Friday, December 4, 2015

Another Journalist Gets Roger Patterson's Deathbed Confession Wrong

Roger Patterson, known for filming a bigfoot in Bluff Creek, CA on October 20, 1967

"I was absolutely devastated the day I heard Roger Patterson had made a deathbed confession that the 1967 bigfoot footage he shot was a hoax." --Tony Casey, perpetuating a rumor

In an article titled, "Why we're always looking for the monsters on the hillside" and published by the Johnson City Press, journalist Tony Casey claims Roger Patterson had confessed on his deathbed he had hoaxed the film. There is no evidence for this. He continues to reason in his article how the "confession" shattered his hope that bigfoot was real, while shoring up his critical thinking. Read an excerpt below:
Leading up to Patterson’s admission, I was objectively sure — albeit in a non-scientific way — that if that footage was real, bigfoot was also most likely real because the creature in the film, according to my eyes, couldn’t be anything but bigfoot. It very clearly wasn’t a bear walking on two legs. It was one of two things: a human in an ape suit or bigfoot itself. The scene shot in the creek bed that day is forever ingrained in my mind: the massive upright ape-like creature, calmly walking with an impressively taut arm swing and carriage, moving away from the camera, looking over its shoulder to acknowledge the equipment, but not in too much of a hurry.

It was too good to be true. It was literally too good to be true. When I found out it was a hoax, things changed for me, but for the better I’d argue. Instead of taking things at face value, I began to require concrete evidence for my beliefs.
How about concrete evidence for your rumors?

The has a great article about how that deathbed confession rumor may have started. You can read about it below.

The most commonly heard false fact about the Patterson footage:

"The guy who got the footage admitted on his deathbed that he faked it."

This is not true. This is a mixup. Here's how the mixup started.
The man who obtained the most well known photo of the Loch Ness monster (not bigfoot) admitted on his deathbed that he faked that photo.

The story of his confession popped up in newspaper headlines around the world. The story didn't last long as a news item, but every new agency, in every country, on every continent, ran the story.

The story mutated in the press, from a crypto story about one photo from Loch Ness being debunked, to "Mystery of Loch Ness Finally Solved." 

The BFRO article continues to explain how things got worse.

 The Patterson footage was mistakenly associated with a "deathbed confession" related to a famous "monster" mystery.

The Loch Ness deathbed confession story grabbed such big headlines, it was inevitable that someone would try the same formula down the line. It only took a few more years.

The heirs of a man named Ray Wallace initially reported his "deathbed confession" about faking the first famous bigfoot tracks in Northern California.

Ray Wallace left behind a few pairs of wooden feet for making fake tracks. He would sell plaster casts of fake tracks at his roadside tourist shop.

His heirs later recanted the "deathbed confession" part of the story, and instead said they "just know he started the whole thing."

The initial "deathbed confession" element helpd [sic] get the story onto the AP Wire. It became "The Father of Bigfoot Dies". 
If you are interested, click to read New York Time's Ray Wallace deathbed confession article printed January 3, 2003.

You can even go to Tony Casey's article, Why we're always looking for the monsters on the hillside to let him know that Roger Patterson's deathbed confession is only a rumor and he can keep hoping for bigfoot.


  1. Hope you or someone has straightened this poorly-researching commentator out?

  2. Steve Kulls calls reporters the Blamestream Media, and he is right. These people do not even bother to do the most basic research. And another thing-he seems to think if the P/G Film is a hoax, then Sasquatch does not exist. That is not saying it is a hoax, but if on the infitessimally small chance it is proven a hoax, that would not invalidate the entire subject matter. So this guy made two errors right there.


Let's keep the language clean, keep in mind we have younger fans and we want to make this the best bigfoot website for bigfoot news and bigfoot research.

Please read our terms of use policy.