Friday, June 04, 2010

Kingman UFO Crash Revisited

I have received new information on the Kingman, Arizona UFO crash of 1953 an it doesn’t look good for the validity of this case. Remember, this all started when Arthur Stancil told Ray Fowler he had been involved in part of a crash retrieval operation. It was, at that point, a single witness case and the witness himself said that he tended to embellish his stories when he had a little bit to drink.

But then came Judith Woolcott who corroborated the tale with one of her own, saying that her husband had a small role in the retrieval. He had been in Vietnam when he wrote to her about this, but he was killed shortly after he had mailed the letter.

Then, on June 1, 2010, I heard from Kathryn Baez, the daughter of Judith Woolcott and the entire tale as told by her mother blew up...

She said that her step-father, William Woolcott was not only still alive but he had not served in Vietnam. He made it clear that he was a Vietnam era veteran, and his ship had served somewhere off the coast of Vietnam. The sailors were told they had not been in Vietnam. Further, Woolcott did not marry Judith until 1980 so he clearly was not the soldier killed in Vietnam after having participated in part of the Kingman retrieval.

But Judith had been married before. Kathryn told me that her father was Elmer E. Fingal who was born in 1938 and died in 2006. At the time of the Kingman crash, he would have been fifteen and clearly wouldn’t have been in the tower working and he wouldn’t have been an officer in the military at that time.

Fingal had also served in the Navy and Kathryn said she didn’t think he had been in Vietnam. It makes no difference because he clearly had not been in the tower and just as clearly he had not been killed in Vietnam.

Where does that leave the tale told by Judith Woolcott? No where. It never happened. Neither of her husbands had been a witness to anything. Kathryn told me that her mother liked to embellish stories and this was just another of them. In fact, Kathryn said, "I often felt that my mother sensationalized her life for which I didn’t agree and we would often butt heads."

So, we fall back to Stancil who killed his own credibility with his varying tales and his admission that he liked to spin stories, especially after he’d had a few.

There is now no independent corroboration for the case, no newspaper articles, no documentation and no solid witnesses. I think we must label this case for what it is. A hoax.


starman said...

You could well be right but what about Stancil's diary, showing him leaving for some secret assignment at the relevant time? 1953 was long ago; you'd think that by now, if the assignment wasn't UFO related, it would be something declassified, so it should be easy to really kill the case.

KRandle said...

Starman -

The diary notation gives no specifics... It is quite generic and could be about anything. Unless someone can come up with something specific, I think this has moved into the realm of a hoax.

starman said...

Yes I know it didn't mention anything specific. But if it was not UFO related, it should be declassifid by now, so someone could determine what it was. Aren't there any living colleagues, relatives or documents which can verify anything? Could a search using the FOIA yield something on that May '53 assignment?

Unknown said...

My name is Josh and a old friend of mine who is a friend of yours gave me a book of yours that I never read until now. You thanked my friend in your book and I am trying to find my old friends contact information. I met this man when i was a kid and he was stationed at a military base near my hometown. He used to throw footballs with me and let me ride his bike etc.. until he got transferred. Is there anyway I can contact you and ask you some more questions and see if you can help me find my old friend.

borky said...

Uh-oh, Kev.

I'm not sayin' you're analysis is ultimately wrong but you should've checked out the daughter more fully before you went with this piece.

Clearly you've got no time for the Kingman story, yet in your eagerness to discredit it you've may've too readily seized on the daughter's claims her mother sensationalized her life.

The daughter even admits "we would often butt heads", and I personally know of a number of 'family wars' where siblings've gone 'round defaming their parents out of motives ranging from: "they never bought me a Cabbage Patch Doll when I was five", to "they're thwarting my attempts to claim my rightful inheritance by not dying quickly enough."

And in a specific case known to me, the daughter went 'round telling everyone her mother was senile to cover up she herself was a heroin addict who was robbing the mother blind.


KRandle said...

Josh -

Simple enough. Just send me a letter to the post office box that is given in the "sales pitch" for books.

borky -

Sorry but the duaghter also said that while she had been estranged from her mother, their relationship had improved in the last few years...

Not to mention that I learned that her stepfather, Woolcott was still alive and her first husband would have only been 15 in 1953. He died in 2006... So, who was the husband that sent her the letter before his demise in Vietnam.

All this means that the information I had developed was confirmed by the daughter. The mother's story is uncorroborated.

Unknown said...

Is this the address??? - Kevin D. Randle
PO Box 10934
Cedar Rapids, IA 52410

Erez Robinson said...

Hi Kevin,

First off I just wanna say that I admire your objective investigative contribution to the field, I sure hope that one day we will all know the truth.

Just wanted to note that although Stancil lost much of the credibility by varying the stories and admitting to boozing and such.
I must point out that it is possible that once the "right people" found out that he blew his whistle, they threatened him and told him to start varying the story and to say stuff that will discredit him. Just like a wife beater tells his wife to say "I fell down some stairs".
I'm just saying that it's possible.
I admit that we better mark this one as a Hoax, but we need to leave a little open door in case something pops up in the future.