Jump to content

Sierra Shooting from A-Z


slabdog

Recommended Posts

Guest Jodie

Well he said he had bear tags. That would be easy to prove but use the correct spelling of his name if you research it, it's Smeja.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BFF Patron

Well if he WAS bear hunting on October 8th during a season that started on the 10th, how would you go about getting bear tags, legally to cover that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jodie

I wouldn't know Bip, and don't care enough to check, but it would be an easy thing to do for a criminal investigator that showed interest. It would also settle the question of the general area where this happened

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 4 power scope is usable at 20 yards, I just checked to be sure. Admittedly the date inconsistency is troubling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Hutch, I'm pretty sure I know who you are and what you're trying to do. I'm not ashamed to be investigating this. Would you prefer I walk away? Do you want to go find someone more qualified? You have an investigation background, how bout you? Go for it. Never mind, I'm sure you'll just say, I'd never work with a piece of .... like that, right? A lot of what you're saying is not accurate. I could point out all the inaccuracies but why? You'll just counter, then I'll counter, and round and round we go. I honestly don't have the will or energy to prove anything to you. I've answered a gazillion questions on this thread, and for the most part people have been cool with me. I don't sense that this will go that direction, so I'm not down for it. I have been very very clear why I got involved in the first place. If you care to research that point it might enlighten you a touch. And no, Justin is not writing a book, and neither am I.

Have a great day,

DR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hutch

First off, you begin by stating there are so many holes and inconsistencies, and say when someone is telling the truth the story does not change, then you do not point out one single point where the story changed. About the date, big deal. So he was up there 2 days before opening day. Most hunters go up early to set up camp, possibly do some last minute scouting, and just generally prepare for opening day. Saying he was up there hunting bear doesn't mean he was literally hunting bear on October 8th. He came across an animal he thought could be a bear. Had he ID'd it as a bear, you don't know if he would have poached it. The fact that he identified it as a monster, then shot it nullifies your claim that he poached a bear. The .25-06 is quite similar to a .270, and I have taken many big game animals with it. It's plenty of gun for bear. As far complaining that he didn't take at head shot, really? Every hunter is taught you take a shot at the vitals (heart/lung), and he hit it right where he should. Next. As far as a scope being useless on 4x, c'mon now. I've called in coyotes to 10 yards, and 4x is just fine. All of these arguments really amount to nothing. If you don't believe him, that's one thing, but laying all these things out as some type of smoking gun analysis is pretty weak.

Edited by arizonabigfoot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BackInAction

When I heard the interview the first time (in my mind) it seemed as though he shot from the road, or very near a road. Possibly while standing right next to his truck. I don't know CA hunting laws, but I assume you are not allowed to shoot from or near a road. Though, I'm not sure how important that detail is to the whole story given the subject matter.

The part that (still) bothers me the most about this story is that the adult BF waves its arms in the air, vocalizes and begins to approach the hunters (who are in or very near to their noisy mechanical horse). That action seems quite counter to most (all?) BF encounters. If they were 80-100 yards away (240'+ for the math challenged), why not walk/run quietly out of view?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hutch's post's make alot more sense and have more proof of validity than the idea of people looking for bigfoot killing a couple then taking just a little tiny piece away with them.

I think the people defending this as true are basing this on their own wishes that it were true and not evidence(or lack thereof)

Hutch has given statements that even a quick google search can prove to be true, yet the other party provides nothing but empty words of dubious consistency but they still have support.

:unsure:

Edited by See-Te-Cah NC
To remove questionable content
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ghuda, who's defending anything? I simply said there are many inaccuracy's with what Hutch said. That's not a defense, and this is not a war. Because I investigated his story, and because we asked him to send in what he found in no way means that we are cool with what went down on that mountain that day. I do believe him, and you don't. And yes there is evidence, and it's under study. I'm not trying to sway anybody to see it the way I do. People can think what they want. It's pretty apparent that you, nor Hutch know much about this event. I've never come here in defense mode. I've come here to clear up inaccuracies, and that's what I've tried to do. I never came here to argue if this was right or wrong, simply came here to answer questions. I don't want to be rude, but I don't think It's my job to bring you up to speed. It's all here, just takes time to look over.

By the way, the authorities were called, by Justin, and I, multiple times, and both of us were laughed at and not taken seriously. I will say this again. Our goal in the Olympic Project is to work toward species verification, and then advocate for protection so these types of events don't happen anymore. I've been in the process of of recruiting the top minds in this field to make this happen, and we will work at it until it does. As awful as this event is, some good can come from it. That's why I decided to not walk away. If you want to put me down for that then get after it, but maybe you should look at the big picture.

DR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Hutch

DR, I have no idea who you are and we have never met. I am not involved in anything bigfoot related other that to be a party who has 30+ years hunting and firearms experience and happened upon this sierra shooting article on the internet when doing some unrelated internet searches the other week. When I speak of holes and inconsistencies, I am referring to all the other "retelling" of this story by the driver and others who have spoken on Justin's behalf. There are stories the animal was on the road, in a meadow on the right side of the truck, on the left side of the truck - stories that the animal was shot in October and then in November, etc. This is why I am focusing only on what Justin Smeja himself stated on the radio interview. I am not trying to stir anything up here than to point out the inconsistancies in Justin Smeja's story as it pertains to the law and what would actually happen in a regular hunting situation. Hell, I hope he did kill a BF and I hope we see a body and photos to prove it for once and for all! Hunting scenarios vary all over the place as does the acumen of the hunter. Based upon what has been said about Justin, he is an expert hunter who in the heat of battle, made many rookie decisions. While I though about it earlier but did not note it as I was not trying to write a novel myself, Ghuda makes a valid point above with respect to the fact that this particular animal was acting in total contrast to the documented behavoir of these animals which further brings this story into question. Ever think there is a reason that no law enforcement agency had launched an investigation??? Anybody think about a polygraph for Justin and the Driver??? Jodie - I am sorry that I misspelled Justin's last name in the initial quote. However, this does not change what Justin himself stated as it pertains to the facts of his story. I can play a full round of golf with a 7 iron. I can tow my 24 foot boat with a Volkswagen Beetle. I can catch a tuna on 4 lb test line. And I am sure you can shoot and kill a bear with a 25-06. The question is why would you? This is not a criminal trial with an opposing attorney, so why in the world is evidence beind withheld? The only reason that I can summize is that there is inconclusive evidence. These NDA's I hear of are all a smokescreen as well. We are not leaking the receipe for Kentucky Fried Chicken or Coca Cola here folks, we are simply proving or disproving the existence of a new species. I'm sorry, but I still maintain that at this point in time without a polygraph, photos, or a full body and not a peice of cut up meat, that this story is highly dubious - spelling or otherwise.

Edited by Hutch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hutch, I feel ya. Justin has offered to take a polygraph test, and we do have pictures of the flesh sample. Evidence is not being withheld, it's part of an ongoing DNA study. There are a lot of researchers and research organizations involved in this study. Everybody involved is giving the geneticist a chance to finish her work that she started almost three years ago.

The NDA's are not in any way a smoke screen. We all signed them and we are holding true to our word with the folks we signed them with. If I give someone my word, it's like concrete. Not everybody feels that way but I do.

Again. We are not trying to convince anybody of anything. It's your right to believe it or not. I think that's where most of the confusion is coming from. This story was leaked a while back. We had no control over that. The only reason I'm talking about it today, yesterday and so on, is because it was leaked very inaccurately. It forced me into damage control mode. Please understand, we are not trying to convince you or anybody that it's true. The evidence should speak for itself when it's released.

I to am a hunter. I'm a wilderness guide, and I also guide Deer hunts. A 25-06 is a very capable round. He was Bear and Deer hunting, and he was hunting legally in an open area. As far as the incident is concerned, we don't advocate or condone what went down, but we are trying to pull some good out of a bad situation. I could have simply walked away in the beginning, but what good would that have done? The only way we will ever get protection for this amazing species is to prove they exist. If this event can help with that then that was my only choice.

DR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Hutch

DR,

I am good with what you are saying. I just have very serious doubts about this story as there is zero evidence to back it up and my numerous personal experiences in the field bring many aspects of this story into question. FYI - I don't consider someone voluntarily going on a radio program and telling his story a "leak". Justin sought out his publicity by going on line in a chat room on a taxidermy website forum - not the best way to keep a secret.

Justin can take a polygraph test - there are many private firms who do this and they are relatively cheap - around $300-$500. This does not need to be administered by law enforcement. I think the BF community would welcome this as would Justin to clear his name. It would sure clear up a bunch of questions and add validity to this story. I have done many of these tests in the past and those who have nothing to hide take them voluntarily. Those who are hiding something usually avoid them.

Develop a list of concrete questions that would be asked and post them on this forum for all to see. Adminsiter the test and have the examiner post the pass/fail results. Pretty simple.

I don't question the fact that you have photos of an unidentified peice of meat. You may even have DNA results showing a uncataloged DNA sequence that either closely matches primates or hominids heretofore undiscovered - and I hope you do! Don't get me wrong, I am rooting for you. I would like to see a new species discovered here. I just think with all the hoaxes in the past, shadow research on a peice of flesh you have had for a year and a half, and dubious stories like Justin's, that you are not doing yourself any favors in bringing validity to your work.

Again, I would like to reiterate that I am not against your work - I hope you find this thing and can unquestionably prove it to all.

The excuse that Justin has offered to take a polygraph but no one wants to give him one is weak. Come up with the $500 - heck, I am sure we could raise $500 on this site pretty easily. I will develop the questions to be askled and secure an agreed upon polygraph examiner. We will come to Justin in NorCal, conduct the test, and post the results here. That should lay this to rest for once and for all!

Are you game? Is Justin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not interested in contributing to such a fund. I am content to sit and wait for Dr Ketchum's results, rather than push the issue forward. Polygraphs are unreliable, and it would just be adding smoke to an already unclear situation. I think Justin has said enough truth as he see's fit, and he certainly does not owe me any more explanation, nor am I entitled to scrutinize him anymore than he has already been through. He certainly did not come off as a hero, or even a good guy with the story he has told, a tough road to "choose" as a hoaxer I would think.

The story is in the sample,or certainly as much as the story as Justin wish's to share, and that is his choice, if you don't like the story, dismiss it, state your opinion, and let it stand. I will wait for the science.

Edited by JohnC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hutch, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Who ever said that Justin doesn't want to take a polygraph? No one wants to give him one? Weak??? Where did that come from? I said he's willing to. Perfect example of me trying to keep the story straight. Him talking a polygraph is up to him. He's his own man and I'm not his handler. Do you want him to take it to make you feel better about what happened? If he feels like that's something he should do then I'm sure he'll do it, but I'm quite sure he's not going to do it to try and prove everybody wrong. The point is he's not trying to convince anyone that he's telling the truth. He's sharing what happened. It's your choice to stay on the fence, believe him, or not believe him.

As far as me not doing myself any favors, well I'm not in this to do myself favors. The need for protection of this species far outweighs worrying about what people and other researchers think of me. Most of the top minds in this field understand that, and have either decided to join my team or work with me closely. This is not a popularity contest and it never will be for me. This day and age it's hard to believe that anybody does anything for the right reasons. Everything's suspect, and that's really unfortunate. Working with Justin was a very hard decision for me, as I've stated time and time again. When I decided to, I gave him my word to work with him through completion, and that's exactly what I'm going to do, because I said I would. As I said before, my word is concrete. I want to see these beings protected, simple as that. If I fall out of graces with the rest of the "Bigfoot world" then so be it.

DR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...