Analysis of NYC
“First Responder” Accounts
Of FDNY and EMS Personnel
on 9/11/01

Compiled by Andrew Johnson (ad.johnson@ntlworld.com)

 

with Contributions by

 

Morgan Reynolds

Russ Gerst

Jeff Strahl

CB Brooklyn

Cathy Palmer

	September 2007

Table of Contents

1.    Introduction.. 4

1.1      Initiation. 4

1.2      Tribute. 5

1.3      Rationale. 5

1.4      Method of Data Collection and Analysis. 5

1.5      Data Considerations. 6

2.    Numbers of Witnesses Reporting Site and Sound of Plane Crashes.. 7

2.1      Witness Account Sample Size and Note about Numbers. 7

2.2      Assumptions. 7

2.3      Percentage Calculations. 7

2.4      Access Database Queries. 7

2.5      Witnesses To Plane 1 (NOT on TV)8

2.6      Witnesses to Plane 2 (before impact) – those within ½ mile of WTC Complex. 9

2.7      Witnesses to Plane 2 (before impact) – those further than ½ mile of WTC Complex. 11

2.8      Other Considerations Related to Plane Impact Witnesses. 12

2.9      Other Witnesses Who Were Not Sure About The Incidence of Plane Crashes. 13

2.10    Anomalous Accounts of Plane Sightings and Impacts. 15

3.    Additional Studies of Accounts Separate to Reports of Plane Impacts.. 19

3.1      Accounts Mentioning a “Missile” or “Rocket”. 19

3.2      Selected Accounts Mentioning “Plane Parts” and Luggage/Suitcases. 19

3.3      Accounts Mentioning “Landing Gear”. 20

3.4      Accounts Mentioning FBI Agents and the Possible “3^rd Plane”. 21

3.5      Accounts Mentioning Hearing the F-15’s. 23

3.6      Accounts Containing Redacted Portions. 24

3.7      Accounts Mentioning Car Fires After WTC Destruction. 24

3.8      Account Mentioning Building 7 Was Expected to Collapse. 25

3.9      Accounts Mentioning Descriptions of Debris. 26

3.10    Accounts Not Mentioning Loud Explosions as Towers Were Coming Down. 27

4.    Conclusions.. 29

4.1      Plane Accounts. 29

4.2      Accounts with Redacted Portions. 29

4.3      Accounts Mentioning Collapse of Towers. 29

4.4      Other Accounts Raising Suspicion or Concern. 30

4.5      Overall Conclusion. 30

5.    Appendix A - Further Technical Details of Data Analysis.. 31

5.1      Initial PDF Text Searching. 31

5.2      PDF Conversion Software – Converting to Raw Text Format31

5.3      Text Layout Processing. 31

5.4      Text Searching. 31

5.5      Collation of Data in Microsoft Excel32

5.6      Use of Microsoft Access Database. 32

6.    Appendix B - Witness Account Details.. 35

6.1      Witnesses to Plane 1. 35

6.2      Witnesses to Plane 2 (before impact) – those further than ½ mile of WTC Complex. 47

6.3      Other Analyses. 49

7.    Appendix C - List of Witness Accounts/File Numbers.. 50

8.    References.. 59

 

List of Tables

Table 2‑1 Duplicate Witness Accounts Found. 7

Table 2‑2 List of Witnesses To Plane 1. 8

Table 2‑3 List of Witnesses Who Reported Hearing Plane 1. 8

Table 2‑4 Counts of Witnesses Near or Inside WTC at Time of 2nd Impact9

Table 2‑5 List of Witnesses near WTC Who Reported Seeing Plane 2. 9

Table 2‑6 List of Witnesses near WTC Who Reported Hearing Plane 2. 10

Table 2‑7 List of Witnesses near WTC Who Reported Seeing and Hearing Plane 2. 10

Table 2‑8 List of Witnesses Inside WTC Who Reported Hearing Plane 2. 11

Table 2‑9 List of Witnesses further than ½ mile from WTC Complex Who Saw Plane 2. 11

Table 2‑10 List of Witnesses further than ½ mile from WTC Complex Who Heard Plane 2. 12

Table 2‑11 List of Witnesses Near WTC Who Weren’t Initially Sure They Saw a Plane Crash on the 2nd Impact12

Table 2‑12 List of Other Witnesses Who Were Not Sure About The Incidence of Plane Crashes. 13

Table 3‑1 Accounts With Redacted Portions. 24

List of Figures

Figure 5‑1 PRGrep Text File Searcher31

Figure 5‑2 Microsoft Excel Data Collation. 32

Figure 5‑3 Access Database Witness Data Capture Form.. 33

Figure 5‑4 Access Database Query Design. 34

Figure 5‑5 Access Database Query SQL. 34

 

1.1                          Initiation

This study was proposed by Attorney Jerry Leaphart, in September 2007, as a way of determining more information about the supposed plane impacts on the WTC Towers on 9/11/2001. Jerry brought to our attention the accounts / “oral histories” as given by “First Responders” to the 9/11 Tragedy, as posted on the New York Times Website, at the link given below.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_full_01.html

These accounts were published on 12^th August 2005.

Jerry originally tasked the people listed above with analysing the accounts of the responders listed on the Web Page above to determine the following:

a)      Those who described seeing and hearing a jetliner.

b)      Those who described seeing a jetliner but hearing only an explosion or sounds inconsistent with a jet.

c)      Those who described seeing only an explosion and asserting or surmising a jet.

d)      Those who described hearing an explosion and saying either saw no jet or not sure of jet presence.

e)      Those who described seeing an explosion and saying either saw no jet or didn't think jet was present.

f)        Those who described seeing an explosion and were perplexed by a report that a jet was involved either because didn't see one or didn't hear one or both.

g)      Other variations.

Other people on the list worked through sets of accounts and submitted a list of comments and noteworthy accounts, which seemed to either have inconsistencies, or some elements which did not make sense.

As the analysis continued, the scope was expanded some what to include such things as:

·         Reference to “Missile” or “Rocket”

·         Reports of “Plane Parts” and Luggage/Suitcases

·         Reports of Seeing Landing Gear

·         Reports of FBI Agents and the Possible “3rd Plane”

·         Hearing the F-15’s

The witness accounts of the latter are particularly interesting to compare to their accounts of the sound of the 2^nd Boeing, before impact.

1.2                          Tribute

Whatever the conclusions of this study and however it is interpreted, we must pay a large tribute and debt of thanks to those people who responded on the day of 9/11 and the lives they undoubtedly saved and the injuries they helped to prevent.

At one level there is a desire to dispassionately analyze the data and evidence to determine what happened on 9/11, but at another it is worth remembering that the witnesses concerned did not know what they were going into and how terrible the events would become, as they unfolded. At another level, however, the very nature and execution of the 9/11 Black Operation can also be considered as being a “Psy-Op” – the disturbing reality of which was deliberately designed to discourage us from thinking about and studying the events of that day.

1.3                          Rationale

The study was undertaken because of the already compelling data, evidence and arguments which very strongly suggest that the stories of large jet planes striking both WTC towers are at best suspect and at worst fake. See references 1 - 4 for further analysis of some of this evidence.

We therefore wanted to try and determine how well a range of eyewitness and ear-witness accounts supported the other evidence, and what other information we could glean from these accounts.

This study therefore tried to determine:

1.             The numbers of witnesses that were within ½ mile of the WTC buildings when the supposed plane impacts took place.

2.             The number of witnesses who reported seeing a plane.

3.             The number of witnesses who reported hearing a plane.

1.4                          Method of Data Collection and Analysis

1.4.1                     Data Collection

A more detailed description of the method of data collection is given in Section 5. In summary:

1.             Over 500 PDF files were downloaded from the New York Times page referenced in section 1.1.

2.             These PDF files were converted to raw text format for easier searching.

It was noted that there were some errors in the construction of the New York Times page, with 1 account not being properly linked to the web page e.g. 9110232 (Kevin Martin). Additionally, when all the files were downloaded, it was noticed the accounts were indexed up to 9110511, but there were breaks in the sequence. Therefore, substitute links were created on a local web page, resulting in several additional PDF files being downloaded from the New York Times website which were not linked to the page above.

1.4.2                     Data Analysis

Software to search the text files (“PRGREP”) was employed as follows:

1.             The text files were searched for all references, initially, to the word “plane”, “jet”, “aircraft”, “airplane”, and “airliner”.

2.             These accounts were then quickly scanned to establish what the location of the witness was when they saw or heard about the planes. (The great majority saw or heard about the 1st plane on TV or radio or emergency services radio. A large majority heard about or saw the 2nd plane on TV).

3.             Where the location of the witness could not be determined accurately enough, the account was not included in the overall figures. In the accounts used, where reference to an exact street or location such as “opposite WTC 1” or “outside WTC 7” or “on the BQE”, the witnesses discussion of seeing or hearing a plane was then determined.

4.             This information was copied into an Excel spreadsheet, which was in turn converted into an Microsoft Access (2000) Database, which gives a large number of options for analysing, processing and formatting the data, as shown in later sections.

5.             Queries were designed to select the information regarding the witness accounts of planes. A further documenting of the results of these queries can be found in section 6.

6.             As the accounts were analysed, other points of interest (such as reference to burning cars, FBI agents and passenger luggage) were noted.

1.5                          Data Considerations

1.5.1                     Times accounts were given

The first account was recorded on the 9^th of October 2001 and final account was recorded on 1^st Feb 2002, which was over 4 months after 9/11.

1.5.2                     Conditions under which accounts were recorded

The accounts were recorded by FDNY personnel, when the witnesses were not under oath and they were taken without cross-examination.

1.5.3                     Ambiguity

There is some ambiguity in the data, due to some witnesses not making clear exactly what they saw. In some cases, it is possible that they did see “something” and didn’t report it when they were giving their accounts, as their minds were focused on describing some other part of their experience.

1.5.4                     Trauma / Affectation of Witnesses

Some consideration has to be given, in some cases, to the idea that some witnesses’ accounts or memories of the day may have been affected by the unique nature of the tragedy as it unfolded and what they themselves were part of. From studying the accounts, however, there only seem to be a few cases where this may have affected what the witnesses reported regarding the “plane impacts”.

In cases where witness accounts seemed to be unclear – e.g. it appeared they must have been at or near the WTC complex around the time of the 2^nd impact, but they don’t mention anything about it in their accounts (perhaps due to the traumatic events), then these accounts were not used in determining the numbers given in the Section 2.

2.1                          Witness Account Sample Size and Note about Numbers

A total of 505 accounts were downloaded (a different figure to that listed on the New York times page). 4 of these were determined to be “repeat” accounts – for some reason, the same person was interviewed twice, on different dates:

Table 2‑1 Duplicate Witness Accounts Found

Discounting these left a total sample size of 501 accounts. The words “plane jet airplane aircraft” were found in 426 accounts, 1770 times.

The final account sample size was used for the “witnesses to a plane” study (discussed in this section) was 291. Accounts were chosen with a view to mainly focusing on those who gave an exact or unambiguous location when reporting seeing “plane” 1 or 2. A few of those who simply described seeing the impacts on TV were left out, but some were included – the main focus of the study was on those who were close to where the 2^nd impact happened.

2.2                          Assumptions

It is reasonable to assume that there would be far more people who reported seeing the 2^nd plane than the first, due to attention being focused on the unfolding disaster.

2.3                          Percentage Calculations

These were only done for those accounts concerned with the 2^nd plane, as it would be expected more people would have been paying attention for a plane noise at this time, and more people were closer to where the plane was.

2.4                          Access Database Queries

In the following sections, queries used for the Access database are referenced in the headings.

 

2.5                          Witnesses To Plane 1 (NOT on TV)

2.5.1                     Witnesses Who Reported Seeing Plane 1 before impact (NOT on TV) (Query A1)

16 witnesses reported seeing the 1^st plane before impact. Segments of their accounts can be read in Section 6.1.1.

Table 2‑2 List of Witnesses To Plane 1

2.5.2                     Witnesses Who Reported Hearing Plane 1 before impact (NOT on TV) (Query A2)

16 witnesses reported hearing the 1^st plane before impact. Segments of their accounts can be read in Section 6.1.2.

Table 2‑3 List of Witnesses Who Reported Hearing Plane 1

2.5.3                     Witnesses who Reported Seeing and Hearing Plane 1 Before Impact (Query A3)

1 Witness reported seeing and hearing plane 1 before impact. A segment of his accounts can be read in Section 6.1.3.

 

2.6                          Witnesses to Plane 2 (before impact) – those within ½ mile of WTC Complex

2.6.1                     Witnesses who reported being near or inside WTC at the time of The 2^nd Impact (Queries B1 and B2)

Table 2‑4 Counts of Witnesses Near or Inside WTC at Time of 2nd Impact

2.6.2