Maj. Donald Keyhoe
Alamogordo, New Mexico
1536 Connecticut Ave. N.W.
your letter for Coral since I have been very close to the Stokes case
which seems to he your prime interest at present.
First, let me
say that I feel the Stokes incident is better left along---but not for
its lack of authenticity. The reason is Stokes' personality. He is
quite excitable arid easily confused under cross-examination. This is
largely because he does not have a fluid command of the English
language (I have found this to be true of many technically skilled
people by the way) and is easily tripped up by verbal trickery.
that Stokes was hospitalized is nothing more than an hysterical lie. He
did finally say that he may have seen a natural phenomenon. When I
asked him about this later his response was, "I had to say that. They
wouldn't let me alone until I did."
We talked to Jim
at length on the evening of his sighting and feel that it was
authentic. He, at this time, exhibited a redness of skin which is hard
to account for although it may have been sunburn (in spite ol' two days
of cloudiness and rain). He was bubbling over with an excitement that
could not be feigned, for Jim is no actor.
As to the other
witnesses, we are quietly checking into this angle. but have uncovered
nothing definite except that someone other than Stokes did call an El
Paso paper to report the identical incident on the same afternoon. I
say "other than Stokes" because his Texas drawl is easily recognized. I
am inclined to think that your surmise concerning military silencing is
If you can give
us a little more to go on, we will look into the report of "another
sighting" bv Stokes which you mentioned. We have to tread lightly,
however, for Stokes is a reticent, disillusioned man these days.
Local comment on the
Armstrong fiasco is that it was a pretty one-sided affair. Menzel
elicited the ridicule and scorn he richly deserves. Incidentally, most
employees at the Sacramento Peak Observatory (Sunspot. N. M.) who
actually work for him personally consider him to be a big fat phony.
Your censoring was
unfortunate from the standpoint that it could make it pretty difficult
for you to ever appear on another show of this dimension. Has it
occurred to you that it may have been planned too---that you were
actually baited into that situation? Why was Edwards so nervous?
evaluation staff has achieved considerable professional stature
recently but unfortunately many of them still prefer anonymity. This
may change soon however.
You have been
recommended to receive a pre-publication copy of Coral's book for
review purposes Nothing definite has been established concerning a
publication date however. My personal opinion is that it will be pure
dynamite--and I'm fairly conservative. That gal is a forceful and
By now you must have
received the APRO Bulletin for January, 1958. What I have told you here
concerning Stokes is to be considered a confidential addition to what I