Leaderboard

I don't guess it ever occurred to anyone that Justin might not be the most articulate person you've had the joy to listen to on an interview. That's why this thread is 60+ pages long. He keeps having to define every adjective, noun, phrase, or turn of speech he chooses to use. I did not get that Justin thought this thing was a guy in a suit. I understaood him to mean that was one of the options that he thought of when he made his decision to shoot. His use of that example as one of the things that crossed his mind before he said he took the shot was rather thoughtless, no doubt, but I know that is not what was meant. What has come across to me was that he did not think these were people, that they were some kind of unknown animal/monster. A guy in the suit option was mentioned by forum members here when he first told his story, not by him. So lets address the arm waving, to a human, yes, this is surrender, but it does not mean the same thing to all primates. It can be interpreted as a sign of aggression. When Justin first described the story here, he never used the term "surrender", the forum members did. Where do you think he got it from? We don't know what sasquatch is nor do we have behavior studies to back up the assumption of what was meant by the gesture. So what if arm waving has not been reported before in sasquatch sightings? I'm sure we all agree on what a normal sasquatch report is don't we? There is some question about the placement of the shot, side, front, or back, what does it matter if you think you are shooting at what you think is an animal? Like I said, I don't like what happened. There is some truth to the statement that Justin's interview has been contaminated, now that he is using the forum member's words, the story sounds even worse. But humans are predators, so why are you judging Justin because he shot what he thought was an animal? Because you think sasquatch is human, well you don't know that for certain and won't for awhile even if the study is ever published. We need better evidence than either DNA or a body will give us individually.

I've been interested in the squatch mystery since the mid 1970's. I don't contribute to research mainly because my trained profession doesn't overlap at all with squatch research and I just don't have the time to get into the field (i have 4 girls...i'm VERY busy raising them). But after listening to the interview on squatchdetective, i've found a way that my 15+ years of professional training and experience can actually contribute to research. In my profession I spend a ton of time listening to "stories" to determine if they are real, exaggerated, false, reasonable, etc. My assessments can be based off of the details of the story, the character traits of the teller, the consistency of details (or lack of), the tone of responses, the words chosen for responding, the pauses taken in response, does the info fit, does it make sense, are there independent corroborating data points, etc, etc. There are hundreds of clues that people give when speaking. A major part of my job is deciphering that information to make investment decisions. Usually I have some control over the questions asked and I can steer the situation to suit my aims. I couldn't do that for the "shooter" interview, but there was still good info in the interview. My initial take is not all, but the preponderance of data points I heard lead me to believe the probability the shooter was not telling the whole truth was materially greater than 50%. The shooter was evasive, ambiguous, searching, at times verbose and other times curt, etc. etc. I'm not saying I know it with 100% certainty, but I have a greater than 50% confidence that the story is materially different from the reality of what happened that day.

I know what went through my mind every time I have seen one, & at no time was there ever a thought about killing them. Condemning murder isn't "just as bad" as committing it. Anyone that believes that needs to reevaluate their own character. You ask them for a gift, they give you one, then you contemplate shooting them. I guess this is why you can be so sympathetic. The only thing that would stop you is fear of retaliation.