Guest Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 November 1985 Nome, Alaska Supposedly a local pilot and his newly wed wife were en route to Anchorage were they would make connections for their honeymoon. The weather turned sour so he touched down in a Cessna 180 or 185 on floats. He taxied to shore where he and his wife looked for a spot to pitch their tent for the night. Having found one he turned toward the plane to fetch the tent with his wife following him. He heard his wife scream and turned to see a hairy biped running from the location towards the woods with his wife under one arm. The pilot chased after the critter before realizing that he could best stop it with a firearm and returned to the plane to fetch his rifle. He followed, seeing them three times before he lost sight of them. He found a particle of cloth from his wife’s garment. He either spent the night in his tent and looked the next day or flew to Anchorage and reported the event to the Alaska State Troopers who began a search but were unable to come up with any positive results. The wife was never found and the pilot was reportedly distraught and a “basket case†for years. Source: Larry Kaniut, Alaska, July 2007 in Bigfoot Encounters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 I've heard a recent call-in, but it took 2 people calling in a few minutes apart, because the dispatcher just blew off the first caller as a hoax. This was in the midwest, around 2AM in a town. Looked at the town and there was forest area all around it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 Which town? Same thing happened when a single engine plane crashed on the interstate by my house about 12 years ago. Dispatch: "Are you serious? You know it's illegal to prank call 911" LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 I guess this is as good a place as any to come out of the closet, I was in the same business as Gumshoe, 25 years, retired, local law enforcement. Not going to get specific as to where, but it was an agency with about 650 square miles of jurisdiction ranging from a couple of small cities to isolated mountains, some above timberline. Gumshoe speaks the truth regarding the his take on the average street cop. If we got a call where there was any potential risk to public safety involved, we went. Period. Prioritized, yes, but we went. I had a lengthy reply typed out, but I think I will leave it there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 (edited) Good job Brother, plus one …. J Edited December 8, 2014 by Gumshoeye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 @North - very cool to have another member than can provide some insight into that. Question - have you, or someone you worked with seen any evidence? Tracks, figures, etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 (edited) Cotter, I have not seen any evidence, and no one I worked with has seen any evidence and then shared the info with me. That said, there have been reports filed that are in the BFRO database that are in my jurisdiction and some of the jurisdictions you could drive to in a day. I did some cross-checking and there was nothing on file with our agency on any of those dates and times, which really doesn't surprise me, and no scuttlebutt ever reached my ears about anything. I'm really not comfortable with identifying who/where I worked for. No top secret stuff or conspiracy stuff in that answer but I am retired; I don't work there anymore and don't want to represent them without the authority to do so. Which I ain't got. I'll be happy to give the general perspective of a guy in my line of work with my experience. I retired a sergeant, I worked patrol, served as a training officer and worked investigations and a couple other assignments in my time so I might be able to contribute to the conversation now and then. Gumshoe and I have shared a PM or two and we have an amazing amount of professional and life experience in common, he is much further down the BF research path than I am tho. Edited December 9, 2014 by Northfork Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trogluddite Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Northfork, Would you agree that even if a random cop saw a bigfoot on night shift, he or she might have strong motivations to pass it off as "a big animal I didn't see clearly" until after retirement. Police and other investigators must bank (build up) their credibility. Some de minimis lie or petty misconduct that might fly at the Gap or McDonalds will destroy a law enforcement officer's ability to do their job, as defense attorneys will always start cross-examination with, "Isn't it true, officer, that you were caught lying about X? Then how can the jury believe you today when you testify about Y?" I believe that an officer would have similar problems with the local bar if it became known that he/she "saw a bigfoot." "So, Officer Dokes, would you say the masked man running out of the bank was shorter or taller than the BIGFOOT YOU SAW!!??" Just a theory I've kicked around a bit but haven't posted. Seems like just as good a thread as any other to post it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 (edited) Northfork, Would you agree that even if a random cop saw a bigfoot on night shift, he or she might have strong motivations to pass it off as "a big animal I didn't see clearly" until after retirement. Police and other investigators must bank (build up) their credibility. Some de minimis lie or petty misconduct that might fly at the Gap or McDonalds will destroy a law enforcement officer's ability to do their job, as defense attorneys will always start cross-examination with, "Isn't it true, officer, that you were caught lying about X? Then how can the jury believe you today when you testify about Y?" I believe that an officer would have similar problems with the local bar if it became known that he/she "saw a bigfoot." "So, Officer Dokes, would you say the masked man running out of the bank was shorter or taller than the BIGFOOT YOU SAW!!??" Just a theory I've kicked around a bit but haven't posted. Seems like just as good a thread as any other to post it now. A good prosecutor may stand up and object on the grounds that “Bigfoot†is not relevant to the case in which case the judge may sustain or over-rule and ask the defense to reword the question. I mean there are limits to absurdity! I would expect prosecution to respond by embarrassing the defense by asking him on cross-examination if it was true he left the toilet seat up as some say .... Take him off his game and embarrass him. How's that for an answer? Edited December 9, 2014 by Gumshoeye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trogluddite Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 (edited) Never mind. (Edited to remove all snark, which was the entire post) Edited December 9, 2014 by Trogluddite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 (edited) Well I guess you got a freebie and didn’t have to ask then. Edited December 9, 2014 by Gumshoeye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 (edited) Trog: In general, what Gum said. I think it would be a huge stretch to try to use your example as Brady material, it wouldn't stand. It would be crushed as irrelevant, unsubstantiated, and probably would not score any points with the judge...none that I've ever testified before. Judges are not fond of mistrials. Furthermore, if the defense didn't have an actual report prepared by said officer or another way to verify the sighting he wouldn't be able to use it in the first place. Without the paper or a witness to said cop's report (that didn't get shot down as hearsay) the defense counsel would never know of such a experience. I don't see the average cop making it that easy. Cops don't generally shoot the breeze with the defense bar about stuff like that, I will give you that. And no offense, but you sure worded that like an attorney.... Edited December 9, 2014 by Northfork Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trogluddite Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Northfork, Not surprising about the last part... notwithstanding both replies, I believe that currently serving LEOs have an additional incentive to not report an encounter. They cannot put their reputatoin for truthfulness at risk; having an official report out there stating that they saw a mythical (for most people) creature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Counselor I am not trying to be argumentative, and you are free to believe it if you like, but I really doubt that there is any concern at the street level about your scenario. There just isn't, and I haven't been gone long enough that if something had been put in place, formally or informally, I would know. And it ain't there. Honestly, it ain't. It might be someplace else, but not here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trogluddite Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Likewise on the "not trying to be argumentative part..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts