Guest slimwitless Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 I don't buy the story, but if true I as well believe he has the body and it most likely "spoke" to him when it was dying. Justin's never fully articulated what happened in the two or three minutes after he shot the juvenile. He usually glosses over it with a comment like, "a bunch of stuff happened". I'm not sure whether it "spoke" but I get the feeling it was some kind of profound experience. I could be wrong. For instance, I was certain he started a thread called "The Sierra Kills" with his introductory post to this forum. Sadly, threads were merged and the original title was lost. That's how I remember it anyway. In the interview, he said he didn't know where the phrase came from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thepattywagon Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 He shot it in the throat, so I doubt it was able to do much other than cough up blood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 (edited) Maybe. That's not the vibe I got from his interviews. Somewhere he said it'd be in the book (maybe in the chat room here, maybe...elsewhere). Anyway, I thought it was a good interview. The execution was better than I expected and I actually learned a few things I didn't know. This is the first time I've heard he would have taken a second shot at the adult if the driver hadn't yelled, "NO WAY"! The part about throwing the juvenile's body toward the driver and the whole story of how quickly Randles called after Justin spilled the beans to K.W. It should make for an interesting movie. I told someone I'd cast a young Vincent D'onofrio for the part of the shooter. ...if true, of course. Edited July 16, 2012 by slimwitless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted July 16, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted July 16, 2012 .... I wonder if Prof Sykes has had any, and if that's the lab he's referring to? Randles already reported that a sample has been sent to Sykes..... whether it has been studied or not I'm not sure but apparently it has been received and I believe IIRC that it has been screened at least. This from another thread and info. possibly from another BF site. Don't ask me to recall where they were, I can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Maybe I can help provide a little insight into how some of us hunters think. I've hunted for 30 years, and I killed my first deer when I was 7. Many of us were not affected by the Bambification of America. I'm really sorry but we just don't attribute human characteristics to wild animals. Of course that doesn't mean we don't have a respect and admiration of these animals, and absolutely wouldn't want to see them suffer or be wasted. There is one thing that is being twisted here that is bothering me though. The way it is being spun to make it sound as some kind of war crime when people are saying that hunters, "find joy in killing an animal". Many of you may not understand this, but yes, there is joy when a hunt comes to an end. When you've invested countless hours and dollars and paid the phyiscal toll preparing, scouting, and hiking all with the sole purpose of putting yourself in position for that shot, it's extremely gratifying. A lot of that comes mainly because of our profound respect for the animals we hunt. More often than not, you're outsmarted by these animals. You're on their turf, they have evolved to survive there and have tremendous physical advantages, so when a hunt is successful, you're gonna have to excuse the high-five. I know many do not understand it, but for many of us, it's part of a culture that has been handed down to us and it's something that we value very much. Some of my hunts are basically family reunions and are the only time I get to see uncles and cousins that I don't see the rest of the year. Killing an animal does not reflect on the amount of respect someone has for human life, and many of us just don't feel like we should try to be guilted into attending confession for dropping a few coyotes on the weekend. Side note, coyotes are overrunning certain parts of Arizona, ruining livestock, bankrupting ranchers, and destroying antelope populations, so some of us feel it's our duty to help get the numbers under control. Okay so after all that, as far as Justin is concerned, it's pretty clear he feels bad about what he did, but I don't think it puts him in the category of a Jeffrey Dahmer or Ted Bundy. If it becomes totally illegal to shoot a previously thought to be non-existent animal (as it should be), then from here on out we should all be judged by our actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunflower Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Thanks for the education. My brothers gave it up after they realized that they could afford to BUY food. They saved tons of money not having to buy bigger and better guns, camping equipment, four wheel drive vehicles and licenses, and the list goes on....... I am so close to going vegan.....it pains me to think of all the injustices and cruelty that happens to farm animals. Besides if you knew what was in the some meat you probably wouldn't eat it anyway. It was something JS said that made me seeth inside.......he said "they don't belong here" What the _____? He doesn't either, he has a home in Sacramento. Those woods were those hairy person's home til he decided to exterminate them. Sorry for the rant, but this just chaps my behind that such characters as JS make decisions to end the lives of innocent beings. He didn't know what they were, but he was going to kill them anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Within the first 2 minutes of the video I am thinking BS. The rest of the video doesn't change my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 See-Te-Cah... +1 from me. I have thought from the beginning that he took the juvenile body with him. "Finding" the piece just seemed too convenient for me. If you are digging in the snow for something you REALLY want to find but can't, then you all of a sudden find a piece of hide from that very animal, there's no way you would stop looking at that point knowing how close you are. I was always fairly certain that if the story is true, then he has the body. Unbelievably however, I never put 2 and 2 together and thought about the idea that he was looking to have it stuffed. I can't believe I overlooked the taxidermy thing... I guess I just figured that was a message board he often posted on and wanted to know what they thought, but now that you have articulated it I am pretty certain that if the story is true, you have hit the nail on the head. Great one! Within the first 2 minutes of the video I am thinking BS. The rest of the video doesn't change my mind. Strange, you're usually so opened minded about these things! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 My husband is/was a highly trained kinesic technique interviewer that also trained other police officers in the technique and if used properly it can be a very important tool. He always said though that it was only as good as the training and the experience of the person using it and that it could never be counted on as 100% accurate as it was only a tool that was used in interviews as a first phase. By itself it is only an indicator of probable deception or honesty and is certainly not a proof of deception or honesty. He says that watching a TV segment or a doing a quick talk with someone is never good enough because you have to establish their normal physical and verbal behavior patterns and note variations from that norm which takes time and patience. You have to understand that the verbal and non-verbal responses go hand in hand and be ready to pick up on the subtle or sometimes big differences that the subject exhibits. (I'm quoting his course training manual now haha!) Let us know if he gets a chance to look at it, thx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 See-Te-Cah, great post and +1. I just finished watching the entire interview a second time. There is definitely more to the story than he is telling, especially around the time of shooting the juvenile. Whether the missing part(s) is that he has the juvenile's body, whether they actually found the big one's body, or whether (as Cervelo has suggested) the little one "spoke" to him as it was dying... I don't know. He said it took a couple of minutes for the little one to die as he was holding it up and staring in its face. I would love to hear from Derek Randles after he has a chance to watch the interview. Does it seem pretty accurate from his perspective? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Pretty sure he took both bodies with him, or left one behind and took one. IF you watch him when he says he killed both kids he's speaking truth the truth, then realizes what he said on camera and changes what he said. Who is the interviewer? Tim B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I didn't see the remorse or how he was obviously affected. I heard a different version of events from what I had previously read. The only question I have is why does he keep doing these interviews? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighunter43 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) As an avid hunter myself....I saw several "red flags"....a couple have been mentioned: 1.) I either have serious doubts about his big game experience in that he describes making a "kill shot" and heard the crashing, etc....but can't find the carcass of the adult? I've tracked numerous bowkills, some with and without blood trails...always with success. Your telling me he can't track a wounded 600 pound animal that is "crashing", etc.....should have been easy.....so basically we don't have a confirmed kill on the adult. 2.) Your telling me his buddy gets out of the vehicle and doesn't take his gun when they look for this "monster"....and then they split up for a while and the buddy has no gun...sure...tracking a wounded BF with no gun?? 3.) I'm sorry, I haven't seen many .25-06's or any rifle near that caliber leave a "basketball" size exit hole.....this all could be 100% on the level....but there are some things not adding up! Edited July 17, 2012 by bighunter43 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I was surprised to learn that he's supposedly taken a lie detector test (and passed) and offered to take another while being filmed. I don't put a lot of faith in those things but at least it shows he's earnest. I think a similar interview format including the driver would go a long way to dispel some questions. It will happen at some point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) Thepattywagon My biggest question is why 'Driver' didn't grab his rifle when the left the truck to find the 'monster' he shot.Brave guy, no doubt, since he and Justin split up more than once in their search, while the two young monsters were running around so close to them. Considering the babies in the proximity, I would think he would be worried about another large one being around. Justin's quote about the little ones was, "We're not even paying two s**ts about them". Interesting, considering they had no clue as to what these creatures were. Just by listening to justin talk about hunting, he knows his stuff,with that said, I do not understand how they did not find the adult, I hunted since I was 4 am know 47, one of the first skills you aquire is tracking, how do you not track a 600 lb animal that has a lung shot with a 25-06, even if it was not a pass through shot, their would be extreme organ damage, and with a lung shot, bright red spray usually easy to track. I just find it hard to believe they couldn't find the adult. also, why would you go looking for an animal of that size and only one gun that was wounded, the most dangerous animal, is a wounded animal, any experienced hunter knows this, and he kept referring to it as "dead" after he shot. I think there is so much more to what really happened. Cervelo I'm a hunter and can assure you that this guys viewpoint is in the minority of hunters I've dealt with in my 52years. The only time I've ever had any dealings with hunters that disregarded the season is people who were subsistance hunting. While it might be a hard concept for a none hunter to understand but most hunters don't enjoy killing but obviously some do there's a description for that type of behavior and disregard for life in general but the rules of this fourm would inhibit me from using it in this context. You have hunters and you have killers, there is a big difference. I hunted on a trip with this older guy that was staying in our cabin, all he would do was ride around on a quad, shooting whatever deer he seen and gave every one of them away, did not even keep one of them. he is a true killer and has no idea on how to hunt. Some of the best days I had hunting, sitting sun up to sun down in my treestand, and I never even picked up my bow off the rest. Just sitting there, watching the woods come to life. Edited July 17, 2012 by zigoapex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts