Bill Wilkinson, aka Ben Hammott, has at last confessed that his improbable discoveries (The Loch Ness Monster, The Tomb of Mary Magdalene, artefacts from the wedding of Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene, bottles containing treasure scrolls and, most recently, an aborted deception involving the most coveted biblical artefact of them all (The Ark of the Covenant)) have each been hoaxed.
This represents over twelve years of public and private deception in the name of fame and profit.
My whistleblowing regarding the Loch Ness monster deception is reproduced in full at the end of this post, and was originally published on 14th of March 2012, prompting an implosion within Wilkinson’s team. Amongst the information revealed to members of the team over the last few days was irrefutable evidence that the relics ‘discovered’ by Hammott were purchased on eBay and, most concerning, the ‘real’ body staged in the Mary Magdalene tomb dated to 1957. Where had it come from?
A full written confession was issued by Bill Wilkinson on 18th of March, in two different forms. The first came via his colleague, Sandy Hamblett, who posted the following on the Arcadia forum:
Statement from Ben:
"It has been a long time coming and something that is long overdue. And to tell the truth, for once, I am glad it has all finally come out and I thank Andrew for being the intermediary that facilitated this outcome. I have thought many times about coming clean and telling the truth, but lacked the guts to do so.
Everything I said I discovered is a hoax, planted by me and only me.
Sandy, Bill, Pat, Rene and Bruce, my brother, and everyone else were unwitting pawns in my game, for the lack of a better word. I have no idea why I did it, or carried on what was at first a stupid prank that escalated out of control. My intention was never to deceive, but then of course it was by doing what I did.
Perhaps I did it for the money, though very little was ever forthcoming and realised early on that it probably never would.
Did I do it for fame and attention? Perhaps. I did enjoy it at times but it wasn’t the driving force behind it.
Maybe I just carried on to see what I could get away with. I really don’t know.
I know saying sorry to the many friends and acquaintances I have made and deceived over the years, can in no way make up for what I have done. There is probably nothing I can say or do now to right the wrong. But I am very, very sorry and know that many of them I will lose, which apart from the deceit, is perhaps the worst thing about this sorry and despicable act of mine.
Have I made money from my exploits, yes, a bit through book sales, but nearly all the money I have made has paid for further research and my many trips to rlc to try and find something real that I still believe to be there, to in some way hope to make up for my past deeds. I do believe Saunière found a secret, something hidden in the vicinity of Rennes-le-Chateau, and there is something truly amazing to be found. It is something that I will continue looking for.
I have had nothing since bad luck since I become involved with the Rennes-le-Chateau affair, bad karma, almost certainly. Today I have no money, no family life, no home and now probably very few friends. It is perhaps a well disserved outcome.
I apologize to everyone who has supported me over the years, everyone who bought my book, but most of all I apologize to my friends and family for letting them down. I cannot say sorry enough to Sandy, Bill, Rene and many others for being my friends and supporting me all these years. I have lied to you and let you down in such a big way I cannot even hope for your forgiveness.
Anyone who would like to return my book can contact me for a refund and when I have the money I will reimburse them.
Ben"Despite having defended Wilkinson for years, and having been repeatedly deceived by him, Hamblett expressed her empathy at his sorry state of affairs.
This was followed by a subsequent confession to René Barnett, the producer of the
Bloodline documentary that featured Hammott’s bogus discoveries. Barrett, a staunch defender of Wilkinson over the years, resent Wilkinson’s confession to her Facebook following, also on 18th of March 2012:
"This has been a long time coming and something that is long overdue. And to tell the truth, for once, I am glad it has all finally come out.
I have thought many times about coming clean and telling you and others the truth, but lacked the guts to do so.
Everything I said I discovered is a hoax, planted by me and only me and no one else involved knew the truth, not even my brother.
I have no idea why I did it, or carried on what was at first a stupid prank that escalated out of control. My intention was never to deceive, but then of course it was by doing what I did. Perhaps I did it for the money, though very little was ever forthcoming and realised early on that it probably never would.
Did I do it for fame and attention? Perhaps. I did enjoy it at times but it wasn’t the driving force behind it.
Maybe I just carried on to see what I could get away with. I really don’t know.
I know saying sorry to you and the many friends and acquaintances I have made and deceived over the years, can in no way make up for what I have done. There is probably nothing I can say or do now to right the wrong. But I am very, very sorry and know that many of them I will lose, which is perhaps the worst thing about this sorry and despicable act of mine.
I have had nothing since bad luck since I become involved with the Rennes-le-Chateau affair, bad karma, almost certainly. Today I have no money, no family life, no home and now probably very few friends. It is perhaps a well disserved outcome.
I apologize to you, someone who has supported and defended me over the years, I cannot say sorry enough for what I have done. I have lied to you and let you down in such a big way I cannot even hope for your forgiveness and so will not ask for it.”
Ben"
from reneeWhile Wilkinson’s confession is admirable, it does not appear to tell the whole story. In fact, he appears to be taking ‘one for the team’, as they say, in the hope of concealing further incriminating information. Wilkinson goes to great lengths to set the record straight that only he was involved in the hoaxes. Yet, his brother and trusted researchers (as portrayed in the film,
Bloodline and in Wilkinson’s book) are always nearby.
And then there is the Ark of the Covenant deception.
Unlike the Loch Ness Monster and Mary Magdalene tomb deception (whose props were commissioned by Wilkinson and sculpted by the same high-profile prop artist), reliable sources confirm that the Ark of the Covenant construction, and deception, was a team effort. The matter is complex indeed, for the team sought funding from at least two, high-profile German household names, in support of the project.
At the same time, a documentary was being filmed about the ‘discovery’ of the sacred relic and, needless to say, the filmmaker was deceived about the authenticity of the artefact. The pictures below are, in fact, the fake Ark of the Covenant that the film intended to feature. Since these pictures have been taken, however, Wilkinson has collapsed the cave (and it is a real cave in the vicinity of Rennes-le-Château), so that no further access was possible, thus rendering the fake artefact unavailable for scrutiny, just like his last fake tomb (Mary Magdalene) had been conveniently collapsed.
The fake ark before the tomb was collapsed by Wilkinson
Close up of the fake ark before the tomb was collapsed by Wilkinson
Another close up of the fake ark before the tomb was collapsed by Wilkinson
The enormity and severity of the deceptions seems lost on the Rennes-le-Château community at large, as if an apology can make amends for a dozen-plus years of fraud. In addition, criminal offences may have been committed.
My original post from March 14th follows:
Quote:
In 1999 Bill Wilkinson changed his public-facing name to Ben Hammott, an anagram for ‘The Tombman’. The change highlighted his alleged discovery of a tomb in or around Rennes-le-Château; a tomb he would later suggest contained the body of Mary Magdalene. However, new evidence suggests that there may have been another reason for his name change.
Also in 1999, Bill Wilkinson, supported by his brother, Mick, presented a video of what they claimed to be the Loch Ness Monster to a team of specialists at the Loch Ness & Morar Project, a respected organisation, led by the esteemed authority, Adrian J Shine. According to Shine, the Wilkinson brothers were looking for validation that the video was authentic, so that they could sell it, presumably for a large sum of money.
Bill Wilkinson (far left) presenting to the Loch Ness Project.
(Adrian Shine with beard, second from right. Mick Wilkinson not pictured.)
My conversations with Adrian Shine (February 2012) confirmed that the Loch Ness Project scientists rejected Wilkinson’s video. Shine confirmed that Wilkinson submitted a copy of his video on 5th August 1999 and that they notified him of their findings seven weeks later, in a letter from Shine dated 25th September, which described Wilkinson’s effort as, “
a well constructed hoax”.
A copy of the Shine’s letter follows:
Another letter around the same time, this one from the company hired to analyse Wilkinson's 'Nessie' footage, termed it, “
an attempt to deceive” and added, “
we feel that the neck and head are latex mouldings, attached to and manoeuvred by a diver”. The full letter follows below:
Wilkinson subsequently attempted to sell the video of “Nessie” to various newspapers, including the Sun and the Mirror, and he did receive an offer from one of them, which he turned down in the hope that he could demand a significantly greater amount of money should Shine and his team authenticate the video. They did not, and the offers dried up.
A still from Wilkinson’s ‘Nessie’ video
Shine also mentioned that he visited the Loch at the location where Wilkinson indicated he had filmed ‘Nessie’, not expecting to find the creature, but rather in the hope of identifying how Wilkinson had orchestrated the deception.
Within a couple of months of his video being rejected, Wilkinson changed his name to Ben Hammott and moved on from the Loch Ness Monster and began refocusing on the tomb of Mary Magdalene in Rennes-le-Château, which he had discovered previously. No-one took notice of his Loch Ness Monster fiasco and it had faded into oblivion until an individual by the name of Richard Paul watched a documentary (Bloodline) with a colleague of Shine, who recognised Wilkinson from the Loch Ness Monster deception.
Hammott’s alleged discovery of the tomb of Mary Magdelene attracted considerable attention within the Rennes-le-Château genre for a while, but little interest was generated in the mainstream press or within academia, due (in part) to his resistance to showing French officials the tomb, despite having met with them on at least one occasion.
Today, no evidence (besides Wilkinson’s own video footage) has been produced to confirm the tomb’s existence and Wilkinson is said to be fearful of returning to it due to his belief that ‘it is cursed’. Curiously, Wilkinson’s video ‘evidence’ never included audio of the camera’s descent down the irregular-shaped shaft in the cave. When I examined the camera a few years ago I noticed that this feature could not be turned off, begging the question: was there something on the audio that Wilkinson wanted to hide?
Subsequent to the alleged discovery of a tomb that looked more like a movie set than the last resting place of one of the most renowned women in history, Wilkinson and his team discovered a chest containing miscellaneous items, which he and his colleagues suggested were artefacts from the wedding of Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene, together with three bottles containing un-aged parchments with poorly written and anglicised Old French. Each was discovered in the vicinity of Rennes-le-Château. Not surprisingly, all items were (and are still) obtainable on eBay.
Bill Wilkinson (aka Ben Hammott) soon released a book, and a documentary was made on the subject of the whole affair by the name of Bloodline. Its director, Bruce Burgess, who was as close to Wilkinson and his discoveries as anyone, later had this to say about one particularly farcical aspect of the researcher’s quest:
“When Ben found bottle three up on Blanchefort, I went with him… I must admit that I thought the whole treasure was silly beyond belief, so I took a nap in the bushes…And guess what, they found a crack in the 'Guardian' rock which resembled (???) the crack on one of the stations of the cross in the church, in which was stone marker, and although they removed it, somehow remembered that it pointed in a certain direction (???) which led to a rock, under which was....yes, you've guessed it, the small brownish bottle contained clue three. Glad I was sleeping off lunch.” - Bruce Burgess, Arcadia Forum 2010
Burgess also provided the audio from the day, which included the writer, researcher and Wilkinson supporter, Bill Kersey instructing Hammott to dig a little deeper beneath the third bottle because “god may have placed a fourth bottle there”. Sure enough, Hammott returned to the spot some weeks later and discovered the fourth bottle. Inside sources have confirmed that Hammott personally placed the fourth bottle there, just as he had personally hidden the others.
Not only is such a deception a punishable offence, but an unacceptable consequence of such behaviour, particularly in a genre ridden with fraud and deceit, is the continued manipulation of the public, particularly with regard to artefacts holding strong religious and political connotations. This begs the question: should the genre self-regulate itself? And if the answer is ‘yes’, then this brings me to the following point.
It has come to my attention that a covert project is under way to sell an artificial / fake / recently-constructed Ark of the Covenant look-alike to private investors for an enormous sum of money. In this instance, however, the plan is not to publicise the alleged find until it has been sold; only then will it be presented to the public, so as to avoid the critical eye of sceptics. It appears that the Ark of the Covenant look-alike is located in a cave, and I have been presented with details from a reliable source. I believe that it is in our interest, and we have an obligation as a genre, to expose this deception.My whistleblowing represents a stand against such continued nonsense. A fake Ark of the Covenant is now for sale. All I can say is buyer beware.
Enough is enough. I hope you agree.
Andrew Gough
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
