Hoaxes, Hoaxers, Frauds, And Con-Men In The Bigfoot Community

[Oonjerah]

This is something that I would never have figured out on my own. So it was a big "AHA!"

and made me remember the movie. (In fact, I forgot the rest of the movie.)

House of Games (1987), Joe Mantegna, Lindsay Crouse; (He's a con man; she's a shrink.)

Quote Mike/Joe: It's called a confidence game. Why? Because you give me your confidence?

No. Because I give you mine.

Here Mike explains that when a con man targets you, his 1st step is to convince you that

he trusts you. Apparently, most of us instinctively react by giving trust in return. Thus

we've been set up and are ready to be played.

BigFootery attracts a lot of con men. Best we should understand our enemy a bit.

If Ed said, "I am gay," it might imply, "I am trusting you with something very important

and private." Is he really gay? That is not relevant. He had their trust is relevant.

[Guest]

Cisco said:

I don't think Melissa is defending DW or DO. She's just giving an alternate point of view, based on her conversations and observations. The reality is that we can all speculate until the cows come home and we really won't have all sides of the story until Ed decides to tell us.

You're right. I am just telling people what was said to me - and being as honest as I can. That is the definition of neutral and objective. I am also trying to give others something to think about. Not everything is as cut and dried as it appears and while I might do something one way - someone else may handle it totally different. Hindsight is always 20/20 - always. I only have information that one person was responsible for this hoax - but as I said - if someone can provide evidence of more than one person being responsible - I am all ears and I will stand behind you.

Honestly, it doesn't matter to me what Ed has to say.

Oonjerah said:

BigFootery attracts a lot of con men. Best we should understand our enemy a bit.

That is what I would personally like to see people thinking about - or this is lesson we may never learn from. Very wise words and advice, Oonjerah.

[Guest]

This is something that I would never have figured out on my own. So it was a big "AHA!"

and made me remember the movie. (In fact, I forgot the rest of the movie.)

House of Games (1987), Joe Mantegna, Lindsay Crouse; (He's a con man; she's a shrink.)

Quote Mike/Joe: It's called a confidence game. Why? Because you give me your confidence?

No. Because I give you mine.

Here Mike explains that when a con man targets you, his 1st step is to convince you that

he trusts you. Apparently, most of us instinctively react by giving trust in return. Thus

we've been set up and are ready to be played.

BigFootery attracts a lot of con men. Best we should understand our enemy a bit.

If Ed said, "I am gay," it might imply, "I am trusting you with something very important

and private." Is he really gay? That is not relevant. He had their trust is relevant.

my point exactly

[Guest]

I have followed BF stories since 67. I'm relatively new to the forums and all the recent claims. I remember the suit in a freezer and a couple of other claims. This question or topic may have been discussed at another place or time, if so I apologize. Is it criminal, and if so have any charges been filed on these hoaxers?

It seems to me, wasting time, resources and possibly costing $, should be against the law.

[Guest Tontar]

The point with my question, " is it illegal to hoax a BF sighting"? If so, has anyone been prosecuted?

It depends. Certainly there are laws that could possibly be broken by hoaxers. However, the basic answer would be no. At this point bigfoot has not been legally nor scientifically proven to exist, and as such it remains in the mythological category. This is not an argument over they exist or not, nor what evidence suggest they do exist, but merely the simple fact that they do not legally nor scientifically exist "yet". Unless someone can produce evidence of a law that prohibits the impersonation of a currently mythological creature, there would be no law against simple bigfoot impersonation.

However, if one attempts to trick one for profit, who knows. I think that there might be some who would think that would be fraud, but it could likely be defended successfully in court, but I don't know. For example, selling footprint casts under the label of "authentic bigfoot prints" could be argued, since there is no way to determine that any tracks or prints are actually authentic.

But if it is illegal to hoax a bigfoot sighting, no, not on the face of it. It's probably going to come down to whether or not someone profits from it. If someone ever takes that to court, and wins, then shows like Finding Bigfoot and others would likely be open to a followup suit. Which is also likely the reason that the Patty suit is such a touchy issue to dive into. Money was made, and continues to be made, on the PGF. If shown to be a hoax, a fabrication, then the concern would be about having defrauded the sources of that cash.

[Guest RedRatSnake]

That reminds me of this case.

'Bigfoot' Filmmaker Sues New Hampshire

An amateur filmmaker who donned a hairy Bigfoot costume and scared hikers on New Hampshire's Mount Monadnock is now suing the state for not allowing him back on the mountain without a permit.

http://www.aolnews.c...oyle-fights-fo/

Tim ~

[Guest]

To be fair, all we ever had about this was Ed Smith's word. Why should we choose to believe the initial story instead of choosing to believe his follow-up claim that it was all made up? It works both ways, of course (why should we now believe him that he's only made it up). We don't have great reasons for either choice.

reminds me of Star Trek:

[trying to confuse an android]

Captain Kirk: Everything Harry tells you is a lie. Remember that. Everything Harry tells you is a lie.

Harcourt Fenton Mudd: Now listen to this carefully, Norman. I am... lying.

Norman: You say you are lying, but if everything you say is a lie, then you are telling the truth, but you cannot tell the truth because everything you say is a lie, but you lie... You tell the truth but you cannot for you lie... illogical! Illogical! Please explain! You are human. Only humans can explain their behavior! Please explain!

[Cotter]

It depends. Certainly there are laws that could possibly be broken by hoaxers. However, the basic answer would be no. At this point bigfoot has not been legally nor scientifically proven to exist, and as such it remains in the mythological category. This is not an argument over they exist or not, nor what evidence suggest they do exist, but merely the simple fact that they do not legally nor scientifically exist "yet". Unless someone can produce evidence of a law that prohibits the impersonation of a currently mythological creature, there would be no law against simple bigfoot impersonation.

However, if one attempts to trick one for profit, who knows. I think that there might be some who would think that would be fraud, but it could likely be defended successfully in court, but I don't know. For example, selling footprint casts under the label of "authentic bigfoot prints" could be argued, since there is no way to determine that any tracks or prints are actually authentic.

But if it is illegal to hoax a bigfoot sighting, no, not on the face of it. It's probably going to come down to whether or not someone profits from it. If someone ever takes that to court, and wins, then shows like Finding Bigfoot and others would likely be open to a followup suit. Which is also likely the reason that the Patty suit is such a touchy issue to dive into. Money was made, and continues to be made, on the PGF. If shown to be a hoax, a fabrication, then the concern would be about having defrauded the sources of that cash.

I'm confident that you have done your research on this. Good post.

;-)