Hi, Fran.

I see the word "abduction" and can understand why someone would assume that, but my reading [incomplete as it is {I'm no expert on this case}] of this thing is that Taylor was forced towards a craft by robot-like machines, lost consciousness, and remembered nothing of an assumed on-board experience --- seeing no "entities" during his conscious time. Because "abduction" and "on-board" seem to me to be assumptions [and, again, someone may easily have better information], I consider this not as a CE4 but as a CE2 trace case --- as traces there were in abundance.

I do not have much of a file on this but feel that one could be built. The easily available sources are:

A). a two-part piece in FSR by Martin Keatman and Andy Collins entitled "Physical Assault by Unidentified Objects at Livingston." [my apologies for not having the volume numbers handy];

B). "Close Encounter in Scotland" by Stuart Campbell {before he became a debunker and changed the spelling of his name}, appearing in Journal of Transient Aerial Phenomena, volume 1, #2, March 1979. The guys who ran this journal, who were the core BUFORA group, thought highly of this case, and one of them called it the best case in Britain;

C). APRO published "The Scottish Landing Case" in its July 1980 Bulletin, on the front page;

D). another resource for which I have an embarrassingly incomplete citation is a UFO Magazine article [c.2003] entitled "The Livingston Case - Revisited." This turns out to be a better than usual article for this source as it was written by Gary Heseltine of the PRUFOS Police Database {since the case had an extensive police investigation.}

If Livingston is a good case [as BUFORA and Heseltine believe] it is because of the trace component rather the apparently dataless "abduction", but again someone probably has better information.

Mike