>no offence Giorgio, but didn't find it interesting.

no offence at all!!

>one good thing though was that a qualified hypnotherapist regressed the key
>witness.
>that can only be a good thing I think, but hypnosis is not the be all and
>all I
>think.
>if it was, it would be used to admit evidence in a court of law.
>we know this is not possible.

this is not a good thing, I think. Unfortunately the hypnotic regression
was in use in Italy at the time, and someone continues to do it on the
witnesses. However, the CISU decided to do not use hypnosis in
investigation some years ago, adhering to an ethical code proposed, if
I'm not wrong, by the BUFORA.

>what did you think of this case?

I read sometimes ago the initial investigation report, and it was very
interesting. Unfortunately, as happened to other witnesses, also
Zanfretta became more a kind of "tv character" than a witness.
I saw him again on tv last year, he told again the story for his
several encounters and spoke about the object the aliens left
to him... I think the original encounter was interesting, but next
the story became more funny than interesting.
Anyway, the books of Rino Di Stefano should be among the best
on this case, and the appearance of the aliens are not really
consistent with the description Zanfretta initially gave to the
investigators. Many elements were added in the course of time.

Another interesting case is the one which occurred to Brother
Madau in 1948: did you hear about that?

Regards
Giorgio

_________________________________________________________________
Ricerche online più semplici e veloci con MSN Toolbar!
http://toolbar.msn.it/