Drew

Peter Byrne- Guilty Of Fraud

142 posts in this topic

"I cannot think of a time as an adult that I ........ or committed fraud at a criminal level."

 

^I'm sure the IRS, if it wanted to, could find a time.

 

;-)

 

Actually, the IRS have audited me and the time they did, I actually had more deductions coming than what I originally thought, thus I erred in their favor.

 

I think it may be to my red hair that I was always afraid to do something criminal as my description would certainly stand out in most any circumstance.   :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fraud is intentionally misrepresenting something to another party.

 

Because you added incorrectly does not a fraudster make of you.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Byrne was truthful in his message to georgerm he didn't intentionally misrepresent the matter. Agreed, ignorance of the law is not an excuse, but an oversight can be made without understanding the correct procedure or the full ramifications of said oversight beforehand.

 

The man has admitted that he did wrong. He "added incorrectly," so to speak, and he's now paying for his lack of understanding. Restitution is being made for his supposed lack of understanding.

 

I suppose that the only point to be made at this point is that we either believe his claims, or we don't. I guess that's up to the individuals that use his claims to base their opinion(s) of his work in other areas to decide. As for me, I don't claim to know the truth of the matter.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See-

He did not 'add incorrectly', he intentionally lied about his situation.  That is the key element in a Fraud Charge.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... so to speak.

 

3.  As to my financial and leagl problems ....when I was 64 I applied for Social Security but, because I had not  contributed enough in taxes-not having been in this country long enough to do so-I was not eligible for same. However, the Social Security people  told me that until I was eligible, in other words when I had contributed enough in income tax (which I did achieve, recently) I could draw a substitute allowance called SSI. What they did not tell me and which is not to this day written up in any of the SS rulings, is that one may not draw this if one is out of the US at any time for more than 30 days. Which, for my wildlife conservation projects I was, many times to where in the end-and this is just an educated guess-some envious little person informed Social Security and they looked into it and came after me. There were several charges, all of which they told me would be dropped (they were)  if I would plead guilty to one and make appropriate financial restitution, which, on the advice of my lawyers, I did.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You missed this part:

 

Byrne pleaded guilty in August and admitted that between 1992 and 2012 he concealed from SSA and DHS his travels outside the United States and his compensation, while receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and food stamps. 

 

When Byrne was questioned by SSA and investigators in 2012, he failed to disclose all of his travels and assets.  When SSA asked to see his passport, Byrne advised that he had accidentally destroyed his passport by running it through the washing machine.

 

Agents also located a copy of a letter from Byrne to Safari Press directing that any future royalties for his published books be sent to his girlfriend.  Byrne had previously been questioned by investigators whether he was receiving royalties for the books he had written on topics such as his search for Bigfoot and game-hunting in Nepal.  Byrne denied receiving royalties. 

 

The Honorable Garr M. King stated that Byrne’s actions had been intentional and criminal, but agreed with the parties’ recommended sentence of probation primarily because of Byrne’s age.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You missed this part:

 

 

If Byrne was truthful in his message to georgerm he didn't intentionally misrepresent the matter. Agreed, ignorance of the law is not an excuse, but an oversight can be made without understanding the correct procedure or the full ramifications of said oversight beforehand.

 

The man has admitted that he did wrong. He "added incorrectly," so to speak, and he's now paying for his lack of understanding. Restitution is being made for his supposed lack of understanding.

 

I suppose that the only point to be made at this point is that we either believe his claims, or we don't. I guess that's up to the individuals that use his claims to base their opinion(s) of his work in other areas to decide. As for me, I don't claim to know the truth of the matter.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Byrne was truthful in his message to georgerm he didn't intentionally misrepresent the matter. Agreed, ignorance of the law is not an excuse, but an oversight can be made without understanding the correct procedure or the full ramifications of said oversight beforehand.

 

 

 

I can see Byrne not knowing the rules, but when asked to disclose any other monies in other accounts .... who forgets having accounts that have as much as 85Gs in them.

 
It appears that Byrne not only forgot about ever getting royalties, but he also forgot about asking Safari Press to send any future royalties to his girlfriend. The only relevancy of any of this is that its supportive of Byrne's possible intentional faking of track finds,  which in turn may have given the false impression to financial backers that Peter had an edge that made him the 'go-to-guy' with their money for getting results in finding a Sasquatch.
Edited by Bigfoothunter
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This stuff is more or less irrelevant.

 

We should keep the focus on the charges of hoaxing regarding re-use of photographs as John Green claimed.   If proven, THAT is what is relevant to his legacy as a bigfooter.   It appears he was a fraud, hoaxer, nothing but a self promoter.    Todd Standing of an earlier generation.    That's it, his entire claim to fame.  

 

MIB

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^

 

You are correct. Thomas Steenburg says he was the one that first pointed it out to John Green years ago. I'll ask Thomas to post the Byrne book title and page references he was reading to me from yesterday when we spoke about that photo. I believe the photo was taken by Green or Dahinden. Regardless, it was used for three different track finds. All that was done was it had been reversed and flipped over to give an appearance that it was a different photo in each instance.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got an e-mail from Bigfoot hunter asking me to post here the title and page number of Peter's book where he use's a footprint photo, which would be used a number of times again under different descriptions, and explanations. I pointed this out to John Green back in the early 1990s which caused a stir. The book title is 'BIGFOOT MONSTER, MYTH or MAN', By Peter Byrne Published in 1975. Page # 18, top of page.

Other usage of the same photo check out Bigfoot Hunters posts 80 and 81. It all self explanatory.

 

Thomas Steenburg

Edited by steenburg
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bigfoot Hunter, all of your awesome research photos are not showing up.

 

Did you delete them?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting quote by Byrne:
 

 

"There are a number of rivalries in the Bigfoot field. Their principal basis is of course the belief that at the end of the Bigfoot rainbow there lies a pot of gold. ...[h]ad they over the years projected a fraction of the time and money that they spend vilifying each other on Bigfoot research [they] would surely have solved the mystery by now."

 

http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-31252-portland_expert_bigfoot_researcher_bickering_has_delayed_finding_bigfoot.html

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites