Firefighter chases dog and both are missing 411?

What all you people are failing to realize is that despite the physical evidence EVERYTHING i.e. info, timelines, etc. is coming from his friend Byars. These two could have gone out into the woods together as some sort of homosexual lovefest gone wrong when one of them realizes they aren't gay etc. That would explain the ecstasy.

originally posted by: GreenMtnBoys
What all you people are failing to realize is that despite the physical evidence EVERYTHING i.e. info, timelines, etc. is coming from his friend Byars. These two could have gone out into the woods together as some sort of homosexual lovefest gone wrong when one of them realizes they aren't gay etc. That would explain the ecstasy.

Uhm... while I agree that all we have came from his friend, and it's not like we can tell for sure if he's telling the truth (or even if what's being reported is really what he told the police), but... how does being gay explain the ecstasy?

a reply to: GreenMtnBoys

"Being gay would explain the ecstacy"! I'm LMFAO! Ecstacy isn't
explanatory of anything. And there is negative 0 evidence that
either firefighter was gay. Perhaps you watch the villiage people
to much.



And I don't appreciate any bigoted responses here in.
So be kind of nice if you could tone it down just a bit?

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: LukeDAP

A post that doesn't make sense? Show me a post here in
this whole thread that does make sense? Your post is right on time
and welcome indeed. The posts that have tried to make sense of this?
Have failed miserably.

Only in your opinion! for all we know; many posts in this thread may have touched on the reality of what really happened.
Maybe if we just knew a bit more?!

I often come back to this thread hoping theres been updates or to see what others have written. All the Paulides 411 stuff was interesting, I'd never heard of it before! Yep, its been a good thread!

Listening to you and some of the other posters talking about paranormal possibilities was also interesting, its not something I'd normally read, but it was fun.

But then......then! you started talking about mysterious entities that are so powerful they can control the weather! thereby making it possible to have their wicked way with their victim!

Well....thats....pretty way out there!

You also wrote

The cops themselves have ruled out foul play.
Period. You can't disagree.

Your saying discussion of foul play is finished, Period! But discussion about entities controlling the weather for the purpose of obtaining a victim; is perfectly ok!

a reply to: VoidHawk

If I said anything of entities controlling the weather please quote me
Void. And do I think foul play is still on the table? Hell yes but it has to make
some kind of sense and at least sound logical. Which rules out anything
that's come up in this thread. I mean the thugees and Kali make more sense.

And even this should be considered.



There are demons associated with dogs. Do I think that's out there?
Well why wouldn't I? But this whole damn story is out there already.
You have to see that first. So you can assume I've got some hours
vested here Void. My point is, I'm not just tinkering here. I'm diggin
deep miho. And there were no weather changes involved in this
story either. Altho it did happen under a full moon and on friday
the 13th. So go figure.

Only in your opinion!

And you sure make that sound worthless.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: GreenMtnBoys

"Being gay would explain the ecstacy"! I'm LMFAO! Ecstacy isn't
explanatory of anything. And there is negative 0 evidence that
either firefighter was gay. Perhaps you watch the villiage people
to much.

And I don't appreciate any bigoted responses here in.
So be kind of nice if you could tone it down just a bit?

You see! Again you appear to be trying to shut down any theory of foul play!
And you clearly have no knowledge of what GreenMtnBoys was talking about. SOME! gays do use ecstasy for enhancing pleasure, so there IS a link between that drug and gays. And its not unknown for married men to sneak of somewhere to satisfy their gay tendencies.
Its possible! GreenMtnBoys response is not "bigoted".

Personally I think the purpose of the drug reports was to muddy the waters.
Was the guy who survived tested for drugs? If so where's the report? after all, they've seen fit to publicly insinuate that herdman had taken drugs; so why cant we know about the other guy?


Two men go hiking. Only one comes back.
He knows his friend is lost in the wilderness without food water or even his shoes.
While trying to find his way out he stumbles upon two fishermen.
Imagine you were him, you've been stumbling around in the wilderness desperately trying to find your lost friend and you come across two people who could offer some serious help. What would any normal person do in that situation? thats right, they'd tell them whats happened!!
However, this guy, says nothing!
That is NOT normal behavior!

The guy who came back tells a story thats VERY difficult to believe, that story being that herdman ran off into the night chasing his dog.
Who really believes that nonsense?
Any dog owner will tell you that you don't run after a dog in the wilderness, it can run so much faster than you that chasing it is pointless, no, you dont chase a dog, you call to it!, and herdman and his dog were both experienced, he would not have run off into the dark wilderness chasing his dog!

Next we have the search.
Helicopters - Police - Trained sniffer dogs - Trained search and rescue teams, cannot find a body.
Some days later Herdsmans body is eventually found at the foot of a cliff. It's strange that on a previous search of that area they found nothing!

Blunt force is reported as the cause of death.
The body is far out from the foot of the cliff, indicating that he didn't get there by falling, therefore he had to have been placed there! Or he climbed there, and the blunt force was caused by an attacker.

The Herdsmans dog fiasco!
The dog finally shows up but.....they somehow lost it !
Didn't anybody think to shout "FOLLOW THAT DOG", after all there were helicopters and search & rescue teams available!

Ruling out foul play is not an option as this case has foul play written all over it, even the reaction/response of the police is suspicious!

a reply to: VoidHawk

Whatever!

The guy who came back tells a story thats VERY difficult to believe,
that story being that herdman ran off into the night chasing his dog.

"The guy" hasn't made a single statement to the press. So it's all the cops said he said.
And you haven't provided the quote I asked for either.
And I only asked that Mountain boy tone it down.
And you still haven't provided anything logical.
So now what?

I have been following this whole thread. In my opinion, VoidHawk has made a lot of good points and logical points. I agree that we should not rule out foul play. Everything about the case is very strange, however, I see no reason to dismiss non-paranormal options as invalid.

a reply to: gwynnhwyfar

I'm not dismissing anything. I even said foul play can't be dismissed.
But if there was any reason for the cops to suspect foul play concerning
Taylor Byars they would be all over it. So Voidhawks contention is invalid
by any reasonable assertions. There's no proof of gayness so speculate all
you want. I'm just tired of seeing explanations that go against what the
Pros are saying it obviously isn't. The cops say no foul play. Lets just ignore
that? Second guess all you want from behind a damn computer. This thread
asks in the OP, only if it adds up to a missing 411 case. Answer that question?

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: VoidHawk

Whatever!

The guy who came back tells a story thats VERY difficult to believe,
that story being that herdman ran off into the night chasing his dog.

"The guy" hasn't made a single statement to the press. So it's all the cops said he said.
And you haven't provided the quote I asked for either.

I never actually quoted you, but it may have looked that way, another member spoke of controlling the weather and I thought you had responded to it, my bad.
However, I cant help but notice that when someone suggests weather controlling entities may be at play, you did not say to them "you haven't provided anything logical".
In my book the likelyhood of foul play is much more logical than weather controlling entities.

originally posted by: randyvs
And I only asked that Mountain boy tone it down.

To quote.

originally posted by: randyvs
And I don't appreciate any bigoted responses here in.

originally posted by: randyvs
And you still haven't provided anything logical.

And again thats just YOUR opinion!


As I mentioned above, this has been a good thread, still is

a reply to: VoidHawk

"you haven't provided anything logical".

Please Void come'on! Do I really have too!

Here for the record:

I think the notion of weather controlling or even knowing ahead of time
approaching weather conditions is absurd. And again it has no bearing in t
his case at all. Heaven't I already said that on this very page? Are you reading,
or just defending?

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: gwynnhwyfar

I'm not dismissing anything. I even said foul play can't be dismissed.
But if there was any reason for the cops to suspect foul play concerning
Taylor Byars they would be all over it. So Voidhawks contention is invalid
by any reasonable assertions.

Huh?
Remember saying this

originally posted by: randyvs
I swear, it looks more like the cops know they haven't explained this occurance any where near adequately. Only compounded by the fact they know they can't. Because that would involve the truth about what ever it is they're obviously try'n to hide.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: VoidHawk

"you haven't provided anything logical".

Please Void come'on! Do I really have too!

Here for the record:

I think the notion of weather controlling or even knowing ahead of time
approaching weather conditions is absurd. And again it has no bearing in t
his case at all. Heaven't I already said that on this very page? Are you reading,
or just defending?

And havent I already said that was my bad?
Why bring that up again?

a reply to: VoidHawk

Answer me this please? Does this case add up to a 411 case or not?
Why would the cops defend anyone who might be invovled or be
responsible in any way making themselves look stupid at that same time?
By any reasonable logic that dismisses any "Foul play" on Byars behalf.
Not just my opinion.

"A love fest gone wrong" that's just gay!

I suppose the ecstacy thru the dogs off the scent too.

Byars killed his friend drug his dead weight ass up 1200 ft to only
stuff him ubder a few bushes, sprinkled perfume in the area to throw the dogs
off the scent. Called for a massive search to ensue and they couldn't find the
poor basturd for two weeks? Then the cops claim no foul play on the part of Byars?
Some great detective work go'in on there boy.

GTFOOH!

Byars being guilty in this, or growers is more unlikely than Kali or Satan himself.
And not because I want it that way. But because it's true. It's been ruled an accident
but that makes even less sense than foul play on the part of bigfoot. All rational falls
by the wayside! I would love for authorities to say they've made an arrest but it was
an accident?

Again nothing adds up!

Maybe it was the two fisher men?



What would be Ideal is for Paulides to do a vid like this for
Mike Herdman.

a reply to: GreenMtnBoys

Oh god, here we go again.

I would just like to say two male friends can do MDMA together without fu*king each other and it being a "homosexual love fest". You're really hung up on this whole "homosexual" angel and quite frankly the whole thing comes off as bigoted and really ignorant sounding.

Secondly we don't know anything about what the friend may or may not have taken.

Thirdly, we don't know when or how much Herdman took. The body was found after a significant period of time, "partly mummified". The tox report is useless. God knows how the body being exposed to the elements for that long could have tainted the results.

What's the easiest way to have people immediately stop questioning the bizarre circumstances of this case? Easy. Drugs.

a reply to: VoidHawk

VoidHawk, while I do understand your points (really, I do!), it seems prudent to point out a couple of things which have been reiterated in this thread many times...

Firstly, and most importantly, none of us here, or in the media or in the general public can make make any well informed and rational opinion on what Byars' claimed to have happened. Why? Because beyond a vague outline of the events preceding the disappearance of Mike Herdman and his own escapade after he got lost searching, we've heard nothing else. We haven't heard any details of timeframes, weather conditions, unusual behaviour (in the part of men or mutt), and we've, significantly, we've heard no thoughts from Byars, who was there, in even what direction Herdman was running. No information has been divulged to the public from Byars. He's made no statements beyond his initial one (in which he just expressed sadness and confusion as to where Mike went), and the police have not made any of his interviews public.

Secondly, in light of the first point, it is completely unreasonable and downright disrespectful to insinuate they'd gone off into the woods for a big gay drug party. We've had no word Byars took anything, so why would Mike? Considering he apparently was a happily married man with a young daughter, both of whom are still around and stuck with their grief, it seems unlikely he was a secret woodsman who had a thing for grabbing the axe handle (if you take my meaning).

Thirdly, as I said, I understand your point. Specifically, if two people go into the woods and one comes back, surely there's reason to assume foul play? And yet, the police have publicly stated they do not believe Byars took any action to harm Mike. Now, police are usually the very first people to point a finger. While justice says "Innocent until proven guilty," in reality it's a very different thing. We don't know what Byars said to them, but it was enough that they were willing to straight away tell the press "He didn't chop him up."
If they were trying to entrap Byars, and possibly gather evidence or testimony while leaving him to think he was scot-free, they'd have made a different claim. Usually it's "Can't rule anything out," or something similar.

Fourthly, as for the body... Now, I'm not 100% on this but i believe that after locating the body searchers said they hadn't looked there at all. Why? Cause there was no logical or sensible reason to assume he'd gone up there.
Also, I agree with you on the blunt trauma problem. I'm not sure where this ME got his education but I'm pretty sure any competent medical examiner (or even any person with a rational brain cell in their entire head!) would immediately hold off on announcing a cause of death after seeing a head obviously damaged by an attack. Couple pages back somebody pointed out the difference in terminology regarding head injuries, and the use of "blunt trauma" indicates someone intended to hurt him. I would also point out that we've STILL had no word on what exactly the other injuries to the body were, the ones all grouped under the category of "consistent with a fall." If I tripped over and broke one leg and somebody took a baseball bat to the other, both injuries would be "consistent with a fall" if I were unable to provide testimony.

Fifthly, the drug report. Pure and total bull droppings. As somebody else pointed out a while back (very, very neatly I might add), drug tests require bodily fluids. The body was found partially mummified (read: dessicated) and so would have lacked a substantial amount of bodily fluids. And you bring up a very good point regarding Byars... why have we had no word on his drug reports? Or word he was charged with possession? Or use of an illicit substance?

Sixth, and this is nothing to do with the case, but just general info. You said...

gays do use ecstasy for enhancing pleasure, so there IS a link between that drug and gays.

I know a lot of gay people (male and female) and a lot of straight people (male and female). It would be incredibly difficult to identify which group uses more drugs than the other as they are both pretty much identical in terms of use. Gay people take drugs. Straight people take drugs. Blanket statements like yours do nothing but express ignorance, and help steer this investigation down a line of faulty, and biased reasoning. Which, ironically, is happening quite a lot now the news has moved on to other things.

Seventh, why would Byars have concocted such an unlikely scenario? They were alone, in the woods, with pretty much no one around for miles. Byars knew this. If he truly wanted to get rid of Herdman there are a thousand different and more useful ways he could have done it. Thrown him off a cliff and said he slipped. Poisoned him and fed him to animals. Hell, he could have even shot him and blamed illegal growers!
But that's not what happened. He came back from the woods, and said my best friend ran off into the night after his dog, barefoot and with no gear. And that's all we have. Like I said, until we get a full and detailed statement from the police regarding the information Byars provided to them we do not know what else he said which made the police believe that the circumstances didn't sound dodgy. Which they hella do!

Also, has anybody considered filing an FOIA with the relevant depts? It'd be interesting to see whether or not they send it out. And if they say it's part of an ongoing investigation, we at least will know that there is something going on behind closed doors.

originally posted by: JackofBlades
a reply to: VoidHawk

Firstly, and most importantly, none of us here, or in the media or in the general public can make make any well informed and rational opinion on what Byars' claimed to have happened....................

Agreed, and thats why I wasn't happy that any idea of foul play appeared to be being shut down, because we dont know.
However, as nearly every person who's taken part in this thread has done, myself and others are free to speculate, and thats all I'm doing.

originally posted by: JackofBlades

Secondly, in light of the first point, it is completely unreasonable and downright disrespectful to insinuate they'd gone off into the woods for a big gay drug party.

I had no intention to insinuate any such thing! All I did was pick up on something another member wrote concerning ecstacy and gays - "I'm LMFAO! Ecstacy isn't explanatory of anything".
While drugs are probably taken by all groups, I do know of gays who use ecstacy purely for the reasons I stated, therefore I think its reasonable to ponder the idea?

originally posted by: JackofBlades
Considering he apparently was a happily married man with a young daughter, both of whom are still around and stuck with their grief, it seems unlikely he was a secret woodsman who had a thing for grabbing the axe handle (if you take my meaning).

Agreed, but it's not unheard of for people to have hidden lives. Personally I believe its most unlikely, but that doesn't we shouldn't consider it.

originally posted by: JackofBlades
Thirdly, as I said, I understand your point. Specifically, if two people go into the woods and one comes back, surely there's reason to assume foul play? And yet, the police have publicly stated they do not believe Byars took any action to harm Mike.

Maybe Byars is a very good liar and he's fooled the police? or maybe the police have their own reasons for accepting what they know to be lies?

originally posted by: JackofBlades

Also, I agree with you on the blunt trauma problem. I'm not sure where this ME got his education but I'm pretty sure any competent medical examiner (or even any person with a rational brain cell in their entire head!) would immediately hold off on announcing a cause of death after seeing a head obviously damaged by an attack.

And thats another reason why I'm not happy to rule out foul play.

originally posted by: JackofBlades

Fifthly, the drug report. Pure and total bull droppings. As somebody else pointed out a while back (very, very neatly I might add), drug tests require bodily fluids. The body was found partially mummified (read: dessicated) and so would have lacked a substantial amount of bodily fluids.

Earlier in this thread I wrote that the drug report was bs. That kinda suggests I'm right to wonder about the police having their own reasons for accepting Byars possibly bs story?

originally posted by: JackofBlades
And you bring up a very good point regarding Byars... why have we had no word on his drug reports? Or word he was charged with possession? Or use of an illicit substance?

This is something thats been bugging me, I would have thought it would be standard procedure to test Byars considering the circumstances of this case, ie: two men go off into the wilderness and only one comes back, and he tells a rather strange story.

originally posted by: JackofBlades

Also, has anybody considered filing an FOIA with the relevant depts? It'd be interesting to see whether or not they send it out. And if they say it's part of an ongoing investigation, we at least will know that there is something going on behind closed doors.

I'm not in the US, or even know how to go about such a thing. If this had happened in the UK then I might be tempted to find out how and give it a shot.


I often dont make myself as clear as I ought to, single finger typing and a lousy grasp of language see to that, however I'll try to explain.
I keep popping back into this thread in the hope that more info has been released or that maybe another member might have added their own thoughts on this case, there's been some good stuff in here, hence, I was disappointed to find people suggesting that foul play is no-longer an option. I find that surprising! and thats why I reacted to it.

I have never intended to insinuate that anyone was gay, and in my opinion it wouldn't matter if they were, but as I stated above, I was just pointing out that GreenMtnBoys suggestion was relevant, it should be looked at and I'd bet money the police have considered it.

You are correct that none of us have enough info to come to any conclusion, but thats been the case right from the start of this thread; and yet it has several hundred posts speculating on what might have happened, so whats suddenly changed? Why is it no-longer considered worthy to discuss foul play?


On topic

Having lived with a dog for seventeen years and been involved with dogs for many more years, I just dont buy the "he ran of into the dark after his dog".
I may not have that guys backpacking experience, but I spent a great deal of time out in the sticks with my own dog, and something I learnt very quickly was how pointless it was to chase after him.
In herdsmans case it was dark and we're told his dog ran off into the night.
The first problem herdsman will have is which way did the dog go? Unless he can see the dog its utterly pointless chasing after it, thats what I learnt with my own dog.
Are we to believe that herdsman was so stupid he'd be willing to run off in any random direction chasing his dog?
I wouldn't do it in the day light, yet we're to believe Herdsman did it in the darkness!
My personal opinion is that he had way more sense than that, I dont believe that part of the story. Certainly not in the way its been presented to us.

The fact that the police are happy with that story tells me -
1. There's more to it and they're not willing to make it public.
2. Its a complete fabrication and they know it, but chose to accept it.

I sincerely hope I'm wrong, I hope its all as its been told, that way there's no bad guy

a reply to: VoidHawk


Couple things Void.

I never really meant to claim foul play was completely off the table.
Only in the case of Byars and growers, because of the police ruling
of no foul play, surely would be inclusive of those possibilities.
Could the cops be playing opossum? I've seen that before, but I'd
be speculating.

I swear, I'm just try'n to keep the thread from rehashing the same things
over and over for the readers sake. And at the same time not insult a
member ( you) who contributes largely to this site. Let alone anyone else.

I also suffer the same single fingered handicapp.

originally posted by: VoidHawk
...Two men go hiking. Only one comes back.
He knows his friend is lost in the wilderness without food water or even his shoes.
While trying to find his way out he stumbles upon two fishermen.
Imagine you were him, you've been stumbling around in the wilderness desperately trying to find your lost friend and you come across two people who could offer some serious help. What would any normal person do in that situation? thats right, they'd tell them whats happened!!
However, this guy, says nothing!
That is NOT normal behavior!

I have genuinely appreciated your contributions to this discussion, VoidHawk...
I would like, though, to address the excerpted portion, above...

I find it unbelievable that the two fishermen found the campsite without being, at least, 'tipped' to its location, by Byars.
And, if he told them nothing more than "I need help finding my car/truck"...I don't see why they would have headed back in the direction of the campsite...as creek (read - intermittently &/or mostly dry-creek) fishing would probably-not have been their aim...
AND...just seeing a 'campsite' during daylight, does not mean that it is abandoned - so - what might have alerted them to its significance if they had not been given some kind of story by Byars...?

Just my thoughts on this one of your questions.

originally posted by: semperfortis
Well just about anything can and does happen in the wilderness..

It always cracks me up when people post ....

"Well I've been in the wilderness umpteen years"
"I've never had XXXXXXX happen"
"I would have XXXXXXXX"
(Fill in the Xs)

Anytime someone posts such garbage, you know they truly have little experience..

In the wilderness, one small mistake, that even the most seasoned professional can easily make, can put you into a life and death struggle..

I hope this guy and his dog turn up Okay...

You're going to have to do better than regurgitating talking points from TV.