The ‘Hitchhiker’ Files: Did a two‑legged “wolf” stalk a Pentagon UFO investigator?

Short answer: There’s no independent evidence for the bipedal “wolf” story. It’s an insider anecdote from the government’s AAWSAP program, not a verified fact. But the government UFO study was real, funded, and partly declassified—and that’s where the story gets interesting.

Lead correction: This wasn’t just a “top‑secret” rumor—there are official papers

The article claimed the government hasn’t released documents. That’s wrong. The Defense Intelligence Agency’s AAWSAP program is documented in declassified records:

• The DIA’s contract solicitation and Statement of Objectives were released via FOIA, confirming AAWSAP launched in 2008 and was run through contractor BAASS in Las Vegas for roughly two years. The Black Vault – AAWSAP solicitation
• In 2022, 37 of 38 technical reports (DIRDs) commissioned by the program were released. The Black Vault – DIRDs archive

So yes, AAWSAP existed. Yes, parts were classified. But large chunks are public.

The program, the people, the pivot to the weird

• Verified: Dr. James (Jim) Lacatski is a longtime DIA analyst with an engineering background who helped run AAWSAP. Military.com
• Needs context: Calling him a “rocket scientist” is more TV shorthand than a formal title.
• Verified: AAWSAP began in 2008 after DIA officials took interest in reports around Utah’s Uinta/Uintah Basin (Skinwalker Ranch). Military.com
• Verified: Sen. Harry Reid backed the effort and sought higher protection in a 2009 letter. Reid letter (PDF)

On paper, AAWSAP’s mission focused on advanced aerospace tech—propulsion, materials, “human effects,” and more. In practice, insiders say the team also cataloged post‑encounter health and psychological effects—and then stranger claims began to pile up. DIA Statement of Objectives

The “hitchhiker effect”: a story that follows you home

In a recent on‑camera interview with Las Vegas journalist George Knapp, Lacatski said multiple investigators experienced a “hitchhiker effect”—paranormal phenomena that allegedly followed them home from fieldwork. KLAS/Yahoo summary

The most cinematic claim: an investigator on the East Coast supposedly saw a “wolf‑like creature” standing upright against a tree, with “deep scratch marks” left behind. Variations of this account appear in insider books and interviews, sometimes under the pseudonym “Jonathan Axelrod.” Media speculation links that pseudonym to former official Jay Stratton, though this has not been officially confirmed. Interview and book discussion

• What we can verify: These accounts exist in insider narratives—books, interviews, and conference talks. EdgeScience overview by Colm Kelleher
• What we cannot: There’s no public, independent forensic report on the “scratch marks,” no released lab analysis, and no corroborating documents from law enforcement or DIA.

Bottom line: the “hitchhiker” stories are compelling, but they remain unverified anecdotes.

What AAWSAP really produced—and what it didn’t

• Reported by insiders: AAWSAP/BAASS had about 50 full‑time investigators and produced more than 100 reports and a large database. This is repeated by the program’s authors but not independently audited. Skinwalkers at the Pentagon (publisher page)
• Publicly released: 37 technical DIRDs covering a wide swath of advanced aerospace topics; plus the contract records and objectives. FOIA archive
• Contrary official context: In 2024, the Pentagon’s AARO historical review said it found no evidence the U.S. government or contractors possess or reverse‑engineer non‑human craft or “biologics,” and noted a proposed program (“Kona Blue”) never materialized. This undercuts the strongest “crash‑retrieval” narratives that swirl around AAWSAP alumni. AARO report coverage • AARO report PDF

Politics, money, and the fade‑out

• Verified: Funding ran for about two years before pausing; KLAS cites a 27‑month window. KLAS/FOIA docs
• Unverified: Lacatski’s claim that Sen. Reid feared 2010 reelection optics and suspected a “spy” in his office leaking details. This is his account; no independent proof surfaced. KLAS/Yahoo summary

What’s true, what needs context, what’s not proven

• True

  • AAWSAP was a DIA program (2008–2010-ish), contracted to BAASS in Las Vegas.
  • Lacatski helped run it; Reid backed it; key documents exist via FOIA.
  • The program’s scope included advanced aerospace concepts and “human effects.”

• Needs context

  • “Top‑secret”: Elements were classified, but much is now public.
  • “Rocket scientist”: Informal label; Lacatski is an engineer/intelligence analyst.

• Not proven

  • The “two‑legged wolf,” orbs, and shadow figures as objective events.
  • Physical “scratch mark” evidence; no independent analysis released.
  • Identities behind pseudonyms linking specific officials to specific incidents.

• Contradicted by official review

  • Claims implying approved, ongoing crash‑retrieval or reverse‑engineering programs. AARO’s 2024 report says there’s no evidence. AARO report

How we checked

We compared the article’s claims against:

• DIA contract records and objectives (FOIA). The Black Vault
• Military.com’s profile of AAWSAP’s origins and key players. Military.com
• The KLAS interview and syndications quoting Lacatski. Yahoo/KTNV link
• Insider publications (Skinwalkers at the Pentagon; 2025 New Insights listing). Book listing
• AARO’s 2024 historical report and major outlet coverage. Washington Post

What we still need to see

If the “hitchhiker” cases are to move from gripping stories to evidence:

• Public release of contemporaneous field notes, timestamps, photos/video with metadata
• Independent lab reports on alleged physical traces (e.g., “scratch marks”)
• Corroboration from non‑program witnesses or local authorities
• Clarification on pseudonyms and identities (with consent) to enable verification

The takeaway

• AAWSAP was real, funded, and partially declassified.
• The “hitchhiker effect” and the two‑legged “wolf” remain unverified insider claims.
• Official reviewers say there’s no solid evidence of crash‑retrieval or alien tech programs.

Curiosity is warranted; so is caution. Until independent evidence surfaces, the strangest parts of this story belong to the realm of claims—not confirmed facts.