UAPRADUAP Research and Disclosure
Member Area

Pascagoula Incident

·

Case Summary

On the evening of 11 October 1973, shipyard workers Charles Hickson and Calvin Parker were fishing near the old Shaupeter shipyard on the Pascagoula River, Mississippi. They reported a blue-lit oval craft, three unusual beings, immobilisation and an examination inside the object.

The men contacted Keesler Air Force Base and then the Jackson County Sheriff’s Department the same night. Officers secretly recorded their private conversation after interview; both remained visibly frightened and continued discussing the reported beings. This contemporaneous recording is the case’s distinctive evidential strength.

The recording supports sincere belief and early consistency, not the physical presence of non-human craft or beings. No photograph, landing trace, recovered material, medical proof or radar record has been publicly tied to the encounter.

Witnesses

Charles HicksonCalvin Parker

The 11 October 1973 Record

The reported encounter

While fishing, the men heard a buzzing or whirring sound and saw an oval, blue-lit object near the riverbank. They described three grey, wrinkled, claw-handed figures that floated toward them. Hickson said he remained aware during an eye-like examination; Parker described losing consciousness or retaining fragmentary memories.

Immediate police handling

After the report to local law enforcement, officers assessed the men as frightened and not clearly intoxicated. They left the witnesses alone with a concealed recorder running. The resulting audio captured fear and discussion without apparent rehearsal of a hoax.

What the record establishes

  • Hickson and Parker reported the encounter to police on the same night.
  • A concealed recording captured their continued distressed discussion.
  • Early accounts were broadly consistent on a craft, beings and immobilisation.
  • No independent physical or instrumental evidence identifies the cause.

How the Pascagoula Story Developed

The same-night police statements and concealed recording provide the strongest documentary evidence. Medical attention, national coverage and civilian investigation followed quickly. Hickson became the principal public spokesman; Parker initially remained more private and gave increasingly detailed accounts in later years.

11 October, evening

Charles Hickson and Calvin Parker report an encounter while fishing near a Pascagoula River shipyard.

Same night

Police interviews and concealed recording document the witnesses’ immediate state.

Following days

The witnesses receive medical attention; national coverage brings investigators to the case.

Evidence, Documents and Physical Record

Same-night record

Police interviews and audio

The statements and concealed recording preserve the witnesses’ response before later publicity reshaped the story.

Witness state

Distress is well documented

The recording and officers’ observations strongly support fear and sincerity, while stopping short of verifying cause.

Site context

Industrial alternatives remain live

Shipyard lights, machinery, equipment and local activity are relevant candidate stimuli, even if the witnesses knew the environment.

Physical record

No decisive corroboration

No image, trace, material, medical finding or publicly linked radar record independently confirms the reported object.

Evidence Assessment & Hypotheses

The concealed recording gives Pascagoula an unusual contemporaneous check on the witnesses’ demeanour when they believed they were alone. Their continuing fear and discussion weaken a casually coordinated hoax interpretation. They establish more about the men’s state and understanding than about the external identity of the beings or examination described.

Industrial surroundings offer sources to test against the initial observation, while the witnesses’ familiarity with equipment provides constraints rather than a categorical exclusion. Altered-state proposals address immobilisation and examination imagery differently from the shared external-object claim. Neither a general psychological analogy nor a general industrial setting supplies an event-specific reconstruction.

Without an independent image, track or physical trace, the recording cannot bridge testimony to a non-human encounter. Its immediacy makes the earliest sequence more useful than later elaboration. The case therefore sustains a serious reported experience and credible distress, with its physical cause unresolved rather than authenticated through the strength of belief alone.

Open Questions and Next Steps

The priority is to preserve the earliest documentary record, reconstruct the physical site, and measure later narrative development against the same-night account.

Question

What does the full audio contain?

Answer

A complete transcription compared to formal interviews would distinguish spontaneous detail from prompted recollection.

Question

What was operating at the site?

Answer

Shipyard, port and lighting records could test industrial misidentification with a specific reconstruction.

Question

How did Parker’s account change?

Answer

A chronological inventory of 1973 statements and later interviews would quantify elaboration rather than assume it.

1. Transcribe and compare

Align the concealed recording with police notes and earliest press interviews.

2. Reconstruct the site

Identify equipment, vessels, lights and activity on 11 October.

3. Audit later claims

Seek same-night third-party reports before treating later local lights as independent corroboration.

Witness Deep Dives

Compare the two principal accounts with the same-night audio record before relying on later retellings.

Charles HicksonCalvin Parker

Source Library

The same-night police record is the primary anchor; later books and media should be read as testimony history rather than replacements for it.

Tier 1 Contemporary / Primary

Tier 2 Archival / Investigation

Tier 3 Historical / Critical

Further references and records

These bibliographic references and record descriptions do not have a direct document link here. Where the discussion relies on a later account of a record, the linked author remains the source for that account.

  • Jackson County Sheriff’s Department notes and interview records.
  • Early press interviews and near-contemporaneous medical observations.
  • Same-night police statements of Charles Hickson and Calvin Parker
  • Concealed police recording of the two men
  • Contemporary officer assessments of demeanour
  • Civilian investigator interviews and polygraph materials, with sponsorship noted.
  • Analysis of the recording’s value for sincerity versus external accuracy.
  • Later books and interviews by Hickson and Parker—useful for continuity and elaboration.
  • Popular treatments calling the audio proof of non-human presence—useful claim history, not proof.