Northern UFO Network Case Summaries - No 3 - 1982 07

Magazine Overview

This issue of the NORTHERN UFO NETWORK, titled NUMBER THREE and dated July 1982, focuses on the controversial theme of UFO abduction cases explored through hypnosis, under the headline "TWO HYPNOTIC FANTASIES??". The magazine aims to cover a wide spectrum of the phenomenon, moving beyond 'safe' options to address current trends in ufology.

The Role of Hypnosis in UFO Abduction Research

The article begins by tracing the history of hypnosis in UFO research, starting with the Betty and Barney Hill encounter in the USA in 1963. It questions whether the memories retrieved under hypnosis represent real events, fantasies created by the hypnotic state, or dreams believed to be real, suggesting the truth might be a combination of factors. The widespread publicity of the Hill case is noted as a potential influence on subsequent 'abduction' narratives.

A significant point raised is the disparity between the number of abduction cases reported in the USA and the relative scarcity in Britain and Australia. The use of regression hypnosis in UFO work is described as controversial, even among ufologists, due to doubts within the medical profession about hypnosis itself and its potential to enhance imagination and susceptibility.

Professor Alvon Lawson of California State University, along with hypnotist William McAll, conducted experiments regressing individuals who had no prior interest in UFOs, getting them to imagine abductions. Their findings suggested that common elements in these stories could stem from the trauma of birth, a theory that was presented to British researchers in July 1982.

Case Study 1: Linda's Experience by the Mersey

The first case history detailed involves a witness referred to as Linda, who, along with her daughter Andrea (15) and son Marcus (5), experienced an encounter near the River Mersey in East Didsbury, South Manchester, on August 19, 1979. While collecting wildflowers, Linda saw what she initially took for the moon, a golden ball of fire. The object moved, and upon investigation, they saw it was low and circled them. Linda described it as gondola-shaped with a dome-like top, bobbing like a hovering helicopter, emitting a bright white light that hurt their eyes and a rotating red light. Andrea described a rocking chair shape with girders underneath. The object then moved towards Manchester Airport.

Linda fled, twisting her ankle, and her husband jokingly asked if a spaceman caused it. Peter Warrington, MUFORA chairman, suggested it might have been a lightplane or helicopter, given Manchester Airport's proximity. However, the family disagreed.

Crucially, a time discrepancy emerged: the sighting was estimated to have occurred between 21:00 and 21:10, with a 20-minute walk home normally taking 10 minutes due to the urgency. This suggested a missing time period of about forty minutes, as Linda's husband, Trevor, was working until 22:00. This discrepancy prompted Harry Harris, a lawyer working with MUFORA, to conduct regression hypnosis on Linda and Andrea, with Dr. Joseph Jaffe as the hypnotist.

Under hypnosis, Andrea recalled little beyond a dark blue object with white circles. Linda, however, became extremely fearful, describing a figure over 6 feet tall in a dark suit with a yellowy, mask-like face and Chinese-like eyes. She heard "GO*GO*GO" and felt herself floating towards the object. The experience was described as having a "OZ Factor" effect, with time frozen and sounds vanished. Linda felt herself floating above the ground and saw the children before losing awareness. She later found herself awake in a brightly lit room on an orange bed, feeling heavy and unable to move. She claimed the entity was called "Algenyon". A rash had also appeared on her arm.

Confusion and controversy surround this case within MUFORA, with debates on whether it was a fantasy, a misidentified helicopter, or a genuine abduction. Linda's background of strange dreams and psychic experiences is noted.

Case Study 2: Jenny's Dream and the Man in the Road

The second case, "I DREAMT I SAW A UFO", is presented as particularly interesting due to its genesis. The witness, Jenny, an insurance broker in her twenties, had experienced persistent, vague dreams of UFOs and aliens, which she believed were simply dreams with no indication of a real event. Harry, recognizing the potential link between strange dreams and abduction cases (as seen in the Hill and Aveley cases), arranged for her to undergo hypnosis.

Initial attempts to regress Jenny to her dream memory were unsuccessful. However, a different approach, suggested by MUFORA investigator Ke Sacks, involved asking Jenny to search for any real incident that she might be consciously thinking of as a dream. This led to a dramatic and immediate recall.

Jenny recalled being in a car with her boyfriend, Jim (now her husband), in June 1980. She was driving back to Helmshore, Lancashire, from Cheshire, with Jim asleep in the passenger seat. It was late at night, and she was nervous as she was a learner driver. Suddenly, a large object with red and yellow lights appeared on the road ahead, blocking her path. She tried to wake Jim but couldn't. The object's glare was intense. Two figures emerged from it and approached the car. Under hypnosis, Jenny expressed intense fear, describing one figure tapping on Jim's side of the window and another looking in at her. She saw a five-fingered, large hand on the window and described the figures as tall (estimated seven feet) with masked faces and silvery boots, moving in slow motion. She recalled their eyes as "slit-like" through a visor. The figures tried to get her to come out, but she resisted. She heard a whirring sound, and the figures returned to the glare. Her next memory was of the object being gone, leaving her feeling extremely tired and confused, with the incident seemingly forgotten.

Quotes from the hypnosis tapes reveal her distress: "I can't move!", "Jim, I wish you'd wake up...", "They're not going to come again...", and "They didn't make me do it...". She giggled with relief at having won the "battle of wills". Jim recalled absolutely nothing.

Conclusions and Discussion

Both cases are considered valuable for their unique character and for providing food for thought regarding explanations for regression hypnosis experiences. Jenny's case is particularly unique, having started as an exploration of a dream and evolved into something else entirely. The article questions whether Jenny was merely fantasizing or if she was describing a repressed event.

The authors emphasize the need for more research into the regression phenomenon. They argue that until basic questions about this tool are answered, the nature and origin of UFO abduction stories will remain controversial. While acknowledging that some may have reservations about the objectivity and place of such research within ufology, the authors believe these experiments are important for generating significant arguments, points of debate, and posing numerous questions.

The existence of such a state of affairs, with contradictory questions and debates, is seen as an indication that valuable and positive research is underway. MUFORA welcomes thoughts, suggestions, and reports on further experimentation or duplication of these results.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the controversial use of hypnosis in UFO research, the nature of memory and fantasy, the phenomenon of missing time, and the potential for repressed memories of UFO encounters. The editorial stance, as presented by Jenny Randles, is one of cautious exploration and a belief in the importance of investigating these phenomena, even with their inherent controversies, to better understand the nature of UFO abduction claims.