An account in Tarn-et-Garonne, France

GEIPAN received a questionnaire in January 2012 concerning an observation made on September 17, 2004 at 8:15 PM. That day, a female motorist on the D78 between Molières and Lafrançaise had the impression of seeing a powerful light in the sky, but the crossing of Lafrançaise interrupted her view. At the exit of the village and overlooking the plain, the witness suddenly saw a stationary object. The witness stopped in a curve; the witness described a motionless device, round, with two powerful headlights themselves bordered on each side by several lights. Fearing she would obstruct traffic, she moved forward with her vehicle. The object had disappeared when she looked up again. Only one testimony was collected. The observation is the subject of a strange account: sighting of a round motionless device with headlights, and sudden disappearance. But this is a testimony given eight years after the observation; the witness gives no explanation for her delay in reporting such a strange observation (the witness says "I was both in shock and totally overwhelmed because my dearest wish was finally coming true: witnessing a phenomenon of extraterrestrial nature"), yet the level of observational shock did not prevent her from reporting, since she "considered going to the gendarmerie the next day, but it was closed." Beyond the attitude toward reporting, the testimony contains its own inconsistencies: the date is variable (September 17 to October 17, 2004), the witness is attracted by one or two headlights around which she then distinguishes a row of lights, but the drawings produced afterward describe rows of lights without a main headlight. One drawing shows an enormous saucer occupying a large part of the field of view facing the witness, but the witness did not see the disappearance. She was certainly busy restarting her car, but no mention is made of what the passenger might have seen regarding this disappearance, a passenger whom the witness nevertheless knows to associate with her testimony through the use of "WE" and who is described as able to confirm everything. The consistency of the testimony is not sufficient to give an unexplained character to this observation, whose account is strange. This old and delayed testimony is unusable. Consequently, GEIPAN classifies the case as C: lack of reliable information.