VILLERS-SAINT-GENEST (60) --.07.1990

On an uncertain night between July and August 1990, an adolescent and her brother were watching the stars from a bedroom in their family home at Villers-Saint-Genest, France. The catalogue once used July 1 as a filing date, but that was arbitrary and is not treated as a date remembered by either witness. At approximately 00:30, the siblings reportedly saw a luminous point approach. As it came closer, they perceived a gigantic black object that was silent and difficult to distinguish from the night sky. It stopped directly in front of the house. The children heard voices and became frightened. They hid beneath a desk in the bedroom rather than continuing to watch. The available account does not identify the language, number of speakers or exact words. No visible occupant is described in the initially remembered sequence. They remained hidden until the object departed. When they emerged, it was around 02:30. Both were surprised that roughly two hours appeared to have passed, but the record does not establish synchronized timepieces, continuous observation or a measured period of unconsciousness. That exterior observation and concealment formed the account as it was initially remembered. A more elaborate sequence appeared much later and must be kept separate even when placed chronologically at the point where the witness believed it belonged. In 2005, the principal witness awoke during the night in an agitated state. She then associated a memory with the 1990 interval beneath the desk: boarding the object, finding herself among six beings who discussed her, feeling intense fear and suddenly being back under the desk. This material was not documented as a contemporaneous 1990 recollection. It emerged fifteen years later, and the source does not establish whether it represented recovered memory, dream material, later interpretation or an event remembered accurately after a long delay. The Atlas inserts it at its claimed event-time position while marking its later emergence. The witness submitted the account in 2012. GEIPAN referred the material to a specialist in eyewitness testimony at the University of Toulouse working within a CNRS laboratory. The expert considered the beginning of the first observation experientially coherent but treated the later memory material with appropriate caution. The case therefore contains three different dates of evidence: the reported event in summer 1990, the agitated awakening and recovered sequence in 2005, and the formal report in 2012. Collapsing them into one immediate narrative would hide the most important provenance issue. CE4 is retained because the later sequence includes claimed boarding and involuntary presence among beings. The classification does not imply that the 1990 exterior observation itself proved transport, or that the 2005 memory was independently verified. The portrait reconstructs only the initially remembered scene: a massive black silent object outside the village house and two small, fully clothed silhouettes hiding beneath the bedroom desk. It shows no beings or boarding. It is an illustrative reconstruction, not documentary evidence.