Guest vilnoori Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 He shot it in the side of the chest as it was running away. The bullet penetrated both lungs. Well that certainly does not sound like self defense. I made a post that was polite and respectful. I asked for the info regarding the nearest Sheriff and Game Warden locations so I could contact them to verify the info that was being stated by a poster as factually true. I asked for the person to give me the info in PM. Rock if you go by the info on Silver Fox' web site the shooting occurred on Dixie Mountain on a road, near a game preserve, West (north of west) of Frenchman Lake, Plumas County, California in part of the Plumas National Forest, I believe. That would put it under the jurisdiction of the Plumas County coroner/sheriff. Here is the info, be my guest. ............................................... Greg Hagwood Sheriff / Coroner 1400 East Main Street Quincy, CA 95971 Ph: (530) 283-6375 Fx: (530) 283-6344 Hours Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm .......................................... According to Derekfoot however they already contacted LE and they were laughed out and not taken seriously. However if DNA evidence surfaces someone might take more notice. I imagine someone showing up and saying, "I just shot a couple of bigfoots" is a different cup of tea than an actual DNA sample coming up human, being traced to remains that match the story. I guess it depends on whether or not it gets followed up and given the rural nature of the area it might just peter out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rockinkt Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I'm just going to confirm the fact that LE was contacted. A story like this would be not easily be forgotten even if it was laughed off. Since the shooter's story has him allegedly breaking hunting laws in California - they may decide to get interested just for the curiosity aspect. edited to add: Of course - they also could have reported it to another LE jurisdiction. Plus - they also claimed to have contacted Fish and Game. I just get hives when people refuse to divulge such non-consequential info to confirm their stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 Lindsay has an update on his blog about these events. Rumors of a book/movie deal? Hmmm. Speaking of...was he banned from this forum for some reason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HairyGreek Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 It's all rumors... The only real reason I would point someone to his site is to see the other insulting drivel he writes. I think it speaks to the validity of his information. If one wants to learn something, try looking around at his whole site and see how factual you think he truly is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 Vilnoori- If the shooting was done in a national forest, wouldn't the juristiction fall under the Interior Department, or the National Forest Park Rangers? Just a thought. Someone mentioned laws being broken? Well I am wondering if the authorities are not following up on this occurance(or maybe they are) would we not of heard or do you think there is a cover-up going on? ptangier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 Ok folks I've got to throw my 2 cents in reference any reports. When a call comes in to a busy law enforcement agency ref. a Bigfoot, a UFO or some such, what do you think realistically happens? I'd be willing to bet that the caller will be treated with respect because the line is recorded, but no complaint report will be entered into the dispatch computer because in the minds of the dispatcher they just talked to a crackpot. If there is anything done it might be entered as a drive through BOLO. Not an ideal situation to be sure but realistic none the less. No cover-up or anything covert, just real world facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted July 29, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted July 29, 2011 And for the uninformed "BOLO" means what markmc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JudasBeast Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 Think it means "BE ON THE LOOKOUT". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 (edited) I'm in your camp Tim.. The story is interesting at first, where shortly into the learning of the event translated by individuals directly or inderectly connected to the source, the whole thing is difficult to say the least toward transferring any confidence period that there's any hope of truth.. There are comments of countless hours of research having been applied to this situation, while none of the following (we know of) has been done or completed. - No face to face interview from both individuals from the scene. (researchers typically apply this step asap once a report has been learned and/or has contacted the individual involved) - No visit to the site to re-enact/document a story line of the scene, measurements, etc.. - No visit to the site to search for evidence. - No transcribed documentation (time-line transcribe) from the Shooter (signed), w/ or w/out repeated visits to the location as to what took place from start to end. - No photographic documentation of the location, physical (flesh) sample admitted for DNA testing, etc.. - No documentation that a sample has even been admitted for testing. Yes, some of the above may be restricted for release via an NDA (if so, who's NDA is being honored). As this event occurred back in November of 2010, researcher(s) being contacted several months there after, there has been ample time to complete the above critical steps towards a body of research. As most of us would agree, un-obtaining a face to face interview(s), documented transcribes, photographic data, possible sight evidence, not being capture quickly as possible once learned, it's funny how an individual(s) loose mental clarity as to what actually happened at the scene as days and days pass there after.. Maybe post drama, (ie. blog/forum site voices/pressure) produces new or forgotten memories which had or never actually happened... Only the repeated gatherings/memories from telephone conversations are presented as a transfer of absolute confidence that the shooter is telling the truth. Oh boy... Well.. It's the same O'l story on every opportunity towards getting closer to proof that our elusive friends actually exist.. It's either a Blurry picture, a Blurry video, a Blurry Story, incomplete/Burry data, yatta-yatta-yatta... So boys and girls... Until next time... Stay tuned for more Blurriness.. Edited July 30, 2011 by St.Croix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slabdog Posted July 30, 2011 Author Share Posted July 30, 2011 (edited) There are comments of countless hours of research having been applied to this situation, while none of the following (we know of) has been done or completed. - No face to face interview from both individuals from the scene. (researchers typically apply this step asap once a report has been learned and/or has contacted the individual involved) - No visit to the site to re-enact/document a story line of the scene, measurements, etc.. - No visit to the site to search for evidence. - No transcribed documentation (time-line transcribe) from the Shooter (signed), w/ or w/out repeated visits to the location as to what took place from start to end. - No photographic documentation of the location, physical (flesh) sample admitted for DNA testing, etc.. - No documentation that a sample has even been admitted for testing. How do you know these things to such certainty? All the players have dropped off the map...the public map anyways. (And they are well within their rights to do so by the way) Are you assuming that there has been none of the above mentioned activities simply because they have not ,thus far, been shared? I've been just as skeptical as the next guy on this issue but in fairness, the silence from the guys at OP and the other players means one of two things in my estimation: 1) There's nothing to this, its has all been a tall tale, they are embarrassed as hell and hope it will just go away eventually (wrong) or 2) These guys actually have stumbled onto something amazing, are trying to do things the right way from here on out, have learned from their mistakes (the premature public comments and leaks) and are trying to focus on the facts and not the hype. I will say this....there have been a lot of fantastic claims made by the group(s) working behind the scenes on this. Someone will have some serious explaining to do eventually. If not, how could anyone take them seriously ever again. Edited July 30, 2011 by slabdog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thepattywagon Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Derek Randles said he had photographic evidence of the piece of flesh that allegedly came from the creature that was shot, did he not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slabdog Posted July 30, 2011 Author Share Posted July 30, 2011 I think you are correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vilnoori Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 (edited) Vilnoori- If the shooting was done in a national forest, wouldn't the juristiction fall under the Interior Department, or the National Forest Park Rangers? Just a thought. Someone mentioned laws being broken? Well I am wondering if the authorities are not following up on this occurance(or maybe they are) would we not of heard or do you think there is a cover-up going on? ptangier I have no idea, being a Canadian and a layperson to boot. All I can say is that if DNA evidence from the creature that was shot comes up human (as according to rumour it has) then it becomes an item of interest to LE, even a year or two down the road...as long as a death can be proven. If that hunk of flesh is big enough I suppose there would be interest as well even if a death isn't proven. Enough missing persons come up to make it investigation-worthy. What comes to mind is the 6 or so severed feet that have washed ashore here in coastal BC. Although there is no evidence to prove that the feet are from homicides it behooves LE to identify them and rule out foul play. That might be the case here. IMHO anyway. Now if DNA evidence shows that the sample came from a non-human source, then it is a different story altogether. I don't think there would be any evidence left for park rangers to make a case with a year or two down the road and that could be a factor in the delay. Probably by now the only bit left is what the lab has, and that could be plenty. It is a catch-22 situation for the lab because for it to have any meaning at all it must have provenance--that is, they need to know where it came from. Some of that can be determined through isotope analysis I understand. If you can do both isotope analysis for a tentative place-location, do mitDNA plus nucDNA and maybe even karyotype, PLUS hair analysis (I understand the hairs were larger than human) then they definitely have something interesting to publish. IT would have to be a combination of factors, plus a scrupulously careful piece of lab work, very clean and so forth. Edited July 30, 2011 by vilnoori Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 Well lets see St.Croix, you're wrong on all seven line items. Yep, all seven. Don't assume that just because I'm not posting my every move that I'm hiding my head in shame or embarrassment. You see, I would love to share my research on this forum, but every time I try I am bombarded with comments questioning my truthfulness and credibility. I'm just not up for it. I have a lot of research friends that know me, and have worked with me in the field. I talk to them daily and none of them question my motives or credibility. I'm not crying or whining here, I simply don't have the patience to subject myself to this on a regular basis. And FYI, I've just finished combing the area with some of the biggest names in Sasquatch research, and the shooter, so like I said, you're wrong on all seven counts. DR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 Derek, glad to see you came back to post. Also glad to see your not letting the criticism and insults of others keep you from letting the rest of us who are patiently waiting know that your still involved and informed on some of the recent ongoings. Excited to hear a comb of the area has occurred whether by big names or not it would be interesting to know if anything was found to help aid the DNA study. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts