The Ufo Silencers: Mystery of the Men in Black (12 page)

Dr.: Did you stay here on Earth and just look at it from the air?

Sarah: Yes. I saw the whole world.

Dr.: Did they take you to any other world?

Sarah: Well, they showed me this place. It's real and it's there, but it's not.

Dr.: Was it another planet or star?

Sarah: Yes.

Dr.: Do you remember what they did to you that made your skin become tanned, sort of like a sunburn?

Sarah: The bright lights. They've got to stay on. They have to have light.

Dr.: Why?

Sarah: To keep them alive.

Dr.: Why did the bright lights only cause sort of a sunburn on your face and neck and not on your hands?

Sarah: Cause my hands were glowing.

Dr.: Do you know why they were glowing?

Sarah: No.

October 18, 1979
(Second Session)

Sarah described the physical examination administered to her. They put an instrument in her mouth. A "light" was put on her thumb and index finger which painlessly burned holes in each of them. Blood was extracted from the holes. A machine was placed on her head "to find out what I know." She asked the creatures where they were from, but she said she did not know what the answer was.

Sarah saw an ordinary English-speaking human man on the UFO. He said he was there for the same tests. He told her his first name only, but she recalled merely that it began with an "A." He was "from here," Sarah said, but not from her neighborhood. The man said he was taken aboard after she arrived on the UFO. He stayed onboard after she was let go. The creatures told her that they were going to let him go after they had released her. This man may or may not be a Canadian.

"A" told her he did not mind being on the UFO. He asked the creatures questions when Sarah was present, but Sarah could not recall them. "A" had dark hair, which was "going a bit gray." He looked about 43. He was "not very tall" and wore casual clothing. He told Sarah he was a store owner.

Sarah said there were a lot of plants and computers on board, although most of the computers were in another room which she got a glimpse of.

Dr.: How did you get off the UFO?

Sarah: They took me out the door. It wasn't a different color door. It was just a little hole in the wall. I went through a little hole. And then they put me back to sleep and then I was on the ground.

Dr.: Do you remember how they put you to sleep?

Sarah: Yes.

Dr.: How?

Sarah: They told me to go to sleep.

Dr.: Does it still seem very real to you or does it seem like a distant dream?

Sarah: I'd say "real."

Dr.: Were you frightened at all?

Sarah: No.

Dr.: Did you feel they were good people, good beings?

Sarah: Yes.

October 24, 1979
(Third Session)

Note: The incident referred to here occurred on
October 11, 1979
, one day after the first session.

Dr.: What are you seeing?

Sarah: A funny man. He's tall, skinny, and he's got funny-looking shoes on.

Dr.: How are the shoes funny looking?

Sarah: I don't know. They're just funny.

Sarah told the doctor she was in the school courtyard at lunchtime along with her friends. He had followed her to the courtyard from the cafeteria. The MIB came over to her and told her to move away from where her friends were. Then he started asking questions. She said he wanted desperately to find out who her friends were.

Dr.: He gave you no reason why he wanted to know?

Sarah: I think he wanted to kill them.

Dr.: Why? Did he think they were dangerous?

Sarah: Yes, I guess.

The Man In Black said he had a lot of partners everywhere. He warned her that if she did not tell him about everything onboard the UFO that he and his friends would get after her. And if she went away from him while he was talking to her, he would scare her again. She thought about calling for help, but could not because the man's "mind was stronger" than hers.

Sarah told him exactly what she had seen and heard on the UFO. He seemed pleased with her information, only showing surprise when she mentioned the computers. He said he knew there was a man on the UFO. He told her that he had spoken to the human man since that time.

Dr.: How did your conversation end?

Sarah: He just went.

Dr.: You mean just walked away?

Sarah: No, he just disappeared.

Dr.: Right in front of you?

Sarah: Yes.

Dr.: Do you think that he was human?

Sarah: No.

Sarah had told Muskat about the Man in Black on October 12. She said he stood six feet tall and looked like a dead person. He had a dull grey-toned face, slanted eyes and wore a black suit. Sarah could not remember the shape of the lips, but recalled that his grin was sinister. He had a very pointed nose and long fingernails on tapering fingers. His feet were pointing outward at 90 degrees. His shoes had three to four inch heels.

In a summary of the sessions, the doctor noted that Sarah had been taken to a psychiatrist several months before her experience as

a result of school problems, the strains of adolescent adjustments and sibling rivalry. He said she had a vivid imagination and had claimed to have seen some bizarre-looking ghosts. She had a very strong interest in the occult for the past few years, but, according to her mother, not much interest in UFOs. She had not read books or magazines on the UFO subject.

The doctor said the UFO incidents began on July 23, whereas the three-night sequence of sightings started on August 2nd. He mentioned that Sarah "claimed" to have seen some UFOs on that night and the two succeeding evenings. He used the word "claimed," although he admitted he did not investigate the sightings by other people in the area at the time.

The doctor commented that Sarah was remarkably nonchalant about the entire experience both before and after the hypnosis. This was her attitude toward her father's death, he added. Her nonchalance concerning his demise was understandable due to a reason which must remain confidential. Her casual attitude toward the UFO incidents is partly explained by the absence of serious side-effects on her. An important point to note is that she told CUFORN's investigators that the experience inside the UFO was moderately pleasant.

He said the Hines girl seemed candidly surprised to hear what she had said under hypnosis when the tapes were played back to her. He said her casual attitude returned after her initial surprise.

What he does not know is that, from the moment CUFORN was in touch with her and up to a week after the hypnosis was complete, CUFORN'S investigators repeatedly told her to be calm about the incident. She was told that abductions are not as unusual as most people think and that any side effects on her would disappear very shortly. In other words, the investigators conditioned her to a casual attitude.

This attitude conditioning was referred to by CUFORN member, John Musgrave, in his article, "The UFO Investigator as Counselor and Healer," Proceedings of the 1976 CUFOS Conference, pp. 198-200.

The hypnotherapist said that "subjects do not have to relate the truth while questioned under hypnosis." If Sarah was lying, the doctor would not have said that she experienced genuine surprise at hearing a playback of the tapes of the hypnotic sessions, others with years of experience in the UFO field have stated that subjects cannot lie under deep hypnosis. These include Dr. R. Leo Sprinkle,
University
of
Wyoming
, and Dr. James A. Harder.

Dr. Alvin Lawson, in "What Can We Learn from Hypnosis of Imaginary Abductees?," 1977 MUFON UFO Symposium Proceedings, pp. 107-131, stated that it is possible to lie under deep hypnosis only when subjects are deliberately told to imagine an event and are fed leading questions and outright suggestions.

After the first session, CUFORN'S Larry Fenwick asked the doctor if he would monitor Sarah’s bodily direct current electrical field in subsequent sessions. This technique was suggested by Dr. Harold A. Cahn, a clinical hypnotist, in his article, "Use of Hypnosis To Discriminate 'True' and 'False' UFO Experiences," The A.P.R.O. Bulletin, March, 1979, pp. 4-5. Cahn said when a subject is faking there is either "no great DC potential charge (no trance) or whatever verbal account they present is obviously derivative. The doctor declined Fenwick's suggestion, saying that the device is unreliable, despite the fact that he has never used the instrument.

The hypnotist said that the sessions should stop because of the death of Sarah's father and her recent depressed state. However, the threat by the Man in Black at the school may have been the real reason for discontinuing the hypnotic regression.

Possibly, deeper hypnosis could elicit much information from Sarah. Although they are omitted in this article, five times during the hypnosis she said "I don't remember," indicating that mental blocks may have been implanted in her subconscious by the alien entities. It is ironic that the doctor stated that he hoped his summary "will be of use to you and your colleagues in attempting to get a better understanding of the UFO phenomena" (sic).

The doctor's written summary made no reference to the taped session describing the Man in Black. He did not mention that Sarah saw a cat inside the UFO. He did not refer to the photos Muskat showed him of the marks on her thumb and finger and that her mother noted that the pupils of Sarah's eyes were dilated for 12 hours. In the summary and in a conversation with Harry Tokarz, Joe Muskat and Lary Fenwick, the doctor said that Sarah told him under hypnosis that she heard buzzing and beeping sounds when she was aboard the UFO. Her account of this was not on the tapes.

CUFORN's Joe Muskat arranged for soil sample analysis, which was done on August 17, at the Radiation Protection Laboratory, Special Studies and Services Branch, Ministry of Labour, at
Ontario
government offices in
Toronto
.

ROI readout time was 2,000 seconds for gross counts inside the area where the depressed grass was found. Naturally occurring Radon daughters ranged from 123 to 178, with a naturally occurring annihilation peak of 256. Cesium 137, a long lined fallout nuclide reached a peak of 331. Potassium 40, naturally occurring, was also noted. Radiation accounts for the soil ranged from 3 to 83, with an average count of 44.

The counts for the background or normal soil outside the site ranged from 1 to 23, averaging out to 6.743. Thus, the affected soil was more than six times as high in radiation as the soil outside the site, even after a heavy rainstorm.

In the light of the doctor's lack of involvement with this and the other facets of the investigation, it is not surprising to CUFORN that he made the following statement: "I do not believe that any conclusive judgment can be made at this time regarding the validity of her account." In contrast, and in conclusion, CUFORN judges that this was a genuine double abduction incident.