Earth File #804 // SOURCED record

Roissy-en-France square-shaped object observation

On 18 April 2016 at around 5:40 p.m., two witnesses at a bus stop observed objects passing through the sky in Roissy-en-France. The witnesses described a square-shaped object, with differing trajectory estimates; T1 filmed the observation. GEIPAN classified the case B and assessed object 2 as probably lightweight debris of unknown origin, while noting that the initial cause of motion was unknown.
Source // GEIPAN / CNES UAP Case Archive Earth record separated from alien editorial
FRED // CASE CONSOLE
SOL-3 // FILE 0804 // CH 10
CONTEXT VIEW // NOT SOURCE MEDIA
CASE FINGERPRINT
C906-11C3-5EE6
DAYLIGHT
? SENSOR CONTEXT WITNESS CONTEXT
Reported descending motionRECTANGLE
FRED // RECEIPT RETAINED // generated from Earth Record metadata
RECTANGLE
Roissy-en-France, Val-d'Oise // Apr 18, 2016 17:40. The diagram on the left is a structured-record visualization—not a reconstruction, photograph, sensor return, or additional evidence.
PARTIALLY EXPLAINED DAYLIGHT GEIPAN / CNES UAP Case Archive
Witness picturetwo eyewitnesses 1 interface marker(s) // not a headcount estimate
Motion traceReported descending motionpassed through the sky, trajectory described as straight by T1 and descending by T2, observed for approximately two minutes by T1 and 13 minutes by T2
Sensor / evidencevideo recording by T1eyewitness testimony, video
Fred's paperwork completeness9/9 fields // 100%
Interface completeness only // this score does not measure truth, evidence strength, or extraterrestrial probability
1 document(s)1 source node(s)10 structured claim(s) location precision: locality passed through the skytrajectory described as straight by T1 and descending by T2observed for approximately two minutes by T1 and 13 minutes by T2
FRED // RECEIPT RETAINEDPart of the drawer closes; part of it does not. Annoying, but considerably more useful than pretending uncertainty comes in one size.
Fred case console // context visualization // not evidence
Visitor Transmission // AlienBox editorial layer
We did not cause or operate the reported object. Your GEIPAN/CNES record describes two witnesses at a bus stop in Roissy-en-France on 18 April 2016, with T1 filming the observation. The witnesses described a square-shaped object, though their trajectory estimates differed. GEIPAN classified the case B and assessed object 2 as probably lightweight debris of unknown origin; the initial cause of motion remained unknown. We endorse the final clause. It is refreshing when paperwork admits it has reached the edge of its jurisdiction.
Fred // Earth Records Liaison // AlienBox editorial layer
A square, rotating object was filmed over Roissy-en-France; GEIPAN classified the case B and assessed object 2 as probably lightweight debris of unknown origin, while leaving its initial motion unexplained. That is a respectable conclusion: the label on the box is mostly readable, even if someone appears to have thrown the box. Differing trajectory estimates and observation durations are precisely why “unidentified” should not be promoted to “extraterrestrial” by administrative enthusiasm. Off the Earth Record: this one was not ours. Regrettably, that does not identify the debris or explain how it began moving. Earth gets to keep the unresolved part.
FRED // EXPENSE ACCOUNT DENIED

Buy Fred a Gorkon Blue

The Gorkon Outpost has again declined reimbursement. Voluntary support keeps AlienBox running and does not purchase influence over Earth Record conclusions.

EARTH CURRENCY BUY GORKON BLUE // $5 Secure checkout via Stripe // funds settle to Orange-Hat, LLC
QR code for Fred's DigiByte tip address
DIGIBYTE // DIRECT TIP SCAN OR SEND DGB dgb1q9dw0cfzr22n2efrad7l8340na90nlptjnthq0s
OPEN DGB WALLET →
Suggested: 500 DGB // any amount welcome // blockchain confirmation monitor pending
SUPPORT POLICY // Support payments are voluntary and never influence Earth Record evidence ranking, factual conclusions, or editorial treatment. VIEW FRED'S EXPENSE ACCOUNT →
When
2016-04-18 17:40:00
Where
Roissy-en-France, Val-d'Oise
Morphology
RECTANGLE
Evidence authority
SOURCED
Resolution
PARTIALLY EXPLAINED

Why Fred Thinks This Case Matters

AlienBox comparative analysis from structured Earth Record fields // not a new source // not a change in evidence grade
Console archetype // Published-resolution comparison

Fred keeps this file near the top of the pile because the record names 1 sensor type, the source also supplies a published resolution to compare against the original report, and visual-media evidence is explicitly referenced. That combination makes the case useful for cross-archive comparison without changing its evidence grade.

The source record includes a published resolution field. AlienBox treats it as an attributed source assessment to compare with the original report, not as an AlienBox verdict.

What strengthens the record

  • 1 linked source document provide provenance for the Earth Record.
  • 10 claim citations tie extracted statements back to source excerpts or locators.
  • Recorded sensor context: Video Recording By T1.
  • Recorded evidence context: Eyewitness Testimony and Video.
  • The source record includes a published resolution: GEIPAN classified the case B and identified a probable observation of lightweight debris of unknown origin; the initial cause of m....

What limits the record

  • The structured record does not establish multiple independent observers.
  • The current dossier is anchored to one source network rather than independent source networks.

What would help resolve it

  • Can the originating record establish an exact number of observers and whether their observations were independent?
  • Can the source establish a usable duration for the observation rather than only a date or narrative sequence?

Fred Says Go Here Next

Internal research paths chosen from this dossier's structured fields. Similarity is navigation, not corroboration.
UFO & UAP Records With Sensor Data → See how other dossiers record sensor context without treating it as automatic corroboration. Resolved UFO & UAP Case Files → Compare published explanations across resolved case files. UFO & UAP Photo and Video Case Files → Compare provenance and limitations across visual-media cases.
Related Earth File #1265

Salies-de-Béarn reported red cylindrical object observation

Shared evidence context: Eyewitness Testimony; shared source network.

 Related Earth File #1189

Reported luminous points over Clonas-sur-Vareze

Shared evidence context: Video; shared source network.

 Related Earth File #1182

Clesse (71) three orange luminous points observation

Shared evidence context: Eyewitness Testimony; shared source network.

 Related Earth File #1130

Cergy–Pontoise silent rectangular object report

Same recorded morphology; shared source network.

 Related Earth File #1117

Bayonne multicolored luminous phenomenon observation

Shared evidence context: Video; shared source network.

 Related Earth File #1105

Reported dark rectangular object near a Cessna windshield

Same recorded morphology; shared source network.

Earth Record // SOURCED

Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.
Witness typestwo eyewitnesses
Sensor typesvideo recording by T1
Evidence typeseyewitness testimony, video
The case concerns an observation in Roissy-en-France, in the Val-d'Oise department, dated 18 April 2016.
Claim #9037 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“ROISSY-EN-FRANCE (95) 18.04.2016”
Source: ROISSY-EN-FRANCE (95) 18.04.2016 // [[T0001]] Case details
Two witnesses at a bus stop observed an object passing through the sky at around 5:40 p.m. on 18 April 2016.
Claim #9038 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“On April 18, 2016, at around 5:40 p.m., two witnesses (T1 and T2) at a bus stop observed the passage through the sky of an object rotating on itself and scintillating.”
Source: ROISSY-EN-FRANCE (95) 18.04.2016 // [[T0001]] Description
The witnesses described the UAP as square-shaped, with T1 estimating a straight trajectory and T2 estimating a descending trajectory.
Claim #9039 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 96% extraction confidence
“The two witnesses indicated that the UAP was square-shaped.”
Source: ROISSY-EN-FRANCE (95) 18.04.2016 // [[T0001]] Description
T1 filmed the observation; the observation lasted approximately two minutes for T1 and 13 minutes for T2.
Claim #9040 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“T1 filmed the observation.”
Source: ROISSY-EN-FRANCE (95) 18.04.2016 // [[T0001]] Description
Both witnesses thought the object was debris fallen from an aircraft.
Claim #9041 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Both witnesses thought it was debris fallen from an aircraft.”
Source: ROISSY-EN-FRANCE (95) 18.04.2016 // [[T0001]] Description
The case involves observations of two objects, and the source states that a video of object No. 2 formed the basis of most of the analysis.
Claim #9042 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Fortunately, we have a video of object No. 2, and we base the bulk of the analysis on this video”
Source: ROISSY-EN-FRANCE (95) 18.04.2016 // [[T0002]] Description
The witness data are described as numerous and detailed but of limited reliability, with difficult observation conditions potentially causing discrepancies or contradictions in trajectory descriptions.
Claim #9043 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“The data provided by the witnesses are numerous and detailed but of limited reliability.”
Source: ROISSY-EN-FRANCE (95) 18.04.2016 // [[T0002]] Description
GEIPAN assesses that the physical and dynamic characteristics of object 2 resemble lightweight debris affected by gravity, rotation, wind, and turbulence, while the initial cause of the motion is unknown.
Claim #9044 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 97% extraction confidence
“The physical and dynamic characteristics of the UAP observed and filmed by the witnesses (for object 2) resemble those of lightweight debris”
Source: ROISSY-EN-FRANCE (95) 18.04.2016 // [[T0002]] Description
GEIPAN classifies the case as B and identifies a probable observation of lightweight debris of unknown origin.
Claim #9045 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Consequently, GEIPAN classifies the case as “B,” as a probable observation of lightweight debris (origin unknown).”
Source: ROISSY-EN-FRANCE (95) 18.04.2016 // [[T0003]] Description
The case page lists the phenomenon type as debris and the classification as B.
Claim #9046 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Phenomenon type Debris Strangeness 0.30 Consistency 0.70”
Source: ROISSY-EN-FRANCE (95) 18.04.2016 // [[T0001]] Case details
FRED // PUBLIC DESK CHANNEL

Ask Fred About This File

Questions about the dossier get an Earth Record answer first, then Fred may add clearly separated off-record commentary.

Questions are conversation, not evidence. Fred cannot promote a claim, alter a citation, or improve a source tier because somebody asks nicely.

Related Cases

Source Documents

AlienBox displays translated titles when available. Canonical links always point to the original source.
ROISSY-EN-FRANCE (95) 18.04.2016 FR // English display translation
ALIENBOX CLEARANCE // EARLY ACCESS
Receive new dossiers before the humans organize them.
Join the early-access list for new sighting dossiers, major archive drops, Fred's notes, Visitor confessions, and future Clearance-only research tools.
HUMAN COMPLIANCE NOTICE // Fred and Visitor transmissions are AI-generated AlienBox editorial layers. Earth Record claims are separately sourced and audited. Ask Fred conversations are contextual explanations, not new evidence. Foreign-language source material remains immutable in its original archive; English display/analysis translations are stored separately with provenance. Scanner graphics, flashes and alien silhouettes are interface design only.
Earth ArchiveSourcesMethod