An Independent Interim Report Regarding Some Anomalies Within the Official Crash Investigation of TWA Flight 800

Thomas F. Stalcup

Research Assistant, Department of Physics, Florida State University, Tallahassee FL 32310 stalcup@magnet.fsu.edu



March 9, 1999





Several anomalies and inconsistencies remain within the official investigation into the crash of TWA Flight 800 (F800). The failure of the FBI to identify the closest vehicle (a surface vessel) to the plane at the time of the crash, the questionable conclusions drawn from explosive residues found in the wreckage, the secrecy of eyewitness testimonies, and misleading statements to the victims’ family members are among the items discussed in this report. A pattern of concealment and/or disregard of crucial pieces of evidence not supporting a ‘preferred’ theory of mechanical malfunction is identified. Relevant to the concerns in this report is the recent Justice Department Inspector General’s report which found the FBI explosive unit guilty of, among other things, "scientifically flawed testimony..[and]..reports." Similar concerns are noted for both FBI and NTSB officials, groups, and units involved in the F800 Investigation. The facts in this report should prompt an independent investigation into the crash of F800 and into the FBI itself.

Ships in the Vicinity

National Transportation Safety Board radar analysts have identified the tracks of four surface vessels within a six mile radius of F800 at the time of the accident. These tracks, confirmed by the FBI as surface vessels, were detected by the radar site closest to the crash in Islip, NY. The surface vessel nearest to the tragedy maintained a 30 knot heading away from the falling debris and thereby has been named the 30 knot track.

The 30 knot track is a radar tracked surface vessel recorded on the Islip, Long Island radar.

1.Confirmed a surface vessel by the FBI and NTSB, it was in the area, later designated as the debris field, moments before debris began to fall. It left the scene at ~30 knots
(35 mph) rather than assisting with search and rescue.
2.Its position just before F800's breakup is consistent with the origin of a 'flare' type object which rose from the ocean surface, according to eyewitnesses.
3.Its speed (30 knots) and direction (away from the accident scene and land) are inconsistent with the many citizen mariners who sailed to the area to aid in the search
and rescue effort.
4.To date, this vessel has not been identified by the FBI or NTSB as stated in the following letter from Lewis D. Schiliro, Acting Assistant Director in Charge, FBI.

In a July 27, 1998 Letter from Lewis D. Schiliro, Acting Assistant Director in Charge, FBI, responded to an April letter to the FBI from Congressman James A Traficant, (D) Ohio.

"… Question 2: In its analysis of radar tapes, has the FBI been able to positively identify every single aircraft and surface vessel that was in the proximity of TWA Flight
800 at the time of the accident?

FBI Answer: No…in January, 1997 the FBI first noted the presence of a surface vessel…between 25 and 35 knots… Despite extensive efforts, the FBI has been unable to
identify this vessel."

The FBI has constantly reminded government officials and the public that every possible lead has been pursued. Claiming to have "left no stone unturned..[and]..during the
24-Hour period: 371 vessels identified," the FBI failed to identify the closest surface vessel to the crash. The identities of the remaining three vessels, of which the FBI has allegedly
determined, have not been released to the public or the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).





Explosive Evidence in Wreckage

PETN/RDX

The explosives PETN and RDX were detected and confirmed to exist by the FBI between rows 15 and 25. Later, however, the FBI stated that these traces were consistent with
explosives allegedly spilled during a canine training exercise a few weeks before the crash.

This explosives "spill" was not reported until after the detection of PETN and RDX within the wreckage of F800, and the area of the spill was inconsistent with the explosive traces
detected in the wreckage. Officer Burnette of the St. Louis Police Department, carrying out the bomb sniffing exercise, failed to record the tail number of the wide body plane in
question, while two such TWA planes existed in close proximity during the exercise. Burnette testified that he neither saw nor heard any individuals aboard the plane during the
exercise which ended no earlier than 12:15 PM. The wide body plane which later flew as TWA Flight 800 left its St. Louis gate for Honolulu at 12:35 PM, fully catered, with all of its
passengers and crew aboard.

Could officer Burnette neither see or hear any passengers, crew, or caterers 20 minutes before the plane left its gate? Did Burnette conduct his exercise on a nearby, nearly identical
TWA 747 which left its gate at 1:30 PM? If Burnette did conduct his explosive training exercise on the 747 which later flew as TWA Flight 800, why did the locations of the alleged
spills conflict with the traces detected with the F800 wreckage? These questions must be answered before any investigating agency can attribute the PETN and RDX traces found
within the F800 wreckage to the above mentioned spill.



The Red Residue

After noticing a red residue on several (rows 17-19) passenger seats within the rows in which PETN and RDX were detected, lead TWA Investigator and Head Pilot Terrel Stacey
brought the residue to the attention of FBI investigators. Weeks later, the FBI refused to share its laboratory results on the residue, citing evidence in a criminal investigation,
prompting Stacey to remove samples of this residue, giving them to James Sanders (author/journalist) who in turn had the residue tested at West Coast Analytical Services
(WCAS) in Sante Fe Springs, CA. The results of this test showed high concentrations of elements used in missile fuel and pyrotechnics. The publication of these results in the
Press Enterprise newspaper of Riverside, California received national press coverage, prompting the FBI to make a series of public statements[Official, 1997 #13; Loeb, 1997 #11;
Kallstrom, 1997 #14; FBI, 1997 #15] concerning the residue and their dissatisfaction with Stacey's and Sanders' actions.

The media attention over the WCAS results influenced the NTSB to have the residue tested independently at NASA’s Materials Science Division. Based on the NASA results, Dr.
Merrit Birky (Lead Investigator, Fire and Explosions Group, NTSB) stated that the residue was consistent with the contact adhesive named in (report 97-IC0154) as Scotch Grip 1357
Contact Adhesive. Upon further inquiry however, it was found that the NTSB never tested the WCAS samples. Separate samples were lifted from the wreckage, and most
surprising, no attempt was made by the NTSB to determine by chemical analysis if these samples were consistent with those removed by Captain Stacey. Furthermore, FBI chemist
Steve Burmeister, has stated that the red residue was not consistent with the 3M adhesive tested at NASA.

In essence, the NTSB only proved that TWA used seat adhesive on its seats, not that the WCAS residue was adhesive. This fact spurred the independent testing of the 3M
adhesive named in the NTSB report at Florida State University (FSU). Results from these tests were inconsistent with the WCAS results and brought to the attention of NTSB Vice
Chairman Francis, who forwarded them to Dr. Birky. The following excerpt is from a fax to Dr. Birky addressing this issue.

In a fax dated 8/31/98 from Thomas Stalcup, Florida State University to Dr. Merrit Birky, NTSB:

"What was the purpose of Report 97-IC0154: to verify TWA's claim that adhesive is used to hold seat fabric together, or was it to counter the conclusions of James
Sanders? If the latter is the case, then elemental analysis of the report's samples is necessary. Only after determining the samples tested in the above report are consistent
with the residue tested by WCAS, can the NTSB assert that this same residue is consistent with adhesive."

Previous to this fax, Birky was asked a similar question:

8/27/98 phone conversation (TS designates Thomas Stalcup, Florida State University, MB designates Dr. Merrit Birky, NTSB):

TS: "And I think, ah, it would have been good if you did an elemental analysis, not to prove whether it was adhesive or not, but to prove if it's the same stuff, to make sure
that you and Sanders had the same stuff, therefore you say the red residue is adhesive, you mean that it's the same residue Sanders is talking about."

MB: "… to try to prove that we have the same samples as Sanders, I'm not sure it gets us very far. Supposing you come out differently, then what are going to say? Well,
you’re not going to put the thing to bed."

The necessary tests to determine consistency between the NTSB and WCAS residue have yet to be performed, and whether or not they "come out differently" should be of no
consequence. If the NTSB carried out appropriate tests to determine that their samples were consistent with the WCAS results, the claim that adhesive was the source of the
WCAS residue would have been scientifically valid. However, the NTSB put science aside in order "to put the thing to bed," and any claim that the WCAS residue is adhesive has
no scientific basis. The FSU tests exclude the 3M adhesive as a possible source, which leaves the question of the residue's origin an item for debate two years after the crash.

Nitrates

A piece of the aircraft's center wing tank (labeled CW-504 during reconstruction) was sent to NASA for chemical analysis by the NTSB. On it was a strange residue in a "splatter"
pattern. Test results concluded the presence of nitrates in this residue, alarming NASA scientist Charles W. Bassett, as nitrates may indicate the presence of explosives.
Ammonium-Nitrate (the explosive used in the Oklahoma City bomb), for example, is one of the many nitrate based explosives.

To chemists, nitrates are known as ‘anions,’ and when combined with ‘cations,’ the resultant molecule is explosive. If Ammonia (a cation) was detected in the splatter pattern, a
strong case could be made for Ammonium-nitrate as the origin of the nitrates. Therefore, when investigators determine the presence of an anion, the next step is to look for a cation
within the same material.

Bassett reported the nitrate (anion) presence in CW-504 to Dr. Merrit Birky and concluded in report 97-1C0063:

"An attempt to determine the origin of the anions present in both samples was not conducted at this time but is of concern and is under further investigation."

However, instead of requesting that Bassett determine the nitrate's possible explosive identity, Birky sent other aircraft parts for testing which lacked the questionable residue. No
further testing of CW-504 was requested, the source of the nitrates was not determined, and Bassett's report, quoted above, was never released to the public.



The materials sent to Bassett after the nitrate report were parts from the plane’s air conditioning units. Birky instructed Bassett to determine whether these parts could have
possibly been the source of the splatter pattern on CW-504. Bassett concluded in report 97-1C0089 that:

"there is no indication that any of the reference materials examined in these analyses, served as the source of the surfactant coated polyester which was discussed in
report 97-1C0064…nor is there evidence to indicate any of the reference materials served as the source of the nitrate presence in [CW-504]."

Less than a month prior, a seemingly redundant report comparing air conditioning materials to the CW-504 splatter pattern by the FBI appears to conflict with Bassett’s conclusion,
and makes no mention of any nitrate presence. Here, in a vague summary, the FBI concludes:

"Based upon the comparison examinations conducted, specimens [CWT splatter material] are consistent with having originated from the sources represented by [foam
air duct material], or a similar source."

The FBI’s failure to identify the nitrate presence within the CW-504 spatter pattern is disturbing given that two of the three theories for the crash included the possibility of a
nitrate-related explosion. The NTSB’s detection of nitrates on CW-504 should have prompted further testing of the splatter pattern. Chemical tests available for determining a
possible explosive source of the material were never utilized. Instead, other parts of the aircraft were tested in apparent disregard to the possibility that the spatter pattern may have
been evidence of an explosive material.





The FBI's Inconsistent Statements to Family Members

In November 1997, the FBI suspended their investigation into F800 in a nationally televised press conference, wherein a dramatic CIA produced animation simulating the official
crash sequence was shown to explain the alleged missile sightings. Shortly after this press conference, FBI Assistant Director, James Kallstrom addressed some of the family
members concerning the eyewitnesses and their alleged responses to the CIA animation. Kallstrom's statements to family members implied that some eyewitnesses were not
credible and a remaining 244, retained as credible, thought the CIA animation was plausible. Jose Cremades (President, Victims of Flight 800) relayed Kallstrom’s statements in a
letter dated December 3, 1997.

Excerpt from a 12/3/97 letter from Jose Cremades:

"Mr. Kallstrom of the FBI has told me that the 244 witnesses retained as 'credible' by the FBI have found the CIA video plausible."

However, in September 1998, Kallstrom states that all eyewitnesses were credible, the number 244 represents them, and that they never screened the CIA animation.

Excerpt from an interview with James Kallstrom (TS designates Thomas Stalcup, and JK, James Kallstrom):

TS: Those [244] were the credible, or were those maintained as credible….were there some that weren't, above the number?

JK: No…they were all credible...

TS: And you never asked them what they thought of the CIA video?

JK: No

Kallstrom now denies ever having the CIA animation screened by any eyewitnesses. His statement to family members that eyewitnesses "have found the CIA video plausible" is
deceitful and contradicts reality.

Also in the 12/3/97 letter, Cremades stated:

"The FBI has also told me and other family members that those [who thought they saw a missile] witnesses agreed that, if they did not see the aircraft AND the missile as
two distinct objects, they must have seen only the aircraft, the latter being much larger than any conceivable missile."

Eyewitnesses disagreed:

After informing witness Darrel Miron of Mr. Cremades quote above, he replied:

(12/3/97 phone interview[Stalcup, 1997 #26]): "That's total fabrication."

After informing witness Paul Runyan of the same quote, he replied:

(12/4/97 phone interview[Stalcup, 1997 #27]): "Yeah right, coming off the water."

(12/6/97 phone interview[Stalcup, 1997 #27]): "Would fuel burn from the [ocean] surface going up, or from the plane coming down….What I saw was going up from the
surface…like a rising flare."

Witness Major Fred Meyers responding to a similar question:

(11/24/97 radio interview): "Well that's pure fabrication...What's going on in the FBI, I don't know."

Witness Richard Goss responding to a similar question:

(11/24/97 radio interview): "I can't see that's possible at all…[the CIA animation] was a joke."

The major question in the heads of the family members, news media, and concerned citizens about the crash of F800 is what the eyewitnesses saw. Many were reported to have
seen an object streak toward the aircraft before any explosions. James Kallstrom's statements to the family members were nothing less than misleading. Stating that the
eyewitnesses agreed with the CIA animation implied that they agreed with the FBI conclusions or at least commented on the animation. However, no eyewitness was asked about
the animation and of the over 100 individuals who witnessed the streaking object, an overwhelming majority disagree with the official crash sequence and the CIA video.

Note: Independent triangulation of eyewitness accounts has determined the origin of at least one high speed projectile to be over two miles lower in altitude and nearly
seven miles north of F800. This object's trajectory, according to eyewitnesses, ended at the aircraft with a brilliant white flash.



The FBI's Influence on the NTSB Baltimore Hearings

The NTSB Public Hearings into F800 were scheduled to begin on December 8, 1997 in Baltimore Maryland. As a forum for discussing all facets of the NTSB's investigation,
hundreds of pages of documents, culminating from months of investigative effort were slated for release. Among these documents were the test results of explosive
residues and eyewitness reports. However, a few days before the hearings the FBI drafted a letter to NTSB Chairman Jim Hall which effectively banned these items from the
hearings.

December 3, 1997 (five days before the NTSB Baltimore hearings), FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom sent a letter to NTSB Chairman Hall. An excerpt from this
document is reproduced below.

"…Set forth below are the specific parts of the hearing, as set forth in the 11/29/97 5:56 AM draft Witness list, to which we [FBI] object and the bases for our
objections.

…Review of Witness Statements Panel

…the FBI…objects to requests to disclose or include in the public docket of any FBI FD-302s or summaries of FD-302s prepared by the NTSB that report the
results of any interviews or reinterviews of the 244 eyewitnesses whose reports were examined by the CIA in connection with it's analysis and to calling any
eyewitnesses to testify at the public hearing…

…Investigation For Missile/Warhead Impact/Bombs/Explosives; Residue Examination (exhibit 20I); PETN Findings, Small Explosive Charges

…we particularly object to discussion of the residue examination and the use of exhibit 20I, an FBI Laboratory report on the chemical analysis of the residue
found on the seats."

In an unprecedented maneuver less than a week before the hearings, the FBI successfully banned all eyewitness testimony and physical evidence in support of a bomb or
missile from the Baltimore hearings. Certain witnesses, however, in support of mechanical malfunction as the cause were cleared by the FBI as the letter includes:

"we do not object to the use of and inclusion in the public docket of summaries prepared by NTSB of FBI interviews of other individuals to the extent their
information may relate to mechanical or similar issues."

The FBI's apparent need for secrecy effectively restricted from public debate any crash scenarios in conflict with their own. The absence of laboratory results of explosive
residues from the public docket placed total reliance on an FBI Crime Lab with a history of inadequate scientific checks and balances. More disturbing is the fact that the
FBI Explosives Unit (EU) involved in the F800 explosive residue testing was the unit most scrutinized by the Inspector General of the United States Justice Department:

"[The Inspector General’s Office has] identified several cases in which examiners within the EU had testified outside their expertise, testified inaccurately or
ambiguously, or stated opinions that are scientifically unsupportable."

The secrecy involving the FBI’s investigation into F800 is unwarranted and does little to dispel doubt over the EU’s and other FBI units’ performance. While referred to
repeatedly as showing no evidence of a criminal act, explosive test results were peculiarly absent and their discussion stricken from the NTSB public hearings. While
assuring victims’ family members that the eyewitnesses agree with the FBI conclusions, those eyewitnesses were never allowed to speak nor their reports discussed at the
hearings. Lacking eyewitnesses and their respective reports, what hundreds of individuals witnessed had to be re-created in their absence and without their input. The
FBI/NTSB conclusions remained hollow, as public scrutiny and peer review of key segments of the investigation were avoided by their concealment from the hearings and
the public.



Conclusion

The FBI and NTSB conducted incomplete testing of crucial pieces of evidence, with contradictions between agencies. Both agencies have failed to identify the nearest
surface vessel to the tragedy. Victims’ family members have been misled by top FBI officials. Eyewitness reports have been inaccurately portrayed by FBI officials and a
CIA produced animation. At least one key NTSB official finds it more important to "put the thing to bed" than to conduct a scientifically sound investigation.

Most of the NTSB’s investigative efforts are available to the public. However, due to FBI pressures, important parts of the investigation have not been released. Curiously,
these parts are those which may contradict the official theory of the investigation, and their absence allows suspicions of a cover-up to continue. Release of these important
results could quell any of the legitimate or unfounded suspicions.

In order for the FBI to regain the trust of the American public, it must release the details of its investigation into the crash of F800 for independent oversight. These
thoughts, shared by many citizens, are well summed by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers before the Judiciary Committee, United States House of
Representatives; Subcommittee on Crime in the wake of the USJD/OIG Special Report into the FBI’s Explosives-Related Misconduct :

"We speak from a non-governmental perspective about the importance of restoring integrity to, and citizen confidence in the FBI lab…Among the IG's most
troubling findings are the following types of folly and wrongdoing.

Scientifically flawed and inaccurate testimony.

Testimony beyond the examiner's expertise.

Outright fabrication of test results.

Tampering with lab reports.

Inadequate or nonexistent record-keeping and test result documentation.

Unqualified examiners, with little training and little or no formal education in their assigned areas of expertise.

Failure by management to resolve serious and credible allegations of incompetence.

…These cases confirm that the FBI lab needs ongoing and expanded, neutral oversight and overhaul. They demonstrate what an unstinting effort it will take to
discover and undo the long-lasting damage brought on by the lab's culture of dishonesty and sloppiness…

Lack in public confidence in the FBI Laboratories has real and serious implications. The secrecy surrounding the investigation of F800 does little to help alleviate this
discontent. A greater public good is served by releasing the details of the FBI’s investigation and achieving faith in the FBI laboratories than the "FBI's concerns regarding
making public the results of a criminal investigation." The crash of F800 is still unresolved. This report has addressed significant anomalies that need independent review.



Recommendations

1.That the FBI release to the public all details of its investigation into F800.

2.That the NTSB test the CW-504 splatter pattern for the existence of cations.

3.That the NTSB conduct elemental analysis on each sample named in the NASA report 97-IC0154, and publicly release the results.

4.That the FBI and CIA release all data (including the complete eyewitness data) used in the CIA produced animation describing F800’s final minute of flight.

5.That an NTSB public hearing is scheduled which contains the release of all eyewitness reports and allows the testimony of the eyewitnesses. This hearing should
also release and discuss all explosives related test results and documents related to the tragedy.

6.That the NTSB conduct independent interviews with the eyewitnesses to gain bearing line data to all objects observed.

7.That the FBI release the identities of the three surface vessels closest to the crash and list the vessels’ reason(s) for not assisting in search and rescue.

8.That the FBI and NTSB allow independent testing of all explosives related wreckage.

9.That the FBI test for explosive traces on wreckage items consistent with an alleged spill during a bomb training exercise conducted on June 10, 1996 at St. Louis Int’l
Airport.

10.That the recommendations of the Justice Department’s Inspector General’s report be implemented fully and rapidly.

11.That Congress hold hearings into the Official Investigation of TWA Flight 800.



References

1.Justice/OIG, U.D.o.J., The FBI Laboratory: An Investigation into Laboratory Practices and Alleged Misconduct in Explosives-Related and Other Cases (April,
1997), . 1997, USDOJ: Washington, D.C.

2.Pereira, C., et al., Airplane Performance Study, . 1997, NTSB: Washington, D.C.

3.Schiliro, L.D., Letter in Response to Congressman James A. Trafficant, (D) Ohio, . 1998, FBI.

4.NTSB, Radar Image: http://www.ntsb.gov/events/twa800/radar_45.gif. 1997.

5.Pereira, C., Private Communication. 1998.

6.FBI, FBI Press Conference - TWA Flight 800, . 1997, FBI New York Office: NY.

7.Adcock, S. and K. Royce, Chemicals Point to Explosive, but Aren't Full Proof, in Newsday. 1996: Long Island.

8.CNN, FBI: TWA Jet Used In Bomb-detection Drill Before Crash, in Cable News Network. 1996: New York.

9.NTSB, Safety Recommendation, . 1997, NTSB: Washington, D.C.

10.FBI, Letter To Rep. James Trafficant. FBI, 1997.

11.Airport, S.L.I.l., Gate Log. TWA, 1996.

12.Shelton, M. and B.M. Hovanec, Laboratory Report, . 1997, West Coast Analytical Services: Santa Fe Springs.

13.Sutton, G.P., Rocket Propulsion Elements. 6th ed. 1992: John Wiley and Sons Inc.

14.Hendrix, D., Solid Fuel for Rockets Follows Basic Recipe, in Press Enterprise. 1997: Riverside.

15.Bassett, C., Report 97-1C0154, . 1997, NASA: Kennedy Space Center.

16.Birky, M., Fire and Explosion Group Factual Report, . 1997, NTSB.

17.Stalcup, T., April '98 Phone Conversation with Merrit Birky (NTSB), . 1998.

18.Burmeister, S., Private Communication, . 1998.

19.Salters, V., ICP Mass Spectroscopy, . 1998, Florida State University: Tallahassee.

20.Stalcup, T., August '98 Phone Conversation with Merrit Birky (NTSB), . 1998.

21.Bassett, C., Report 97-1C0063, . 1997, NASA: Kennedy Space Center.

22.Basssett, C., Private Communication, . 1998.

23.Bassett, C., Report 97-1C0089, . 1997, NASA: Kennedy Space Center.

24.FBI, FBI File No. 265A-NY-26908, . 1997, FBI: Washington, D.C.

25.Kallstrom, J., FBI Press Conference, . 1997, FBI: Washington, D.C.

26.Cremades, J., Email to Thomas Stalcup, . 1997, President, Victims of Flight 800.

27.Kallstrom, J., Phone Interview, . 1998.

28.Meyers, F., Radio Interview, . 1997, Art Bell Show.

29.Goss, R., Radio Interview, . 1997, Art Bell Show.

30.Dorney, M., Interview, in The New York Observer. 1997: NY. p. 16.

31.Dougherty, T., Interview. Hard Copy, 1996.

32.Ellistion, B. and J. Gang, Police Report, . 1996, Suffolk County Police Dept.: Moriches.

33.Eick, D., Interview, in Press-Enterprise. 1997: Riverside.

34.Evans, E., Police Report, . 1996, Suffolk County Police Dept.: In Boat.

35.Gallagher, W., Interview, in Press-Enterprise. 1997: Riverside.

36.Greig, M., Police Report, . 1996, Suffolk County Police Department: Mastic Beach.

37.Khalilch, R.G., Police Report, . 1996, Suffolk County Police Dept.: Smith Point Beach.

38.Lenahan, F. and L. Lenahan, Police Report, . 1996, Suffolk County Police Dept.: Hampton Bays.

39.Lisle, B., Radio Interview, in Art Bell Show. 1998.

40.McConnell, S., Radio Interview, in Art Bell Show. 1998: East Moriches.

41.Naples, J., et al., Interview, in The New York Observer. 1997: NY.

42.Penney, R., Taped Interview, . 1997, William Donaldson.

43.Perry, L., Interview, in Dan's Papers. 1998: The Hamptons.

44.Runyan, P., Phone Interview, . 1997, Thomas Stalcup.

45.Terney, P., Police Report, . 1996, Suffolk County Police Dept.: Mt. Sinai Harbor.

46.Verardi, C., Police Report, . 1996, Suffolk County Police Dept.: Center Moriches.

47.Desyron, L., ABC World News Sunday, in ABC News. 1996.

48.Clanahan, Z., Phone Interview, . 1998, Thomas Stalcup.

49.Casola, L., Phone Interview, . 1998, Thomas Stalcup.

50.Casola, R., Phone Interview, . 1998, Thomas Stalcup.

51.Bilodeau, V. and J. McBride, Police Report, . 1996, Suffolk County Police Department: Moriches.

52.Angelides, P.J., Public Statement, . 1998, Eyewitness: Westhampton.

53.Miron, D., Phone Interview, . 1997, Thomas Stalcup.

54.Donaldson, W., Interim Report to the Aviation Subcommittee, . 1998, House Aviation Subcommittee: Washington, D.C.

55.Kallstrom, J., Letter to NTSB Chairman James Hall: Objections to Hearing Items, . 1997.

56.Alcorn, D.S. Regarding Oversight Hearing into the Forensic Laboratory of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. in Judiciary Committee, United States House of
Representatives; Subcommittee on Crime. 1997. Washington, D.C.: NACDL.