Dr. Jacques Vallée : "Open Letter to Jean-Jacques Velasco"
The following is an authorised reproduction and translation of Jacques Vallée's letter to the author of "Roswell, l'enquête qui change tout".
Jacques Vallée
PO Box 641650
San Francisco, CA. 94164
San Francisco, March 2, 2026
Open letter to Jean-Jacques Velasco
RE: ‘ROSWELL’
Hello Jean-Jacques,
The Éditions Trédaniel kindly sent me your book on Roswell, for which I thank them. Your gracious inscription leads me to believe that we may still be able to communicate, despite the multiple personal attacks against my integrity and abilities as a scientific researcher and venture investor, that your book contains.
Reading the book, and after a thorough review of it and its historical context, I am left surprised and disheartened (I will not dwell on the insinuations made by people you may have listened to at Roswell).
I have no comment to make on the observations and investigations of the Roswell case. Just remember that I have a complete file on this event since my work with NIDS in the 90s, and with BAASS after that. A confidential file which will remain tucked away in a drawer, but on everything else I feel compelled to highlight passages from your book which left me in shock :
You repeatedly mention a so-called time proximity of this case with the one of Trinity, which I studied for many years and in great length: you know this, because you cite my book.
Page 238 of your book: “a crash having taken place a few days later, over a zone (…) which would be the famous case reported by J. Vallée”
This is false: Trinity happened in July 1945, Roswell in 1947! It’s enormous, in the US, in terms of historical and political perspective. Without delving into the details, the vast worldwide US army deployment was not yet over in 1945, whereas the economic, social and political situation had drastically changed in 1947. Furthermore, these two events, which are not close in time, aren’t geographically close either: it’s roughly 279 kilometres between the Roswell and Trinity sites! 165 miles to reach the American Highway and over 8 miles to the Trinity crash site. It’s at least 3 hours by car, going at the speed limit (comparable to the journey from Bayonne to Toulouse), followed by a half-hour, if you are willing, roaming across open terrain in a four-wheel-drive.
The local geography is therefore completely different between the two sites. New Mexico is a very large state (121.590 US sq. miles) which is comparable to the size of Poland. Trinity occurred two years prior to Roswell and has by no means been copying Roswell.
You imply an absence of testimony at Trinity and the lack of thoroughness in my work:
Page 237: “A desert region solely inhabited by native Indian tribes… No formally identified witnesses, no precise description of the site nor of the recovered physical evidence …”
This is false:
The region is not a desert! The breeding of large herds is a generations long practice. My book includes photos of the site and details.
The Indian tribes who developed the region in the 18th and 19th centuries migrated to Arizona. The current population (70,000 people) is Anglo-Saxon and Hispanic American. Note that Rémé Baca’s family, one of the direct witnesses, is Spanish, of European descent, and not Indian nor Mexican.
There were two livestock herders on the ranch, who observed the object’s arrival, heard its shock against a military communication tower and stayed for many hours next to the crashed object. These two witnesses returned to the site, where they cared for cattle and fences, over the seven days where the object remained in place and was inspected by the army.
Our book includes transcripts of lengthy interviews with the families and the two witnesses. One of them, who is still alive, visited and measured the interior.
Your book explicitly accuses me of knowingly making myself complicit in a fraud, a mere forger copying data from Roswell.
Page 237: “It is Jacques Vallée, the Franco-American ufologist, who portrays himself as the spokesperson for this unknown “crash” event…”
All the details of my investigations, day by day, are set out in our work on Trinity (along with observations on four other sites which I had worked on with professionals in New Mexico) in my multiple volumes journal, Forbidden Science, published a long time ago, and available within minutes on internet for a few dollars.
As you know, there is no witness of the crash at Roswell. The debris and bodies were found later. The CUFOS teams, directed on the site by Mrs Hynek with whom I was in close contact, had a hard time locating this (these?) important sites before concluding to the reality of this crash. The question is still not fully resolved today, and the controversies continue. I had followed them in my works with Stanton Friedman, a seasoned physicist, and with Colonel Corso (who had seen the bodies after Roswell) during two-days long interviews, confidentially organized by Colonel Alexander at the NIDS, in Las Vegas.
The bird names (Falcon, Partridge etc.) were invented by an individual who publicly recognized being a front for DoD’s disinformation, William Moore. He admitted it at a MUFON conference where there was one thousand people (myself included), therefore this is not confidential. Unfortunately, you fell for it like many others. The Aviary was a false organization, created to ridicule and discourage researchers by means of disinformation in the 70’s (Moore was paid for this ‘work’, and confessed it to us). This too, is available in many books, including mine.
- :- :- :- :- :- :- :- :- :- :- :-
I could forget all of this but there are much more serious matters: you directly accuse me, with your publisher’s full awareness (who should nevertheless have reviewed your manuscript with his editorial advisors?) to be an American spy in France. Obviously, it is like asking someone if they have stopped beating their wife. We could never refute such an accusation, and the doubt is permanently set. But here, you accuse me of knowingly betraying my native country.
Even if it is impossible to prove one is not a spy, you know there were people within our circle who were in the position to verify, and whom you could have easily consulted, in your quality of ex-employee of a ‘sensitive’ government institution. Some of the individuals in question are among those named here among the officials I have copied in this letter. You know them as I do. Yet, you have not made this obvious enquiry.
I am obliged to take into account this serious accusation, now widely disseminated in France and internationally by your publisher and the media, which was brought to my attention by your own readers – with the suspicion and potential physical threats that this implies for me and my family.
I have, therefore, resigned from the CNES-GEIPAN expert panel, and I regretfully wrote to Mr Luc Dini of the Sigma 2 group (3F technical commission), that I will no longer do anything official that deals with this topic in France.
Your book’s multiple insinuations are serious because I have kept a financial investor role in French and international companies, a profession that doesn’t play around with such an accusation: it implies dissimulation, and foreign instructions that may interfere with the strategy and even the purpose of existence of a business corporation.
My integrity and my professional independence have been at the foundation of my work within French, European and American financial investment funds for over 40 years. I contributed to financing over 60 ‘start-ups’ in medicine, aerospace, artificial intelligence and in business software in the five funds that I started within international teams, notably NASA’s venture capital firm “Red Planet Capital” (which had selected my team among 45 candidates) and three Euro-American funds with professional financial partners who are French, Belgian, Swiss, Japanese, Canadian and American. I have been, twice, a member of European financial committees in Brussels.
I also have been one of the financiers and member of the Board of Directors for Dr Pouletty’s company SANGSTAT, the second French medical company for which we have successfully completed a rare introduction to NASDAQ. I was part of the French government scientific committee selecting investments (free of charge) for the Evry Génopole, for 10 years, with French doctors and representatives of main French pharmaceutical companies: ideal position for a spy!
Generally speaking, as in “general Partner” and member of Board of Directors for such companies, I have always respected the highest integrity and a responsibility that has never been in question. Institutional investors have means to verify whether they are entrusting a little spy with millions of dollars or euros (with the arrogance of being a ufologist in his spare time?).
I am forced to remind you it was I who insisted that you be invited to Pocantico as a part of the American astronomy elite; that I successfully convinced professor Hynek (whom I had introduced you to) to come to Paris to support the GEPAN when a majority of consulted French leading scientists had recommended to shut it down; and that you and I have together redone the Trans-en-Provence investigation, including analysis of your samples which had not been carried out by CNES.
You have suffered, as I have, from malicious insinuations and illegal attacks against our private lives. It is through your book, however, that I find myself exposed to an accusation of treason against my country and my colleagues. You will understand that I find this unpleasant surprise hard to accept. I am waiting for the decisions that you will take, with your publisher, to rectify this situation, and then, I hope, we will return to more serene relations.
Jacques.
PS1 : Contrary to political parties, the scientific debate doesn’t consist in excluding divergent opinions. Quite to the contrary, it encourages it. My interpretation of Kenneth Arnold’s case is different from that of Pierre Lagrange, but precisely, I am not competent in sociology, and it is this difference that interests me. I consider him with respect and friendship, and I listen to him. Likewise, my disagreement with Bruno Mancusi is real but neither he nor I have a demonstration-ready solution to the abductions problem (you neither). If we are both wrong, maybe we will find a solution together? This is how “science moves forward”… not by eliminating criticism.
PS2 : You write,
Page 239: “… real isotopic anomalies, only indications that can identify if a material is of extra-terrestrial origin or not”
This is scientifically wrong. In science, medicine and in the army we use some materials that have lab-made isotopic anomalies, to tag injected or mixed substances. An anomaly such as Ubatuba may be of terrestrial, artificial origin. (Let’s not forget that there was no available witness of the crash for this Ubatuba investigation, as at Roswell). The isotopic natural composition does not vary in the solar system and maybe further out as well: A lunar or Martian piece of aluminium does not differ from a standard Aluminium, or only by a minimal fraction (<5%) just like the terrestrial geological samples.
End of letter
Translated by Kate Sellier, reviewed by Dr. Jacques Vallée
Editor’s notes :
This letter follows the publication of Jean-Jacques Velasco’s book : “Roswell, l’enquête qui change tout”
Trinity : The Best Kep Secret, 2021
NIDS : National Institute for Discovery Science, 1995-2004, “was the first professional scientific research institute in the United States that was devoted to the exploration and investigation of UAP and other anomalous phenomena.” Dr. Eric Davis
BAASS : Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies
SANGSTAT : “SangStat, which has a subsidiary in Nantes, develops its own technologies but also holds the exclusive North American licence from Pasteur-Mérieux Sérums et Vaccins for Thymoglobulin, a treatment for rejection reactions.” Les Echos
GEPAN : Study Group on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, created in 1977, by the CNES (French space agency)