• SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, seven years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Use the coupon code ufo20 to receive a 20% discount on five-year or lifetime subscriptions. And PayPal now accepts cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, in payment. We also offer a second payment method for major credit or debit cards (which also includes Apple Pay and Google Pay), so act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Walter G. Haut Affidavit Surfaces, The Smoking Gun? 'Witness To Roswell'



Jersey John

Paranormal Novice
From MarsAve
I don't take any fault in the way the letter was written, as long as there was a witness may make it even more credible - as I feel it is.
But, the witness' name is blacked out, the notary's name is given, yet the document isn't notarized (according to the New Mexico requirements). If we find that the document is not what it purports--i.e., that it is not a sworn notarized statement--doesn't it call into question the underlying statements? The purpose of a lawfully notarized statement is that the person giving the statement swears, under oath (or acknowledgment), that he executed the document without duress or incapacity.

There are many questions, about the document, as well as the underlying story. For example...

  • Why is the "sworn statement" non-conforming?
  • Has anyone produced the notary and/or the witness? We know the notary's name (Beverlee Morgan). Has anyone verified this is her lawfully notarized document?
  • Why did Haut selectively tell people he saw the debris and bodies (e.g., Shirkey in 1989)? Did he maintain his secrecy promise to Blanchard or not?
  • Doesn't his personal interest in the Roswell story render his representations subject to greater scrutiny? (He was, I believe, co-founder of the Roswell Museum, which employs his daughter. He also was one of the most vocal "it was a UFO crash" advocates for years, notwithstanding his promise of secrecy.)
  • Is it not possible that he believed the UFO crash story and felt a small fabrication might help cement further research, maybe even disclosure? He either lied when he said he didn't see debris or bodies or he lied when he later said he did.

In short, I have questions. I hope we get some more answers on the upcoming Paracast segment.
 
M

MarsAve

Guest
from Jersey John;(JJ)
"But, the witness' name is blacked out, the notary's name is given, yet the document isn't notarized (according to the New Mexico requirements). If we find that the document is not what it purports--i.e., that it is not a sworn notarized statement--doesn't it call into question the underlying statements?"

MarsAve(MA): very good point, but then wouldn't that be very easily found out...? Kinda hope they weren't that stupid -


JJ:" The purpose of a lawfully notarized statement is that the person giving the statement swears, under oath (or acknowledgment), that he executed the document without duress or incapacity."
MA: Maybe they figured they'd do it on the cheap - and maybe they figured this would happen - ultra scrutiny...

JJ:"There are many questions, about the document, as well as the underlying story. For example...

JJ:Why is the "sworn statement" non-conforming? "
MA: Hopefully that can be found out later-sounds like it can be easily explained-
JJ: "Has anyone produced the notary and/or the witness? We know the notary's name (Beverlee Morgan). Has anyone verified this is her lawfully notarized document?"

MA: I wonder if an Internet search would reveal any clues - on her profession..? That would be a tough to explain if they don't come forward-


JJ: "Why did Haut selectively tell people he saw the debris and bodies (e.g., Shirkey in 1989)? Did he maintain his secrecy promise to Blanchard or not?
Doesn't his personal interest in the Roswell story render his representations subject to greater scrutiny? (He was, I believe, co-founder of the Roswell Museum, which employs his daughter. He also was one of the most vocal "it was a UFO crash" advocates for years, notwithstanding his promise of secrecy.)

MA: With a secret like that - he had to tell somebody - he also may have become jaded to all of the BS and wanted to say some things to vent a bit - talking outloud to himself may have made him vent a bit, then pull the lid back on - he was watching what was going on and becoming disgusted with it all.....starting the Musuem - seems fine to me - with what he knew....but also seems odd, he'd open himself up to the scrutiny just by doing that - but i really don't have a problem with that - his knowledge. Have you ever known the only answer to a question, and everybody else was going about it the wrong way -sooo close, but so far off... how long would you remain silent?


JJ: "Is it not possible that he believed the UFO crash story and felt a small fabrication might help cement further research, maybe even disclosure? He either lied when he said he didn't see debris or bodies or he lied when he later said he did.
MA: He had to be in on it - just harnessed to what he can say - as above- ever know the only answer but can't talk?

JJ: "In short, I have questions. I hope we get some more answers on the upcoming Paracast segment."

Good Points Jersey John, maybe others will participate...one thing i always keep coing back to, is these people have to be incredibly stupid to say something like this -in this day and age- for all of the Internet to see....or they are telling the truth! Many of your questions are very good - and you could pick 'em apart.....! Hopefully they'd have the right answer......good job!

MarsAve
 

technomage

Paranormal Adept
Any more recent thoughts on this book? I was thinking of getting this book, but a lot of questions are raised in this thread.
 

Constance

Paranormal Adept
Any more recent thoughts on this book? I was thinking of getting this book, but a lot of questions are raised in this thread.

If you're at all open-minded about the Roswell event you should by all means read this book. It, along with David Rudiak's research, wholly available online,, is the high-water mark in Roswell research.
 

technomage

Paranormal Adept
If you're at all open-minded about the Roswell event you should by all means read this book. It, along with David Rudiak's research, wholly available online,, is the high-water mark in Roswell research.

I was very impressed with their early Paracast interview even with the slides debacle. I think there were too many credible witnesses for Roswell to be easily dismissed. I'll add this to the list of books I intend to get.

Thanks.
 
Top