In a recent and unsettling development, journalist Michael Shellenberger submitted a detailed timeline on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs) to the U.S. Congressional Record. Among the many revelations included, one reference in particular has sparked concern: the mysterious death of antigravity researcher Amy Eskridge.

Known for her work in advanced propulsion and her outspoken views on secrecy in scientific research, Amy’s story has taken a dark turn. Shellenberger cites retired UK intelligence officer Franc Milburn, who alleges that Eskridge was targeted with directed energy weapons and murdered by a “private aerospace company” operating within the United States. According to Milburn, the reason was clear: Eskridge was involved in advanced propulsion research and the broader UAP conversation:

"Retired UK intelligence officer Franc Milburn claims she was targeted with directed energy weapons and murdered by a 'private aerospace company' in the US because she was involved in the UAP conversation and working on advanced propulsion."

This claim, now part of the Congressional Record, forces a blunt question. Either private aerospace corporations and secretive elements within the U.S. government really do possess advanced technology that defies known physics, or they do not. There is no in-between. If Amy Eskridge was killed because of what she knew or what she was working on, then such technology must exist. The question then becomes: why go to such great lengths to hide it?

Officially, Amy Eskridge is said to have died by suicide. But given the allegations now made part of the Congressional record, many are questioning whether that explanation tells the full story.

Amy’s final interview, posted on Jeremy Rhys’ YouTube channel, only adds to the unease. She appears intoxicated, but she also seems deeply paranoid. She spoke of being followed, of people entering her home without permission, and even claimed someone had gone through her underwear drawer. This version of Amy is very different from the confident and articulate person seen in earlier interviews and public talks.

One detail from her later comments stands out. Amy said that Hal Puthoff, a well-known figure in both government research and fringe science, once appeared at her apartment unexpectedly with a “whistleblower.” This encounter has never been explained publicly, and it raises even more questions about the people who were watching her and what they may have wanted.

Her father, Richard Eskridge, a highly respected propulsion expert in his own right, has never publicly addressed her death. His silence is notable. Whether it stems from grief, legal restrictions, or fear is anyone’s guess.

The inclusion of Amy’s case in Shellenberger’s Congressional submission is not just a strange footnote. It represents something bigger. If her death was indeed the result of her involvement in sensitive technology, then the stakes of the UAP conversation are far higher than most people realize. These are not just stories about strange lights in the sky. They are stories about control, secrecy, and potentially, lethal force used to protect unknown assets.

Full Shellenberger Timeline submitted to Congress: PDF link – see page 207