Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

A New Look At The Story Of Bob H

Recommended Posts

Guest

Okay, again.

I really want to keep this on track.

Okay, what do you all think about this comment. It's post 2 of this thread. Also, pay attention to the date of the article which is noted at the end of the full article on Bigfoot Encounters (link is in that post).

http://bigfootforums...dpost__p__34472

Back on topic I hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I find it interesting that the 'skeptics' are constantly demanding documentation and proof from those who are constructing a plausible scenario for what really happened but at the same time they are building their entire scenario on fluff,rumors,hearsay and outright false claims.

It is definitely a double standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

I can reasonably expect Roger may have told his wife - but I would have no reason to even assume Roger told Bob Gimlin. Loans are personal, and usually held as private information between the person accepting the money and the person loaning it. But, as I said, I am only speculating as to whether this was a loan or not.

Roger Patterson and Jerry Merritt did not keep the loans they got from Vilma Radford's accident settlement private from each other so oops. The extent of the closeness between Gimlin and Heironimus us such that if Heironimus had a grievance over a loan to these guys over something Bigfoot-related, Gimlin should really know about it.

Not only that...

1) What necessitates Patterson as the recipient of the loan? It could as easily have been Gimlin as Patterson.

2) Patterson doesn't need Heironimus when he has moneybags DeAtley.

I am also speculating that costume being shown at the Idle Hour Tavern, was a costume created by Bob H - or someone he knew well.

That certainly doesn't jive with what Gary Record reported, not to mention Gimlin missing the chance to peg his old friend as a Yakima Bigfoot hoaxer.

Why should I discuss Chico with Gimlin, he already discusses Chico. What's your point, or is that just more of your well worded insults?

Quite simple - there is an undeniable connection between Gimlin, Heironimus and the PGF. If you are concocting a new conspiracy this year based on the word "back", you should probably talk to Gimlin about exactly the level of involvement between him and Heironimus was for the Bluff Creek trip. That would mean right off the bat discussing Chico.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

If there was a loan - we do not know the conditions of that loan, now do we? If Roger promised to pay $1,000.00 to Bob H, we do not know the conditions of that promise, now do we?

The only person who says this promise happened is Bob H - no one else can attest to the validity of that promise as they did not witness the actual conversation where the promise happened. Unless you have witnesses to the conversation between Bob H and Roger Patterson..

I have asked you for these witnesses and you have ignored my requests, so that tells me you have no witnesses to this promise. I find it hard to believe Bob H was promised $1,000.00 to walk across bluff creek for that amount of money, and not have asked for something in writing guaranteeing payment or partial payment up front. Bob H is the one that says Roger couldnt be trusted, yet he trusted him anyway???

2) Patterson doesn't need Heironimus when he has moneybags DeAtley

By your own admission, DeAtley was not funding Roger's expeditions. So, that rules out "money bags DeAtley".

Edited by Melissa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Condensed commentary by Gary Record, Howard Heironimus, and Glenda Heironimus on Bob's grievance over the $1000 payment promised to him...

July 6th, 2010 Kitakaze interview with Idle Hour suit witness Gary Record...

KK: Do you remember going with Bob around 1970 to see Waylon Jennings and Jessi Colter do a show?

GR: Yes, I do.

KK: Do you remember where the show was at?

GR: (pause) That would have been the Saddle Tree. The Saddle Tree Club

KK: And who was with you?

GR: Oh, let me think. It was Bob, Glenda, that's Bob's wife. Her sister, Diane and Bob. That's her husband.

KK: The Clifts, you mean? Bob and Diane Clift? Diane was Bob's sister?

GR: No, no. Diane was Bob's wife's sister.

KK: Sorry, thanks. And do remember Bob having any important conversation at that show?

GR: Well, he talked to someone about the movie - Patterson's movie. You see, they had left him in a bad way about it. They never paid him for it.

KK: So you know about Bob's role in the movie as being the Bigfoot, the guy who wore the suit?

GR: Oh, sure, I do. Of course, yeah.

KK: And who was this person Bob was talking to?

GR: Al. Al DeAtley.

KK: You knew Al DeAtley?

GR: Sure, I knew him. I worked for him for 10 years.

KK: Worked for him? You mean his pavement company?

GR: That's right.

KK: What did you do?

GR: I drove truck.

KK: I know it's a very long time ago, but do you remember anything that was said between Bob and Al?

GR: Oh, I'm not sure. I don't think I was right there. Bob wanted to get the money Roger promised him.

KK: You weren't standing next to Bob at the time?

GR: No, I don't think so. I wasn't right there. I saw him right after. He wasn't too happy. Roger had promised him $1000.

KK: And did you know Roger personally?

GR: Yes, I did.

Notes from my July 2010 interview with Howard Heironimus...

- Roger came to HH in late '66 or early '67 and asked him to be a part of a movie about Bigfoot so they could make money.

- Roger asked HH if his brother Bob would be interested in being the Bigfoot. HH told Roger to ask Bob himself. Roger had Gimlin ask BH. HH said it was before BH and BG would go riding together in the hills around Yakima.

- HH said that often when he and/or BH would see Roger at the Idle Hour after the PGF was shot that Roger would be drinking wine and promise that money was coming. Roger promised BH $1000 for wearing the suit but to all the men in his Bigfoot movie he never specified the amount he was supposed to give them.

Notes from my July 19, 2010 interview with Glenda Heironimus...

- Glenda was at the Saddle Tree in 1970 with Bob when Bob approached Al DeAtley to get paid the $1000 Roger promised Bob. They were with Glenda'a sister, Diane, and her husband, Bob (it's raining Bobs), along with Gary Record and his wife. Glenda said that Bob pointed out Al DeAtley, whom she recognized, and spoke with her about if he should try talking to him. He decided it couldn't hurt to try. Al shut Bob down and told him to take it up with Roger. I asked Glenda if Bob seemed mad about it and she didn't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Again Kitakaze, that is the word of someone, not involved with the actual loan discussion. I can say - You owe me money, but If I cant prove it, then I cant prove it and you don't owe me a dime.

I don't know why you are arguing this point. None of these people claim to have been involved in any discussions of money between Roger and Bob H - heck Your guy (Gary Record) even says he wasnt near Bob H when he talked to DeAtley about the money. They could have discussed fishing for all Gary knew, and Bob H could have said anything.. I like how you only bolded specific parts of that quote by Gary Record... LOL.

GR: I drove truck.

KK: I know it's a very long time ago, but do you remember anything that was said between Bob and Al?

GR: Oh, I'm not sure. I don't think I was right there. Bob wanted to get the money Roger promised him.

KK: You weren't standing next to Bob at the time?

Then Gary qualifies that statement by saying specifically "I wasn't right there".

GR: No, I don't think so. I wasn't right there. I saw him right after. He wasn't too happy. Roger had promised him $1000.

You keep using people who can not attest to the actual conversation that is said to have taken place.

Edited by Melissa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Okay, what do you all think about this comment. It's post 2 of this thread
.

I see that those who are trying to debunk the PGF are and have always been eager to glob onto those who have an agenda against Roger Patterson for some reason.

So in 1982 we have this Rant Mullins who admitted that he was resentful of Roger Patterson,(I wonder what that was all about) therefore the skeptics of that day seemed to think that his claims had validity even though he apparently produced no documentation and he never revealed his "Patterson associate". More hearsay.

Today we have Bob Heironimus who also bears a grudge for some unknown reason. The claim of being owed money based on an agreement that he has no documentation to support seems to be a burr in his saddle. Some of the skeptics of today are simply following suit and globbing onto his unsubstantiated claims yet they are doing their best to try to appear that they themselves have no grudge to bear. Still the whole story is built on someone who is resentful.

Edited by Washingtonian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze
The only person who says this promise happened is Bob H - no one else can attest to the validity of that promise as they did not witness the actual conversation where the promise happened. Unless you have witnesses to the conversation between Bob H and Roger Patterson..

I have asked you for these witnesses and you have ignored my requests, so that tells me you have no witnesses to this promise.

Explaining that the living witnesses to the actual agreement are Bob Heironimus, Bob Gimlin, and Patricia Patterson is not ignoring anything. That's three people for you to interview.

I find it hard to believe Bob H was promised $1,000.00 to walk across bluff creek for that amount of money, and not have asked for something in writing guaranteeing payment or partial payment up front. Bob H is the one that says Roger couldnt be trusted, yet he trusted him anyway???

What is the disconnect here? Because after being used by Roger Bob afterward feels that Roger cheated him does not mean at the time of agreement he did not trust Roger. He likely would have trusted Roger as much as Gimlin or Merritt did. Seriously, what is that?

By your own admission, DeAtley was not funding Roger's expeditions. So, that rules out "money bags DeAtley".

Sweet mother...

Melissa, for the love of Tony Danza, please pay attention. There is no "By your own admission, DeAtley was not funding Roger's expeditions." There is DeAtley making that claim to Greg Long and me arguing how it is not in line with the evidence.

My argument is that DeAtley was funding Roger, was with Roger the main architect of the hoax, and involved from the beginning. I think I've been pretty clear about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Wash,

In that quote from Mullins he discusses bear hide. Well, by all accounts Bob H described the suit as being made (initially) out of dark brown horse hide.

Could this be the actual source of the dark brown hide and not a horse? Even Morris claims he used all dark brown fur during this time period.

http://img59.imageshack.us/i/blackbear233600x450.jpg/

There's a lot of bears in them mountains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Gimlin told Green in 1992 that he and Roger agreed to split the costs on expeditions, but that Roger's were covered by DeAtley. DeAtley himself says he never did any such thing.

So, which is it Kitakaze? Either you are using DeAtleys words because you believe him, or you do not. Anything else is misdirection. I agree that DeAtley never agreed to fund anyone - or repay loans. I do not see DeAtleys name on the Radford Contract - do you?

Maybe you shouldn't tell others to pay attention. I am paying attention just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
I have asked you for these witnesses and you have ignored my requests, so that tells me you have no witnesses to this promise.

And now that this has been clearly stated any witness produced from this day forward would have to be taken with a BIG grain of salt.

I find it hard to believe Bob H was promised $1,000.00 to walk across bluff creek

Especially now that we know that if Roger wanted to hire someone he could have hired a professional mime for much less money.

Edited by Washingtonian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
southernyahoo

I'd like to add something about Bob H.. He openly admits that he got this whole idea to come forward after watching a show on TV about "worlds greatest hoaxes". He saw people getting paid for their achieved hoaxes. I could just see a light going off in his head, I got it! I'll claim to have been the guy in the suit, people don't believe the "creature" is real anyways, I'll show those guys back at the tavern how good a lier I am, and get paid big bucks for this one. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I'd like to add something about Bob H.. He openly admits that he got this whole idea to come forward after watching a show on TV about "worlds greatest hoaxes". He saw people getting paid for their achieved hoaxes. I could just see a light going off in his head, I got it! I'll claim to have been the guy in the suit, people don't believe the "creature" is real anyways, I'll show those guys back at the tavern how good a lier I am, and get paid big bucks for this one. LOL

I think your right. I think he felt enough time had passed, and it would be safe to at least try to say he was the person in the suit - no other claims had panned out thus far... It makes perfect sense to me. I am curious how all these other people could have known, yet it remained a secret for so long - until Bob H had finally had enough.

Odd to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Especially now that we know that if Roger wanted to hire someone he could have hired a professional mime for much less money.

Yes, and it has been said many times that Roger had connections within Hollywood - why didnt he use a professional?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Again Kitakaze, that is the word of someone, not involved with the actual loan discussion. I can say - You owe me money, but If I cant prove it, then I cant prove it and you don't owe me a dime.

So barring people including Howard Heironimus who Roger spoke of the $1000 offer to for his brother, you want somebody who was there when Roger, Gimlin, and Heironimus made that agreement and recorded in some fashion to prove the event occurred 43 years later? Of course Howard is out because I tracked him down and he unfortunately, though undeniably involved with Roger, is Bob's brother (yet from out of the blue you have Howard living with Roger and Patty :blink: ).

OK, let's talk about demand for proof then...

You can't prove Gimlin was ever actually present when the PGF was filmed, nor even Roger. You can't prove the film was developed on Sat. Oct. 21st.

You can prove Patterson signed a contract with Vilma Radford, right? Oops, not according to 2010 Radford contract forgery conspiracy.

Oh wait...

Roger did not con Vilma out of anything. In fact, he signed a contract.

Hot potato!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...