Our response to "unintentional manipulation" during questioning

Earhart researcher, filmmaker Richard Martini: No manipulation

• 
• 

Details

 

Published on Monday, March 04, 2013 00:00

Written by By Alexie Villegas Zotomayor - avz@mvariety.com - Variety News Staff

Hits: 127

 0StumbleUpon0Reddit0Digg0 0G+0 2

Font size:

Aircraft Recovery Associates refutes the arguments advanced by The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery researchers in their research paper on the reliability of witnesses.

In their research paper titled, “Amelia Earhart, Saipan, and the Reliability of Eyewitnesses,” TIGHAR researchers Dr. Thomas F. King, Thomas A. Roberts, and Joseph A. Cerniglia cited studies as they offered caution in connection with “uncritical reliance on eyewitness accounts – particularly when these accounts have been gathered by untrained personnel and have been frequently retold.”

EARHART RESEARCHERS CAPTAIN PAUL COOPER, MIKE HARRIS, AND RICHARD MARTINI ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE DURING A PUBLIC PRESENTATION AT AMERICAN MEMORIAL PARK LAST MONTH. PHOTO BY ALEXIE VILLEGAS ZOTOMAYOR

TIGHAR is exploring the Nikumaroro Hypothesis, that Amelia Earhart and her navigator Fred Noonan may have crash landed on Gardner Island, now Nikumaroro, in the Phoenix Islands in the Republic of Kiribati.

In response, Aircraft Recovery Associates lead investigator Richard Martini, on behalf of the group said that the comment borders on “unintentional racism,” implying that the islanders aren’t capable of accurately recalling their own memories.

“Are these researchers saying that these islanders we’ve interviewed are lying? Or that they are being manipulated? Are they stating that the U.S. Marines are lying? Or that they are being manipulated?” asked Martini.

Martini, a journalist and an award-winning documentary filmmaker, has been conducting his own research for the past 25 years.

Martini e-mailed this reporter their response and posted a copy on their website earhartonsaipan.com.

“There’s no such thing as ‘unintentional manipulation’ — a clever catch-phrase to make it seem that ‘oh, they must be making this up because the camera is convincing them to lie about what they heard or saw.’”

Citing the article published by Variety last Friday, Martini said, “The article claims that “even word choice by a questioner can influence memory,’ which of course is possible, unless you’re someone who’s been doing this for some time, and knows how to ask a person to recollect whatever it is they want to recollect.

King et al. stated in their paper, “Most of the eyewitness and other accounts by American military personnel are subject to similar forms of unintentional manipulation, memory construction, and faulty interpretation. Although there may be kernels of truth in some or many of the stories, there are ways of accounting for them that do not involve the presence of Earhart and/or Noonan in the Marianas.”

For Martini, “manipulation” is a pejorative and that there are no two ways around it. “Either a person is manipulated or they are not,” he said.

Martini said, “It may be ‘unintentionally racist’ because it’s been the history of Saipan, the history of the Chomorro people, that if an American can’t understand them, or take the time to ask them questions about their lives, about their personal experience during the war, they couldn’t possibly be telling the truth about what they heard or saw from their parents. The Chomorro were first told by the Spanish what to say or believe, then told by the Germans what they should or shouldn’t learn, and then by the Japanese on what they could or couldn’t say. And then when the CIA was based in Saipan until 1962, another group of people would tell them how to speak or what they could or could not say. Our exprience on Saipan is that everyone has secrets to tell, but in general, has chosen not to tell them.”

Martini also described as “paternalistic” and “chauvinistic” the TIGHAR researchers “expertise masquerading as science.”

He said it has little or nothing to do with science or the pursuit of the truth.

He said this is typical “of people who have a vested interest in their own version of the truth.”

“For example, one man we interviewed, 82 years old, said he was 12 years old when he saw a female fitting Earhart’s description sitting with her arms bound behind her in the back of a army truck parked prior to the War in Chalan Kanoa. He said, ‘I clearly remember it, as the truck was parked for 30 minutes, and I had never seen a white person before.’ We asked him questions about other details about the war, about his family hiding in caves. These and other details we were able to corroborate. Why would he slip one lie into an hour of truth?”

Martini said that the Chamorro people interviewed couldn’t be “cajoled or “manipulated in any fashion to say something they didn’t actually witness.”

He also said that a Chamorro will say that he or she didn’t see it personally and say that somebody else did.

“A Chomorro will say ‘I did not see this personally, and I repeat that it was my mother or father who saw it, so I can’t say that it happened, but this is what they said. He didn’t say it was Amelia Earhart. He said it was a ‘tall, thin woman wearing a khaki shirt with light colored hair with her arms bound behind her back and a black bandana across her face.’ If he was being manipulated — or trying to obfuscate — why not just say ‘I saw Amelia Earhart?” He did not know who she was, but he did see her as a prisoner prior to the war.”

Martini said they take the time to corroborate information.

Citing as an example what a U.S. Marine relayed to him, Martini said the veteran told him, “I remember it as if it was yesterday. I was the wire operator in Col. Clarence Wallace’s tent. I decoded the message that came in on June 19, 1944 that said ‘We have found Amelia Earhart’s airplane on Aslito airfield.’ I took the message to my commanding officer and he signed it. And I thought it was odd that he made no comment about it. And then he ordered me to the hangar to guard the plane for 24 hours.’”

Martini said they corroborated this story in interviews with other soldiers who saw this man guarding the plane.

“What part of his story was made up? What part was ‘manipulated?” he said.

Martini said, “To call a U.S. Marine a liar is, in our humble opinion, beyond the pale. Oh sorry — he was ‘unintentionally manipulated’ into repeating what he saw. Well, we have news for these researchers; the camera, in this case, doesn’t lie. This Marine spoke the truth and we have five other corroborating witnesses. And we’d like to see them tell a Marine to his face that he was ‘unintentionally manipulated.’”

“To imply that as a filmmaker, or a journalist, we have somehow manipulated people into saying what they think they saw, as opposed to what they saw, or what their parents told them they saw, is to imply we’ve been unintentionally (or intentionally) manipulating eyewitnesses,” said Martini.

The veteran filmmaker also said, “As a team, we’ve been at this for enough time to understand the difference between conjecture and reporting.”

The Aircraft Recovery Associates said, their premise is simple: let the people speak for themselves about what they saw or heard.

“We suspect those who choose to ignore the overwhelming accounts do so because of an inherent disregard of native islanders, or US Marines, or both,” said Martini.

Martini said the TIGHAR group has been developing and testing their hypothesis that Earhart wound up on Nikumaroro for 30 years.

“Isn’t it time to step back for a moment and consider that there might be some logic to what all of these eyewitnesses have said? After all, if the premise was true that people can spontaneously make up memories based on wishful thinking, where are all the witnesses who saw her on some other island? If it’s true that the U.S. Marines might have been deluded by the fog of war, why didn’t they say she was on Iwo Jima, Okinawa or Guam?” said Martini.

For Martini, one cannot ignore the fact that over a dozen soldiers claim they found her plane, saw her plane, or watched it burn at As Lito airfield.

“This was only 7 years after it disappeared — it’s not like they’d had a chance to come up with some other scenario,” he said.

Aside from these soldiers, he said, there were over 200 eyewitness accounts.

In the span of three weeks, they managed to get 15 new eyewitnesses.

“Logic tells us that these accounts bear further scrutiny — not that they may be incorrect, or manipulated, which is faulty reasoning — any cop can tell you that when eyewitnesses agree upon something, then it’s worth pursuing. That is, unless they’re being ‘unintentionally manipulated’ of course,” said Martini.

- See more at: http://www.mvariety.com/cnmi/cnmi-news/local/54035-earhart-researcher-filmmaker-richard-martini-no-manipulation#sthash.bN7NFXS4.dpuf

Response to Tighar's "unintentional manipulation" in eyewitness reporting

Tighar has finally responded to our research...

By saying it's not really research.  

Please consider this article in today's Mariana's Variety:

Archaeologist, researchers caution reliance on Earhart eyewitness accounts

• 
• 

Details

 

Published on Friday, March 01, 2013 00:00

Written by By Alexie Villegas Zotomayor - avz@mvariety.com - Variety News Staff

Hits: 417

MOST of the eyewitness accounts and those of U.S. military personnel are subject to unintentional manipulation, memory reconstruction, and faulty interpretation.

In the wake of the persistent interest to probe the mystery surrounding the disappearance of famous aviatrix Amelia Earhart and her navigator Fred Noonan, Dr. Thomas F. King, Thomas A. Roberts and Joseph A. Cerniglia, in a paper titled “Amelia Earhart, Saipan, and the Reliability of eyewitnesses” examine the hypothesis claiming that Earhart and Noonan were on Saipan based on accounts given by residents and some U.S. military personnel and also how these so-called “eyewitness accounts” could be tainted.

“We want to offer some cautions about uncritical reliance on eyewitness accounts — particularly when these accounts have been gathered by untrained personnel and have been frequently retold,” wrote King, Roberts and Cerniglia.

The three are affiliated with The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery or TIGHAR that has been exploring the Nikumaroro hypothesis — that Amelia Earhart and Noonan managed to land on Nikumaroro, formerly Gardner Island, in the Phoenix Islands in the Republic of Kiribati.

King et al. said that there was a flurry of interest in 2012 in stories about Earhart and Noonan on Saipan in the Northern Marianas 75 years after their disappearance while en route to Howland Island from New Guinea in 1937.

They said two new books were published that featured these stories and more are yet to come.

King, a senior archaeologist with TIGHAR, along with Roberts and Cerniglia also submitted a paper last year to the first Marianas History Conference and their paper delved into the eight stories that point to Earhart and Noonan in the Marianas.

In their new paper discussing the reliability of eyewitness accounts, the authors divided these stories into two groups: (1) Micronesian stories, recollections of Chamorro, Carolinian or Marshallese delivered orally and recorded by non-Micronesians; and (2) U.S. military stories, related by U.S. military personnel about what they experienced or by others to whom they spoke.

They said that a few stories come from non-military American sources. They also noted one story from a Japanese informant reported by Mike Campbell in his book.

“The reports that are most impressive to most readers are those of eyewitnesses: people recounting what they say they actually saw, usually in 1937 on the part of the Micronesian informants and 1944 on the part of U.S. military personnel. If these people are not lying — and how could they all be? — then an unbiased reader may reasonably conclude that what they say is true,” said King et al.

The authors cited contradictions in the accounts however.

King et al. said, “A problem that confronts some of the authors who have published material on the Earhart-on-Saipan hypotheses is that eyewitnesses have sometimes provided contradictory testimony.”

They said this problem is often addressed by rejecting some stories and accepting others.

“Acceptance and rejection are often couched in very unambiguous terms,” King et al. said.

They said that informants whose stories are rejected are taken to be Japanese collaborators, participants in a U.S. government cover-up or simply not to be trusted.

“It may well be that all informants were telling what they believed to be the truth, though perhaps shaded in some cases to meet what they understood to be social expectations. However, this does not necessarily mean that any informant described ‘objective’ reality — that is, reality as it might be perceived by another party. There are good reasons to view all the eyewitness and other informant stories with skepticism, even while accepting the honesty and good will of those who have told them,” they said.

As to the reliability of eyewitness accounts, King et al. shared scientific studies that explored reliability of memory, including memories of eyewitnesses.

They cited, among other studies, research undertaken by Elizabeth Loftus of the Univ. of Washington whose 1979 book “Eyewitness Testimony” as the most widely available.

Referencing Loftus, King et al. said, “A growing body of research shows that new, postevent information becomes incorporated into memory, supplementing and altering a person’s recollection. New information can invade us, like a Trojan horse, precisely because we do not detect its influence.”

For the TIGHAR researchers, the studies including Loftus’ tend to show that memory is a highly malleable phenomenon. “Our memories can be significantly transformed by influences from outside our heads— notably by the suggestions of interviewers.”

“Even word choice by a questioner can influence memory,” they said.

These studies, they said, show that people’s memories can change over time in response to external and internal stimuli, and that people can come quite seriously to believe that they recall things that are different from what they originally saw and stored in memory.

“Altered memories can be as vivid, and as firmly and honestly believed in, as ‘pristine’ memories,” they said.

Senior archaeologist King and his fellow researchers said that there is a possibility of false memory creation with respect to both major populations of Earhart-on-Saipan eyewitnesses, referring to veterans of the U.S. military and Micronesian residents.

Explaining further, they found it striking that most memories related to Earhart and Noonan and the Lockheed Electra surfaced a dozen or more years after the 1944 invasion of Saipan.

“Many were not reported until the 1990s, in response to inquiries by Henry Duda, Thomas Devine and others.”

“It is not difficult to imagine a veteran of the invasion, looking back on a very exciting, frightening, confusing, perhaps heroic, perhaps traumatic period in his life, and finding gaps in his memory, things to wonder about,” they said.

They said that reading an appeal like Duda’s, or a book like Fred Goerner’s, Paul Briand’s, Vincent Loomis’, Buddy Brennan’s or Thomas Devine’s, “he may begin sifting and re-sifting his memories.”

They cited a notice published in Leatherneck magazine issued by Henry Duda that stated: “C’mon, Marines. Let’s bring out the truth. During the invasion of Saipan, I, and other Marines, as well as Army and Navy personnel, became aware of considerable material and information that Amelia Earhart, her navigator, Fred Noonan, and their airplane had actually landed on Saipan during her 1937 around-the-world flight, rather than the generally accepted assumption that they had gone down at sea. I wish to contact any additional Marines who may have information, especially those who were on guard duty where her plane was found in a Japanese hangar at Aslito Field.”

For King et al. they didn’t want to criticize Duda’s notice; however, they noted that it was a leading question.

“This sort of questioning pervades the record of eyewitness testimony elicitation on which the Earhart-on-Saipan stories are largely based. To judge from the psychological literature, it would seem almost made to order for the inadvertent creation of false memories,” they said.

They also said that there could be complications with Micronesian people recovering memories of 1937.

They said that there is some evidence that some American servicemen actively sought Earhart as they advanced through the islands.

They said that these servicemen may have asked very leading questions in 1943-1944.

The U.S. servicemen, they said, were encountering Micronesians going through “intense emotional upset.”

They said, “There would surely have been a strong motivation to tell the frightening newcomers what they seemed to want to hear and show them what they seemed to want to use.”

They also did not discount the opportunity for the creation of false memories.

As to the creation of false memories, the researchers also cited an interview made by Fr. Arnold Bendowske with Matilde Fausto Arriola in 1977, which they said was a “textbook case of leading the witness.”

Fr. Bendowske, in interviewing Arriola, said, “I mentioned to the Admiral at that time your name because you saw Amelia Earhart yourself.”

According to the transcript of that interview, Arriola replied, “I did not know her name when I first saw her. She did not mention her name or who she was.

Asked of the year, Arriola was trying to remember and Fr. Bendowske asked her, “Was it 1937 or 1938? Do you recall?”

The Earhart researchers said that Arriola regarded the priest as an authority figure being a Catholic and the priest’s mentioning that the U.S. military wanted her testimony enhanced the seriousness of the investigation.

“Asking leading questions is not the only interviewer practice that may have skewed the testimony of interviewees; the opportunity to profit from the ‘right’ kind of testimony also seems to have existed in some cases,” King, Roberts and Cerniglia noted in their research paper.

The TIGHAR researchers also looked into interrogation across cultural boundaries, implications of group opinion, and intercultural misunderstandings.

For King, Roberts and Cerniglia, “Although there may be kernels of truth in some or many of the stories, there are ways of accounting for them that do not involve the presence of Earhart and/or Noonan in the Marianas.”

They said, “This is not to say that Earhart and Noonan definitely were not captured by the Japanese, imprisoned on Saipan, and/or executed and buried there. Some version of the Earhart-on-Saipan story may be true. The evidence is tainted by the methods (or lack of method) involved in its collection, making it difficult if not impossible to judge its veracity.”

They said the association with Noonan or Earhart should be set aside in considering the stories about an American woman held captive on Saipan; that an effort to identify her and reconstruct her story could result in a valuable contribution to the history of Micronesia during the Japanese period and World War II.  

- See more at: http://www.mvariety.com/cnmi/cnmi-news/local/54002-archaeologist-researchers-caution-reliance-on-earhart-eyewitness-accounts#sthash.JHQxsFSM.dpuf

And now, if you will, consider my (our) response to the writer of this article, so it's clear what Tighar is really implying about Chomorro and US Marine testimony:



Dear Marianas Variety,

Sorry we didn't get back to you earlier.  We went to Japan to continue research on the Earhart saga. Yes, we do plan to create a documentary and a book.  In Rich's case, he's already completed a documentary on the topic called "Earhart's Electra" which is available at Amazon.com, it was the genesis of this search of Saipan.  It was posted at Kickstarter, and Mike Harris happened to catch it, and pointed out that it was he who had shot the footage of the islanders who saw Amelia Earhart on Saipan back in 1983.  This footage has always been incorrectly attributed to T.C. "Buddy" Brennan, who came up to Mike at a lecture and asked if he could accompany him to Saipan. Mike suggested he and Rich team up - he saw Rich had been interviewing US Marines about finding the airplane on Aslito airfield - the same GI's that he'd read about.  Rich interviewed Robert Wallack who found her briefcase, Thomas Devine, Douglas Bryce, Andrew Bryce, Erskine Nabers who was a wire operator on Saipan and decoded the message that they had found her plane on Aslito on June 19th, 1944.  Rich has four other US Marines who either saw the plane or saw it destroyed by US Forces.  On top of that there's the extensive list of islanders that CBS newsman Fred Goerner interviewed in the 1960's, the people Oliver Knaggs interviewed on Mili and Majuro, the islanders Mike Harris interviewed on Jaluit and Saipan in the 1980's - some of the dozens of whom are referenced in many books including Don Wilson's.  Then of course, there's the "Stars and Stripes" which printed the first Earhart allegation in 1944, where two GI's claimed they were asked to dig up her grave. Which brings us to the article ("Archaeologist, researchers caution reliance") about researchers warning that eyewitness reports are "subject to unintentional manipulation."  This comment borders on "unintentional racism" as it implies islanders aren't capable of remembering their own memories.  How can that be?   Are these researchers saying that these islanders we've interviewed are lying? Or that they are being manipulated?  Are they stating that the US Marines are lying? Or that they are being manipulated?   There's no such thing as "unintentional manipulation" - a clever catch phrase to make it seem that "oh, they must be making this up because the camera is convincing them to lie about what they heard or saw."  The article claims that “Even word choice by a questioner can influence memory."  Which of course is possible, unless you're someone who's been doing this for some time, and knows how to ask a person to recollect whatever it is they want to recollect. Either a person is manipulated or they are not.  "Manipulation" as a word is a pejorative, no two ways around it. It may be "Unintentionally racist" because it's been the history of Saipan, the history of the Chomorro people, that if an American can't understand them, or take the time to ask them questions about their lives, about their personal experience during the war, they couldn't possibly be telling the truth about what they heard or saw from their parents. The Chomorro were first told by the Spanish what to say or believe, then told by the Germans what they should or shouldn't learn, and then by the Japanese on what they could or couldn't say.  And then when the CIA was based in Saipan until 1962, another group of people would tell them how to speak or what they could or could not say.  Our exprience on Saipan is that everyone has secrets to tell, but in general, has chosen to not say them. This kind of paternalistic, chauvinistic so called expertise masquerading as science - which has little or nothing to do with science, or the pursuit of the truth, is typical of people who have a vested interest in their own version of the truth.  For example, one man we interviewed, 82 years old, said he was 12 years old when he saw a female fitting Earhart's description sitting with her arms bound behind her in the back of a army truck parked prior to the War in Chalan Kanoa.  He said "I clearly remember it, as the truck was parked for 30 minutes, and I had never seen a white person before." We asked him questions about other details about the war, about his family hiding in caves.  These and other details we were able to corroborate.  Why would he slip one lie into an hour of truth? In all the interviews, we found that the Chomorro people go out of their way to state exactly what they saw or didn't see, and can't be cajoled or manipulated in any fashion to say something they didn't actually witness.  A Chomorro will say "I did not see this personally, and I repeat that it was my mother or father who saw it, so I can't say that it happened, but this is what they said."  He didn't say it was Amelia Earhart. He said it was a "tall, thin woman wearing a khaki shirt with light colored hair with her arms bound behind her back and a black bandana across her face."  If he was being manipulated - or trying to obfuscate - why not just say "I saw Amelia Earhart?"  He did not know who she was, but he did see her as a prisoner prior to the war. We have taken the time to corroborate what their parents or relatives have said with other people who saw or said the same thing.  Or take the US Marine who said "I remember it as if it was yesterday. I was the wire operator in Col. Clarence Wallace's tent.  I decoded the message that came in on June 19, 1944 that said "We have found Amelia Earhart's airplane on Aslito airfield."  I took the message to my commanding officer and he signed it.  And I thought it was odd that he made no comment about it.  And then he ordered me to the hangar to guard the plane for 24 hours."  We were able to corroborate his story because we interviewed other soldiers who saw this man guarding the plane. What part of his story was made up?  What part was "manipulated?" To call a US Marine a liar is, in our humble opinion, beyond the pale.  Oh sorry - he was "unintentionally manipulated" into repeating what he saw. Well, we have news for these researchers; the camera, in this case, doesn't lie. This Marine spoke the truth and we have 5 other corroborating witnesses. And we'd like to see them tell a Marine to his face that he was "unintentionally manipulated."  To imply that as a filmmaker, or a journalist, we have somehow manipulated people into saying what they think they saw, as opposed to what they saw, or what their parents told them they saw, is to imply we've been unintentionally (or intentionally) manipulating eyewitnesses.  We've been at this research for over 30 years. Rich was hired to share his research for the feature film "Amelia,"  has done documentaries for the US State dept among others and knows the protocol of investigative journalism. Mike came to interview people who saw Amelia Earhart here back in 1983.  As a team, we've been at this for enough time to understand the difference between conjecture and reporting.   Our premise is simple; let people speak for themselves about they saw or heard.  We suspect those who choose to ignore the overwhelming accounts do so because of an inherent disregard of native islanders, or US Marines, or both - and in either case, ignore whatever "science" they cite as evidence of their own search, considering the source. The truth is, Tighar has had a bite at this apple for 30 years, developing and testing their theory that Amelia Earhart wound up on Nikumaroro.  Isn't it time to step back for a moment and consider that there might be some logic to what all of these eyewitnesses have said?  After all, if the premise was true that people can spontaneously make up memories based on wishful thinking, where are all the witnesses who saw her on some other island?  If it's true that the US Marines might have been deluded by the fog of war, why didn't they say she was on Iwo Jima, Okinawa or Guam?   The fact remains; over a dozen soldiers claim they found her plane, saw her plane, or watched it burn at Aslito airfield.  This was only 7 years after it has disappeared - it's not like they'd had a chance to come up with some other scenario.  And nearly 200 islanders claim they saw or heard or experienced her presence on Saipan, we've got 15 new eyewitnesses in just three weeks alone.  Logic tells us that these accounts bear further scrutiny - not that they may be incorrect, or manipulated, which is faulty reasoning - any cop can tell you that when eyewitnesses agree upon something, then its worth pursuing.  That is, unless they're being "unintentionally manipulated" of course. Scrapbook of AE pix on Saipan Oh, and we interviewed the fellow who was with the Marines when they found this scrapbook on Saipan this week.  His name is Richard "Rick" Spooner.  We encourage everyone to check into his bonafides.  He's known as "the Marine's Marine."  And he joins a chorus of Marines who want to speak the truth about what they saw on Saipan; after all "the truth will set you free."

The investigation continues...

The story continues on Saipan...

Connie Kaufer is a descendant of Mathilde Arriola.  For those familiar with Fred Goerner's book "Searching for Amelia" he interviewed Mathilde extensively.  She claimed she saw Amelia just after her arrival at a former hotel in Garapan, which functioned as a police office.  She was seen also by Josephine Blanco Akiyama, a Saipan resident who currently lives in San Mateo, California (we interviewed her brother John). 

Connie and Paul - photo by Robert Rustin

What makes this story compelling is that Mathilde told Father Arnold, the Catholic Priest that Goerner asked to continue interviews after he'd left, the story of this ring that AE supposedly gave to her.  She was very descriptive of it, saying it had a white gold band, with a white stone setting.  That ring was passed down among Mathilde's descendants, and in the 1960's it was reportedly lost in Chuuk. (formerly known at Truk).

However, according to Connie, it never left Saipan, and in fact was lost during a typhoon.  So we asked her if the property still existed - and it does.  Here it is:

Remains of the house where the ring once lived. Photo by Robert Rustin

But what have modern technology on our side - a ground penetrating radar unit, which can isolate just about any piece of metal within 20 feet.  So, with the permission of the family, Captain Cooper is going to get at trying to locate this ring.  It looks daunting - and it probably is - but worth a shot, don't you think?

Paul getting the details - Photo by Robert Rustin

Meanwhile, permits came in on some of our digging sites; here's our backhoe out at the old Aslito airfield.  When the US came in a took over the field, they renovated it extensively and changed the angle of the runway slightly - which allowed some of the old structures of the airfield to remain in their same position that can be verified on maps and photographs.  We've pinpointed a number of likely sites for where the Electra was burned and pushed off the runway - and here's a couple of them:

Directing the backhoe to the right spot - Photo by Robert Rustin

Some areas are dense jungle, while others are a combination of local rock and metal.

Digging it - photo by Robert Rustin

And finally, a word about David Sablan.  David is 82 years young, living history of Saipan.  He's been President of the Chamber of Commerce many times and knows pretty much everyone on the island.  And in fact, he's related to pretty much every native on the island.  He's been an invaluable resource.  His own story includes hiding in a cave up in the mountains with his family, and his father speaking enough English (one of only two on the island who did speak English) that saved them from being killed in their cave.  We've met many descendants who were also in that same cave during the war, and soon, we're going to return with Dave to that very cave.  But for now, we can't thank him enough.

David M Sablan, Connie Kaufter, and Captain Cooper - Robert Rustin photo

Digging on Saipan, Tokyo and DC

The new week finds new revelations...

Members of our team back on the East Coast conducted an interview with Richard "Rick" Spooner, decorated US Marine veteran of the battle of Saipan.  Those familiar with History Channel broadcasts may recognize him as "the living historian of the Marine Corps."

Major Rick Spooner USMC

He told our team about a key piece of evidence in our search for evidence that Amelia Earhart was on Saipan, and when it is revealed will alter the story of her disappearance and what we've learned about what happened to her and the Electra.  We thank Rick for letting us interview him at his restaurant in Stafford, Virginia, "The Globe and Laurel." He is one of a growing list of Marines who are speaking out about what really happened to the aviatrix.

Meanwhile, digging has begun on one of our key sites at Naftan point.  Captain Paul Cooper was in action today, tearing apart one of our key sites near the airfield.

Photo by Robert Rustin

And in Tokyo, Rich Martini made an unscheduled visit to the nation's archive for Army and Naval history.  Together with a translator, who helped Rich navigate the thousands of records that are kept there, they pored over accounts of prisoners of war that are kept in the archive.  Specifically looking for a list of prisoners who were kept in the Garapan Jail from 1937 to 1944.

Translator Katori in front of the Defense Archives (no pictures allowed!)

Actually there were four Americans.  Two were captured in 1937, brought to Saipan and first sent to the hospital, and then sent to the jail.  And in early 1944 two American pilots were shot down and kept at the jail - and were subsequently executed.  The latter two are a matter of public record, the former two are not.

"Earhart permission to fly over Japan" is how this file is labeled.  

However, we have an eye witness who saw the latter two with one of the former - the female in question - in May of 1944.  That would have placed three Americans in the Garapan jail as late as May of 1944, and just a few weeks from the onset of the Battle for Saipan.

Which is pretty startling to think of it.

Sunset over Tokyo

The story continues... stay tuned.

The plot thickens...

The dig continues.. day two

Digging continued into day two and word came in from HPO that our permits have been approved for our larger site near the airfield on Monday in Naftan point.

Things are falling into place.

We had an evening with a number of local residents who came down to here us talk about our journeys into this project - Captain Cooper spoke of his 17 years as a pilot for Southwest, Mike Harris told of his expeditions to find the Titanic, and now to find Earhart, and Rich talked about his bewilderment of why people have ignored eyewitness reports for so long.

Capt Cooper and Mike Harris

Dave Sablan, who met Mike Harris back in 1983 and who has been overwhelmingly helpful in this expedition, spoke passionately of how he is now convinced she was here.  He spoke of being a 12 year old boy and hearing a friend of his father say he was at the airfield in Alsito where he saw Earhart's Electra, and how the aviatrix and navigator Noonan had been taken by the Japanese.  It was not a story a 12 year old boy forgets.  Thank you David.

David M Sablan

We also spoke to Ray Bermudes - his first interview ever - where he recounted how his mother told him as a little boy that she was a nurse in the Japanese hospital because she spoke and could write Japanese.  She told him how she had seen and heard the story of Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan being brought to the hospital in 1937 to treat their wounds.  How she had been told not to tell anyone about it - and she had only told her family, which included a young Ray.  He had never thought to tell anyone the story until he read in the paper we were looking for second hand accounts as well.  Thank you Ray.

Ray Bermudes

Also in the audience tonight an audience member revealed that she was the granddaughter of the woman who had the ring that Amelia had given to her great aunt.  We had heard that the ring had been given by Amelia to Matilde Arriola, and Matilde gave it to her niece Trinidad.  Trinidad is the grandmother of these folks, and we are going to their old home tomorrow to dowse and use ground penetrating radar for the ring - which was reportedly lost during a rainstorm somewhere under the old house.  We'll let you know what we find.  

Half of the audience, sponsored by the Humanities Council

Thanks to all the folks who came out, to Scott Russell for putting the event together and his staff. It was a lot of fun and we hope everyone got new information to contemplate!

We will post the video of the event in a week or so - look to the right side of the page for the link!  Stay tuned!

Digging it on Saipan

Yes!

HPO (Historic Pres of Saipan) Supervised dig at the old Jail in Garapan

We finally put shovel to dirt.

To all those who doubted that could ever happen - it did.  Perseverance, good luck, helpful hands - and being on site all helped.  Thanks to all the folks at HPO who worked overtime to help us get our shovels into the dirt.  What's that they say in the Marines? "Lead, follow, or get out of the way."  Everyone chipped in to help us get to this point.  A heartfelt thanks from the team.

What's down here?  We'll let you know.

Eric and his Auntie Delores

Eric arranged for an interview with his Aunt who lives near the jail.  She went on camera for the first time in her life and told a story that she's never told anyone on camera before.

Her grandfather was Japanese, his brother in law was a policeman.  When Delores was 14 she asked her grandfather about stories she'd read about Amelia Earhart being locked in the jail across the road.  His initial reaction was "Don't ask about that, it happened before you were born."  But she insisted. Finally he pulled his granddaughter aside and said "Yes, there were two fliers in the jail and the died.  Then they were cremated."

Delores showed us how the jail was part of a vast Japanese cemetery - a shinto shrine at the entrance and across the road, up at the top was a crematorium.  We visited that crematorium and saw how the Japanese had used that to send their loved ones into the next realm.  The logic of giving prisoners in the jail a Japanese burial is hard to deny.  So perhaps there never were bones for folks to collect on this island of the famed aviatrix.

Mike Harris, famed explorer, works the B camera

We were on site at 9 am with shovels in hand.  Archaeologist Mike Fleming, with decades of experience and an extensive history of working in Micronesia, supervised the dig.  He revealed a pretty cool fact; when Admiral Nimitz was stationed on Tinian, they brought his Studebaker for him to drive around the island.  And when he left it there, Mike's grandfather snagged it!  So it's part of his family history now.

Archaeologist Mike Fleming

Captain Cooper was instrumental in finding the location for the dig.  We did more ground penetrating radar and more dowsing and with the help of some able bodied locals, were able to begin this dig.

Captain Paul eyeballing a piece of Japanese pottery

Architect Dave Smithers stopped by the site, where we discovered Dave's sister Leah had worked on films with Rich Martini back in her Hollywood days. Small world.  Dave took a trip into the cell that has been identified by locals as Amelia's cell and came out visibly shaken.  When asked what happened, he said that he felt "the strong presence of a female energy in that cell, but angry, trapped, like a tiger pacing in a cell."  David's not known for his psychic abilities, but he shared some incredible stories of his life and events surrounding his father's death.  

Architect David Smithers visiting from Korea

We had an interesting and revealing interview with Jack Salas.  His brother Jesus, passed just prior to our arrival.  For those familiar with Mike Harris' interview with Manny Muna back in 1983, Manny said that Jesus saw Amelia in this jail in a cell prior to the war and pointed it out to Mike. 

We spoke with Joaquin "Jack" Salas - his first ever interview.  At age 82, his memory was as sharp as could be, and remembered specifically seeing "a female woman, thin, with blond hair" sitting in the back of a truck, her hands tied behind her back and a black bandana tied around her head.  He said the truck was parked near his home in Chalan Kanoa (usually mispelled as Charan Kanoa, as that was what the Japanese soldiers called it) for a full thirty minutes. He saw other prisoners in the truck, but said he could "never forget it, as it was the first time I had ever seen a white person's face."  

The date was prior to the beginning of the war in Saipan.  There were more details that he gave, which will be part of his interview - the first info ever given from this gentleman.  His father ran the sugar cane train, spoke four languages, and had 8 children that hid in the caves when the war began.  Jack lost his brother Jesus just recently, and said that his younger brother Tony was also with him when he witnessed the famous aviatrix sitting in the back of a military truck for 30 minutes.

Joaquin "Jack" Salas

Finally, the local Buddhist nun who blessed our expedition stopped by to hand out some water. Sunim is her name, she runs the Zen Buddhist temple of the island, is the only Buddhist monk on Saipan, and had never been to see the jail in her 12 years living here.  It was nice to see her come out and cheer us all on.  Thank you Sunim!

Filmmaker Rich and Master Zen Buddhist monk Sunim

Stay tuned for more action from Saipan!!!