August 31, 1994
At approximately 10:00 AM, on 10/22, I conducted a
taped telephone interview with the prime witness (JK). A
letter and six Form 1's were sent to the prime witness.
I requested witness send copy of photos to me AND Jeff
Sainio. The following are notes taken from the phone
Before it had gone they got at least four good
pictures. One of the individuals who was taking pictures
around the campfire that night had a Vivitar fully
automatic 35 mm camera, loaded with 400 ASA color film.
He was instructed to grab his camera and shoot. He had
been out West with a fire crew, fighting fires and had
taken pictures out there. The lens was standard, not
Prime witness met and talked with two hunters the following day at 10:30 AM EDT. They had been enroute to the campground from Ft. Wayne, IN, and when they were 1/2 mile south of Mongo they spotted a white object move in front and to the east at low level at a high rate of speed. This was at the same time of 2130 EDT.
Newspaper accounts show at least two other good witnesses (the Martins) testifying that this was no blimp. Reports of a blimp (Family Channel) in area. Finally, a man, his wife, and two daughters saw the same or similar object at Hamilton, IN, and took videos. Their sighting was at 8:45 PM and a little over 20 miles SE of Mongo. The object was less than 100' up and there was no sound. Although some of video was erased, the object in one scene is large, pear shaped, and definitely not a conventional object.
The blow-ups of the Mongo object were received on October 21st and were cropped negatives #8 & #9. JK had another pair of negatives at the time of the interview, #4 & #5. After making prints from #8 & #9 a few days prior to this interview, he had swapped negatives with the camera owner.
The witness says the first photos are more distinct. "You are going to be more impressed with the ones I just got yesterday," he said. Negatives #6 & #7 reportedly did not show the UFO. The blow-ups and prints were made on a department store customer-operated Kodak machine called "Create-A-Print".
Photo #8 shows object (moving west to east in downward course) with illuminated leaves in the foreground due to camera flash. Photo #9 is similar, w/o flash, object still moving west to east and downward. Camera flash had been turned off for #9.
In the first two photos the object had come closer and reportedly looked like a "fried egg".
I requested that he fill out a Form 1 and try to get the others (5) to do the same. Six Form 1's were provided.
A drawing was supplied with the blow-ups of negatives #8 & #9, and witness states that this is what the UFO looked like, as it was very bright and coming in, first like the moon. Object had panels that could be seen when the object was due south. He says drawing/photos don't do justice to the actual event. There was absolutely no noise. Three dogs did not react in any way.
He was out hunting the next day and actually saw the Family Channel Blimp that others had reported. "There is no way in hell (that) we saw a blimp that night."
The object they saw and photographed on the 31st was no further than 1/4 mile away, and from 500' high to as low as 100' at one point. Witness then states the object was more vivid when first coming in. Apparently the object was receding on subsequent shots. At first he thought the object to be a bright meteor. It didn't take long for them to realize that the object was not a meteor. In negative #4 & #5 you "can see a distinct line right around the center", he said.
Source Test, Man-Made: Advertising, commercial, military, and private aircraft eliminated. A blimp seemed possible. Witness testimony appeared to rule this out. Later analysis by Dr. Richard Haines effectively ruled out any type of blimp or any other source. We had already eliminated a balloon, fixed structure, hoax (on witness or by witnesses). Twelve witnesses were reliable, object was real, description and photos (and a video) indicate an unidentified craft was in the area, along with a possible blimp.
Evaluation: Unidentified craft. Berliner Strangeness Scale: 2 (Night object); Berliner Credibility Scale: 7 (Still photo(s) by professional). Speiser Strangeness Factor: S5 (Highly strange; suggests intelligent guidance); Speiser Credibility Scale: P5 (Highly credible, leaving almost no doubt).
Comments by the State Director