The Night Watch
Part 3 of the Moca Vampire Saga
Read Part 1 here on UFOmystic entitled: Dark Visitors: Puerto Rico’s Moca Vampire.
Read Part 2 here on UFOmystic entitled: Killer Snakes, Winged Weirdoes and Politicians.
On April 2, the predator paid a visit to a farm owned by Isauro Melgar in Corozal’s Barrio Negro. The Moca Vampire killed eight goats and a dozen rabbits on the property. This loss was particularly painful for the small farmer, since the breeding rabbits had been quite valuable.
Fearing that the unknown entity would stage a return on the following evening, Melgar kept watch all night, spreading poison on the ground to eliminate whatever it was seemed interested in his rabbits. Joined by a group of armed neighbors, Melgar kept watch until three in the morning. The moment the men disbanded, whatever it was returned with a vengeance to slay more animals. This only strengthened the farmers’ determination to remain awake all night, if need be.
At half past midnight on April 5th, Isauro Melgar and his companions were startled by a deafening sound that suddenly blanketed the otherwise silent countryside. Amid the unearthly din, the farmers saw a shadowy figure running swiftly through the trees, away from an open pasture. They would later discover that four more goats had been slain. Stoical despite of his losses, Melgar told the press that “whatever killed my goats was definitely not human. I don’t believe in vampires, of course, but I really can’t say what kind of creature killed my animals.”
Official declarations began appearing in the media and in government communiqués two months after the mutilation spree began. Dr. Benedicto Negrón, a veterinarian for the Puerto Rico Department of Agriculture, noted that “the situation was a concern” to his agency, expressing a fear that the uncanny events might unleash hysteria among the population. In an April 9th editorial, the now-defunct “El Mundo” ran an editorial requesting greater leadership from the government in solving the bizarre mutilations.
To be continued…
This entry was posted
on Monday, February 5th, 2007 at 9:03 am and is filed under Alien Encounters, Animal Mutilations, Chupacabras, Evidence, Eyewitness Accounts, Strange Creatures, The Redfern Files. You can follow responses via RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is not allowed.
del.icio.us Digg Reddit BlinkList Google Ma.gnolia StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Help
- Related News Stories:
- A Startling Revelation »
- A Legendary Researcher On the Scene »
- Killer Snakes, Winged Weirdoes and Politicians »
- Dark Visitors: Puerto Rico’s Moca Vampire »
- Island UFOs »
|
Feb 05 2007 
February 5th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Nick,
A few weeks ago I found a video on YouTube of an old Chupacabra documentary that says …
“When the Chupacabras scare hit Mexico in the Spring of 1996, one of the most vivid images of the alleged creature was the one that appeared in this clip. While it was explained away as “the carcass of a cat set on fire”, the video voiceover says that the state of Sonora’s veterinarians decreed that it was the carcass of an unknown species of giant bat…”
For what it’s worth…
SMiles
February 6th, 2007 at 1:29 am
Interesting…though utterly typical.the “authorities” worry more about “hysteria” spreading among the populace than about making actual efforts to identify the predator and take action to end its predations.
February 6th, 2007 at 9:31 am
I agree with Mr. Hancock, Interesante…!
But in all reality, I don’t recall any government oficials getting involved. Then again I lived in one of those rural areas where TV and newspapers was a rarity. I recall all the commotion and some of the rumors. Many things were happening at that time. I can’t recall the exact date, even though I coould look it up, but I believe it all started happening after Hurricane Eloise.
Searching for something like that I would rather get trackers from the African continent or from an Indian reservation in the US. Puerto Rico has never been a hunting place so therefore the populace really can’t track animals. The people that have ever shown up have no idea that maybe two thirds of the island is forrest/jungle. Very hard to track anything unless you are trained for it. And as we can see, even in the African Continent they have not been able to track Mokele Mbembe. Puerto Rico is thousands of times tinier and they still can’t locate these phenomena.
February 6th, 2007 at 10:15 am
Bill Hancock: ‘the “authorities†worry more about “hysteria†spreading among the populace than about making actual efforts to identify the predator and take action to end its predations.’
Nick, it seems to me this sort of thing Bill refers to is a standard manoeuvre of all ‘enforcement’ agencies the world over: rather than admit their own impotence and, indeed, their own barely suppressed hysteria over their impotence, they switch the emphasis to the victims’ ‘hysteria’ - yet the victims, as often as not, are individuals who, in comparison, are actually conducting themselves cool-headedly, in spite of facing pressures that amount to the economic equivalent of life and death.
Not is this solely a ufological or paranormal concern: we see exactly the same hysteria in the antics of the likes of Blair and Bush with regard to terrorism, while at the same time claiming they’re merely carrying out the demands of their supposedly hysterical electorates.
February 6th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
On this topic (and the related cattle mutilations issue,) I have to place my bet on human pranksters for the really mysterious, blood-drained-carcass cases.
Unless the SciFi channel’s “Mansquito” has come to life, I’m unaware of any animal that drinks blood and is large enough to consume the blood of an animal as large as a cow or even a goat. I was raised on a farm and have butchered my share of cows and pigs. We’re talking about quantities of blood in the “several gallons” range. Every try to drink even a single gallon of water at a single sitting? That would have to be a SERIOUSLY large animal to pull it off, unless it hunts in packs and shares the same puncture marks for sucking on with its hunting mates.
The most common sentiment put forth vis-a-vis’ the “It can’t be a human,” argument is that there are rarely any markings on the ground that can be identified as footprints or tire tracks, etc., so how was the bloodless carcass carried to its final resting place, or else if it was killed on the spot, where are the ground markings that would give away the perpetrators who did the evil deed.
There are schools here in the States that teach hunting, tracking and stalking skills. Tom Brown Jr., for one, operates such a school. He learned his skills from an old Apache tracker. I can’t speak for Puerto Rico, but here on the mainland we have no end of “survivalist” and self-appointed “militia” groups that get seriously involved in learning para-military skills like these. I dare say that Tom Brown Jr. could probably butcher and bleed a whole herd of cows and not leave even the slighest telltale sign he had been there.
The Moca V, or at least the “shadowy form” that the farmer saw running away may or may not have been involved in the animal killings, but his description implies that he really didn’t get any kind of substantial look at whatever or whoever it was. Kind of falls into the category of “unexplained lights in the sky.” Just because they look different than what we are accustomed to seeing doesn’t make them ET spaceship, and a shadowy form seen late at night after staying up until after midnight on high alert doesn’t make for a very convincing monster.
February 7th, 2007 at 9:18 am
Alan Borky is right, of course, in noting that the “authorities” play the “hysteria” card as a dodge all the time…when the truth is, the witnesses and such are usually NOT hysterical. They aren’t flakes or raving whackos. They are just normal folks trying to live in a normal world (guess what? Psychologists all like to point out that we are rut-prone creatures…we LIKE rut-like “normality” as we perceive it…and DON’T like having the boat rocked by off-the-wall occurrences).
If these people get a little hyper its because they are royally ticked off at being patronizingly dismissed (dissed) as “hysterics” or “kooks”, and are angry at the authorities (who are supposed to be looking out for them)just “don’t want to hear it” and hustle to ignore the situation…usually distancing themselves from it as much as possible. Talking about “hysteria” among the people is a tactic rooted in “If you don’t like the message, attack the messenger” methodology…one used by politicos and bureaucrats from time immemorial.
When MindEcdysiast says the authorities didn’t get involved in much investigation there in P.R., that sounds just about right. Typically they’ll run like hell in the opposite direction.
February 8th, 2007 at 7:50 am
Bill,
My post wasn’t meant as an ad hominem argument; merely to point out that perfectly honest and forthright people who see ordinary things in unfamiliar circumstances can and do easily mistake them for mysterious things, be they lights in the sky or shadowy figures scuttering of into the night.
A further logical fallacy that nearly all of us fall victim to is in making an automatic association of one thing with with another. A man’s livestock are being killed. The man hears a previously unheard roaring sound. A man sees a shadowy figure running away into the woods. These are three separate pieces of information that may or may not be in any way related to each other, but the automatic presumption by many is to link all three facts as being examples of a single phenomenon. Other than that they were all new and strange to the men who reported them I can’t see anything in the account that connects those three dots into a single picture.
Some years ago my wife and I went out one night around 9pm for a walk. It was well after dark. We were in a very sparsely populated area, walking along a dirt road that lead between stands of trees and fenced in cow pastures. As we aproached on stretch of trees (which was within one of the fenced pastures,) my wife and I heard the sounds of ground cover cracking and breaking, as though someone was walking on twigs. My wife suddenly freezes in her tracks and points toward the nearest stand of trees. She tells me that she saw a tall, dark shape that moved among the trees. It was very dark out at that time of night and all one could see of the trees were just silouhettes of the trees themselves that were only slightly less dark than the night that surrounded them.
As I’ve mentioned before, I was raised on a farm and we had many such stands of trees on our property. Cows love to bed down in them at night, and they do walk about some, breaking and snapping twigs, dried leaves and other deadfall on the ground. I explained this to my wife, but she was certain she had seen something tall, dark, and moving. So I jumped the fence, walking into the trees and had myself a little look-see. There was nothing. Just some cows who were in fact laying down sleeping or quietly standing there.
But I couldn’t convince my wife, even after I checked things out first hand. When I returned with my report her comment (in a somewhat irritated tone,) was, “Well, then I guess there must be such things as Werecows because what I saw was NOT a cow!”
From her perspective she heard twigs snapping, which she is unaccustomed to hearing at night like that. Then she saw or thought she saw a large, tall moving silouhette. In her mind she linked these two facts together as having one and the same cause and…presto! Werecows.
But my wife is not a nut case (at least I don’t think she is.) She’s an attorney, with a Doctor of Law degree, and one of the most savvy people I personally know. She wasn’t making things up or intentionally distoring her story. She simply connected a few unfamiliar dots under unfamiliar circumstances and came up with a fantastic conclusion. I don’t think any of us is beyond making that kind of error given the right set of conditions.
February 8th, 2007 at 9:53 am
Oh, hey, my man…you are absolutely right with the thing about presumptions being made…both pro AND con…on seemingly weird events (that may or may not be “truly” weird). And your story about what your wife thought she saw is a perfect example of somebody seeing “something” but just being sure of exactly what. Good point here is that you went and LOOKED. You at least made an effort to check and see what you could discover. The reflexive “don’t want to HEAR it” crowd would blow it off automatically. Going to look…as you did…may not have resulted in total explanatory satisfaction, but it least was a pro-active attempt to try and make a determination about something. THAT is a GOOD thing. Just blowing a puzzling (to a witness) situation off as a “can’t be, therefore it isn’t” example of “hysteria” is what irks people, and that’s what we’re talking about as an all-too-often bureaucratic reaction.
By the way, FYI (yourself and others), Nick is absent in postings and comments for a while because of a family medical situation that has come up over “across the pond” in the UK. He will be back in action as soon as the situation resolves itself.
Bill
February 8th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
Here’s hoping that Nick’s family medical situation sets itself to rights quickly.
Having written as I did above, I have to confess there are some genuinely puzzling reports of cryptids, and though they are seen at night, under stressful (creepy) circumstances, the details given by witnesses are so fine that one is left wondering what was actually seen.
The so called “Beast of Bray Road” falls into that category. I’ve read eyewitness accounts that go into extreme detail, describing the color of fur, the shape of ears, etc. The descriptions are so detailed that it’s difficult to propose any known creature that might account for the sighting, even given the aura of creepiness surrounding the encounter.
So you’re stuck with either a hoax, a hallucination, too much booze, or witnesses describing things not yet known and cataloged. Who knows? Maybe my wife DID see a Werecow!