Guest Posted December 2, 2012 Posted December 2, 2012 (edited) he just expands on some of the things and feelings during and after event, the story of what happened did not change. Edited December 2, 2012 by zigoapex
Guest SmokeyMntnHooch Posted December 2, 2012 Posted December 2, 2012 One question from me: Why? Have to be a little more specific than that. Why shoot the adult? Why shoot the baby? Why not bring the baby back with them? What? I have to say, the state of Bigfoot in general would be in my head if I ever had one in my sights. It really depends on the situation, seeing as there could be more in the immediate area and I don't want my head ripped off, but I'm 60/40 on pulling the trigger. Think what you want about me or my actions, but I care not if someone or the community at large would hate me for it because it would finally end this whole charade of existence, DNA, the species, etc. You could hate me for what I did but if I would provide a type specimen for science to photograph, dissect, and study then many people would no longer be laughed at, considered loony, forums would be clear of skeptics of the species and science would never be the same. That would be a trade off for a groups hate towards me. My only real question is why not bring the baby back with you and to call BS on the "Rangers coming" line. I know hundreds of people like Justin who just like to put rounds into something for whatever gratification it has for them. I usually don't kill a fish or animal unless it will be eaten and used properly, that's my conservative nature but plenty of people kill for the sake of killing, no rhyme or reason. Well, I would kill a Snakehead if I caught one in my home state because it's an invasive species that destroys habitat but that's a different talk all together.
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted December 2, 2012 Posted December 2, 2012 Unless the DNA study is a fraud, I think there really was some kind of shooting that day due to the DNA results obtained from the flesh samples. It's actually probably the biggest confidence booster in this whole Sierra kills topic for me. That, plus Bart Cutino's thermal video which was taken at the site. He said it'll be released soon I think...
Guest Posted December 2, 2012 Posted December 2, 2012 (edited) What about the driver interview? That was totally opposite of Justin's original story. My only real question is why not bring the baby back with you and to call BS on the "Rangers coming" line. I know hundreds of people like Justin who just like to put rounds into something for whatever gratification it has for them I've thought about this too. Justin seems to indicate they were up there poaching at the time of the shootings. If they poached a bear it would have taken longer to load that bear into the truck then throwing the baby sasquatch in, so why were they so worried about a game warden hearing the shots, bear or sasquatch just about the same amount of time to load up and get out. On top of it they took the time to search around for the adult body after the shot was fired, then shot again to kill the kid. They didn't seemed worried about getting caught poaching a bear, but were worried about being caught with a squatch? Edited December 2, 2012 by squatting squatch
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted December 2, 2012 Posted December 2, 2012 Last I checked, the drivers story was pretty much identical.
Guest Posted December 2, 2012 Posted December 2, 2012 I just watched the interview again. The drive states it was a beautiful shoot and it was awesome to watch the body ripple from the impact. Not the remorseful person Justin made him out to be.
Guest SmokeyMntnHooch Posted December 2, 2012 Posted December 2, 2012 I just watched the interview again. The drive states it was a beautiful shoot and it was awesome to watch the body ripple from the impact. Not the remorseful person Justin made him out to be. I don't think Justin made him out to be "remorseful," he just told him not to shoot it and said when he did shoot the baby he came back up the hill and was like "Really?" As far as the driver goes, he even said that despite everything else it was amazing to see the body ripple. That doesn't alter his main point. I've been with people who shoot something I told them not to shoot but that doesn't change the fact that seeing a bullet hit a big animal and watching the ripple effect isn't an impressive sight in and of itself.
bipedalist Posted December 2, 2012 BFF Patron Posted December 2, 2012 SMH, you do realize that Justin claims he had never heard of Bigfoot before this encounter don't you?
Guest SmokeyMntnHooch Posted December 2, 2012 Posted December 2, 2012 SMH, you do realize that Justin claims he had never heard of Bigfoot before this encounter don't you? Never said that I bought intricacies of his story, but I think on the whole that he did shoot an adult and the young one. I quite frankly don't care about the little things he may have altered to potentially cover his ass but I'm giving him the benefit of the redneck doubt that he shot an adult and a juvenile.
Guest slimwitless Posted December 2, 2012 Posted December 2, 2012 (edited) Never said that I bought intricacies of his story, but I think on the whole that he did shoot an adult and the young one. I quite frankly don't care about the little things he may have altered to potentially cover his ass but I'm giving him the benefit of the redneck doubt that he shot an adult and a juvenile. Well, he did say he had seen "Harry and the Hendersons" as a kid. I remember a more thorough answer where he said he couldn't recall ever having a conversation about Bigfoot. I'd believe that in a second. Sometimes people abbreviate when telling a story they've repeated hundreds of times. On the other hand, I can understand how knowing about Bigfoot before shooting it might not be the best way to frame the story to Bigfoot researchers/fanatics (at least those who didn't study under Grover Krantz). Edited December 2, 2012 by slimwitless
bipedalist Posted December 2, 2012 BFF Patron Posted December 2, 2012 ....Never said that I bought intricacies of his story...... Hah, what intricacies, that's more a symptom of the problem?! No?!
Guest SmokeyMntnHooch Posted December 2, 2012 Posted December 2, 2012 (edited) Well, he did say he had seen "Harry and the Hendersons" as a kid. I remember a more thorough answer where he said he couldn't recall ever having a conversation about Bigfoot. I'd believe that in a second. Sometimes people abbreviate when telling a story they've repeated hundreds of times. On the other hand, I can understand how knowing about Bigfoot before shooting it might not be the best way to frame the story to Bigfoot researchers/fanatics (at least those who didn't study under Grover Krantz). When you have a passion/obsession/vested interest in a "fringe" topic, sometimes you tend to forget that it's not something "normal" folks converse about. I can count on one hand the number of people in my immediate life that I have ever had an actual conversation about BF with. Several of them weren't until AP and History started airing shows about them. Most people don't think about BF, don't want to talk about BF, and don't care about BF. Sometimes I get lost in that fact myself. Hah, what intricacies, that's more a symptom of the problem?! No?! Brevity after retelling the story countless times and altering/trying to alter parts to keep him legally sound. Poachers don't like to admit they are poaching, especially if it involves a "mythical being" that is so human. I don't care about his motive, thought process, or small things he changed in his story...I just question leaving the young one there if he actually did shoot it. I know how it is shooting a 400lb bear and Elk, no way they were getting an adult dragged out of there (especially not field dressed) but leaving a little fella there? That's the most fishy part of it for me. Edited December 2, 2012 by SmokeyMntnHooch
bipedalist Posted December 2, 2012 BFF Patron Posted December 2, 2012 I'll just say again for about the 40th time, I'm glad that if the Ketchum study publishes, it is probably not 100% hinged to the Sierra Kills sampling. When the book comes out, I might feel differently of course. Not that all books contain non-fiction, or that a certain one will.
Rockape Posted December 2, 2012 Posted December 2, 2012 SMH, you do realize that Justin claims he had never heard of Bigfoot before this encounter don't you? Did he say that? Or that he had just never given it any thought or talked about it.
Recommended Posts