UPDATE Reed ET Story
Said Producing Few Solid
Leads - No Evidence
Just In Time For The Holidays...Ho-Ho-Hoax!
By Royce J. Myers III <>
Note - As always, responses are welcome.

It was the case that had it all: a dead alien body, crystal-clear photos of both an alien and a small UFO, video documentation, photographic negatives, a witness. It was missing only one important element...truth. UFOlogy is yet again plagued with another case of fraud. In the infamous tradition of Billie Meier, Alien Autopsy, Hale-Fraud, and EQ Pegasi comes Dr.Jonathan Reed and his bogus story of an encounter with an alien in the woods of Washington state. I'm sure that most of you are already familiar with the story, those who are not can view a transcript of the story at Art Bell's website For all who have contributed their time and resources, I thank you it's unfortunate that hoaxers do not care about wasting the resources or damaging the credibility of the UFO community, as this shameless scam demonstrates. I have been following this fabricated tale for the last few weeks. I have already covered some of the information contained here and I base my conclusion to this case on the following:
THE ALIEN PHOTOS: After receiving information from others researching this case, I received a photo from Rita Bensette, a resident of Canada, who became involved after reading the Sightings Headlines story about the case. Rita contacted me with an acute observation about the alien's clothing, under enhancement one can clearly see a straight pin. You can see this straight pin without enhancing the photo if you look carefully below the collar line of the full-face photo. Reed and his accomplices used selective lighting in an attempt to cover up details of the alien below the neck. Look at the face and you will see a concentration of light from either a garage lamp or a flashlight on the alien's head, yet no where near the body.
Rita also pointed out that if you take a standard straight pin and put it up to the computer monitor for comparison that it is an exact match, with the exception of the size due to the photo itself. Now, someone else said that it is part of a scan line, but after doing the comparison I am very hard pressed to believe that. There is some pixel distortion visible within that area of the photo, but the pin appears to be a solid object. It has a needle point on it and a small sphere on the end...just like a straight pin. This fact would sink any story Reed could come up with as he claimed after cutting the cloth with an exacto knife that it liquified and then solidified. There may be other pins in the garment but they are not as easily made out. You go look at the photo and decide. I will be happy to send you a copy of Rita's enhancement of the photo and the original, just e-mail me. There may also be more straight pins throughout the alien. The clothing also appears to spread out near the bottom of the photo like a gown, suggesting that straight pins were utilized to hold the material on the alien. Rita sent this information to Art Bell, she never received a response. I also contacted Art Bell. His responded wanting to know what the proof was, I e-mailed my findings to him a week ago but never received a response back.
The photos are very convenient in hiding many details only providing head shots of the alien. That's okay, the photos tell a much larger story. Visible in the forehead region are either sculpting or casting lines, look at the shadowing around the head. The alien is obviously a prop as it is very "stiff" and non-organic in appearance and as Gary Val Tenuta observed (among others), the alien is very similar to that of the one in the movie "Fire In The Sky." This brings me to the "wound" on the alien. Reed claimed to have hit the alien with a tree branch and to having caved in its skull. I have been employed as a laboratory assistant within the forensic evidence unit of a police department. I have seen a lot of photos involving assaults and have viewed the body of a murder victim who died as a result of blunt trauma to the head. Reed's claim of having assaulted the alien is laughable at best.
First of all, the appearance of the wound is not consistent with that of blunt trauma to the head, especially for only having hit the alien once. The wound is too nice and round in appearance. Blunt force involving a club, hammer, stick, etc., will constitute medium velocity. This is important in interpreting the blood evidence involved. Blood will spatter a certain way under certain conditions. For example, blood will have a fine misting effect when the trauma involved is high velocity such as a gunshot wound at point blank range. Crime scenes involving blood can very accurately be reconstructed based on an interpretation of blood spatter. One can tell the velocity and point of origin/travel involving blood droplets as well as the type of force and narrow down the type of weapon used. In the case of Reed, it is obvious that the blood is not real for a number of reasons. For a head wound there most certainly is not much blood on either the thermal blanket or the alien. The pattern of the blood is telling in that not only was it placed there by artificial means, but isn't real nor is the alien. There is also blood visible on the right side of the alien's did it get there? The blood has soaked into the alien head prop demonstrating that it is non-organic. Also, there is not one single blood pattern even closely resembling or indicating blunt trauma involving medium velocity. The blood is not consistent in that it is not uniform. Blood will drip or run from a dependent portion of the body. A good example, if you cut your finger and watch the blood, it will run down your finger in a very uniform manner...the blood on the alien does nothing close to that. The alien and its "blood" are not immune to the law of physics nor forensic science.
The 'stuffing' coming out of the alien is also ridiculous. It has no similarity to anything organic and looks like insulation. Rita Bensette makes another excellent observation in pointing out that there appears to be, under enhancement, an 'x' on the spot where the wound appears. This would indicate that Reed and his fellow conspirators marked the spot where the wound was to appear. Another problem is that if Reed was attempting to establish a physical case based on the alien and its wounds, why is there no mention or photos of the alien's wounded arm that Reed's dog was supposed to have attacked? I also question why there is no debris (i.e.: dirt, leaves, moss, pine needles, et al) in the wound area. I served as a Forest Protection Officer with the U.S. Forest Service and can tell you that anyone hiking is going to bring back some piece of the forest with them, especially if they hit the ground and their head is bashed in.
I believe that Lea H. MacDonald has covered the many inconsistencies with lighting and shadowing in great detail(there is a link to MacDonald's website at the Sightings homepage). Rita Bensette, who has an eye for detail, sent me a photo showing that there is a geometric object in the photo under the "obelisk." It looks as though it may be a camera or something with a lens. If Reed had both his cameras with him the whole time, where did this object come from? It is odd because Reed claims the incident took place in a remote location.
Upon converting the obelisk image from a positive to a negative, you can see what appear to be holes. Also upon closer observation, it appears the object is transparent as you can see the outline of the background through the object. This would suggest that it is a digital product and not a three dimensional object. There also appears to be three stems with leaves in a photo that are either paste ups or digital touch ups. The exposure time Reed said he used is also inconsistent as a 1/2 second exposure time would not be enough to regulate the needed amount of light for a photograph in overcast weather. I have taken several pictures out in the woods with my camera, and have had to use an auto exposure in overcast weather. The other problem with the photos is that Reed never mentions having a tripod for his camera, yet his "obelisk" photos are perfectly still, well lit, and centered. Another problem with the aforementioned is that the video taken by Reed is described as being shaky, poorly lit, and not well centered...why is there a difference between the video and the photos?
Aside from the above, there are many other problems with this story:
* Reed and Raith have a "business manager", Ms.Chris Fine. Fine has stated that in addition to a book and video, there are negotiations for a movie deal based on the claims of Reed. I dropped the name of a movie producer I know in Los Angeles to Fine during a conversation we had. I said he may be interested in making the movie. Fine immediately asked for me to give him her phone number. The point is this: If Fine is already negotiating a deal for a movie, then why seek out someone else? This tells me that they are wanting to get a deal made as fast as they can. This all indicates that this is a fraud being perpetrated for the motive of financial gain. This is a criminal act in many states as it constitutes fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud, both of which are felonies. If a computer was used in the perpetration of fraud, then it too is a felony crime.
* Fine says that they (herself, Reed, and Raith) are not interested in proving anything to anyone, this statement says it all. They have refused to release copies of photos and the video for anyone to view or analyze. Additionally, Reed claims to have photographic negatives, but again refuses to have them evaluated by an independent laboratory. Fine says they're not releasing any of the evidence for safety reasons.
Fine claims that a female associated was attacked while delivering a copy of the video (to Art Bell), the alleged assailant taking only the package and leaving the woman with injuries requiring medical attention. None of this was mentioned on the Art Bell show and is probably poorly timed theatrics. With all of the exposure Reed has received, there is no reason for them to hold back on releasing anything or for him to hide. Of course holding off until the deals are made and the money is in the bank would be the smart thing to do, being exposed as a fraud early on would most definitely hurt any chance of financial gain.
* Reed states that he had his video tape and video camera analyzed by an "expert' who concluded that the video was authentic and that the camera was in working condition. This so-called "expert" has yet to be named and the alleged test results released. An interesting comment made by Reed regarding an analysis was this, "I have been through this process before and I will provide the evidence under the right circumstances."
Those circumstances probably involve a six or seven figure sum of money and royalties. Those involved with this scheme probably saw Fox Television's Alien Autopsy and thought that if Ray Santilli could pull it off, so could they. At least Santilli came off as genuine and didn't use 'B' rated theatrics and props. And if Reed was wanting to present physical evidence to support his tale, what happened to the watch that supposedly stopped during the encounter, the shirt that was torn by the obelisk but later was found to be not torn, and the ashes of his dead dog? None of the parties involved in this tale are willing to give out much in terms of details. Fine declined to tell me exactly where the encounter took place (specifically a trailhead name), saying that it was unimportant.
* Reed says his friend "Gary" (who conveniently has vanished) contacted Peter Davenport of the National UFO Reporting Center. Mr.Davenport does not recall ever having a conversation with anyone about a dead alien body. Mr.Davenport is a well-educated, intelligent man dedicated to serious UFOlogy, had there ever been such a conversation I am quite sure he would have remembered it...anonymous caller or not.
* Fine says she previously knew Robert Raith as the two were neighbors in Seattle for about 3 years. Strange that this incident took place in Washington as well. This would strongly suggest that Reed, Raith, and Fine all know each other and have planned this scam for some time now. Fine said she introduced Reed to Raith, how did Fine and Reed meet?
* Why is it that Robert Raith appeared on Coast To Coast AM before Reed? My guess, to lay out the story and script it for the rest of his accomplices. Why did Reed take so long to come out with his story? One would argue that he was in hiding, evading government agents and fearing for his life. I think the safe bet here is that he and his accomplices needed time to get their stories straight and fabricate their evidence. * Reed's claim of being followed the whole time he had the alien at his house is ridiculous as are his claims that unknown persons had gone through his home previous to the alien and his evidence being stolen. Why would a group interested in the alien wait so long to take it? Also, if this was some covert government group attempting to cover up the incident, Reed's house would have been burned to the ground and, along with himself, anyone associated with the incident at all would be a corpse.
There are too many questions, too many inconsistencies, and far too many conveniences associated with this story. The bottom line here is that this fraud and those involved in its perpetration are doing damage to serious UFOlogy. If Reed was at all sincere about any of his claims, then he would have no problem in submitting his evidence for analysis. I challenge Reed and his associates to prove me wrong about this case. Do the responsible thing Reed, submit what you have and let the evidence speak. The evidence never lies, those with something to hide do.
--Royce J. Myers III
1430 Willamette, No.344
Eugene, Oregon 97401