posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 02:34 AM
I'm not marketing for Steve because I'm not being paid for that kind of job, effort, or time. I am using every possible resource to reach as much
of the population of Inverness-Shire as is possible with the non-budget and no money that I have to continue this investigation. If the location and
the custodian of the tooth item is identified, then and only then, money will be given to me to travel back to Inverness to either sue in the local
courts on behalf of my witnesses or to purhaps physically recover the item through other, more direct, means.
I have used every possible news media, discussion forum, blog and radio appearances in order to apply stress & pressure upon the residents of
Inverness-Shire who might have knowledge of what private individual "Impersonated" a game warden or community cop ("Water Bailiff" [???]) thus
robbing two American tourists (My opinion).
Cop or civilian, taking an animal relic, film rolls and videotape from any foreign tourist still constitutes theft under the laws of the United
Kingdom with the exception of preserving a crime scene, UK National Security or UK Homeland Security. Cops who steal are still criminals in the UK.
Civilians claiming or otherwise impersonating cops are still criminals in the UK. A "Shakedown" is still a "Shakedown" in the UK even if the
victim is a foreign tourist. If this whole thing was a hoax, then my two witnesses were victimized. If the tooth is real, they are robbery
I have achieved contact with an actual peace officer with the Northern Constabulary in Inverness who recalled two young, irate, American Caucasian
males in that police station in March. He thinks they were the victims of a hoax or a local fisherman with a hard core protective attitude over his
favorite fishing spot. He stated that they demanded the tooth be returned to them prior to them being firmly rebuffed by the officer of the desk.
The pictures of the tooth published are part of a series of photos shot on the gunwall of a boat which clearly show it and it's rootage from all
The "Experts" which are included in our "Jury of experts" are museum curators, tenured professors, fishermen, oceanarium husbandry personnel, and
others who to the man and woman have required that their names not be broadcast until they can actually hold the item / relic in their own hands.
They are willing to comment on the photo images to me in private but are not willing to publish or broadcast themselves on the tooth until such time
as it can be physically examined in their own laboratory facilities. This is no surprise and is certainly reasonable. Nobody wants to step into the
"Center ring" of the cryptozoological "Circus" until they have solid DNA and biological materials evidence in their hands.
Being a private detective, I'm not bound to the same emperical standards that a lettered Ichthyologist or palaeontologist is. I can quite
responsibly convey to you folks my current opinions based upon current patterns and trends in cooberated witness statements and the appearance of
things in imagery. As the trends in the investigation change, so will my opinions and so will my announcements on the status of this case.
As a detective, I am obligated to approach the case with the assumption that it is a hoax and that ALL parties in this matter are untrustworthy.
Also, conversly, I am obligated to look for any and all possible examples of substances and structures in nature which would account for the
appearance of the item / relic on mini DV tape and 35mm film.
The witnesses making their claims are obligated to cooperate and undergo any and all background investigations and questions regarding their personal
characters and the burden of proving their claims is squarely on them.
So far, they and their stories have held up under repeated telling. I used multiple perspective techniques for interviewing witnesses, designed to
help me identify and isolate inconsistancies and conflicts amongst the various tellings. These interview techniques are taught by every major police
agency and federal academy and are time-honored and very hard to defeat.
Until I hold the item / relic in my hands, I cannot state with absolute conviction that the item is a real biological specimen or a fabricated item.
I do not know what the Loch Ness Tooth is and can only report on what it looks like from the images, and how believable my two witnesses appear as
they originally told their story in front of their own fathers and grandfathers.
I have detailed, close-up images of teeth from a number of eels which I will eventually have my wife and associated web friends post after we finish
processesing the images.
I travel for work and I log on to ATS as my travel and family time allows.
I have no hostility. I hope this thread stays active for a long time. I do know that I have no influence with the ATS site owners. They only know
me from a few private e-mail communications last Summer.