Thursday, March 25, 2021

X-Zone Broadcast - Lawrence Spencer and the Nonexistent Nurse


Lawrence R. Spencer was the guest on the program this week. As noted in an earlier post, he claimed that a “Roswell nurse” had sent him a package of documents about the UFO crash and her telepathic communications with the alien survivor. You can read that earlier post here:

Lawrence Spencer

Although he had said he would send a copy of his book to me, I told him that I already had it and didn’t need it. I did read enough of it to realize what it was, and enough of it to realize that it was not based in our shared reality. I did, however, ask him a few questions to set up the program, or as they would say in the world of courtrooms, lawsuits and legal dramas, to build a foundation. It was also meant to provide information for those who had not stumbled onto this particular nonsense. You can listen to it here:

(Of course, you can access this show and others in the embedded audio player on the left as well.)

He said that he had been sent all these documents about the “nurse’s” role in the Roswell case including the “top-secret” transcripts of her debriefing sessions. He said that he had retyped the documents and published them before destroying them. He said he was afraid of the government targeting him and his family for releasing them… he was afraid these documents had been stolen. He didn’t seem to understand my point that if he had retyped them and published them, he wouldn’t be safe because it proved he had had the documents. By destroying all the originals, he had no way to prove that the documents had ever existed and that he wasn’t just inventing the tale. There was no difference between publishing the originals so that we could see them and publishing his retyped versions of the originals since both could lead to the same place. But without the originals there was no way to verify anything about them.

I also noted that his attempts to vet the documents were nearly nonexistent. He said he looked on the Internet. I suggested that he could have contacted one of the Roswell researchers for help. His excuse was that he simply wasn’t “into UFOs and Roswell,” so he didn’t know about that. I thought typing in Roswell UFO crash would lead to our names… but he avoided all contact. And that tying this to Roswell was a way of drawing clicks to the nonsensical tale.

For those interested, you can listen to the interview and listen to his rather lame attempts to suggest the story and nurse were real. I made it clear that I didn’t believe there was a nurse or any documents. In fact, I suggested a polygraph to get at the truth and the invitation has been sent to him.

Next up is Bill Konkolesky to talk about his book, Experiencer 2: Two Worlds Collide. Should make for an interesting show.


Capt Steve said...

Hi Kevin,

You showed a lot more patience with Mr Spencer than I would have shown!

Louis Nicholson said...

Part One of Two

Kevin, I was very surprised and disappointed over your ad hominem attack on Mr. Spencer. Mr. Spencer, both in his book and during his interview, repeatedly said he did not know whether the story was true and that it may very well be fiction. That was why he published a disclaimer in the beginning of the book that it might be fiction, something you gave him credit for during the show.

When you pointed out the many aspects that seem to make the story false, (and I agree it probably is false) he did not disagree, did not argue with you and plainly stated he took your word for it. He repeatedly stated he knew nothing about UFOs or UFO investigators when he published the book and therefore did not vet the information the way you or other UFO experts would have done. He said he published the story because he thought people may have been interested in the story, true or not. Because he did not thoroughly vet the story and destroyed the documents upon which the book was based, you accused him of being a liar which I think was very improper.

Maybe Mr. Spencer is lying but maybe he is not. The point is that you have no evidence he is a liar and to publicly say he is lying without proof is very improper, unprofessional and dangerous. It appears to me this is no different than a news reporter receiving a story from an alleged eyewitness to a car accident, robbery or UFO and after the witness is proven to have lied, the reporter is called a liar unless the reporter can produce proof that the witness actually told the reporter the lie. How many times does a news reporter even attempt to vet what someone tells them before reporting it?

You point to his destruction of the documents as a major basis of your calling him a liar. He said he destroyed the documents because they might have been classified or stolen and he wanted to minimize his legal exposure. As a retired criminal prosecutor and defense attorney, I can see some logic in that. It would be extremely difficult to prosecute someone for being in unlawful possession of classified or stolen documents when there is no proof that the person actually possessed any classified or stolen documents. The fact that a person restates something that was stated in a classified or stolen document is not proof that he possessed the document. Information from a classified or stolen document can be given to another without the second person ever being in possession of the document or even knowing it was classified or stolen to begin with.

You claim his retyping of classified information makes him just as legally culpable as if he possessed the documents. However, without evidence that he possessed the documents, the government would have to prove that he knowingly and willfully published classified information as required by 18 U.S. Code Section 798, the statute which pertains to this crime. How could it prove he knew the information was classified? He said he did not know whether it was classified and only wanted to minimize his legal exposure if it turned out the documents were classified.

Louis Nicholson said...

Part Two of Two

Equally disappointing is your blog assertion that readers can “listen to his rather lame attempts to suggest the story and nurse were real.” That is simply untrue. He repeatedly claimed during his interview that he did not know whether the story or the nurse were real just like he stated in his disclaimer in the beginning of the book.

He also made it very clear that he does not care whether people believe the story or not because he doesn't know whether it is true. After you publicly attacked his reputation and veracity so severely of course he has to agree to take a lie detector test. If he takes it and passes it, are you going to apologize to him? It seems to me the only reason you attack Mr. Spencer's credibility is because, as you stated during the interview, you do not like the fact that some people believe the story is true. Based upon other things you have said in other cases, it is clear you have a special sensitivity to people believing things in the UFO field which are not true. While I understand that sensitivity, you should not allow that emotion to cause you to attack authors who clearly state in their books and interviews that they do not know whether the published stories are true.

KRandle said...

Louis -

Since he reproduced the documents completely, including the alleged classification markings on them, it is clear that he had them as a source. He even destroyed the letters sent by the nurse, which were not classified and were of no danger to him or his family. These letters would have provided evidence to prove part of his tale.

Second, if he takes and passes the polygraph, I will certainly apologize to him. But he knows the truth and it is that there is no nurse and no documents.

Finally, I don't really care what others believe about UFOs. I try to point out where the evidence takes us and waste too much time with these tales attached to Roswell that are attached to Roswell for no other reason that it will generate interest in the lies. Such things should offend us all.

Moonman said...

Come on, man! The guest seemed very sincere and cool. He will ace a polygraph test, 10 of them .. a hundred.. I mean, do you really believe such things anyway? Are they ever used in a court of law? No, only to fool perps into confessing.

I like whenever you see a UFO or ancient aliens TV show they say something like "we are just presenting this information and don't know if it is true or not, YOU decide." Sounds pretty democratic.

A scenario. Someone faked being a nurse and sent him something that spooked him and he is incompetent enough to do the things he did. I mean he IS a philosopher, not a rocket scientist. In this case, he would ace the polygraph.

But even if he faked everything, he may ace the polygraph.

I wanted to hear more about the post-Singularity creatures not from this Universe. Sounds far out.

Louis Nicholson said...

Kevin, those points about the classification markings and the nurse letters are good ones and certainly cast doubt on Mr. Spencer's claims. However, they still do not prove that Mr. Spencer lied.

People do stupid things all the time but that does not necessarily make them liars. For example, I remember representing a guy who was stupid enough to sell drugs in front of a police station and a bank teller who stole money out of customers' accounts thinking no one would catch her. They admitted to me that they did this.

In addition to the other reasons I mentioned in my prior comments, I strongly believe you, for your own personal benefit, should be very careful in making statements of fact that someone not a public figure has lied in a particular instance. There is nothing wrong in saying you don't believe the person. But to say that the person is definitely lying may bring you problems you do not want to deal with.

John Steiger said...

A fascinating and incredible interview. I write "incredible" because Mr. Spencer should not be believed.

As Louis Nicholson states above "he does not care whether people believe the story or not because he doesn't know whether it is true." Fair enough, but he cares sufficiently to publish "Alien Interview" as a book and translate it into multiple (I think he said 12) languages, plus an audio version (!)

Linking the story to Roswell appears to be an act of commercial exploitation. And publishing this unverified material is an act of pollution onto the factual basis for Roswell.

Mr. Spencer received the "documents" in the mail, failed to verify the contents' authenticity, but published them anyway. MJ-12 again, albeit on a smaller scale.

Moonman said...

Another thing I thought about. If someone sends you top secret documents, what do you do? I instinctively think I should contact the authorities. Unless you are Wikileaks. Weird that the author would transcribe and then destroy the originals.

The characters of the author's book sound like creatures out of the Simulation that Elon Musk and elites always suggest we are part of.

As to any proof for Roswell, I think that unlikely. You are going to have to use unusual means that are usually unaccepted by anyone (remote viewing, ESP). I like how the CIA used remote viewing to view Mars aliens.
Maybe someone should do Roswell circa the time of interest. Would at least make for a nice "maybe fictional, maybe real, you decide thing".

KRandle said...

Moonman -

I provided more than enough information so that you could search out the book and read it yourself. Took me about five minutes to find it on the Internet.

Louis -

I would argue that someone who has published nine books, has multiple websites, and has done dozens of radio interviews is a public figure. I would argue the truth as an absolute defense, and we can look at his own words about that as well. I would have no complaint had he labeled the book as fiction and not attempted to link it to Roswell for the additional attention that would draw.

John -

I think we are on the same page here. It certainly is an act of pollution.

And for those interested, still no response from Lawrence Spencer, though, as I say, he is sometimes slow in responding to email.

Louis Nicholson said...

I think your arguments that Mr. Spencer is a public figure for defamation purposes and that you could legally prove he was lying by his own words would fail but I will not belabor that.

It is interesting to note that so far on Amazon 88 people reviewed Mr. Spencer's book. The overwhelming majority of them think the information is either pure fiction or probably fiction. Some think Mr. Spencer is just espousing Scientology. Despite this, they collectively give the book a 4.4 rating out of 5. Not bad.

Also, Moonman makes a very good point about polygraphs. The courts do not allow them (or even a witness testifying they asked to take a polygraph, which has been my experience) because they are unreliable. So even if Mr. Spencer fails it, that is not definitive proof he lied. Conversely, if he passes it, that is not definitive proof that he is telling the truth. So why bother? If I was Mr. Spencer, I wouldn't take a polygraph test just to please Kevin Randle. He didn't need it to please those 88 people who gave him a collective 4.4 rating on Amazon.

KRandle said...

Louis -

There are a number of states that do allow the use of polygraphs as long as both parties stipulate to that use. I'm well aware of the trouble with polygraphs but there are used by the government regularly to test the loyalty of employees. But I get all the problems with this.

Louis Nicholson said...

Yes. I stand corrected on some states allowing their courts to use polygraphs. I see on the internet there are 23 states that allow them and it appears that not all those states require both parties to even agree. Pennsylvania, where I practiced law years ago, apparently still does not allow them.

R. Von Quest said...

Hi Kevin! Been following you off and on for years. Just started to listen to this interview last night, and I'm about 3/4 of the way through. Never heard of Spencer before, but to me it clearly seems off before even digging into it. I was surprised this is from his (self-published, 2009?) book and its getting air-time today. I also see he did another book as well as a sequel? I agree with you, high probability of nonsense. Has all the red flags. Anyways...

I have no interest in reading it, nor do I have a copy. Forgive me if this has been addressed or answered about the cover of his book, specifically the Photo of the alleged Matilda. Did he state this the ACTUAL PHOTO of her, or is it just a representation?

The Photo on the Cover is Marjorie Hansen (New York?). Army Nurse Corps, Discharge 23 Mar 1946 (Roswell was 1947), Rank 1st Lieut. 97th General Hospital.

Wasn't sure how to contact you, so I posted here. It was a slow night. I'll post the Photo after this on my Twitter account and you can see the full un-cropped Original there, since I can't post it here. Twitter:

If he already said as much, you can disregard.

(sidenote: Polygraphs are pseudoscience. Not sure why'd you pursue that angle. You already have him in Check.)

KRandle said...

R, Von Quest -

I knew that the picture was not of MacElroy because it was of an officer and according to Spencer, she had been an NCO. I think he just pulled a picture of an Army nurse off the Internet for the cover of the book.

I really don't need an argument about polygraphs. I'm well aware of the problems with them but point out that the government requires those with important positions and high government rank to take the on a regular basis.

Louis Nicholson said...

R. Von Quest:

I see on Amazon that in 2017, a "Deluxe Study Edition" of the book was published. So I guess that is the "sequel."

I read quite a bit of the surprisingly long Amazon book sample of this edition. After reading it, I can understand why Kevin thinks Mr. Spencer made up the story. It certainly appears that way and/or he has some acute psychological problems.

Moonman said...

This whole book is a mole hill. Kind of sad to pursue. What a waste of time!

I mean, we went through the Roswell slides mess. That was not a mole hill.

This dubious present book is highly likely fantasy by someone... exactly who, who cares? Caveat emptor.

R. Von Quest said...

If anyone is interested, here is the source for that original Photo I tracked:

Its the Edwards History & Genealogy Center in New York.
Marjorie Hansen is at the bottom of the WWII section.

Aparajit K R said...

The book says for sure that there are life-forms on Venus and that such life is in extreme environments. The book was first published in 2008. Recently end of last year life-forms on the clouds of Venus have been corroborated by the scientific community, though there is some dispute. Hopefully clear-cut picture on that will come in the upcoming years and that would add authenticity to the original material. Now coming to Matilda Macelroy, her original name was Matilda O'Donnell but the army changed her army records according to her after the interview was completed. Only way to find that she existed is to verify from the post offices in Navan,County Meath Ireland whether a mail was sent from Matilda around August-September 2007 or get details from St.Finian Cemetery where she and her husband were interred or from the flats they lived in Ireland before they died.

KRandle said...

Unknown -

Did you miss the part where he said that he burned everything so that he has no proof that the letters and all that ever existed? Did you miss the part where he basically admitted that it was a work of fiction? I was annoyed that he linked it to Roswell and the alleged nurse didn't seem to understand the rank structure of the military in 1947 and used one from the Air Force created after 1957. Too much wrong here and it needs o further investigation... unless we can somehow see the documents that Spencer destroyed, which destroyed his credibility.

Aparajit K R said...

Yeah the fact that he burnt the documents is a huge problem for the credibility that I agree, however he didn't admit till day that it is a fiction from him. He has claimed it is non-fiction only but maybe if at all fiction it is a fiction created by the nurse. Coming to rank I did check in this wikipedia link and Mattie Treadwell book on WAC the pay grades and posts.
The promotion from 54$ to 138$ looks perfectly possible. Let us argument sake agree that she was indeed given the senior master sergeant title just for that particular assignment with the same pay grade as master sergeant(138$). Maybe there were no vacancies for master sergeant so only they created a new post for her. I am just trying to give an argument for her case as it is mentioned that she is a senior master sergeant twice in the book or the simple conclusion is as you said the alleged nurse did not understand the rank str.

I wondered sir what happened to the polygraph test. Did Lawrence Spencer undergo it?

KRandle said...

Unknown -

The problem is that nurses in the military are all officers and not sergeants. The problem is she said she was a medical technician, but there were no female technicians assigned to Roswell in 1947. The problem is that she claimed a rank that was unique to the Air Force after 1957 but has never been an Army rank. She didn't know what she was talking about, or more to the point, Spencer didn't know what he was talking about.

BTW: The command staff in Roswell did not have the authority to create a new rank for her. In fact, that would have taken a process that would have left a paper trail, not to mention that there has never been such a rank in the Army.