Blue light in La R�union, France

On August 17, 1980 at 1:30 in the morning, two witnesses are driving on national road 1. Arriving at Cap Houssaye, they see for a few seconds three motionless human shapes on a mound overlooking the sea about fifteen meters from the edge of the road. These shapes, lit by the headlights, are described as being about 2 meters tall with a heavy build, and on their heads orange, egg-shaped swellings. No particular noise was heard. The next evening, one of the witnesses will see from her home, in the direction of Cap Houssaye, a very bright blue light on the ocean in the direction of the observation site. The witnesses only report it to the gendarmerie on August 30. Sent immediately to the scene, no trace will be found in the area by the gendarmerie. GEIPAN continues to publish all of its archives on its public website www.geipan.fr. Among its publications are old cases classified at the time (A, B, C, or D) which are now being re-examined, with the sole aim of being more relevant in the conclusions. Thanks to new technical means (software) and the investigation experience gained over recent years, this re-examination sometimes leads to new remarks or even a change in classification. This observation case, previously classified D and named SAINT-GILLES (974) 1980, is part of a set of cases recently re-examined. The initial classification as D unexplained can be understood by one witness's (T2) opposition to the hypothesis of divers. However, the reported elements of normal human shapes, apart from the shiny appearance under the headlights and the large orange eyes, fit this hypothesis well. The possibility of divers on the coast in the middle of the night in August on Réunion is plausible, even in the apparent absence of a parked vehicle on the road. We note that the frightened witnesses did not stop to observe the evolution of these shapes, nor did they look for a parked vehicle nearby. In the absence of justification from the witness for his objection, it is the hypothesis that should be retained. But the observation of a ground phenomenon without an associated description of a phenomenon observed in the sky or at the interface between sky and earth (aerospace) does not fall within GEIPAN's remit. Even if the diver hypothesis is most plausible, GEIPAN prefers to classify the case as unexploitable at its level. The case is classified C.