The Protecting Earhart MSS and Forensic Analysis [1997-2020; copyright registrations: TXu 1-915-926 & TXu 2-061-539] mark one Investigative Journalist’s comprehensive forensic research evaluation combined with a human comparison analysis.
After meeting some World War Two veterans who insisted that Amelia Earhart privately lived well beyond the war years, Writer-filmmaker, Tod Swindell, developed a consuming interest in the facts attributed to Amelia Earhart’s disappearance and missing person case, that led him to orchestrate a comprehensive forensic research study that featured an in-depth ‘Amelia to Irene’ comparison analysis, the first one ever done.
The complete Study was inspired by the original findings of Joseph A. Gervais [of the ‘Operation Earhart’ investigation Gervais conducted from 1960 to 1970] and a long time collaborator of his, Author Randall Brink. The study features over ten-thousand pages of rare documents, analytical text, photographs, human physical and character trait comparisons, maps, charts, and past-obscured, but once again revisited investigative research findings.
The condensed Protecting Earhart MSS features 415 total pages; 110 of which exclusively exhibit logistical and visual elements drawn from the overall ‘Amelia to Irene’ Comparison Analysis. From a layman’s viewpoint, the Study results appear to exhibit Amelia Earhart’s ongoing existence after World War Two with the re-purposed name of, ‘Irene O’Crowley Craigmile’ applied to her person. (Surname of ‘Bolam’ added by marriage in 1958.) It also examined the post-World War Two, ‘let’s move on‘ logic that left the general public out of the loop of the complexities that surrounded Amelia’s 1937 disappearance. Simply put, a year and a half after she was declared ‘missing‘ in 1937, Amelia Earhart was declared ‘dead in absentia‘ in 1939, a declaration that has never changed.
The intention to keep the name ‘Amelia Earhart’ exclusively associated with a dead person no matter what, evidently came into strong focus during the final days of World War Two. The controversy over the post-1940 only Irene was most notably exposed by a close friend and confidant of the post-1940 Irene’s, former Seton Hall College President, Monsignor James Francis Kelley. In the 1980s and 1990s, Monsignor Kelley admitted to select individuals that his friend, Irene, actually did used to be known as Amelia Earhart, and that he had helped her to become Irene Craigmile during the final days of World War Two. Non-believers insisted that the well-known monsignor was ‘senile’ and his mental condition caused him to fabricate his statements about his friend, Irene. People who knew Monsignor Kelley well, however, remarked that the monsignor was ‘quite lucid’ when he described to them what he did about Amelia Earhart quietly living on and becoming known as ‘Irene’.
When regarded seriously, what would have theoretically been Amelia Earhart’s post-loss FWPP (Federal Witness Protection Program) that allowed her to become the new Irene O’Crowley Craigmile from the 1940s on, would have been something most likely put in place under the omniscient guise of the federal government’s long time FBI Director, J. Edgar Hoover. The FBI’s ‘Amelia Earhart’ file contents from the World War Two years, that included Mr. Hoover’s signatures, indicated an awareness that he had gleaned pertaining to indications of Amelia Earhart’s ongoing existence during the war years under the auspice of Japan. Mr. Hoover was still the Director of the FBI when the ‘did Amelia become known as Irene’ assertion first surfaced in 1970, and he was sure to remain silent about it, where otherwise he would have been expected to weigh-in with an FBI opinion. Hindsight also reveals that no one from the Federal Government of the United States offered an official opinion at all toward the Amelia-Irene matter after the controversy surfaced, and it remained that way ever since.
Importantly as well, the 1970 claim stating that Amelia lived-on and became known as ‘Irene’ from the 1940s on, was never disproved.
The complete Study is available for review on a selective basis. The portions displayed here are revealing of the overall Amelia-Irene congruence controversy.
Questions? Comments? E-mail firstname.lastname@example.org