Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Bigfoot Killer Passes Lie Detector Test. What Does it Mean?

Justin Smeja passed a polygraph test 
Justin Smeja claims to have killed Bigfoot. He recently passed a lie detector test, or more properly, during a polygraph examination, there was no deception indicated. Does it progress Bigfoot research? What impact will these results have on the community. I was able to ask these very questions of four of the principle players; Bart Cutino, Shawn Evidence,  Ro Sahebi, and Carl Olinselot. Below is:

  1. The documentary directed by Ro Sahebi
  2. The seventeen questions/answers/results published in the examiner's report. Original documents at Bigfoot Evidence
  3. And then the answers to the three questions I asked Bart, Shawn, Ro and Carl. What was your role? What does this mean to the Bigfoot Community? And, What does this mean to you personally?



1) In late October 2010, at the site you brought for a "body Search" in July 2011, did you directly fire on two animals; one adult and what you believe one juvenile of a species others would logically term as BIGFOOTS" or "SASQUATCHES"?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

2) Was the first shot fired on-site, a direct hit to a bipedal animal you have never seen before?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

3) When you first saw this "animal", did you recognize it as a species you had never seen before or even knew existed?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

4) Did you encounter two animals that you believed were relative juveniles of the adult subject you shot?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

5) Did You shoot and fatally wound a juvenille "animal" that appeared to be a species that you have never seen before or ever knew even existed
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

6) Did you or Jack stop and purchase cigareetes in Sierra City on your way home after the "Sierra Kills" shootings?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

7) Are all of the statements you are making in regards to you shooting two bipedal primates, which incident is now being called the "Sierra Kills", true?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

8) Is this entire "Sierra Kills" story a Hoax
Answer: No Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

9) Would there be or do you have any reason why you would "make-up" or lie, about statements you have claimed to be true in regards to the "Sierra Kills"?
Answer: No Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

10) After conversing with Derek Randles, were you excited and confident about returning to the shooting site to succesfully collect the remains odf the juvenile subject killed, for monetary reward?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

11) Were you frustrated about not being able to to locate the carcass on your first return trip to the site?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

12) Do you truly beliueve that the piece of flesh you have processed, cut into pieces, and sent to various lab, is a piece of flesh from the unidentified animal you claimed to have shot from the "Sierra Kills" incident?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

13) Is the piece of flesh given to Wally [Redacted] from the same source as the piece of flesh you were instructed to send to a [redacted] lab by bart Curtino?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

14) has the Department of Fish & game taken interest in this "Sierra Kills" incident and questioned you on several ocassions?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

15) Do the artist renditions accurately depict the animals that you shot in the "Sierra Kills"?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

16) After the shootings of these strange animals, did the Department of Fish & Game show up at your house?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED

17) Did the strange animals you shot in the "Sierra Kill" incident, look like a large human dressed in a bear suit?
Answer: Yes Test Result: Passed NO DECEPTION INDICATED
(The order of the the interviews below are in the same order each was introduced to Justin Smeja)

BART CUTINO
What was your role?
My journey into internally investigating this "Sierra Kills" event began in July of 2011 at our "body/remains recovery effort" orchestrated by my great friend and researcher, Derek Randles, and has carried through today, partnering with Tyler Huggins and Justin to initiate independent testing of both the circumstantial (tissue) & non-circumstantial (boots) evidence retrieved from this event. In that time, I've gone from initially believing this event was surely a hoax (with some curious aspects) to now believing strongly the event happened as described by "both" witnesses consistent and unwavering accounts.

What do these results mean for Bigfoot research in general?
 In regards to how we, the proverbial "bigfoot research community," should perceive the results of Justin's polygraph, I think we should respect the fact that the lead witness in arguably the most unprecedented event claim in the history of the subject, aside from the Patterson/Gimlin film, had the courage to follow through and pass a significant challenge to his assertions that he's responsible for having shot two sasquatches on a late afternoon, in October of 2010 in the CA, Sierras. At the same time, we should recognize & respect some of the limitations and contentions of the medium used (polygraph) and keep appropriate "perspective," reserving judgement for the diagnostic testing and determinations (for both "circumstantial" & "non-circumstantial" evidence) currently taking place in multiple labs and now, initiated by multiple parties. I think other positives we can take from this completed polygraph process as researchers with shared a goal of "discovery," is that although we may represent different organizations (Ro with Team Tazer & myself with BFRO, AIBR & The Olympic Project) we can collaborate & work together by raising the standard and providing much needed transparency to this field. 

What do these results mean to you personally? 

With all evidence currently being processed at multiple North American labs, I was admittedly tentative on Justin's behalf regarding him taking a polygraph at this time as I felt there was very little to gain by perception and much to lose in the way of more hardships for him and his family. However, Ro was very proactive in initiating this process and requesting my help with the questioning because of the intimate knowledge I had internally and Justin insisting he always wanted this opportunity. With the assistance of Tyler Huggins (BFRO), we formulated questions that weren't meant to protect Justin, they were meant to catch him being deceptive as we are under no illusion that for this process to have any objective value it needed to be completely unbiased and with an emphasis on transparency. Although I preach "perspective" with the understanding from my collegiate background and experience that polygraph examinations are not 100% foolproof, come highly contended and are used primarily by law enforcement to elicit confessions out of suspects, I'm very proud of Justin for both his full cooperation in the last year and courage to step forward and clear his name at any cost. Based on my familiarity with polygraphs, the experience of a reputable examiner, the machine and questions used, and with consideration how well I know Justin on a personal level, I'd be lying if I said I thought he could beat this test lying. The true test now will come in the form of determinations from highly reputable diagnostic labs and their directors.....nothing to hide... let the chips fall where they may.

SHAWN EVIDENCE
What was your role?
When I went out to the Sierra Kills site with Ro Sahebi, Carl Olinselot, Nadia Moore, David Badorf, and Justin Smeja, I didn't truly understand what my role was until we were actually there. I was there as a journalist and it felt good to part of something that could possibly turn the world upside down.

What do these results mean for Bigfoot research in general?
The polygraph results will help move the discussion forward, and hopefully remove some of the doubts people have about Justin's story. He has been as open as he can, and I believe he's being honest about what happened in October 2010.

What do these results mean to you personally? 
I started to befriend Justin Smeja to see who he's really like as a person. I have visited him at his home numerous times and each time, I get blown away by his honesty. He has been extremely open and forthcoming about everything that I have asked. For example, when I asked to see a piece of the Bigfoot tissue in his freezer, he had no problems with it. Honestly, I don't know what else a guy can do to prove to that he's telling us the truth. I'm at the point now that I really have no choice but to believe the guy.

Do I believe in Bigfoot? Yes. If I'm going to believe Justin, I have to believe that there is a bipedal hominid lurking in our woods.

RO SAHEBIWhat was your role?
My job is to tell Justin's story. It's the most fascinating story I've ever heard. No matter how this ends, or how much of it you believe, the story is incredible. In the Bigfoot world, people want content, and there's not enough good new content out there. I'm just trying to fill in a little bit of that huge hole.

What do these results mean for Bigfoot research in general?
The results are important to those who understand the whole situation. To most, the polygraph by itself, is not much. Now if the DNA study come up with something and you listen to the drivers story, then add credible players like Bart Cutino, James Bobo Faye, and Derek Randles to the situation... you start get something. Sure none of it is definitive, but at the very least, you have to stop and take a look.

What do these results mean to you personally?
The results were the icing on the cake. I had started to spend a lot of time talking to the players involved and it slowly changed my view on the situation. Before the polygraph test took place, I had already told Justin that I believed him. The problem, it is a hard story to defend. So this just gives me a little bit more ammo to fight with.

CARL OLINSELOT
What was your role?
My role on this trip was to assist Ro Sahebi in the filming and documenting as both a cameraman and organizer. My job was to film all the behind the scenes footage. When Ro's camera was turned off my camera would turn on. I recorded the casual moments in between the polygraph, before and after, the conversations about when to release the results, and everything that was not a structured part of the documentary but still important to understand how events in between occurred. I also assisted in paying for the polygraph, coming up with the phrasing of questions for the polygraph, and overall just assisting Ro with equipment, charging batteries and anything that needed done.

What do these results mean for Bigfoot research in general?
For the people who already know the existence of Sasquatch it will only reinforce their confidence and resolve to do fact based research. For the skeptics it probably won't mean anything. People are prone to not trust polygraph results and that's fine, but it is a shift from the typical bigfoot "research" where someone tells a story with no evidence. The polygraph focuses on more objective and fact based results rather than just taking a persons word for it - and that's a major step.

What do these results mean to you personally?
For me personally I was very skeptical about Justin's story. After talking with him and spending time with him I was much more convinced he was telling the truth before the polygraph. Knowing that he had no time to prepare for a polygraph and that many of the questions were added just minutes before the test was administered added to the credibility and greatly reduced the chances of Justin being able to lie his way through one. After passing the test and discussing the results with the Polygraph administrator I was 90% certain that Justin is telling the truth. His reaction to being told he was taking a test and his reaction to having passed the test. Being there to witness these events and then having him pass completely was strong confirmation that Justin and the driver are telling the truth about the events of that day.

We would like to thank Bart Cutino, Ro Sahebi, Shawn Evidence and Carl Olinselot for providing their perspective. Stay tuned later this afternoon as we publish our interview with the examiner herself. 

60 comments:

  1. Well, this is what I don't understand.... If he says they have the DNA, then why the polygraph test... If you have a piece of meat from a Bigfoot, then the DNA will come saying what parts of Human and animal makes up that DNA... They are spending so much time and effort and money proving first that he is telling the truth .. WHY?????? That's telling me that the piece of meat is not what it is... The polygraph could be all staged... Until I see the polygraph on video as he was given the questions, then it is not valid ... Something is telling me this is one big hoax....he never shot any Bigfoot ..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And if the DNA comes back human but with some genetic variation - proving it's Homo-something - will you believe then?

      Delete
    2. Obviously the DNA results are not cutand dry. Sounds like you have a lack of understanding of how DNA results are precieved. All too often in scientific research of ape and gorrila species through dna tests labs have gotten the results "unknown primate" guess what that got them? Nothing cause they had just that a primate like DNA but much was unknown as the primers used were primarily for humans or animals none have been disined for both and proven accurate and useful.

      To lean towards the conclusion this is a hoax because he took a lie detector is outrageous

      Delete
    3. You have a source for these all too often "unknown primate" DNA results?

      ["none have been disined for both"]

      Designed for both? Oh! I think I get it? Bigfoot is an admixture of animal and human. Talk about lack of understanding.

      Delete
    4. Jeffrey needs to take off his tinfoil hat and just keep an open mind.

      Delete
    5. Ask anyone who had done extensive research FIRST hand into primate DNA you if you test even 3 dozen samples from hairs and saliva from known primates often will get primate type DNA then end up in unknown on one of the many primal functions. It could be caused by a number of things including contamination. Its not news. What you end up with is in known and primate

      Delete
    6. ["What you end up with is in known and primate"]
      in known? Do you mean unknown?
      Anyways, you can have a case were a sample is either too degraded or not biological to begin with (that would be an example of a negative sample) ...and then, of course, these can get contaminated; which happens often. Plus, if there is something to extract in the first place; you can subtract off the other signature. It's either going to tell you what it is, or what it isn't ...and, I still haven't heard of an unknown signature yet - As in: a sequence that is primate; close to, but out of range of either modern human, gorilla, orangutang ...that kind of signature would be interesting and compelling though.

      Delete
    7. hope they go to prison!

      Delete
    8. If you read? Asked to him they say animal they neveru say didnyou shoot a bigfoot. So he did pass he proply didshoot an animal just not a bigfoot. Lie def test are vry. Crucial by the way they are worded. Gene Simmons was given a lie detector test for if he ever cheated on Shannon the? Was worded did you ever make lovento anyone else besides Shannon he answered no he passed because he only had sexton with the other three thousand and some.its all in the way the question is worded,

      Delete
    9. If you look at all the evidences of others in the USA coming up with stories of seeing a Bigfoot or a Sasquatch is many each year because of hunters and campers which will come across them and its why we are in there territory domain !!! They are real and should be evaluated by experts in this field of research. I really think that B.F.R.O. Mathew Moneymaker and his team should investigate this further for sure !!!

      Delete
    10. If you look at all the evidences of others in the USA coming up with stories of seeing a Bigfoot or a Sasquatch is many each year because of hunters and campers which will come across them and its why we are in there territory domain !!! They are real and should be evaluated by experts in this field of research. I really think that B.F.R.O. Mathew Moneymaker and his team should investigate this further for sure !!!

      Delete
    11. I find it disgusting and disgraceful that some one would kill something so rare . Only a redneck would sit on a gold toilet cover.

      Delete
  2. The video of Justin answering the questions is up on Shawn Evidence site. It's all out there. The man is telling the truth.
    http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete
  3. Scary even if it's faked very scary, a person hunting bear decides to shoot and chase a bipedal primate, next some other nut will see what they think is a Bigfoot and have a murder in their hands, shooting something other than what your hunting shows extream negligence and stupidity, he says he was in fear of his well being so shooting a humanid and giving chase only to stash the body under a bush seems premeditated and shows he knew he was in the wrong. That's why we need The undiscovered Species Act law in effect

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't know anything about an "Undiscovered Species Act" but I agree, one of the most fundamental rules of hunting and shooting safety is to know your target, another is to never point your muzzle end at anything you don't intend to shoot. BAAAD hunter!

      Delete
  4. Scary even if it's faked very scary, a person hunting bear decides to shoot and chase a bipedal primate, next some other nut will see what they think is a Bigfoot and have a murder in their hands, shooting something other than what your hunting shows extream negligence and stupidity, he says he was in fear of his well being so shooting a humanid and giving chase only to stash the body under a bush seems premeditated and shows he knew he was in the wrong. That's why we need The undiscovered Species Act law in effect

    ReplyDelete
  5. wow jeffrey! u aint the sharpest knife in the drawer..OBVIOUSLY!

    ReplyDelete
  6. You guys are wrong.... This is Jeffrey from the Sanger Paranormal Society.... We are at the moment trying to get the DNA off the windows of my truck. The professor who is involved is in comunications with Dr Sykes of Oxford.. I have been told how this works, first they find out if the Material that has the DNA has been contaminated... Once it comes back not human, then they move on to the next step ... Once the extract the DNA, then they try to match it in the data base.. If it comes back unknown, then they take it further... They can determin what is in the DNA, part human, part ape , part Gorilla... This test will give a percentage per what ever it is.... Again, DNA dies not lie... I would only do polygraph if I didn't have any proof and the test should have been recorded on video.... If it was not recorded on video, then you need to do it again ... No cuts or spliced video.. All one take with no pauses .....the video should be pointed towards the machine then when the question is asked should point to the person answering the question then to the machiine to shows the results ... Other wise, it's you word that he passed and not good enough....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When cutting off a piece of meat why not use something recognizable? Such as a finger,ear or even a tooth.

      Delete
  7. Jeff you are a moron. You don't understand what your saying and are wrong on several accounts

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. See the happy moron....he doesn't give a damn

      I'd like to BE a moron...My GOD! Perhaps I am!

      [Dorothy Parker....c. 1929]

      Delete
  8. jeff is just bitter cuz no one pitched in to pay for that face print of a bear and paw prints.. stick with something u know, like chasing gbost!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Perfect polygraph scores are synonymous with psychopaths. Coupled with the fact that we were not shown the baseline questions where Justin answered them with known lies, if in fact, the examiner performed such a baseline test at all.

    I love how most of the questions about the sasquatches were so generalized, such as, "animals", "two-legged primates", etc. That was both funny and suspicious.

    Furthermore, the length of the questions were so long, you could tell the truth for 50% of it and lie for the other 50%, which makes the test results even more suspicious. Obviously, the people who concocted these mammoth questions are not attorneys.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Justin isn't a psychopath. c'mon.

      Delete
    2. I'm not saying he is or he isn't. I'm only stating a fact.

      Delete
    3. Man, I didn't even see the Mammoth question - I thought that vid was debunked?

      Delete
  10. A short note Jeffrey, Humans are animals. We're certianly not plants or slime mold.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Polygraph Examiners are Professionals. I'm sure the polygraph examiner knew what she was doing and asked the baseline questions....the "known lies"! Why are you so negative and suspicious about the examination? Doesn't it make more sense to think that a certified polygraph examiner who has done over 800 examinations would know how to conduct a polygraph and do it correctly, than not? Why do people spend so much time confusing and conflicting actual fact and evidence and try to discredit the truth when it hits them right in the face? I don't get it........... I really think that people who won't believe the simple truth when explained so clearly to them, really don't trust themselves and are individuals that cannot be trusted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Polygraph Examiners are Professionals."?

      Actually, it takes longer to complete barber college than polygraph school.

      And there is absolutely no scientific basis to believe that polygraph has any validity. It's best used when guilty people fear it and refuse to take it. Visit http://antipolygraph.org/ to see how it's used to destroy the lives of innocent people who refuse to lie on so called "control question". That's the dirty little secret behind the box known as "The Mechanical Charlie McCarthy".

      Did you know:

      The consensus view among scientists is that polygraph testing has no scientific basis?
      The FBI considered the creator of the lie detector test to be a phony and a crackpot?
      The man who started the CIA's polygraph program thinks that plants can read human thoughts?
      The foremost polygraph advocate in academia was discredited by a federal judge?
      A prominent past-president of the American Polygraph Association is a phony Ph.D., and this premier polygraph organization doesn't consider it an ethics problem?

      The only reason the FBI uses it is to weed out those nerds who think that the govt is all about truth-you know, whistleblowers, teachers' pets and those who can't stand to be to fail. Those are the first ones to go public with secrets that the govt wishes to keep. It's actually funny to watch them when they "fail" a polygraph, when it's all a matter of an examiner bumping them because of their angelic personalities.

      Delete
  12. The polygraph questions are horrible and I would not put any faith in this exam. We don't know the technique or anything else about the exam. I would love to know who gave this exam. The results should be taken with not a grain of salt, but a whole shaker.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Go to school for a year and get some knowledge about how a polygraph works idiot, then you'll know the technique. It isn't a polygrapher's job or practice to explain "technique" in a report. Do your research before making ignorant comments about scientific technology or profession. Does a doctor post a scientific report on every surgery they do when they save a life in the operating room? NO, they just come out and tell the family they saved their loved ones life!!! Your comment is ignorant and stupid....fool!

      Delete
  13. If I had seen this idiot taking aim at a Bigfoot, and particularly a juvenile, I would have shot him first. If he did this he should be prosecuted and jailed. Hopefully he's the redneck, liar idiot he looks like.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, you'd murder a human (which is a crime) to save an unknown creature that is not protected by law?

      And when the BIGFOOT runs off and you tell the story of your daring rescue, you'll be left with no proof and a tall tale that will result in you being institutionalized....one way or another.

      "Yes, Officer, I shot him in the back to protect a Bigfoot....oh, wait, he was here a minute ago...."

      HAH!

      Some folks lack the skills to survive in a post modern industrial society.

      Delete
  14. JEFFREY GONZALEZ IS A KNOWN LIAR BY FRIENDS AND FAMILY BOTH.. I DID A COUPLE OF GHOST HUNTING INVESTIGATIONS WITH HIM.. 100% IDIOT!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Joaquin Today, Now.

    First I hope karma bites Justin in the butt. He is a dangerous hunter and by his own actions in shooting at a bipedal animal makes him a dangerous person in general. After firing on an unarmed unidentified mammal him and his crony dont have the nerve to bag the animal? For believers like me this does absolutely no good in researching or proving to skeptics. Sasquatch is believed to be intelligent and avoids human contact when ever possible. By these actions we maybe have triggered a primal fear in them causing them to be more hostile thus dampening further field research. Justin is a puss with a gun who wouldnt dear venture in the woods unarmed cause he lacks the intelligence to survive.

    ReplyDelete
  16. May be, after the Department of Fish and Game interviewed both Justin and Jack. DF&G were the ones who returned to the site of the shooting and removed the body of the Juvenile? They have done it before (cover up, we in the research field know why), and that is why it was not there when Justin returned to retrieve it? May be, the adult was not killed and returned to retrieve her/his family, or may be she/he was killed and the other juvenile retrieved it's sibling? Or maybe another predator took the Juvenile like a coyote? Maybe Justin's "STEAK" was from the adult not the juvenile? I have interviewed many Squatch witnesses and I must say when I first heard of Justin's story I was more than a little skeptical. Two guys hunting, sees squatch waving hands above head, debates shooting, hits it goes out of site, two smaller ones show up looking for bigger one then shoots one of them kills it, picks it up looks at it and leaves it there? Seeing one is one thing, shooting it another, but to see three, probably killing two, and come home with nothing but a really BIG STORY, yeah right. But... it all comes down to the retrieved "STEAK".
    Where is the official paper work from an accredited laboratory, recognized in genetics with the results from the "steak". That's the bottom line here boys and girls, ladies and gentleman. There are other possible conclusions to this whole story however, polygraph tests aside, show me the DNA and then the real truth stands up.
    I do not condone killing Squatch people as their genetic marker is only "one off" of ours 355 with about 35 variables this makes them the closest thing to a human on the planet and probably our ancestors, if man even kills his closest relative along with every other living thing on this planet, well then we are quite frankly F____ed er I mean doomed along with the rest of life here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear AnonymousAug 19, 2012 9:35:00 PM:

      I share your frustration and concern about the way we treat the Sasquatch people, each other, and the planet we all live on. Earlier today, however, I happened to read part of the interview with the maker of the film "Letters From the Big Man" on this blog, and then the rest of the interviewer on Examiner.com; and the filmmaker sounds very hopeful. Through an intermediary, he received a message from the Sasquatch that they wanted him to read at the premier of his film, and this was the message:

      "Those who doubt the Light will be very lonely. It is within each one of you. You each must see and feel the Light and it can only be seen and felt through your heart. There is no other way. Do not look outside of yourselves. When you feel the Light and then the expansion in your heart, it is then that you will know the One, with us and with all that is. It is very simple and bright beyond your imagination. We will now walk the path of Light together."

      So there is reason for hope! THEY are hopeful, because they see the energetic/spiritual realities of this physical life more clearly than we do, and they know where we all really come from: that place of light, which informs everything we do, even when it doesn't look like that's what's happening. So if we can respond to their gentle challenge and learn to be joyful, each one of us -- despite what we think we see! -- then we may really do the 180 we'd all like to, and march not to our doom, but to a new harmony with all that is.

      Delete
  17. Coyotes carrying off a Bigfoot... I'll be damned.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Taking apparent joy in the murdering of another species is deeply saddening.

    ReplyDelete
  19. The researcher who developed the U.S. Government's polygraph Test for Espionage and Sabotage "thought the whole security screening program should be shut down?"
    The National Academy of Sciences concluded that "[polygraph testing's] accuracy in distinguishing actual or potential security violators from innocent test takers is insufficient to justify reliance on its use in employee security screening in federal agencies?"
    Spies Ignatz Theodor Griebl, Karel Frantisek Koecher, Jiri Pasovsky, Larry Wu-tai Chin, Aldrich Hazen Ames, Ana Belen Montes, and Leandro Aragoncillo all passed the polygraph?

    www.antipolygraph.org

    ReplyDelete
  20. I still want to see a body. When this stuff happens why don't people just cut the heads off and bring them in for some vet or some animal expert to identify?

    ReplyDelete
  21. It sound to me like there is something to the story after all. If we are dealing with an intelligent and elusive being, then this type of encounter and killing is the most likely to happen, a chance encounter. I belive the DNA results will show similar results as the ones done before, were the have been found to be close or almost Human. This

    ReplyDelete
  22. The Human or almost Human results found in previus research are most likely to this being genetic closeness to our specie rather than comtaminations or mistakes in the test.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Hi All,
    First off a blessing for those who passed away on 9/11.
    Across the pond here in blighty we get the chance to read and observe (Via T.V.)what happens on the U.S Squatch/Bigfoot scene,I myself believe that there are creatures that have survived for vast amounts of time without contact with the human race,my simple thought is this:- A lot of people believe in a god no matter what religion and I say just because you cannot see god does not mean he does not exist and the same thought aplies here to the Squatch/Bigfoot in particular.
    I cannot believe that somebody would shoot an unknown species,from what I have read for no good reason.I simply have a couple of questions:- (1) Using your imagination If you treat this as a Bear incident, why shoot at it when its natural reaction will be to attack fearing the safety of the cubs (after all every Documentry drills into peoples heads DANGER! keep away)so is it not fair to say bigfoot may do the same if feeling threatend ? (2)Like most are thinking wheres's the body ? You would have thought that even after the alledged incident in this day and age his buddy would stay at the site or close by while your man obtained a Camera/Video or like most people these days have cell phones to record everything from ( picking your mates nose to two blokes having a scrap )but none of these where done ?
    Also I note that despite being shot and so called steak was taken why no blood or even on returning with the Bigfoot group no trace of blood mentioned ?
    Anyway what do I know I am just a brit sticking his nose into your affairs but cousins I still believe like many of you across the pond. At the end of the day you draw your own conclusions some more obvious than others.

    1batfastard

    ReplyDelete
  24. You either are a believer or not. This test will only give more confirmation to people that want to believe his story and will do nothing to those that disbelieve (insert excuse here). I for one believe something is out their and thriving, so this only makes this story one worth keeping an eye on now. That's what this polygraph test has done for me. No prof yet so take this test for what it's worth, confirmation that he's atleast genuine. He can tell his tale all he wants but the DNA prof is what he's banking on. Time will tell.

    ReplyDelete
  25. If you dont want to see a sasquatch get killed you should all stop looking for it, right now. When it is found there will be death. Even if granted full protection in their native habitats poachers from other lands will come...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All they need to survive is our disbelief. All of you who hcare about bigfoot please lets just stop telling about them. may be selfish but i dont want the world to ever find them for that will mean the end for the species!

      Delete
  26. I have not followed this very closely but a significant amount of time has passed since these creatures were allegedly killed. I have not found any new info. regarding this incident. This entire story is suspect in my opinion. Were there any pics of the animals postmortem? As was mentioned earlier, DNA will not prove these were sasquatch. It will provide a DNA sample of an unkown species I suppose. If this were true it would be a shame that 2 specimens were taken and left to decay or be eaten by the local scavengers. Again, this smells of a hoax to me.

    ReplyDelete
  27. The quality of writing is very important. I just had a comment on my blog from someone who said that my misuse of the words than and then made the otherwise quality article hard to read. I promptly corrected the errors.
    Sample Research

    ReplyDelete
  28. I am not frightened at the prospect that Bigfoot might truly exist but rather that these "hunters" would just shoot them for no reason!

    ReplyDelete
  29. I would rather it remain unproven than to have one shot.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Why does the Transcript not match what the country girl Polygrapher is saying.

    She says "did you ever see an animal that your never saw, before, ever or never could have thought it would exist ever?"

    and "Did you kill a juvenile animal, that you never believed was ever a species that existed?"

    What?

    Then she blurs her face. No, don't do that. Show your face, loud and proud.

    Also, she said, "I worked for a Private Investigator and saw that you could make money by being a Polygrapher, so it was "Worth it" for me to get training."

    Follow the money.

    Many can tell you what you want to hear.

    Meldrum be forewarned.

    People lie about having cancer to collect charity, the Kardashian's and Paris Hilton did things on Video to get fame and money; even the other day I saw a Food Stamp scammer at a Grocery store with a Friend buying 2 baskets of food - Scam where the friend paid 50% Cash for Food Stamps.

    I hope this story is true but it smells fishy.

    ReplyDelete
  31. nice somebody got one. scares me though because I live in the sierras and seen Bigfoot when i was about 2 or4 but now I'm 14

    ReplyDelete
  32. Appreciate the recommendation. Let me try it out.
    My site :: slow computer

    ReplyDelete
  33. It's perfect time to make some plans for the future and it is time to be happy. I have read this post and if I could I want to suggest you few interesting things or tips. Maybe you could write next articles referring to this article. I wish to read even more things about it!
    My webpage > Work from home jobs

    ReplyDelete
  34. Ok, Justin, as an avid Big Game Hunter ( Alaskan Browns Colorado Black Bear Bull Elk and Trophy Mulies) I will
    go with the fact that you HAVE shot (2) creatures discribed.
    Here is where it stands proffesionally:
    1. You shot the first and the number 1 rule is follow and FIND your kill!!! It is California hunting weather which is ideal for extended time afield to track and FIND your quarry, you lazy ass punk!!!! You realized that what you had attempted to kill and only wounded would have gotten the best of your weak ass if you were to pursue it into the brush. At the range specified, if you were a true sportsman you should have taken the head shoot and been done, go back to your Red Rider BB Gun puss!!! You look to be of size to handle a 7mm or 45-70 something with balls but the thousands of deer you've shot in Cali. are small per average and your weak punk ass can only shoot an 25-06 my 12 niece shoots that shit for christ sakes!!!
    2. The TRUE fact is when the juvenial(s) exposed them selves immediatlly from cover you AGAIN shot without thinking,and F...d up ALL the evidence in your panick of running from your actions.....
    Now there is nothing speciman wise, only WASTE because you are no true and skilled hunter and as for your friend w/combat experience, his judgement was expected to be of
    military pride and logic and he failed WORSE then you.....
    Ihave no reason to negate the killling, only now it was all needless... how many deer,bear etc... you must have wounded and left in the field to die slowly because of your TRUE lack of a "perfect killing machine" you profess to be.
    In closing, a witness WAS present for more than 40 minutes at the other end of that meadow were the creek flows out and due to your gun blazing approach to the
    scene, have noted all activity except the truck lic. plate.
    They will only involve myself as they were simply photographers at the scene and have a great dislike in guns in general, especially after this incident.
    GOOD WORK IDIOT!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  35. I considered this web site to consent to all in sequence on any observation camera definitely, there along with most of carecterstiques. which revenue that have always been rather satisfied to get this web site four courts.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I think I should win since our names are SO CLOSE! Anyway, here is the link. Love your photography! fashion photographer boston.

    ReplyDelete
  37. nice somebody got one. scares me though because I live in the sierras and seen Bigfoot when i was about 2 or4 but now I'm 14Radar Detector Reviews

    ReplyDelete

Let's keep the language and material clean, keep in mind we have younger fans that get their Bigfoot News here too. If your comment is directed specifically to our editor, Guy Edwards, he will personally take time out of his day and ask one of us interns to reply to you in his name.

Please read our terms of use policy.