Guest Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 As I listening to Sasquatch Chronicles Bog Radio, episode #70 the hosts and their guest were discussing Bob Barrett as it relates to his claims of harassment for video filming a torn up campsite that infers Bigfoot related. Was it an aberration or anomaly? Could be but I wanted to see what, if any, other reports claiming campsite destroyed had in common, and so I started looking. Upon closer examination of reports that I read, I noticed more than a dozen similar reports made by people over the years across the country claiming the same destruction. So when I came across this October 1991, Texas report submitted to GCBRO. The essence of this report goes something like this: A man on horseback camps overnight when he awoke to his horse screaming and fussing. Within minutes he hears a terrifying roar and something very large crashing through the underbrush. Not willing to wait another minute, he jumps his horse bareback and they ride out there. A few hours later he returns for his horse tack and camping gear. He found his saddle and leather works torn to shreds and a coffee pot twisted, and anything with human scent completely destroyed. http://www.gcbro.com/TXcherokee0012.html In Indiana, a husband and wife team camping were forced to flee their campsite when they heard rock clacking and see a large bipedal creature standing near their SUV. They say it was between 8-9 feet watching them before they were besieged by rocks and one large struck the tent, ripping the material and destroyed it. During the daylight hours they returned to recover their property and found their things destroyed and a trail of partial prints leading away from the site. Four men camping in Illinois, say they were forced to flee and told police a furry creature standing by a dead tree with red glowing eyes and one of the campers on crutches with a broken foot ran off leaving his crutches behind. When they returned with police four hours later, they heard something running through tall grass and located the tent ripped to shreds. A Michigan camper claimed they were paralyzed in fear when out of nowhere they started hearing roars, screams, and big branches breaking. As the gets closer and closer he flees until daylight and returns to find his tent ripped to shreds and large tree torn up. What say you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohiobill Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Did you check out the police report(s) to see what they thought might have happened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Should I Ohio Bill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohiobill Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 As ex-LEO I would think you would have a unique perspective and insight regarding police reports - being able to read between the lines so to speak. Do you feel that examining the police reports in these cases would be futile for some reason? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 No my friend I am not that dedicated in doing all that, I’m here just to discuss and watch the conversation grow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohiobill Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 That's understandable, enjoy your retirement, you earned it. I know you have stated that you never worked a squatch case but could you walk us through the steps you would have taken if you had investigated a complaint like those above? I'm interested in what sort of paperwork might have to be done for the menacing and property destruction vs a simple prowler complaint. Where should we be looking for proof that might be locked up in an old evidence locker or report somewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) The more I learn, the more I read, the more I am convinced but for a few exceptions, there will be no official reports found. Personally I would write a report or instruct my underling to write it, and I would sign it because that is what they do. How to label the report is up to the reporting person to determine. If the findings were dubious and questionable, I would refer to suspect as “subject unknown†and list what was seen, snap a few photos, report what I observed, and what the reporting person said. I would record the report number, date, time and time and set aside, should any questions surface later. What becomes of the paper when it’s in the system becomes a matter of none of my concern any longer. Hope that helps. Edited January 12, 2015 by Gumshoeye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 A personal friend had left his campsite unattended overnight. Came back the next day to the carnage. He said it looked as though a rhino cleared a swath in the woods. Trees broken, ground tore up, equipment destroyed. He thought bear until he had his sighting in the same area. One thing to note is that the reason he was not at camp is b/c his wife of the time demanded they not sleep in the woods. She wasn't having a very good time. My pal speculates it could have been a show of female dominance as this was the first time he had ever brought a gal onto the mountain with him. He had been visiting the same 'general' area for several years either alone or with a guy pal. Prior to this, his only negative encounter was being escorted out of a mountain area as he and his pal were looking for the pond shown on the map to cool off (it was summer and very hot). They never made it to the pond. Back to back with shotguns drawn, escorted for hundreds of yards and never saw a single hair. AFTER this, he had several camp circlings, but no outright agressive behavior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 As I listening to Sasquatch Chronicles Bog Radio, episode #70 the hosts and their guest were discussing Bob Barrett as it relates to his claims of harassment for video filming a torn up campsite that infers Bigfoot related. Was it an aberration or anomaly? Could be but I wanted to see what, if any, other reports claiming campsite destroyed had in common, and so I started looking. Upon closer examination of reports that I read, I noticed more than a dozen similar reports made by people over the years across the country claiming the same destruction. So when I came across this October 1991, Texas report submitted to GCBRO. The essence of this report goes something like this: A man on horseback camps overnight when he awoke to his horse screaming and fussing. Within minutes he hears a terrifying roar and something very large crashing through the underbrush. Not willing to wait another minute, he jumps his horse bareback and they ride out there. A few hours later he returns for his horse tack and camping gear. He found his saddle and leather works torn to shreds and a coffee pot twisted, and anything with human scent completely destroyed. http://www.gcbro.com/TXcherokee0012.html In Indiana, a husband and wife team camping were forced to flee their campsite when they heard rock clacking and see a large bipedal creature standing near their SUV. They say it was between 8-9 feet watching them before they were besieged by rocks and one large struck the tent, ripping the material and destroyed it. During the daylight hours they returned to recover their property and found their things destroyed and a trail of partial prints leading away from the site. Four men camping in Illinois, say they were forced to flee and told police a furry creature standing by a dead tree with red glowing eyes and one of the campers on crutches with a broken foot ran off leaving his crutches behind. When they returned with police four hours later, they heard something running through tall grass and located the tent ripped to shreds. A Michigan camper claimed they were paralyzed in fear when out of nowhere they started hearing roars, screams, and big branches breaking. As the gets closer and closer he flees until daylight and returns to find his tent ripped to shreds and large tree torn up. What say you? "What says I" is that the people were smart to leave the area immediately. Rapidly of course.. plus 1 to you just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest crabshack Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) I'm quite sure now ohiobill works for the Department of the Interior. Edited January 12, 2015 by crabshack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 And why is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest crabshack Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Just because, your another one frosty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 LOL..... thanks, I knew that was coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JiggyPotamus Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 In response to ohiobill's question regarding the futility of analyzing police reports where destroyed campsites are concerned, I think that the existence of such a police report solidifies that "something" did occur. Likely the campsite was destroyed, thus it cannot be claimed that the entire report was an attempted bigfoot hoax. It could happen of course, but I do not find it very likely except in rare cases. However, I do think that aside from giving us the facts, a police report might be useless in its determinations. Why? Because it is quite likely that the opinions of the officers will find their way into the report. For instance, it would be extremely plausible for a police officer to conclude that a bear was responsible, even if there is absolutely no physical evidence of the presence of such an animal...except of course for the destroyed campsite. Now were there pieces of evidence, such as tooth-marks consistent with a bear, bear tracks, etc., such a conclusion would be more likely to represent the truth. I am just afraid that any police officer, in their attempt to be both objective and fact-based, will not even remotely entertain the possibility of bigfoot, even if huge man-shaped footprints were present throughout the area. If that were the case it would likely be claimed that a person was responsible, again with no evidence aside from the footprints. This is to be expected considering that sasquatch have not been proven to exist. As far as the reports the OP listed, or any instance where a campsite is destroyed, there are two main reasons to believe a sasquatch could be involved. The absence of anything that suggests a bear was responsible, or a visual sighting of a sasquatch. Elaborating on these two ideas, the absence of evidence for a bear could include direct physical evidence for a sasquatch, such as footprints. The visual sighting of a sasquatch could include nothing more than seeing a large, bipedal creature that was obviously not a bear. Why the importance of bears? Obviously because bears are notorious for this behavior, or at the very least are notorious for destroying things in their attempt to find or retrieve food...or what they perceive to contain food. I'm not savvy where bears are concerned to be honest, but from what I think I know these things are accurate. If not please correct me. Bears are destructive- no arguing that. They are just big, furry balls of strength and teeth, and always appear to be hungry. The last point I want to make is that sasquatch involvement should never be assumed just because a campsite is destroyed, especially when there is no evidence suggesting such involvement. It probably is best to assume a bear was responsible, simply because this will be true 95% of the time. The one thing that I would assume however is that a bear would leave some type of evidence behind, whether it is tooth-marks, footprints, etc. Someone who is more knowledgeable where bears are concerned, especially those who have dealt with the animals directly, probably could comment on this point. Is it correct to assume a bear would leave some sort of evidence behind, if it was around long enough to destroy a campsite? Anyway, the sasquatch angle definitely should be given credence if there is visual corroboration, if there are sasquatch tracks, or if there is something else that obviously excludes a known animal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Well if it makes you feel any better crab. I personaly cant stand the dept. Of interior I think there bought and played for by the eco-nazis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts