Release Of Forensic Dna Results For Sierra Kills Sample

[Guest BartloJays]

Tyler, did you ever follow up on the clothes? I ask because in November, 2011, Justin posted the following in the Sierra Shooting thread:

That doesn't sound like something he would knowingly wash. Someone might want to check with him.

You also said my questions about discrepancies with the shooting timeline were reconcilable. I absolutely understand how mistakes can happen but now I'm curious about the very first polygraph question Justin was asked last August:

Bart, didn't you say you wrote those questions? It says "late October" but the shooting supposedly occurred on the 8th. Is that a mistake? Is it significant at all that Justin still passed the question? Just curious.

Great catch Slim, this was my error as when I wrote the questions for the polygraph I had very little time but didn't know it (wrote them at sister-in-laws house before dinner like a night or two before) and I thought I'd have plenty more time to rewrite several but Ro didn't even tell me when the poly was as there was some last minute changes and the scheduled time bumped up. I actually called Ro the morning of and he said Justin just took it and was joking with me that it was a disaster (he passed of course). I remember the timing was hectic as a lot was going on work-wise and back home as I had so much going on that I even missed some of Tyler's questions that I didn't think of, that would've covered even more ground.

I don't think the date should have any effect on poly result because it really is such a minor detail of the question. It doesn't change anything about the context of the question.

Again, on the poly, my only advice to Justin in the preceding week when I expected it was coming and was waiting for Ro to give me a green light to write questions, was to "listen" to the whole question because they were going to be long/loaded and "I'm not giving you any breaks buddy,as if you're going to do this I'm going to try my best to detect deception."

[Guest Tyler H]

Sorjourner,

Justins words can easily be taken the wrong way in his above statement. He still strongly thinks that the flesh recovered is indeed from Sasquatch. I talked with him about two days ago. He thinks the odds of finding a piece of bear flesh there in direct proximity the same color is ridiculously unlikely. Actually the odds are astronomical. In all the time that I've spent hunting, researching and hiking I've come across bear remains one time, and one time only.

DR

Have to wholeheartedly agree with Derek here. It's one of the "red flags" I had when Bart and I got our results. I couldn't, and honestly still really can't, reconcile this point. It seemed he either had to be lying, or it was a piece of squatch that we had tested, and they just got the wrong result.

This was somewhat addressed early in the thread. Aside from perhaps this being a "consumption spot" where scraps of animals were leftover, I still can't cover this one well, and have said the same to Justin.

As squatchers, we say "it should not surprise you that we have not found a squatch body - have you ever stumbled across a bear carcass? It almost never happens." Yet, somehow, Justin found bear meat where he happens to think the squatch likely expired.

Now, I don't know how exactly the location matches where the Squatch supposedly expired... but regardless, it's very hard to reconcile.

Even from an extremely skeptical perspective, I'm not convinced that these new DNA reports settle the debate on the Sierra Kills once and for all. It would be good if someone can get the exact same sample that Dr. Ketchum received tested.

Agreed, and proffered here time and again - until that happens, there will always be questions.

[Guest BartloJays]

Re: timeline - my understanding is, that if Justin considered the intent of the question to be surrounding his claim of the appearance of what he shot, he would not have any feelings that would trigger deceipt when answering that question, even if he knew that date was off. This may be one example of how some of the questions could perhaps have been more succinctly worded, so that each question is only testing/addressing one piece of information, rather than 2 or more.

This is a great point, though I was told at the time that she was only going to use so many (25-40) so I tried to encompass as much as possible. In hindsight, I think her credentials were sufficient (she had 10 yrs experience and a high quality "Limestone machine if I recall) and overemphasized negatively for those attacking her, but... if even for perception only, I would've liked to use somebody else and I think in hindsight, Ro would've. She actually made some recommendations and said she'd bet anything he'd pass another with someone else. Apparently she was impressed by him because he passed "nervous." The right way. At the end of the day it's a nice antiquity (said alot to me because I know Justin thinks he can't lie and beat it) but it would look much nicer to go with favorable dna results.

Remember when I saw your list after Tyler, it was pretty amazing that we had about 20 of the same exact questions with slight wording variances.

[yowiie]

So what happened to the Juvenelle BF that was supposedly shot, where is it?

[Guest]

As it happens, I agree with both of you here and find your positions reconcilable.

He still strongly thinks that the flesh recovered is indeed from Sasquatch. I talked with him about two days ago.

He thinks the odds of finding a piece of bear flesh there in direct proximity the same color is ridiculously unlikely. Actually the odds are astronomical.

Agreed. It is so unlikely as not to be considered a reasonable option that he just found such bear flesh there.

This is the kind of logic that drives most people reading this thread crazy. Logic dictates that if a piece of flesh is reported as being found and it tests for bear it's probably... bear. The odds of it being anything but bear are... astronomical.

It seems all but certain that the sample given was bear.

We agree that sample wasn't just found there. That would be astronomically and ridiculously unlikely.

At this juncture, however, apparently, it seems we know that a sample of bear flesh was provided.

Regardless of everything claimed up to this point and whether true or not, is it not entirely possible if not likely that the sample was introduced to the scene at this point? If not sasquatch, and apparently it's not, is there any other reasonable alternative?

Look at his words. Justin said that we know the truth now. It's bear. If not, perhaps he can clarify?

I am relieved that now you all know the truth about the sample recovered in the Sierras on November 10th 2010. I was giving false confidence in that sample..."

"I can assure you with only my word this changes nothing about what happened on the eighth day of October in 2010.

Is this acknowledging and admitting the changes regarding November's bear sample, despite assurances otherwise? I don't know, but Justin can tell us.

For now I'll spare you the lengthy details. I will have plenty to say in the next few days when I do a release of my own.

People in this circle have said things in private and done things behind closed doors that they will have to be held accountable for very soon.

...I'll look forward to sharing more with you soon.

I wonder what that middle part is about? Doesn't seem to have gotten much attention that I've seen.

I'm kinda interested in hearing plenty more from Justin soon, if he would.

Feel free to correct me wherever I am mistaken as my attention has been intermittent, but maybe it's something of a forest and trees view.

I do not suspect Tyler or Bart 's motives, involvement, or integrity in any way and understand their disappointment. They have gone to great lengths in personal involvement and investment.

Unless there's some big conspiracy greater than the labs and techs delivering corrupted and false evidence to prevent this discovery and disclosure... and I don't think anyone has gone that far.. yet...

I don't know, but maybe Justin can tell us.

[Guest BartloJays]

Have to wholeheartedly agree with Derek here. It's one of the "red flags" I had when Bart and I got our results. I couldn't, and honestly still really can't, reconcile this point. It seemed he either had to be lying, or it was a piece of squatch that we had tested, and they just got the wrong result.

This was somewhat addressed early in the thread. Aside from perhaps this being a "consumption spot" where scraps of animals were leftover, I still can't cover this one well, and have said the same to Justin.

As squatchers, we say "it should not surprise you that we have not found a squatch body - have you ever stumbled across a bear carcass? It almost never happens." Yet, somehow, Justin found bear meat where he happens to think the squatch likely expired.

Now, I don't know how exactly the location matches where the Squatch supposedly expired... but regardless, it's very hard to reconcile.

Certainly not entirely and playing devil's advocate (literally for some people), I have to respectfully disagree with you guys here a bit for several reasons exclusive to the specific "claimed" circumstances and immediate biosphere now having spent so much time there searching and attempting to excavate there. I of course think the odds are highly unlikely... before anyone accuses me of definitively just accepting an amazing coincidence out of denial or something (I talk about remains when lecturing on the subject and have never found bear remains of natural death). As I’ve said from day one, with the state of recognition of tissue, timing (after 5 weeks) and immediate location (60 yards downhill from where they suspect the adult crashed off) it didn't make sense to me that this tissue could be from the large subject shot that day imo. Not ruled out as I thought it possible... but unlikely.

These are some questions, thoughts and points (food for thought if you will to consider) I think are worth mentioning, though please understand I wasn't with them the day of the shooting (10/8/10), nor the day of the retrieval (11/12/10), hence I wouldn't guarantee anybody anything (and I never have), but as an investigator (amateur as we may all be) we need to look at everything imo.

I’m also going to assume everyone understands the difference between “circumstantial†evidence, which is the tissue, and “non-circumstantial†evidence which would be the blood saturated boots in this case.

First off, “if†the tissue was in fact from one of the purported subjects shot that day and assuming their story is accurate, by description, the tissue could only match the initial adult subject shot that after being clipped, went down on all fours and headed uphill into some dense secondary red firs before being heard crashing through trees maybe as much as 50-70 yds uphill. The juvenile shot, by color alone (very dark) would be logically eliminated as a tissue candidate, unless maybe sun exposure prior to several feet of snow dumping, lightened the hair enough in which in that case, I’d contend there’s almost no way for the flesh to be in relatively healthy condition it was in when it was purportedly retrieved, photographed and shipped off to Dr. Ketchum.

First, they may believe it because they saw the shot location and impact but they don’t know for certain, by their own admission, that the large one expired. For all they know it could’ve waited them out and bled to death uphill, it could’ve died two miles away and bled out, heck for all we know it could have somehow made it and be the stationary subject in my thermal footage from 8/23/12. I think what everyone could agree on is that the tissue came from a deceased and not living subject.

One thing noticed by both myself and especially my primary partner in everything bigfoot-related, Ranger Robert Leiterman (who btw, felt that no way could there be a correlation 5 weeks apart) is that the location of the tissue was 50-70 yards downhill from where they heard the only “viable†bigfoot candidate (adult) crash off and assumed to be near death. As I mentioned previously, the hillside is lined with dense red fir secondary. What we couldn’t understand, besides the 5 weeks and recognition state, is why the contributors large and small and predation events that would’ve certainly taken place post mortem, would've also brought the tissue downhill (assuming it’s from the adult) through all of those dense obstacles as if we consider predators subconscious need to reserve & conserve energy (needing less caloric intake) they should’ve theoretically dragged “up†before “down†with respect to particular tree & foliage layout of immediate area. At least in our opinion and as a 30 yr CA State Park Ranger and expert tracker, I value Robert’s opinion even more than my own in that scenario.

As far as the similar hair color goes, I have no problem with bears in the area matching that color because Justin was right that almost all bears in the area have the same color. I’ve seen one there now myself (and one chocolate) and on the day before my thermal footage last August, Ro and Todd were driving up the primary road in the afternoon and both saw a bear with identical full body sun-streak color, emphasizing how cool and different the color was upon seeing and informing us. Is it genetic or are they sun-streaked from exposure and large canopy openings/medium tree density at 7000ft? Whatever it is, and I realize we’ve seen a small sample size (2 out of 3), most bears in the area appear to be that particular color and Justin was right about that.

“Steak†has always been a deceiving description of what they had because it portrays the visual of a nice, thicker piece of meat when in reality what they retrieved in width can be measured in millimeters (thickness of attached tissue) and barely in inches. In other words, a piece of hide from field dressing (maybe poachers? As location is bear heavy in season and it’s a cul de sac patrolled by wardens in special permit area) is not impossible. What they claimed to retrieve via pictures represents “hide†to me but I can’t be certain because I’ve obviously only seen the processed pieces and was almost 9 months late to the party, though Justin agrees there’s nothing that rules out “dressed hide†when asked. But as Derek stated…Justin believes the likeliest scenario was that the tissue was from the adult subject shot.

The story of the retrieval absent some critical details can be a bit deceiving if we examine those details and what was actually claimed. To most… they hear that they went back to look for the juvenile, couldn’t find it and then, very close nearby, “hey look, flesh on the ground that looks like the bigfoot we shot,†collect it, send it onto Ketchum, she claims bigfoot genome, our labs get bear and human contamination….end of story right? In reality, that’s not exactly how it happened from what they claimed…â€if†they are being truthful of course. They claimed reluctantly going back (actually they refused to go back before mention of possible monetary reward if they find “skeletal†remains) with bloodhound informally trained to scent bear, they get there and the area is so covered in snow they were surprised the gate wasn’t locked yet, they go to area where juvenile was placed and dig unsuccessfully for hours, then…on hill above and much closer to where juvey was placed than adult subject presumed to have crashed off and died, they are alerted to a specific area near a stump by the dog and proceed to dig, subsequently coming up with the Sierras tissue, including fat. In other words, if they are telling the truth, they don’t find tissue without the benefit of the dog.

Looking at “all†pics of the tissue after retrieval, it appears relatively healthy and in pretty good shape for being out 5 weeks, hence, it was relatively fresh. One thing I’ve learned about Justin is that him and Jack consume the bears they’ve hunted and either field dress them, or do it back at home, usually within 24 hrs. I was told that from day one. This got me thinking recently now knowing firsthand how much they covet bear meat (btw for those that haven’t indulged, it’s flavorful and beefy…a least for the first 90 seconds you’re chewing the same piece) and was confirmed by Justin, they should have no frozen bear pieces possessing hair and hide. Doesn’t mean they couldn’t have gotten it from somewhere or someone else (anything is possible) however, but to them, that would serve really no purpose to preserve remains in such a way.

Last but not least, thankfully Derek had the presence of mind not trusting both guys he didn’t know, to request them to GPS their location and document it in some fashion to prove they were at location on date of retrieval. Justin had pictures he showed me recently that he took of GPS site coordinates on 11/12/10 (time/date stamped) in the afternoon, potentially proving they went back when they said they did. Furthermore, they have several pictures later in same day with the Sierras tissue, including piece Melba received before it was cut in Justin’s hand. In other words, for them to …say… “defrost†a bear piece they would’ve had in their freezer to send in (which they know will be dna tested immediately) they would’ve had to do so before leaving, then drive 2 ½ hours to site and know they are just taking a picture to show they were there on that date/time, drive 2 ½ hours back home and have the presence of mind to take pics of defrosted bear on same day to get time/date/stamp. Not impossible, but would’ve took a lot of premeditation and this was never something they brought up as like a hidden bogey they possessed for insatnce, matter off fact, we just “pieced†(no pun intended) it all together recently.

There’s much more to consider and sift through but I’m tired right now

The only things I can guarantee anybody from my personal perspective is that:

1) I eavesdropped on both guys without their knowledge about 15 months ago and what I heard was an incriminating conversation in which both of them believed they were alone (they still don’t know what they said and barely remember conversation) and talked intimately about the events of that day including brief casual mention of leaving without the juvenile. Though understandably mere hearsay to you, it was very compelling from my standpoint because as I mentioned, the context of the conversation was almost impossible as it was so casual that even knowing the guys a hundred times better now, it’s hard to fathom if they were bsing each other (makes no sense) and like I said, if this was a missing persons case and they were the suspects and that conversation was taped and admissible, they were gone. Without this overheard conversation, I would’ve never given the event much of a chance, let alone investigated further.

2) Justin successfully passed a polygraph which even if you think it’s junk science, it’s not easy to do, especially from someone who fears they may work better than they do (and had “the sack†to take it with not much to gain)

3) After passing the polygraph, Justin was accompanied by 5 other people all on the shelf (at best) in regards to the reality of the claimed shooting event, they made a last minute decision to stay there on site (300 yds from killsite) and were subsequently stalked around perimeter of camp at 4:30 AM by two large bipedal subjects that even momentarily stepped out of the tree-line. Needless to say, all 5 of those people backed and supported him after and one broke down crying from the epiphany. Shawn and Ro who co-founded The Sierras Evidence Initiative with me, both were skeptics at the time of bigfoots existing at all, let alone the Sierras event being a reality.

4) Two weeks later on Au 23^rd almost 23 months after the purported shootings and from 300 yds from where the purported shootings took place, I got 40+ minutes of thermal footage unexpectedly at 1:30 AM with Shawn right by my side, of multiple subjects that are definitively bipedal and taller than anyone in our party (all accounted for) who loitered just inside the tree line on a vantage incline and within 36 yds of a sleeping Justin and two of our companions (Ro & Todd) for over 90 minutes without making a sound and without the benefit of a light source. All six of us present are 100% positive what the subjects are (no viable alternatives) as are the people not present that night who were invited by me to come investigate the incident independently and participate in the extensive re-creation process.

Those are the facts Jack, and I’m looking at astronomical circumstances either way.

Either those four factual things happened because both Justin and Jack are telling the truth

regardless of results (rather our labs or Melba) on circumstantial tissue (which I’ve always had little faith in as I explained) and they all fall right in line, or….. they made it this far lying and they are remarkable coincidences and I just got extremely lucky in an extremely viable, but seasonal habitat.

Take your pick, “from my position.â€

[bipedalist]

Appreciate the rehash Bart!

It at least serves as an attempt to integrate alot of the stuff floating around out there for people to consider.

[Guest slimwitless]

I don't think the date should have any effect on poly result because it really is such a minor detail of the question. It doesn't change anything about the context of the question.

I agree. The only reason I ask is that a later shooting date would square with Derek's timeline on the Olympic Project site. I think there were likely some poor "estimates" early on that led to some ongoing confusion. About the clothes, I'm surprised they were washed. From his quote, it seems like he knew they were important. You need to give that kid a good sucker punch.

Aside from perhaps this being a "consumption spot" where scraps of animals were leftover, I still can't cover this one well, and have said the same to Justin.

I asked earlier and I don't remember an answer. I'm curious. Did anyone expect to find the DNA profile(s) of the animal(s) that fed on this sample?

[Guest Tyler H]

thanks Bart - Even I'M learning some stuff abut the encounter here!

Perhaps it slipped my memory, but I don't think I realized just how far the tissue was found from where they suspected the adult had died. This statement: "immediate location (60 yards downhill from where they suspect the adult crashed off)" was informative for me.

At the time I was at the kill site, and during the times of my initial interviews with Justin, I believe there was less clarity about where the adult had gone down. But you and he have made so many more trips to that site since then, and I know that more details and evidence have come forward which now better inform the entire encounter. (Locations have become more precise from some tell-tale signs of digging and such, for example.)

[Guest Thepattywagon]

Bart, can you tell us how you are 100% sure neither Justin or Jack knew you were eavesdropping on their 'incriminating' conversation?

Are you open to the possibility of a prior agreement between them that ANYTHING spoken between them while in the proximity of you all would not deviate from their 'story'?

The reason I ask is because if this whole thing is a lie, and they did shoot a bear, my guess is they would have agreed to stick to the story at ALL times, particularly if there was a remote chance of someone or something eavesdropping on them.

[Cotter]

Here's a stupid question.

When the 'steak' was first discussed, Meldrum and others indicated it looked like 'coyote'. With grays and browns in it.

How in the world does a gray/brown hunk of fur become black bear?

[Guest]

By the way, there is absolutely no such thing as an unknown genome. Or unknown DNA. Once DNA is sequenced, it's known.

Splitting hairs...what I meant by that is pretty clear.

Mulder- no offense but if I told you I and several other witnesses saw your house on fire while you were away I don't think you'd believe it until you read it in the paper the next day or they showed a picture of it on the news.

On a matter of such import yes I would seek verification.

Besides This being common knowledge for every person internally involved with her to some extent or not, if this wasn't the case (Sierras tissue is one of three genomes), why would she and Tyler have several days of physical dialogue (phone, emails) just prior to our release and initiated by Melba (first initiated by interested third party) about testing, assertions by her of Justin taking piece off body and our labs results? Do you think she called Tyler for a pizza joint recommendation when she eventually visits Calgary sometime in the next twenty years? Do you think we're all lying here or could be confused? Although it's Tyler's discretion since he owns those emails containing the exchange with her I think him and I would agree that it would be inappropriate to violate Dr. Ketchum's expectations of some privacy at this point to satisfy one of the only people here in denial. Think about it, none of this would be taking place if there was never a significant claim (Sierras tissue is of a bigfoot and a successful genome performed).

I don't know that at all. If you chose not to release the evidence you or other such claimants have to document those assertions, it's not my fault if I do not accept such a powerful and potentially damning claim absent independently check-able sources. It's no more or less than is required for Ketchum-supportive claims.

[Guest]

Thanks for all the details Bart. Do you have any idea how deep the sample was in the snow? I'm thinking if it was at the very bottom that would tell you that it likely got there before the snow started. You might can figure out how long after the shooting that it started to snow and get an idea when the sample got there.

You mentioned that the sample didn't look 5 weeks old and if it was not deep in the snow then that would go along with that. If it was under all the snow then it was probably there for a longer time. Do you know how deep the snow was?

I'm also curious if you guys have found more large piles of scat. Justin mentioned that before they saw the creature they saw many many piles of large scat in the road, which I did find very interesting. Thanks.

[Guest]

Sojourner asked:

Look at his words. Justin said that we know the truth now. It's bear. If not, perhaps he can clarify?

Justin was going by what Bart and Tyler told him about their results. When I talked to Justin soon after I explained to him how the two studies, ( Melbas and Bart and Tylers) could possibly look WAY different because of the genomes performed and the massive amount of data that was accumulated with her study including FASTA files and Phylogenetic trees. He now understands what I'm saying and is looking very forward to Melbas study being released so it will hopefully validate his story.

Tyler said:

thanks Bart - Even I'M learning some stuff abut the encounter here!

Perhaps it slipped my memory, but I don't think I realized just how far the tissue was found from where they suspected the adult had died. This statement: "immediate location (60 yards downhill from where they suspect the adult crashed off)" was informative for me.

When Bart, Tyler and I were in the Sierras in that following August for the recovery trip I organised, Justin was recounting the story for all of us. When we approached the area were the little one was shot he showed us a dead stump about 40' away and up hill were the flesh was recovered. At that time he said that's about where they thought they heard the larger one fall, and then he pointed out where the stump was broken, and he thought that it could have become broken if the big had fallen into it. Yes he was guessing but it seemed to make sense to him at the time. Also what needs to be taken into consideration is the likelihood that the young ones would not want to get to far from their parent. That stump is exactly where the flesh was recovered. Also, the "bear dog" was acting funny around that area, it didn't dig it up, it was just acting strange. I do have that whole day and Justins thoughts on video tape, I'm not making this up.

I know I said I was leaving this thread but it is important to clarify.

DR

[Guest]

Where the evidence leads at this time is your boy Smeja giving you a piece of bear meat and trying to pass it off as Bigfoot flesh. It seems you should be pissed at him instead of Ketchum.

And your evidence that Smeja ever affirmatively claimed that the piece did in fact come from a BF? He was hopeful it did. He thought it very likely it did. But I have seen no definitive, attributable quote where he in fact claimed anything more than that.