The Bigfoot harvest.

[Pembo]

Sorry it's taken a while to reply. Been busy and haven't had the time to properly research and set out my thoughts. I'm also sorry that this is going to be quite long.

 

I wasn't aware that firefighters were involved in SAR missions, but clearly, in that light, you're right that that experience certainly counts. 

 

My issue with the Dennis Martin case is that much of what seems unusual only seems so if your information comes from David Paulides either directly (from the books/movies/videos) or indirectly (as the narrative that most people relay seems to incorporate his 'take' so that 'reporting' on websites seem to also incorporate them). If you look at actual newspaper reports, NPS reports and FBI Files and documents from the time, everything seems less unusual. 

 

Harold Key and his testimony is a perfect example. According to Paulides Dennis went missing at 3:30pm and that 'the same day sometime between 4:30 and 5:30pm' Harold Key heard a scream. This is important because Bill Martin and a Park Ranger supposedly hiked the 7-9 mile trail from Spence Field to the area Harold Key identified, taking 90 minutes to do so. 

 

The problem - Dennis went missing at 4:30pm (NPS chronology and the Incident report, as well as most contemporaneous newspaper reports confirm this) and Harold Key said he heard the scream 'it must have been around 4:30 in the afternoon. I know that it couldn't have been earlier than 3:30 or later than about 5:30' - Knoxville News Sentinel 7.21.1969. 'Key said that the scream 'a trouble scream' was heard about '4 or 4:30 in the afternoon' - Kingsport Times 7.22.1969

 

So the scream happened around the same time Dennis went missing, was just as, if not more likely to have happened before than after he went missing, and even taking the absolute latest time of 5:30pm would only leave and hour for someone to hike and carry Dennis a trail that had taken his father 90 minutes - his father, of course, would have been hiking as quickly as possible to prove a point, given his (fully understandable) desperation to get the FBI involved.  

 

Without changing the time of the disappearance (whether purposefully to suggest foul play, or a result of the shoddiest investigation/reporting of a fundamental fact possible, who can say?), the whole Harold Key testimony becomes irrelevant, exactly as the Rangers and FBI assessed. 

 

Remember also that Harold Key came forth on the July 20/21 1969. Green Beret help was requested June 15, and they had left by June 26. The Green Beret deployment couldn't be a result of Key's testimony because he wouldn't go on to tell anyone for well over a month after they were deployed and at a time when they'd left almost 4 weeks earlier. 

 

The idea of a man running and carrying something on his shoulder also seems to come from Paulides and Paulides only. He says that he interviewed Bill Martin (although Mrs Martin told Michael Bouchard later, after Bill Martin's death, that she had no recollection of any such interview) and that 'Mr Martin stated that the Keys had thought they saw a dark figured man running along a ridgeline carrying something on his shoulder.'

 

So David Paulides says that Bill Martin said that Harold Key said there was a guy running with something on his shoulder. Only none of that appears in the NPS or FBI reports or crucially the newspaper reports. That means that Harold Key decided to come forward to try to help and either left out the most crucial part when talking to the press, or the press decided against publishing the most intriguing part of the story. Seems unlikely in the extreme. 

 

In addition to that, Bill Martin, who it seems to me from reviewing the FBI files and various newspapers, was of course desperate to get the FBI involved, didn't bother to mention to the newspapers, NPS or FBI that there was this evidence that would point toward a kidnapping and therefore probably get the FBI involved, exactly what he wanted? I don't buy it. There was a taped interview (see page 35 FBI documents) where Bill Martin 'speculated foul play ...but furnished no basis for this inference'. There's a letter in the NPS files (pg69) from Bill Martin to a Mr Hartsog complaining of not being informed of Mr Key's story before the press and before Mr Key showed the FBI and NPS where he was on that day. In it he states that he has spoken to Mr Key 'long distance several times. He complains that some descriptions of foliage and terrain, as reported by the newspaper, was incorrect. He did not complain that none of the NPS, FBI or newspapers made any mention of a person 'carrying something on his shoulder', which is again exactly the type of information that would likely have got him exactly what he was so desperate for. And those are his own written words.

 

My take is that the man Harold Key saw was probably up to no good - moonshining as Harold Key thought, illegal ginseng harvesting like the later man who found bones, or something else. But it seems certain that it had nothing to do with Dennis Martin. 

 

That obviously doesn't mean that  it's impossible that an off the gird mountain man didn't take Dennis because obviously nobody knows for certain. But it still seems infinitely more likely that a 6 year old got turned around in the forest, got lost and in the pouring rain and wind succumbed to hypothermia o, was attacked by an animal or fell down a crevice or into a stream. By all accounts 56 square miles had been searched by 6.23.1969. That equates to a circle with a radius of 4.22 miles. In 9 days. Meaning that the search assumed (or at least was not able to expand beyond) a possible distance of less than half a mile a day. As mentioned in a previous post, a conservative estimate of movement of 1mph would give a search area of over 450 square miles before the search had even really begun.  

 

Regarding the possibility of abduction by mountain men and Green Berets being deployed because of the threat, a few thoughts struck me while researching and thinking about this. 

 

If the Green Berets were deployed because of any such threat, it would require collusion between anyone at the NPS who had contributed to or seen the NPS chronology (so that it was faked), the FBI and anyone within it who knew about the threat of such mountain men and the military, including all those involved in deploying or searching with the Green Berets, with not one single person speaking out in over 50 years. Possible? Maybe. Probable?

 

Would the authorities, knowing of the threat, allowed civilian volunteers to search the very areas that these mountain men were thought to predate on? In particular, if the authorities thought that a mountain man took a small child, would they allow the boy scouts to search remote places in the vicinity?

 

Would the authorities send in the Green Berets to 'take out' a threat in an area that was being actively searched by hundreds if not thousands of people who might see or hear them doing exactly that?

If they did suspect a Kari Swenson type situation, why hide it (in the official records that wouldn't be available to the public, not 'why wouldn't they announce it to the press at the time?')? My (very basic) look at that case doesn't suggest that they hid that case . If they turned out to be right they'd be heroes for finding the boy or giving the family closure (they could obviously come up with a 'they pulled their guns first' type story if necessary to cover for eliminating them if they found Dennis). If they thought so, but turned out wrong, who would care that they were extra precautious?

 

If there are mountain men out there, off the grid, why would the authorities assume that they were murderous child snatchers? And wouldn't the search by thousands have found their dwellings?

 

To me, although as I say, it isn't entirely impossible that Dennis was taken, any scenario other than him getting lost and falling foul to weather or animals, means making leaps in logic that aren't supported by any factual basis. It means saying 'everyone, the FBI, NPS, newspapers and military, is lying to you to persuade you that the very probably happened, whereas what actually happened was the very unlikely, for which I have no real proof'. 

Anyway, that's my 2 cents/pence, an eye opener for me only in the sense that I don't feel I have to look much further into the M411, given that the case that is often held as the flag bearer for the theory falls apart as soon as you start checking things for yourself.

Edited 1 hour ago by Pembo
In editing before posting, I had left some sentences in the wrong order