Firefighter chases dog and both are missing 411?

Another point that I haven't seen...

IF he fell off of the cliff and IF he tried to climb it on the first night as some have suggested... why? I know that's the big question but my point is that it was dark!

The only possible reason to climb higher would be to get a better view of the area but if it was dark, that removes the ONLY logical reason for attempting to scale the cliff.

NOTHING about this case makes any sense.

originally posted by: Answer
Another point that I haven't seen...

...IF he fell off of the cliff and IF he tried to climb it on the first night as some have suggested... why? I know that's the big question but my point is that it was dark!

...The only possible reason to climb higher would be to get a better view of the area but if it was dark, that removes the ONLY logical reason for attempting to scale the cliff.

...NOTHING about this case makes any sense.

Another logical reason to climb...in the night...would be 'in attempt to get away from someone/something'.

Another logical reason...though arguably insane/irrational...would be the effects of certain illicit substances.

Again - though - if going with the simple story that he was looking for Duke... There is the slim possibility that, since the moon was virtually full...he might have thought the vantage would help.

No one knows, if he climbed, if it was night or day. He might have gotten to the top by a different route that night or the next day.

a reply to: roadgravel
Hi all, let me settle a few things, I was involved in the search. The area was by far the most rugged terrain I have ever searched in. The temp was 90's during the day, 6o's at night. Very survivable. There was running water(creek) at his camp site. His pack was found in camp along with bare footprints leaving camp. The camp site was in a steep canyon with sides to steep to climb. This only left up and down stream as logical directions of travel. The rocks were all moss/algae covered and very,very slick. Although the creek was usually in the 10/ 15' wide range there were many deep pools many over 6' deep. The day before I searched one of our members went face to face with a bear after sticking his head into a small cave. When I jumped from the chopper within 10 minutes I had fresh bear tracks in the sand. The search was aided by drones which were limited by the many chopper flights in and out of the canyon, Both could not fly at the same time. There was a dive crew that searched all the pools below the camp site. Again this is the most logical area to search. The dog did stay in the area,(within 1/2 square mile) but was very scared and would not allow people to come near him. We had a 4 person team of professional animal trappers trying to catch the dog.
We all know the sad outcome to the story, The cause of death has been ruled (Blunt Force Trauma).
Our guess s that his dog may have been fighting with a bear/lion. There is no other reason a sound man would have left without shoes. He may have tangled with an animal or simply tripped and fell with a fatal blow. The news did report he was covered partially with brush which suggests an animal may have been involved.
Peace to his family and RIP to him.

originally posted by: roadgravel
I wonder if the authorities checked the top of the cliff for footprints, dog prints or anything that looked as through some slid off over the edge. I get the impression they based the results on their assumptions.

Agreed. I'd like to know if they searched for signs on the ridgeline above where he was found as well. Also, I wonder if they looked for point of impact below the cliff.
I doubt they did. They kept saying there was no indication that this was anything other than accidental; so why would they case the scene for clues? It was just an accident......right?

Some crazy living out there could have tossed him over.

Again I feel it should be noted that this possibility does not explain the failure of the tracking dogs.

a reply to: dinofinder

I don't know why people bring their canines into the wildnerness. It's one thing to go car camping with them but an entire nother to have them deep into wild backcountry. Dogs very much are known to attract cougars and bears.

Also did you hear about the reports of some hikers who claimed to have heard screams or a human voice coming from a cave in the area. What about rattlesnakes? Did you guys see a lot of those? What about Byars telling law enforcement Herdman was "High as a kite"?

Thanks for the info. Sounds like a very beautiful area............6' deep pools in the middle of a drought in CA? Very cool!!!!!!!!

a reply to: Tsurugi


Yes it makes absolutely no sense why they didn't do more forensic type assessments on the surrounding area. Especially up on top of that ridge? I mean how hard would it have been to drop one or two guys off from the helo?

And if he was 1200 feet high how the hell would dogs below be able to smell them? Tracking dogs are good but how would they ever get wind of a scent that high?

That's another thing with Paulides.........he puts way too much stock in this whole dogs can't track the victim nonsense. It happens all the time in hunting. Dogs ability to scent and track isn't perfect.

a reply to: Tsurugi

If you read some of the examples of Paulides in the 411 cases, the dogs NEVER are able to track the scent. They usually pick it up at the point they were last seen and then nothing. That is one of the criteria he uses to select a case. It's as if the person just vanished at that spot, only to be returned at a later time in the spot their body is found. Surprisingly, a lot of children are found alive many miles and at a much higher elevation from where they disappeared. Also to note, most when found are missing their shoes. In this case however, he had none to start with.

originally posted by: Tsurugi

originally posted by: roadgravel
I wonder if the authorities checked the top of the cliff for footprints, dog prints or anything that looked as through some slid off over the edge. I get the impression they based the results on their assumptions.

Agreed. I'd like to know if they searched for signs on the ridgeline above where he was found as well. Also, I wonder if they looked for point of impact below the cliff.
I doubt they did. They kept saying there was no indication that this was anything other than accidental; so why would they case the scene for clues? It was just an accident......right?

Some crazy living out there could have tossed him over.

Again I feel it should be noted that this possibility does not explain the failure of the tracking dogs.

One of the reports I read/heard did make a point of saying that a representative of the medical examiner's office was sent to the scene. If the person they sent out there had any forensic training at all, they've covered the issues you mention. I'm just hoping it will be included when the final report is released. With the intense media exposure this case had generated, I'd expect them to have done an intensive investigation despite the fact that there was no obvious signs of foul play. It's what the medical examiner is supposed to do---investigate unexplained deaths.
Having said that, I do know that every coroner/medical examiner is a different personality and thus the office can be influenced....not saying it happened here but it's in realm of possibilities.

a reply to: dinofinder

While I don't want to cast doubt on your claim, I think it's very clear that a bear or a lion didn't do this. If you Google bear attack photos (WARNING!!! GRUESOME!) it'd be pretty clear to even a rookie medical examiner if his corpse displayed signs of attack from that avenue. Likewise with mountain lions, which similarly leave victims recognisably mauled. Also, if there were even the slightest hint of animal attack the authorities would, in all likelihood, jump on this chance to wrap this up with a pretty little bow and get rid of it.
Animal attack doesn't add up. Sure, maybe animals got to the corpse, but he wasn't killed by a bear or a mountain lion.

Also, to address the drug thing again. Idk what drugs he was supposedly taking (and strangely the source who claimed to hear Byars telling police he was high doesn't mention that. Though I'm sure the officer would have immediately whirled around and demanded to know what drugs they were), but no drug is going to leave someone "high as a kite" for anything beyond a couple of hours. Tops. His body would have just metabolised and processed them out. Now, if he was indeed up the mountain the first night, as logically we must assume he was, why did none of the flyovers see him? Why, after he had come down from the effects of the substances did he not walk back down to a trail or back to his camp? Why did searchers have no contact with him whatsoever until finding his body? And why was Duke so damn scared?

originally posted by: GreenMtnBoys
Also did you hear about the reports of some hikers who claimed to have heard screams or a human voice coming from a cave in the area.

Nowhere was it ever stated that a human voice or screams were heard coming from a cave. The reports (from the first two sources that showed up after a search) said only that "noises" were heard coming from a cave. Both reports state that searchers either investigated the area and found nothing, or inspected the cave and found nothing.

a reply to: JackofBlades

Can you imagine how cool it would be if the cops just admitted it
when they were baffled by a case? Instead of BS'n us constantly with
ultra ego crap, make believe records, what we say, is your reality
and our perfection, because we know it all.

Just to once have them actually say in a human voice.

We don't know what the #### happen.

Where does the idea come from that their not human?

a reply to: dinofinder

Given the surrounding where he was found (it you were there when found), how did the blunt force trauma happen? Are they believing he tripped and hit his head hard enough to kill him? Sounds like falling off the cliff isn't the reason. Hit with an object which implies another person?

a reply to: roadgravel:

en.wikipedia.org...

Blunt trauma, blunt injury, non-penetrating trauma or blunt force trauma refers to physical trauma caused to a body part, either by impact, injury or physical attack; the latter usually being referred to as blunt force trauma.

The term refers to the initial trauma, from which develops more specific types such as contusions, abrasions, lacerations, and/or bone fractures. Blunt trauma is contrasted with penetrating trauma, in which an object such as a bullet enters the body.

I don't know...according to Wikipedia, Physical Attack is "Blunt Force Trauma" rather than "Blunt Trauma."

Happy Fourth of July to all!

Off to the Kingdom of the Posseum's to party at Hell's Gate - cherry bombs

I think people following this story initially, in fact everyone,
deserves some closure and an explanation that makes sense.
And is as close to the truth as possible.

Byers needs to step up and tell the world in plain English
everything he knows that went on out there the night
of June 13 2014.

We don't need some half baked crap story from the cops. They weren't even there.

a reply to: dinofinder dinofinder, thanks for posting here...if the dog got in a scuffle with a bear or mountain lion, wouldn't there be marks on the dog ???the dog was hungry and dehydrated when found nothing else was reported...and if the mt lion or bear got the short end of the stick, wouldn't there be some sign of this

signs in the brush of a scuffle, hairs , a little blood ...something??

a reply to: Missmissie173

My thought was the wound might give some clue as to the object that caused it. Relying on wording from the authorities isn't high up my scale after what the reporting has been.

Good medical personnel should be able to give some reliable.

Something must have scared the dog and the firefighter. It must have been something extremly frightening. He just took off afraid to scream and too scared to tell his friend. He ran out there and whatever was out there probaly caught up with him.

a reply to: roadgravel

His friend turned into a monster and took his gun away and beat him with it. I'm thinking it was mushrooms that turned him along with the full moon.

a reply to: hesse

That is also my belief, hesse. He wasn't chasing after the dog, he was fleeing right alongside it. Byars, for whatever reason, either didn't react or we haven't been told his reaction. Maybe because if we know what his reaction was we will need to know what he was reacting to.

delete