One of the landmark cases of UFO abduction occurred on November 30, 1989, in Manhattan, N.Y. The case centers around one Linda Napolitano, who claims to have been abducted from her closed apartment window into a waiting UFO by the "grays," and subjected to medical procedures. The case became well-known through the efforts of researcher Budd Hopkins. The events began at 3:00 AM...
It would be a year after the actual abduction before Hopkins began receiving mail from two men, who claimed to have seen the abduction. At first, Hopkins was suspect of their testimony, but in time their reports would help build the case into one of the most well-documented alien abductions in Ufology. Without any contact with Napolitano, their report agreed in all aspects with Linda's memories.
Javier Perez de Cuellar:
Eventually, the two men would be identified as bodyguards of senior United Nations statesman, Javier Perez de Cuellar, who was visiting Manhattan at the time of the abduction.
The bodyguards claimed that Cuellar was "visibly shaken" as he watched the abduction. The three men claimed that they saw a woman being floated through the air, along with three small beings, into a large flying craft...
More Witnesses Come Forward:
There would eventually be more witnesses come forward with their accounts of what they had seen. Hopkins kept the details of the eyewitness testimony private until he felt the case was complete enough to release publicly. One of the most striking accounts came from Janet Kimball, who was a retired telephone operator. She had seen the abduction also, but thought she was watching a movie scene being filmed...
Cuellar did aid Hopkins in verifying details of the case through correspondence, but explained to Hopkins why he could not go public with his testimony. This would always leave a gap in the investigation, although there were other witnesses, and Linda's own account of her terrible ordeal. Despite some ups and downs, Hopkins probably did his finest work in bringing together the story of the abduction of Linda Napolitano...http://ufos.about.com/od/aliensalienabduction/p/manhattan.htm
Witness #1 - Ear, Nose and Throat Specialist (1976)
Witness #2 - "Erica" (Winter of 1990)
Witness #3 - Richard (Early February, 1991)
Witness #4 - Dan (Early February, 1991)
Witness #5 - Linda's Husband Steve (Sunday February 24, 1991)
Witness #6 - Linda's Son Steven (March 1991)
Witness #7 - The Third Man (April 12, 1991)
Witness #8 - "Janet Kimball" (Late July 1991)
Witness #9 - "Joseph" (September 3, 1991)
Witness #10 - Dr. Lisa Bayer Podiatric Surgeon (November 12, 1991)
Witness #11 - Carmela (February 22, 1992)
Witness #12 - Brian (Sunday May 24, 1992)
Witness #13 - Sue (July 1992)
Witness #14 - Johnny Cortile (Sunday May 24, 1992)
Witness #15 - "Marilyn Kilmer" (September 30, 1992)
Witness #16 - Frank Turner (Summer of 1993)
Witness #17 - Cathy Turner (Summer of 1993)
Witness #18 - Cardinal John O'Connor (November 1993)
Witness #19 - Reporter Jay Sapir (November 12, 1993)
Witness #20 - "Francesca" (Sunday April 16, 1995)
Witness #21 - New York Post Worker Yancy Spence (Late 2001)
Witness #22 - New York Post Worker Bobby (Late 2001)Witness #23 - Reporter Steve Dunleavy (Late 2002)
The 23 witnesses that are on the public record in the Linda Cortile UFO abduction case were introduced incrementally at random dates and times over a total period of 27 years. There was a 14 year interval between the introduction of the first witness and the second witness. There was a 17 month interval between the introduction of the nineteenth witness and the twentieth witness. There was a 6 year interval between the introduction of the twentieth witness and the twenty-first witness.
For those who contend that the Linda Cortile case must be a hoax, a fraudulent scheme crafted and perpetrated to get rich quick, why were the witnesses introduced into the case incrementally at random dates and times, with yearlong gaps in between some introductions, over a painstakingly slow period of 27 years?...
This website has been built primarily as a consolidation of publicly released information and evidence about the Linda Cortile UFO abduction case. It has also been built to factually demonstrate the inaccurate and libellous nature of the multitude of attacks and allegations levelled against it over the years by a handful of subjective critics.http://lindacortilecase.com/index.html
While Linda's case has been publicly defended in the past, the defenses, for the most part, have only been done in a very general way. The reason for this was because of the sheer enormity of erroneous claims that were contrived, constructed and distributed attacking the case, over fifty-five pages worth. The fact that each of the bogus claims were not individually addressed, rebutted and factually dismantled in detail, was perceived as proof, by some, that the false claims must be true. For others who applied a modicum of time, energy and resources into investigating the case for themselves, as well as the foundations of the allegations made against it, they arrived at completely different conclusions...