It's not my story pal.
and the flaw is an ingorant and WRONG assumption by the poster.
Originally posted by BobM88
reply to post by six67seven
I thought I'd read that his evidence was tested in the Ketchum study?
This brings us to today's news. The website, Sierra Evidence Initiative announced the Bigfoot steak Justin offered as a sample to Melba Ketchum was also independently tested by a group of Bigfooters that took it to Canada’s most respected forensic DNA labs at Trent University. The tests came back as a female black bear and human (Justin Smeja).
Many who are close to Justin still feel his story about killing two Bigfoot is solid, and that perhaps when he went back to the site he did not actually get flesh from a Sasquatch, but from a bear.
However, there are two great opportunities that we are looking forward to. Due to this process. Tyler Huggins and Bart Cutino, the two Bigfooters that submitted the independent DNA study with the Canadian Lab will produce a protocol to help other Bigfooters independently verify/dismiss Bigfoot DNA. The other opportunity is the Sierra Kill Site has had some promising activity since Justin Smeja claimed to have killed the Sasquatches and will continue to be a place of future field research.
The story is also not over for Justin Smeja. Bart Cutino still has boots that were, according to Justin Smeja, saturated with Sasquatch blood. These boots have not yet been tested.
Originally posted by six67seven
Take a shot at the audio!!! Listen to his story, then get to postingedit on 4-1-2013 by six67seven because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by seabhac-rua
Thanks OP for posting these interviews.
I hadn't heard of the 'Sierra Kills' and I always find stories like this intriguing.
As for the credibility of the witness? I neither believe nor disbelieve the guy, he could be telling the truth, he could be a hoaxer. As unlikely as his tale is, people behave in strange ways and do things that most of us would find irrational, so personally I just listen to the story without trying to judge or jump to conclusions. If he's lying then he can spin a yarn for sure, and beat a lie detector to boot, but evidence is evidence and unless he can back up his story with it, it's just a story.
Originally posted by Frogs
reply to post by six67seven
I admit I didn't listen to both in full, I don't honestly have the time at the moment. I'll try to listen to the rest later. But, based on what I heard my early conclusion is I don't believe him.
In the first one he says he didn't want to have the story that he'd seen one and then have no proof or not have done anything about it. Well, that's about 90% of how he has ended up. His "proof" doesn't add up with his claimed experience.
If the juvenile was small enough to lift it was small enough to get back the to truck.
Lets say that wasn't enough, he's an experienced hunter (he claims) and evidently knows something about taxidermy. Why didn't he take something people could ID - a hand, a foot, heck - the head?!
It just doesn't add up to me.
I've hunted for over 20 years. A good bit of that in area with BF sightings and I've been fortunate enough to have a small handful of experiences of my own. I know he passed a lie detector. It just isn't ringing true to me. What he did and the bigfoots allegedly just doesn't gel..