and then was carried into the bedroom.

"My two sons, Elmer Sutton aged 25 and his wife Vera age 29, J.C. Sutton age 21 and his wife Aline age 27 and their friends Billy Taylor age 21 and his wife June, 18 were all in the house and saw this little man that looked like a monkey."

So the Air Force seized on her description and turned it into a possible solution, suggesting, with no justification that the Suttons had been attacked by a horde of monkeys which were immune to shotguns. They overlooked the evidence of the case, dispatched someone to look into it unofficially, and then denied that they had investigated.

That was the pattern they would follow with almost every case in which alien beings were reported. If you saw the creatures, then clearly you had psychological problems. The exception that proves the rule is, of course, the Lonnie Zamora landing case from Socorro, New Mexico in 1964.

Keeping with their tradition of labeling cases but not solving them, the Air Force officers, as they had done in the Kelly-Hopkinsville case, decided that the Cisco Grove witness had psychological problems. There is no need to investigate if the witness is unreliable. Can we say that we are surprised with the cavalier way they treated the evidence, that is, the arrowhead, passing it along and then losing it? Can we say that we're surprised with the way they handled the investigation considering the track record they had already established? Can we say that we're surprised with their conclusion, considering their belief that UFOs don't exist and if you see the creatures from one, then you must be psychologically disturbed?

The Cisco Grove occupant report is just one more example of an opportunity that was missed. Or rather, one that seems to have been missed. What we don't know is who had been out in the forest cleaning the area in which the witness claimed to have seen the alien beings. Just who could have done that?