Paul Freeman Footage.....believe It Or Not?

[LeafTalker]

Thom Powell was present while an English film crew interviewed Paul Freeman for a TV show in 2002, a year before Freeman died. Powell asked for, and received, permission to tape the interview at the same time the English crew was taping Freeman. 

 

Here's an excerpt from a longer article about that interview that Thom Powell published on his website (at http://www.thomsquatch.com/2011_07_01_archive.html):

 

"One interesting element of these tapes is the fact that the English reporter who interviews Freeman has really done his homework.  He knew the controversies that Paul was embroiled in and he did his best to get Paul Freeman to articulate his position on the accusations of hoaxing that swirled  back in the 1990's. The biggest flap surrounded comments made by Freeman on a "Good Morning America" appearance. he  acknowledged "trying to make" a set of  fake footprints. Freeman explained to me as we chatted at my house before the interview that his remarks were taken out of context. He wanted to create a  set of deliberate fakes for comparison purposes. He never tried to portray the his fakes as anything but an experiment.   But by acknowledging on camera that he had 'tried' to make  fake footprins, he created a dust-up that many would seize upon to cast doubt on any and all evidence ever gather by this remarkably dedicated field researcher."

[ThePhaige]

Freeman was not a hoax... he wanted to make a set of feet for testing and to determine the weights based on depth of the prints he was finding and it was taken out of context...that has long been put to bed but yet some always bring it up. 

 

Heres an article on the juvenile, if you view the original you can see it.

 

http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/bigfoot_video/freeman_bigfoot.php

[MIB]

Good stuff!!  Excellent write-up.  Thanks for pointing that out.

 

MIB

Edited June 3, 2013 by MIB

[BobbyO]

So Freeman's not a hoaxer in the true meaning of the word ( Tontar style ) after all ?

[Guest]

Based on what I've learned since being on the BFF, I find the footage inconclusive.

Shaky, at times the camera isn't even pointed at the subject.  Too far away.  Why didn't he zoom in?

Blurry, not clear enough to make out any detail that might determine that it's not a suit.

[HOLDMYBEER]

Freeman's hoaxing is well documented and available for review. He is the original discoverer of the flying sasquatch.

[MIB]

Freeman's hoaxing is well documented and available for review. He is the original discoverer of the flying sasquatch.

Documented where?  Links, please.   So far all I have are unsubstantiated claims of hoaxing, not proof.

[Guest DWA]

It's as authentic as his footprint casts

Actually, unless someone stepped forward and showed the stompers that made those, what's your proof?

 

Meldrum was shown tracks by Freeman that he couldn't discount as hoaxes.

 

That Freeman did get caught in a hoax or two makes his video problematical.  Not sure what I think of it.

Edited June 3, 2013 by DWA

[Cotter]

What hoaxes did Freeman get caught in?

[Guest DWA]

I was given to believe that Meldrum considered some of his footprint casts hoaxes.

 

If I'm wrong though...well, I cheerfully stand corrected on this one.

[LeafTalker]

So Freeman's not a hoaxer in the true meaning of the word ( Tontar style ) after all ?

 

Yes, that's my stong belief (and the belief of many others): that Freeman is not a hoaxer.

 

 

 

 

Meldrum was shown tracks by Freeman that he couldn't discount as hoaxes.

 

 

Meldrum also purchased Freeman's entire collection of casts. That, to me, suggests a pretty high level of confidence that most of the casts were authentic.

[HOLDMYBEER]

 

Freeman's hoaxing is well documented and available for review. He is the original discoverer of the flying sasquatch.

Documented where?  Links, please.   So far all I have are unsubstantiated claims of hoaxing, not proof.

 

 

 

What hoaxes did Freeman get caught in?

 

Post #9.

[Old Dog]

TRACKER, Case Files & Adventures of a Professional Mantracker, by Joel Hardin, 2005, Chapter six: Tracks of Bigfoot.

 

Pretty much says it for me.

 

 

Since most of us don't have that particular book, would you care to paraphrase that section for us?

[VAfooter]

Still looking for something more concrete on this.

 

 

While not the evidence I was looking for, a discussion of some of the "issues" with Freeman's evidence.

 

 

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/dennett03.htm

 

 

29 OCT 1987 GMA Freeman segment (4:25 mark):

 

 

 

OK, sort of an admission there, however, we all know that TV can be edited to show anything they want.

 

 

 

I do not dispute that he may have indeed found evidence, it is his overall credibility that I question. And for me, that calls into doubt everything he says.

[Old Dog]

For some reason, my brain won't let go of this issue.  I have no opinion one way or the other as to if Freeman was a hoaxer or not.  Some are saying he faked the track casts, but this is some of what I have found so far.  This is Chilcutts take on the casts.

 

"When Chilcutt arrived at Meldrum’s ISU office, Meldrum took him to the lab where the print casts were and went back to his office. “I totally let him go, without giving him any background or my opinion as to any of (the casts),†Meldrum says. “I wanted him to judge it purely on what he was seeing.â€

What Chilcutt found floored him. Three of the castings he examined — out of more than 100 over that day and the next two — were clearly from the same foot. “They were definitely non-human,†he says, but “had all the characteristics of dermal ridges.â€

The foot had some scarring on the bottom of the foot. “Any fingerprint expert knows,†Chilcutt says, “when the wound heals, the (dermal) ridges curl inward toward the cut.†Upon close examination of the dermal ridges on the bottom of one of the casts, he says, “No question about it: They were curling back in.â€

That particular aspect, Chilcutt says, “would be very, very difficult to fake†— requiring both an extensive background in anatomy and anthropology but also the resources to pull off the hoax.
Chilcutt’s conclusion: The prints were not fakes.

Asked if it was difficult to accept what a week earlier he would have considered laughable, Chilcutt says no.
“Any forensic person, any CSI guy, they look for the facts. It is what it is,†he says. “Whether it helps the defense or the prosecution, it doesn’t matter. And when I looked at the prints, there it was.
“We’ve got some kind of primate out there. Non-human.â€

 

 

These were in reference to the Freeman casts.