HOLDMYBEER Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 A question for The General or The Driver, or perhaps someone remembers reading the answers someplace in this thread: What were the weather conditions at the time of the shooting, particularly direction of winds and windspeed? What are the names of the California Fish and Game people involved in this? I would like to talk to the fellows who asked for your consent to search your home. Did they leave a card?
Guest Jodie Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 Here is something I've not seen asked. What date did you mail the sample to Dr. Ketchum? Did you use the U.S. postal servive, Fed Ex, or UPS?
Guest Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 Yeh, I heard this version, though much longer from him in a radio interview (apparently the updated version) http://youtu.be/OWZQynrIG6E. I wondered what type of person would think making themselves seem capable of shooting a being after their buddy identifies as someone in a suit and repeatedly says dont shoot, then capable of killing a child after so long a time of identifying them as humanoid, would make their story sanitised? In the apparently sanitised version in this radio interview he repeats that he wanted to kill one of the children but his buddy keeps saying dont do it. He says, "so, I decided to shoot one of the kids" but his buddy tells him not to. He has time, a long time according to him, to recognise the helplessness of the children. I am proud of the posters who have taken a moral stand on this and I join you. Also to those who recognize a dangerous human hunter. Either way Justin 1. he is lying and is a pretty disturbed person, or 2. it's true and he's a pretty disturbed person... either way, it sucks on all levels. I hear no remose or repentance. I hear no boundaries from any higher ups or professionals set for him or themselves on this. Won't be buying books, listening to interviews (thanks for those who posted transcript), and for the most part won't be thinking about this guy in the future. Anymore than I think of anyone who kills, my thoughts tend to go to the victims. That there are those who are shoring up or protecting (I think they think they are?) Justin, I wonder from what? Opinions? He seems rather isolated really, and if the claims are ture he won't enjoy that forever. Anyway... it is a long and detailed thread..and passionate. How I wish it was actually about credibile evidence... so, no need to respond I am not joining just shouting out...thanks for the opportunity!
Guest Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 Thanks! I needed some humor yesterday, and I sincerely appreciate your kind remarks. Mark, Do you ever carry a back-up rifle of some sort in case of an emergency since a gun shoots faster than you can fix an arrow and pull more then one time, or are you skilled enough to fix and pull several arrows in a row if needed? I was just thinking about a rifle as a backup weapon in case of an encounter that needs a lot of firepower to take down for your own safety. I'll answer the "back-up rifle" question. In many states, it's illegal to carry any other firearm while bow hunting. Some states you can carry a firearm and ammunition, so long as that combination doesn't match the critter you're hunting during that particular season, like a take-down pistol. If that makes any sense. That includes the firearm and the ammunition. That is to say, you can't carry a shotgun with slugs into the woods during deer/bear bow hunting season. Period. Unless you're hunting some other critter whose season is open. I was told by a New York DEC cop that if he catches a hunter bow hunting deer or bear who has any firearm at all during bow season, he'll ticket you. That assumes you're bow hunting big game, not turkey hunting or whatever. It can be murky because of overlapping seasons, of course.
Guest cbehnke Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 I've been interested in the squatch mystery since the mid 1970's. I don't contribute to research mainly because my trained profession doesn't overlap at all with squatch research and I just don't have the time to get into the field (i have 4 girls...i'm VERY busy raising them). But after listening to the interview on squatchdetective, i've found a way that my 15+ years of professional training and experience can actually contribute to research. In my profession I spend a ton of time listening to "stories" to determine if they are real, exaggerated, false, reasonable, etc. My assessments can be based off of the details of the story, the character traits of the teller, the consistency of details (or lack of), the tone of responses, the words chosen for responding, the pauses taken in response, does the info fit, does it make sense, are there independent corroborating data points, etc, etc. There are hundreds of clues that people give when speaking. A major part of my job is deciphering that information to make investment decisions. Usually I have some control over the questions asked and I can steer the situation to suit my aims. I couldn't do that for the "shooter" interview, but there was still good info in the interview. My initial take is not all, but the preponderance of data points I heard lead me to believe the probability the shooter was not telling the whole truth was materially greater than 50%. The shooter was evasive, ambiguous, searching, at times verbose and other times curt, etc. etc. I'm not saying I know it with 100% certainty, but I have a greater than 50% confidence that the story is materially different from the reality of what happened that day. 1
Guest Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) I've been interested in the squatch mystery since the mid 1970's. I don't contribute to research mainly because my trained profession doesn't overlap at all with squatch research and I just don't have the time to get into the field (i have 4 girls...i'm VERY busy raising them). But after listening to the interview on squatchdetective, i've found a way that my 15+ years of professional training and experience can actually contribute to research. In my profession I spend a ton of time listening to "stories" to determine if they are real, exaggerated, false, reasonable, etc. My assessments can be based off of the details of the story, the character traits of the teller, the consistency of details (or lack of), the tone of responses, the words chosen for responding, the pauses taken in response, does the info fit, does it make sense, are there independent corroborating data points, etc, etc. There are hundreds of clues that people give when speaking. A major part of my job is deciphering that information to make investment decisions. Usually I have some control over the questions asked and I can steer the situation to suit my aims. I couldn't do that for the "shooter" interview, but there was still good info in the interview. My initial take is not all, but the preponderance of data points I heard lead me to believe the probability the shooter was not telling the whole truth was materially greater than 50%. The shooter was evasive, ambiguous, searching, at times verbose and other times curt, etc. etc. I'm not saying I know it with 100% certainty, but I have a greater than 50% confidence that the story is materially different from the reality of what happened that day. Yes from a professional assessors point of view the anomolies, type of change to the story, consistancies etc give much information about the person telling the story and the credibility of what they have said. I also worked in a field which sounds to be similar to yours (though my assessments were to do with security and related fields) and tend to look at such stories in these terms. Edited January 4, 2012 by Encounter
bipedalist Posted January 4, 2012 BFF Patron Posted January 4, 2012 I thought it was interesting that JC Johnson on Crypto 4 Corners sitting in on the show (one of the hosts) stated that plenty of sasquatch have been shot and some killed already, so how is one more on top of those going to suddenly provide the proof that is going to stop the bloodshed. It is not without a coordinated, concerted effort to stop any future slaughter if you think that this will happen over and over again. Personally, I think these incidents when involving hunters, trappers and wildlife/outdoors people happen more often than imaginable, yet most sasquatch still make their way to safety. Many accounts are not spoken of more to save somebodies state/federal job or corporate mineral/extractive resources position and thus few hear of the accounts and some of the remarkable dodges and escapes. Still I think the Peter incident in Manitoba of the misid'd moose that turned out to be sasquatch happened......and so it would not be beyond the pale for other similar incidents to happen.
Guest Jodie Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 I don't guess it ever occurred to anyone that Justin might not be the most articulate person you've had the joy to listen to on an interview. That's why this thread is 60+ pages long. He keeps having to define every adjective, noun, phrase, or turn of speech he chooses to use. I did not get that Justin thought this thing was a guy in a suit. I understaood him to mean that was one of the options that he thought of when he made his decision to shoot. His use of that example as one of the things that crossed his mind before he said he took the shot was rather thoughtless, no doubt, but I know that is not what was meant. What has come across to me was that he did not think these were people, that they were some kind of unknown animal/monster. A guy in the suit option was mentioned by forum members here when he first told his story, not by him. So lets address the arm waving, to a human, yes, this is surrender, but it does not mean the same thing to all primates. It can be interpreted as a sign of aggression. When Justin first described the story here, he never used the term "surrender", the forum members did. Where do you think he got it from? We don't know what sasquatch is nor do we have behavior studies to back up the assumption of what was meant by the gesture. So what if arm waving has not been reported before in sasquatch sightings? I'm sure we all agree on what a normal sasquatch report is don't we? There is some question about the placement of the shot, side, front, or back, what does it matter if you think you are shooting at what you think is an animal? Like I said, I don't like what happened. There is some truth to the statement that Justin's interview has been contaminated, now that he is using the forum member's words, the story sounds even worse. But humans are predators, so why are you judging Justin because he shot what he thought was an animal? Because you think sasquatch is human, well you don't know that for certain and won't for awhile even if the study is ever published. We need better evidence than either DNA or a body will give us individually. 1
Guest slimwitless Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) I believe the "rawness" of the interview adds to his credibility. He could have told the same series of events in a more sympathetic way. He admitted in one of his first posts here that he wasn't going to come out of this smelling like a rose. I get the sense the guy is haunted by what he's done. He obviously has a strong desire to talk about what happened and he's returned to the site many times to set up trail cams and look for evidence. As for the details, yeah...it looked like a man in a suit. I imagine so. I hear that description all the time around these parts. If they exist, that works in their favor. I'm told at that distance and in the right light, one can discern eye color with a 16x scope. Would he really pull the trigger thinking it might be a man? I doubt it. The word "bigfoot" may not have flashed into his mind, but I'm guessing there was a moment of realization that he was targeting something extraordinary. Does that excuse what he did? I'm not going to judge. Get out the Ouija board and ask the skeleton of Grover Krantz. Edit to add: If I had seen Jodie's post I would have skipped writing this. I agree with her 100%. Edited January 4, 2012 by slimwitless
Guest slimwitless Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 I'm not saying I know it with 100% certainty, but I have a greater than 50% confidence that the story is materially different from the reality of what happened that day. I can almost guarantee you there are aspects of the story he's been asked not to discuss (and not necessarily because of anything he may have signed). That would surely affect your divinations. How did the driver score?
Guest Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) Ive reposted this link to the radio interview as the above link has now come up with a 404. This may clarify for those who unsure of the details. For me Justins whole story is just extremely sad, and is a painful testiment to the loss of sacredness in our society. There are classic stories throughout history, teaching people that all life is sacred, that even apparent "monsters" always turn out to be just another fellow being. Most people encounter what they feel to be a monster in their life, and part of their path in this life is to find a way to understand that encounter in a way of harmony and well being, and in a manner which initiates them into a wise adulthood. Shooting the monster doesnt heal anything or anyone. The person who can encounter their monster with compassion will find no more monsters in their life. Bigfoot, sasquatch, yowie - they are not monsters but if one feels they are then the lesson is to find their beauty and heal the situation. Edited January 4, 2012 by Encounter
Guest HucksterFoot Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 Hey bro don’t shoot, don’t shoot! That is not a bear, that’s a person in a suit Something don’t add up about this. I’m halfway thinking in the back of my mind that somebody’s going to pull around the corner and it’s going to be like a film crew or something.
Bonehead74 Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) Wow. So many panties in a twist over an event that may have never happened. Here's an idea: let's wait until the truth of the shooting and the good doctor's analysis of Justin's sample is known before we go lobbying for federal law enforcement to go scoop up a fellow forum member on completely unsubstantiated charges. What a joke. P.S. Encounter, I can assure you from first-hand experience that monsters do exist, and sometimes they need to be killed. Blanket statements such as yours undermine your credibility. Edited January 4, 2012 by Bonehead74
Guest Jodie Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 And one has to wonder, of all the sorrow in the world involving humanity, this was the one that incited action in self righteous indignation. That speaks volumes in and of itself.
Hammy Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 Is my computer playing tricks on me or did I read a post that went away? Darn now I don't remember who said it.
Recommended Posts