Kevin Randle Responds to Radcliff on Schmitt

Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 23:18:34 -0800

[Responding to:]

My original plan was to ignore this post because it is more of the same tired
rhetoric that has been posted in the past. It is an argument by one colleague
defending another who seems to be the target of misinformation. I fell into
the same trap, writing a glowing, positive letter about my good friend Don
Schmitt who had told me that he didn't work at the post office as alleged,
that he did have the degrees he claimed, that he did work as a medical
illustrator who had contributed to a 600 page medical textbook, that he was
in the witness protection program and who worked with local authorities to
stop drugs flowing into the community. I suggested, based on my conversations
with Don Schmitt, that he was being attacked for his prominence in the UFO
field and the fact that we had a successful book about Roswell.

Imagine my surprise when I learned, within 48 hours of hearing him deny it on
video tape, that he did, in fact, work at the post office. No one ever cared
about that. It was the lie he told, on tape, that was the problem.

Now he explains it that he didn't trust the man making the video tape. He had
heard the man was attacking the investigators, that he was out to get the
investigators. He claimed that someone made a snide comment about civil
servants, so, he decided to lie about his employment as the tape began to
roll. Afraid that he was going to be attacked, he lied so that he could
provide the attackers with all the ammunition they needed to discredit him.
This makes no sense, but some people believe it.

I also have a problem with a letter sent out by Ken Eppler, the post master
at the post office where Don Schmitt works. MILWAUKEE MAGAZINE published an
anonymous letter claiming that Schmitt worked at the post office which began
the debate about Schmitt's employment. Gillian Sender noted that "...Hartford
Postmaster Ken Eppler confirms that Schmitt is employed as a full-time
carrier. Schmitt has worked at the Hartford Post Office since 1974."

In a letter dated March 13, 1995, and signed by Ken Eppler, he wrote, "In the
letter section of the March, 1995 issue of Milwaukee Magazine, It is implied
that Donald Schmitt has worked full-time for the U S Postal Service since
1974. Not only is this untrue, but I have never made such a statement to
MIlwaukee (sic) Magazine or anyone else."

This letter was designed with one goal in mind and that is to deceive. Don
Schmitt, according to what he told me, and said later on tape, had worked
part-time at the post office beginning, I believe, in 1972 or 1974. He became
a full-time employment in 1982.

The question that must be asked is who benefited from this deception? Schmitt
or Eppler? When I called Eppler, after I had heard some very disturbing
things, he refused to answer questions, saying that I should "talk to Don."

When others suggested that the 600 page medical textbook didn't exist, I said
that all he had to do was show it to people. He explained that it cost
$200.00 and he didn't have a copy. I thought it strange that the illustrator
didn't get a copy from the publisher as part of the payment, but said
nothing. Instead, I suggested that any medical library would have a copy and
a photocopy of the acknowledgments page showing his contribution would
certainly end the debate.

The book has never surfaced and it has gone from a 600 page medical book to a
400 page, loose leaf sales tool and is now back to a 600 page medical book.
To this point, in over two years, nothing has been produced to show that this
book exists, or that Don Schmitt worked as a medical illustrator.

I could go on, but there really is no point. We have Don Schmitt engaged in
activities that are not honest. We have caught him in lies about his
employment and background. I could document more but believe this is really
enough. Now, let's look at the charges leveled by Don's assistant, Brad

>I have in the past, done my UTMOST to do what I could to HELP with
>ROSWELL investigation.  I have purposefully kept a low profile
>because of my profession as a psychotherapist.  Not all of my
>colleagues look at everything with an open mind.

>Both past and recent events have taken place over the past threee
>years have again necessitated my personal response to the opinions of
>a still, FEW, ill informed, individuals.  Allow me to speak out. . .
>and if you'll forgive my lapse... some braggadocio.  I regret having
>to take this tact, but recent public statements, with the Roswell
>investigation and "not hearing" of my involvement till late in the
>game, not only hurt me personally, but are TOTALLY UNTRUE.

Knowing of Brad Radcliffe but not knowing of his involvement are two
different issues. These will be discussed at length later.

>Aloow me to clarify five points:

>1.  I served in Vietnam (1970-71, 17th assault helicopter group).
>Upon returning to the United States, I was assigned to Washington, D.
>C. to finish "my time" in service.  I subsequently was hired to work
>as a civilian in the military intelligence branch, located in
>Washington, prior to going to college.  As a result, I still have
>friends who are/were field grade officers and higher rank (ie.
>Generals).  Don Schmitt has always shown great interest in being
>able to meet and speak with these individuals.  I know for a fact
>that Don Schmitt has met and frequently spoken over the phone with a
>retired Pentagon General.  This was known to CUFOS (Center for UFO
>Studies) and Kevin Randle.

First, I served in Vietnam (1968-1969, 116th Assault Helicopter Company,
187th Assault Helicopter Company) as a helicopter pilot. Upon returning to
the United States, I was assigned to the Army's Primary Helicopter School and
Training Center at Fort Wolters, Texas. I left the Army, attended college and
was commissioned in the Air Force where I served as a public affairs officer
and an intelligence officer. All this is interesting, but hardly relevant.

Radcliffe notes that Don Schmitt " has met and frequently spoken over the
phone with a retired Pentagon General.  This was known to CUFOS (Center for
Studies) and Kevin Randle."  Very true, but according to Schmitt, the
pentagon general was a friend of his. Schmitt did not bother to inform us
that the general was actually a friend of Radcliffe's. If there is a problem
here, Radcliffe should speak to Schmitt rather than suggest that either CUFOS
or I have failed to acknowledge his involvement.

>2.  I personally helped Don Schmitt and Kevin Randle with the Roswell
>investigation.  Don and I located for Mark Rodeghier, Kevin Randle,
>Len Stringfield, and Stan Friedman, 509th personnel (from Roswell)
>that they were unable to locate themselves.  We utilitzed who
>abilities and integrity can not be called into question, whatsoever.
>I know for a fact that Don Schmitt went to extraordinary lengths, at
>times, at tremendous risk, to obtain information not obtainable
>through "standard" channels.

And I located many witnesses that no one else had been able to find using
telephone directories, 509th Reunion lists, city directories, and hundreds of
telephone calls. Mark Rodeghier, Len Stringfield and Stan Friedman have all
done the same. The fact that Radcliffe did this does not translate into
anything suggesting that I knew he was involved in searching for these people
because Schmitt didn't bother to mention it to us. The real problem here is
not our failure to acknowledge Radcliffe but Schmitt's failure to do so.

I'm going to take a moment here to drive this point home. When anyone reads
my books, they will see that I attempt to provide credit where credit is due.
They will see that I acknowledge the help of Chris Styles and Don (sorry
about the Doug thing) Ledger for their kindness in the Shag Harbour
investigation. They did the work, I just reported on it. The same of Jerry
Black and his work on Travis Walton. Rex and Carol Salisberry for their Gulf
Breeze work. V.G. Golubic for his search for Glenn Dennis' missing nurse. Dr.
Michael Swords for his help in understanding the history of Project Blue Book
and the Robertson Panel. And, of course, Tom Carey for the work he did in
searching for the archaeologists. The point is that I go out of my way to
supply the credit for those who helped me or dug up the information I needed.
The proof of that is in the books I have written acknowledging that work. Now
why would I leave Radcliffe out of that if I was aware of what he had done in
our searching for witnesses? The answer is that I wouldn't if I had been told
by Schmitt about it. The problem here lies with Schmitt, and not with me.

By the way, I don't personally know some of the people listed above, other
than talking to them on the telephone and receiving copies of their
investigations. So if Radcliffe believes that I left him out because he was
Schmitt's friend and not mine, that simply doesn't work. Schmitt certainly
could have made sure that his involvement was well acknowledged in the work,
but he didn't do that. We had no motive for excluding Radcliffe. He needs to
examine that situation carefully.

>3.  From 1989 through 1994, I frequented special Roswell meetings at
>CUFOS when Kevin Randle was present.

I never denied having met him, only that I was not informed of his
contribution to the Roswell investigation. Attendance at meetings at CUFOS
does not translate into knowledge of his involvement. There were many people
who came to CUFOS to talk about Roswell. I met Karl Pflock there but I don't
think anyone could believe that he contributed to our investigation of

>4.  In January, 1990, I participated in a "roast" for both Don
>Schmitt and Kevin Randle at the Quited Bear Restaurant in Germantown,

As did many others. Again, this does not translate into knowledge of his

>5.  In September, 1994, I, along with a former narcotics officer Gary
>Sterling, attended a press conference at the Astor Hotel in
>Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where Don and Kevin responded to the Air Force
>Roswell report.  Officer Sterling has been a personal colleague of
>Don and mine for many years.

Again, interesting but irrelevant. This does not translate into knowledge of
his involvement. Schmitt didn't mention Radcliffe's contribution at the press
conference. Maybe it was because Radcliffe wanted to "maintain a low profile"
so the problem isn't completely Schmitt's failure to mention it, but
Radcliffe's expressed desire to remain in the background.


And service to the country is irrelevant how? I can make the same claims but
that doesn't mean that I was fully aware of his involvement until long after
the fact.

>One of of our main assistants
>(and a good friend), also served in "Nam," a highly-trained Navy
>Seal, who will live the rest of his life in a wheelchair, the result
>of massive injuries sustained while serving in the war.  This highly
>decorated Navy Seal has also been attacked (ie, Kevin Randle, in his

I attacked this man when and where? What insultive (is this really a word?)
 things have I said about him? Where did I suggest that he didn't exist?
Hell, I don't even know who you're talking about.

>This patriot has
>voluntarily devoted his "expertise" to Don Schmitt and me for over
>seven years.  It is not clear that his accomplishments both in and
>out of the service must be a major threat to Kevin Randle.

How can his accomplishments be a threat to me? This is some sort of
psycho-babble. This allegation makes no sense to me.

>We have utilized the expert help of a number of loyal and trusted
>friends who work for the DOD (Dept. of Defense), VA (Veteran's
>Administration), and IRS.  This has allowed us access through the
>TARGET and KRIADS systems.  We have utililized "friends" in other
>government agencies/organizations including:

>Pentagon Army Intelligence
>Airmen Certification
>Division of Motor Vehicles
>National Credit Bureaus
>Social Security
>Woman in Military Memorial Foundation
>Southwest Military Nurses Association
>National Organization of WWII Nurses
>Pentagon Army Nurses Records Division
>AMA Compendium of Medical Specialists.

>The results clearly speak for themselves.  We successfully located
>over 200 former Roswell personnel.  No one else has advanced the
>Roswell investigation with such unprecedented results before or
>since.  NO ONE.

I too have located dozens of witnesses including some of the most important
to be found. Stan Friedman has done the same. Len Stringfield has done the
same. All of us advanced the Roswell investigation. This, again, does not
translate into my knowing that Radcliffe was deeply involved.

>I have worked closely with Don Schmitt years before he met Kevin
>Randle, and have continued to do so.  Having worked as long as I have
>with Don, both "in the office" as well as "out in the field," I am
>aware that Don Schmitt is only human, and to be human is to
>occassionally make mistakes, to miscalculate, to make errors in
>judgement.  Being aware of such flaws, of which we are all guilty of
>possessing to various degrees, has in no way decreased my trust or
>desire to remain Don's partner in the continuing Roswell
>investigation.  From my perspective, I AM DEEPLY HURT, THAT KEVIN

This simply is not true. I gave him plenty of opportunity for a second
chance. When I learned that he worked at the post office, I advised him to
"confess" all. Instead, he told me more lies about why he had to lie in the
first place. He was in the witness protection program and had received his
job at the post office because of his undercover work. He couldn't talk about
his job to me because his former fiancee and he were having legal battles. He
couldn't tell me about his job at the post office because... well you get the

There is no misinformation spread about Schmitt, only that which he wishes
was misinformation. I have a video tape of Schmitt denying he worked at the
post office, claiming that he has a master's degree and that he was a child
prodigy who began selling his artwork at 6. If there is misinformation out
there, it came from Schmitt.

>Kevin Randle has even
>letters and the letters of others who CORROBORATE Don's personal
>situation., HE has LIED about a phone conversation with Don's father
>statements with Don's parents),  anb over the past two years I have
>INVESTIGATION.  It is my CONVICTION that ultimately it will be Kevin
>Randle who WILL BE JUDGED FAR MORE HARSHLY, rather than the mistakes
>and personal misjudgement Don Schmitt may have brought about in
>relation to the Roswell Investigation.

This is totally untrue. I have never confessed that I fabricated anything. I
have made no slanderous or libelous statements about Schmitt or his family. I
have no idea where this is coming from, nor do I know how Radcliffe could
have verified it.

I do now understand why some of those at the International UFO Museum in
Roswell thought that I had slandered people. Obviously this is another tale
spread by Schmitt, attacking me. Given the fact that we don't associate
anymore, it is not surprising.

But here is a fact that should be surprising to everyone. While we worked
together, he was telling witnesses and his friends not to speak to me because
I was a government agent who had been planted on him. Nevermine that it was
Schmitt who suggested that I join the Roswell investigation, I had been
planted on him. Here was my friend telling people not to talk to me because I
worked for the government. Why would he do such a thing if he is the
upstanding, honest man that Radcliffe suggests?

In fact, Schmitt has told friends that he doesn't engage in the character
assassination that is so common in the UFO field. Yet what does he think that
his tales to these others represent. He is telling them I'm a government
agent, that I slander and libel people, that I can't be trusted. None of this
is true, but he's out there making the allegations and even when  friends of
his are aware of it, somehow it becomes my fault. I really wish they would
think these things through and not let personal loyalties color rational

And I haven't responded to all those letters because there simply was no
reason to do so. It didn't matter what I said or what facts I had, I was the
bad guy in all this and Schmitt was the victim. No matter what I said, it was
turned and twisted until I am accused of making false and slanderous
statements about people. What is the point in a protracted debate when
everything said and all documentation is ignored.

You see it here from Radcliffe. He wrote, "Don Schmitt is only human, and to
be human is to
occassionally make mistakes, to miscalculate, to make errors in judgement.
 Being aware of such flaws, of which we are all guilty of  possessing to
various degrees, has in no way decreased my trust or desire to remain Don's
partner in the continuing Roswell investigation." He is making excuses for
Schmitt by saying we all make mistakes... but we don't all lie to our
partners about our background, education, and spread lies about that partner.
He is going to remain Schmitt's partner so there isn't anything I can say,
nor did I want to, until this attack on me. Radcliffe should carefully
examine the facts and find out if they do lead to me, or if they lead to
Schmitt. I doubt that he will but he should.

I should point out that the OMNI article about the missing nurses so outraged
Radcliffe (and rightly so) that he called me to talk about it. But this
article was a result of Schmitt not following through. When the reporter
couldn't get Schmitt to return his phone calls, he called me or Radcliffe.
But the bottom line is this article is a direct result of Schmitt's ignoring
a reporter, lying to that reporter, and dragging both Radcliffe and me down
with him. Radcliffe knows the truth about this and should consider the facts
about it carefully before he begins hurling allegations.

>It remains my belief that in most recent history Kevin Randle, Don
>Schmitt and I have done more to reveal the truth about Roswell than
>anyone else, and I am very proud of that.  I would like to once again
>point out that it was Don Schmitt who invited Kevin Randle to work
>with him on the investigation.  CUFOS didn't propose it and neither
>did Kevin Randle.  Don Schmitt started it and he and the rest of the
>silent team and myself are going to finish it.  It would seem that is
>what still concerns Kevin Randle- - NOT THE TRUTH ABOUT ROSWELL, BUT
>Brand Radcliffe

I have never denied that Schmitt brought me into this. When people, reporters
have asked, I always gave Schmitt the credit he deserved.

Radcliffe makes his point here as a member of the silent team. Neither he nor
Schmitt were explaining his role to the rest of us. Radcliffe should confront
Schmitt about this, not attack me with untrue statements.

As for sharing the credit or the data (I'm not sure what he means here) I
think I have demonstrated that I do share. I have spent a great deal of time
and effort to share data with other researchers. And, I have gone out of my
way to share credit when I know that the credit is deserved.

And it is interesting that Schmitt has once again failed to confront the
issue. Instead he has his friends call or write. He dodges the important
questions because he knows the truth. There are too many of his statements on
the record now. I wish Radcliffe and the others would compare all those
statements to find out if Schmitt has been honest with them.


Index: Kevin Randle Re:

Created: Nov 4, 1997