In April 2010 CAELESTIA was contacted by M.R., a university student from Montreal who prefers to remain anonymous. In his e-mail M.R. explained that, over the last few years, his interest in UFOs had grown and that he had unsuccessfully tried to locate a copy of the HAINES/GUENETTE report. We responded that copies were indeed difficult to find and provided M.R. with a photocopied version of our copy.
In subsequent mails, we learned that, from the early 80s to about 2005, M.R.'s father (H.R.) worked as a crime-scene photographer for the Montreal Police Department and that, perhaps, his father could shed some light on why officer O'Connor, a member of the MUCP's Judicial Identity Department who had been called to the rooftop in order to take additional photos with his 35 mm camera, finally decided not to take any. We quote from an e-mail M.R. sent us on April 15, 2010:
While both my dad and O'Connor worked out of the same department ("ident"), their backgrounds and job descriptions were very different:
Before his work for the police, my father was a long-time freelance photographer. Tons of experience, and (this is key) varied shooting conditions (all types of sports, underwater, from a helicopter,...). Once hired by the department, he was considered a civilian photographer.
On the other hand, O'Connor was a police officer who took part in a four-week (or so) photography training course. This course enabled him to become a crime scene "tech".
While techs had less skill and much less experience with a camera, they were allowed to dust for prints. They were called to scenes where a crime took place (murder, theft) and involved dusting for prints and other types of evidence collection.
Civilian photogs were not trained to collect evidence or dust for prints, but were considered much more trustworthy and skilled with a camera. Therefore, my dad's typical calls were for events like suicides, accidents, drug/weapons busts...
Anyways, my dad thinks that O'Connor's lack of experience or nervousness with his camera could have contributed to his decision not to take any photos (in addition to thick clouds of course).
In later correspondence, M.R. wrote that a check at the Montreal Urban Community Police archives had revealed that the HAINES/GUENETTE report is now being preserved in the police archives.
M.R. further mentions that he spoke to a few ex-policemen about their careers and possible UFO experiences but, unfortunately, none of them directly witnessed the 1990 Montreal lights. Recently, his father too had talked to some of his former colleagues about their memories from the night in question and most, if not all, remember the event. Attempts to interview other retired officers who were at the scene that November night are still being considered and M.R. will keep us up to date if anything new surfaces. H.R. figures maybe those who've retired would be more willing to go on record and share their knowledge.
In the course of our e-mail exchanges with M.R., CAELESTIA expressed the need of obtaining better quality prints of the photos taken by Marcel LAROCHE. Both M.R. and CAELESTIA have tried to contact LAROCHE in this regard, but to no avail. Already in May 2007, CAELESTIA addressed a letter to Dr. Richard F. HAINES, principal author of the Montreal report, in an attempt to obtain high-quality prints or scans of the photos. Unfortunately, no response was received. But the good news is that, at least, one of the original photos was recently published on the Canadian UFO site www.ovni-alerte.com.