Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Fraud and Fantasy? Bigfoot oil salesmen.


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#1    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 24 February 2014 - 07:39 PM

I have a question about Rick Dyer and his “Hank” show. I’m not talking about his past or his other schemes, but strictly “Hank” on tour.

Bigfoot is (of yet) a myth. I could haul around a tree stump and claim it's bigfoot. Nowhere is there anywhere a documented description of this creature. How do you prosecute someone for a “fake bigfoot”? How do you claim it is a fraud? It does not exist as far as science is concerned, there is no specimen, no universally accepted bigfoot standard, etc.

He is hauling around a mythological creature "Hank" of his own interpretation for others to look at and decide for themselves.

How can you deceive someone to the point of it being illegal when none so far can prove it even exists or what it is?

I paid Santa and the Easter Bunny at the mall for a picture so my kids could sit on his lap. My kids believed it. Should I sue the mall? Should my kids sue me?

Many say bigfoot doesn’t even exist. It is a fantasy, a tall tale, a scary story, a movie monster, etc.  

Is some “standard” for bigfoot the PGF? Then Hank fits right in does it not?

If Bigfoot can be whatever you want it to be. How is he defrauding with Hank?
Even if he said Hank “tested positive for being a bigfoot creature” or some such claim. Of course it did! So would have Patty and all the subjects of the vids we watch on YouTube etc. Because the videographers all already know what their particular “bigfoot” is made out of.

Anyone can claim any definition for bigfoot and be right or at least not wrong. Correct?

Bigfoot is a costume (man-made) in many cases (PGF), so again, Hank fits right in as a bigfoot.

Do I like what he/they do? NO! Do I like how they play with people’s gullibility and ignorance. NO! But it is a personal thing for me about bigfootdom. A vendetta that someone else wouldn’t even care about.

I pay to watch a magician cut a women in half and put her back together. Is it the magician's fault if I believe it? Is it his fault if I don’t believe it because I know better? Should we outlaw Criss Angel stuff? Because people pay for it and believe it? As people do for SOOOO much out there for sale. Venues have every right to cancel what they don't want. But I'd hate to get to the point where fantasy is illegal.

In other words, wouldn't I have to prove Hank is not a bigfoot or, prove what is a fake bigfoot to sue him or prosecute him for this?

Edited by QuiteContrary, 24 February 2014 - 07:58 PM.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#2    Sakari

Sakari

    Rob Lester

  • Member
  • 14,458 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Safford, Arizona...My heart and soul are still on the Oregon Coast.

  • Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Posted 24 February 2014 - 08:01 PM

When you paid Santa and Easter bunny to get pictures with them, you got pictures with them. You also new when you were paying that they were people in costumes.

A magician does not say what he is doing is real, they are called " illusionists ".


Rick is not saying he is performing an illusion, nor is he saying get your picture taken with Bigfoot.

He is saying " I killed Bigfoot, I really did, and here he is, if you pay $$$ " ( not to mention the details of everything else involved in this )



It is simple QC......It is black and white.


Definition of fraud :


fraud
noun \ˈfrȯd\

: the crime of using dishonest methods to take something valuable from another person
: a person who pretends to be what he or she is not in order to trick people
: a copy of something that is meant to look like the real thing in order to trick people



1
a :  deceit, trickery; specifically :  intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right  
b :  an act of deceiving or misrepresenting :  trick

2
a :  a person who is not what he or she pretends to be :  impostor; also :  one who defrauds :  cheat  

b :  one that is not what it seems or is represented to be






Definition of fraud by law :

Fraud
A false representation of a matter of fact—whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed—that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the individual will act upon it to her or his legal injury.
Fraud is commonly understood as dishonesty calculated for advantage. A person who is dishonest may be called a fraud. In the U.S. legal system, fraud is a specific offense with certain features.
Fraud is most common in the buying or selling of property, including real estate, Personal Property, and intangible property, such as stocks, bonds, and copyrights. State and federal statutes criminalize fraud, but not all cases rise to the level of criminality. Prosecutors have discretion in determining which cases to pursue. Victims may also seek redress in civil court.
Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant's actions involved five separate elements: (1) a false statement of a material fact,(2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, (3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim, (4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement, and (5) injury to the alleged victim as a result.
These elements contain nuances that are not all easily proved. First, not all false statements are fraudulent. To be fraudulent, a false statement must relate to a material fact. It should also substantially affect a person's decision to enter into a contract or pursue a certain course of action. A false statement of fact that does not bear on the disputed transaction will not be considered fraudulent.
Second, the defendant must know that the statement is untrue. A statement of fact that is simply mistaken is not fraudulent. To be fraudulent, a false statement must be made with intent to deceive the victim. This is perhaps the easiest element to prove, once falsity and materiality are proved, because most material false statements are designed to mislead.
Third, the false statement must be made with the intent to deprive the victim of some legal right.
Fourth, the victim's reliance on the false statement must be reasonable. Reliance on a patently absurd false statement generally will not give rise to fraud; however, people who are especially gullible, superstitious, or ignorant or who are illiterate may recover damages for fraud if the defendant knew and took advantage of their condition.
Finally, the false statement must cause the victim some injury that leaves her or him in a worse position than she or he was in before the fraud.
A statement of belief is not a statement of fact and thus is not fraudulent. Puffing, or the expression of a glowing opinion by a seller, is likewise not fraudulent. For example, a car dealer may represent that a particular vehicle is "the finest in the lot." Although the statement may not be true, it is not a statement of fact, and a reasonable buyer would not be justified in relying on it.
The relationship between parties can make a difference in determining whether a statement is fraudulent. A misleading statement is more likely to be fraudulent when one party has superior knowledge in a transaction, and knows that the other is relying on that knowledge, than when the two parties possess equal knowledge. For example, if the seller of a car with a bad engine tells the buyer the car is in excellent running condition, a court is more likely to find fraud if the seller is an auto mechanic as opposed to a sales trainee. Misleading statements are most likely to be fraudulent where one party exploits a position of trust and confidence, or a fiduciary relationship. Fiduciary relationships include those between attorneys and clients, physicians and patients, stockbrokers and clients, and the officers and partners of a corporation and its stockholders.
A statement need not be affirmative to be fraudulent. When a person has a duty to speak, silence may be treated as a false statement. This can arise if a party who has knowledge of a fact fails to disclose it to another party who is justified in assuming its nonexistence. For example, if a real estate agent fails to disclose that a home is built on a toxic waste dump, the omission may be regarded as a fraudulent statement. Even if the agent does not know of the dump, the omission may be considered fraudulent. This is constructive fraud, and it is usually inferred when a party is a fiduciary and has a duty to know of, and disclose, particular facts.
Fraud is an independent criminal offense, but it also appears in different contexts as the means used to gain a legal advantage or accomplish a specific crime. For example, it is fraud for a person to make a false statement on a license application in order to engage in the regulated activity. A person who did so would not be convicted of fraud. Rather, fraud would simply describe the method used to break the law or regulation requiring the license.
Fraud resembles theft in that both involve some form of illegal taking, but the two should not be confused. Fraud requires an additional element of False Pretenses created to induce a victim to turn over property, services, or money. Theft, by contrast, requires only the unauthorized taking of another's property with the intent to permanently deprive the other of the property. Because fraud involves more planning than does theft, it is punished more severely.
Federal and state criminal statutes provide for the punishment of persons convicted of fraudulent activity. Interstate fraud and fraud on the federal government are singled out for federal prosecution. The most common federal fraud charges are for mail and wire fraud. Mail and wire fraud statutes criminalize the use of the mails or interstate wires to create or further a scheme to defraud (18 U.S.C.A. §§ 1341, 1342).

Edited by Sakari, 24 February 2014 - 08:02 PM.

Our Wolf's Memorial Page

http://petsupports.com/a04/sakari.htm


#3    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 24 February 2014 - 08:11 PM

I am asking for clarification as to how his "Hank" is fraud. I can read your quotes, but not being a lawyer I'm not sure how it applies to something that doesn't even have a legal definition.

What is the legal definition of a bigfoot, in order for me to be defrauded of it?
What is the legal definition of a dead bigfoot?  It doesn't exist.

I am asking an honest question. I am not defending Rick.

Edited by QuiteContrary, 24 February 2014 - 08:13 PM.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#4    Sakari

Sakari

    Rob Lester

  • Member
  • 14,458 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Safford, Arizona...My heart and soul are still on the Oregon Coast.

  • Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Posted 24 February 2014 - 08:22 PM

View PostQuiteContrary, on 24 February 2014 - 08:11 PM, said:

I am asking for clarification as to how his "Hank" is fraud. I can read your quotes, but not being a lawyer I'm not sure how it applies to something that doesn't even have a legal definition.

What is the legal definition of a bigfoot, in order for me to be defrauded of it?
What is the legal definition of a dead bigfoot?  It doesn't exist.

I am asking an honest question. I am not defending Rick.


Like I said. He is deceiving people ( fraud ) for money. ( intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right
)

He is claiming to have found, and kiled a new species.

Tv Evangelists have been charged and sentenced to fraud.......Has anyone seen God?



The EPA’s highest-paid employee and a leading expert on climate change was sentenced to 32 months in federal prison Wednesday for lying to his bosses and saying he was a CIA spy working in Pakistan so he could avoid doing his real job.

Edited by Sakari, 24 February 2014 - 08:29 PM.

Our Wolf's Memorial Page

http://petsupports.com/a04/sakari.htm


#5    keithisco

keithisco

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,522 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southampton, Blighty!

Posted 24 February 2014 - 08:28 PM

What the heck is the OP referring to... please provide links!


#6    supervike

supervike

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,233 posts
  • Joined:16 May 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 February 2014 - 08:42 PM

View Postkeithisco, on 24 February 2014 - 08:28 PM, said:

What the heck is the OP referring to... please provide links!

Rick Dyer (the same doofus that claimed he had a Bigfoot body back in 2008, but it was a monkey suit with pig guts on it) has been claiming for some time that he shot and killed a Bigfoot in San Antonio, TX.

He now is taking that body on a whirlwind tour.  He has it in a big glass box and pull it around with a Winnebago.  He charges folks 10 bucks for the sideshow.

Here's the first link I googled:

http://www.newsmax.c...02/24/id/554337



But, to the OP.  I think you are right on.  There is nothing he is doing that I think any law enforcement agency will touch.  He calls it a 'sideshow' event himself.


However, there is the issue of fraud with some of his 'Team Tracker' members, as many of them paid for 'gold memberships' that were supposed to include private viewings/exclusive dvds, etc.   He has not delivered on any of those.  But from what I understand, there were only about 20-30 folks involved.  He claims he'll offer refunds, but insists the delays are beyond his control.

There are a few dedicated forums out there that really want to stop him from what he's doing, but I really don't see a way to stop him.

Technically, it may be fraud, but it's no different from any other carnival sideshow.  I can't see a prosecutor wasting any time with this at all.

Dyer will keep raking in the bucks.  One news report I read said he had over 800 visitors on Sunday alone.  He also sells t-shirts and memoribilia...

Maybe the IRS will get him!

Edited by supervike, 24 February 2014 - 08:44 PM.


#7    Sakari

Sakari

    Rob Lester

  • Member
  • 14,458 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Safford, Arizona...My heart and soul are still on the Oregon Coast.

  • Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Posted 24 February 2014 - 09:28 PM

View Postsupervike, on 24 February 2014 - 08:42 PM, said:

Rick Dyer (the same doofus that claimed he had a Bigfoot body back in 2008, but it was a monkey suit with pig guts on it) has been claiming for some time that he shot and killed a Bigfoot in San Antonio, TX.

He now is taking that body on a whirlwind tour.  He has it in a big glass box and pull it around with a Winnebago.  He charges folks 10 bucks for the sideshow.

Here's the first link I googled:

http://www.newsmax.c...02/24/id/554337



But, to the OP.  I think you are right on.  There is nothing he is doing that I think any law enforcement agency will touch.  He calls it a 'sideshow' event himself.


However, there is the issue of fraud with some of his 'Team Tracker' members, as many of them paid for 'gold memberships' that were supposed to include private viewings/exclusive dvds, etc.   He has not delivered on any of those.  But from what I understand, there were only about 20-30 folks involved.  He claims he'll offer refunds, but insists the delays are beyond his control.

There are a few dedicated forums out there that really want to stop him from what he's doing, but I really don't see a way to stop him.

Technically, it may be fraud, but it's no different from any other carnival sideshow.  I can't see a prosecutor wasting any time with this at all.

Dyer will keep raking in the bucks.  One news report I read said he had over 800 visitors on Sunday alone.  He also sells t-shirts and memoribilia...

Maybe the IRS will get him!

Where is claiming it to be just a sideshow?...

Everything I have seen he is declaring this is real, he shot a real life new species, and it will be housed in a Museum, etc,etc,etc...... This is fraud, black and white.

I think what you are correct about is that the " authorities " figure if someone is stupid enough to pay for this, they deserve to lose their money. So, they do not even bother. A class action suit ( civil ) could happen, very easilly. If enough people harped on the Federel Gov. ( not sure what division handles this ) I am sure charges would be filed. Hell, he even claims the Government is involved.

Myself, I see a fraud, and he is making good money doing it. I also see myself, and others, honest people, breaking their ******* backs to make an honest living. I also see people who can not get jobs, and want to work.....So, I am prettty p***ed off about people like this.

What are the websites to stop him?......I just started a facebook page ( my signature ), and if enough people show interest, I will find out whom to talk to, and will get a petition going.

Our Wolf's Memorial Page

http://petsupports.com/a04/sakari.htm


#8    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 24 February 2014 - 11:14 PM

They had him on our news the other day, because of his shows here. Dyer said Come and see for yourself and make up your own mind.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#9    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 24 February 2014 - 11:23 PM

View Postkeithisco, on 24 February 2014 - 08:28 PM, said:

What the heck is the OP referring to... please provide links!

There's a thread on UM http://www.unexplain...howtopic=260198 it's like 30 pages.

You can search engine Rick Dyer and Hank tour.
There is plethora of old and newer info on this guy and his past and present claims and troubles all over the web. Probably on UM too.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#10    Sakari

Sakari

    Rob Lester

  • Member
  • 14,458 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Safford, Arizona...My heart and soul are still on the Oregon Coast.

  • Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Posted 24 February 2014 - 11:33 PM

View PostQuiteContrary, on 24 February 2014 - 11:14 PM, said:

They had him on our news the other day, because of his shows here. Dyer said Come and see for yourself and make up your own mind.

If I saw him, I would have a very hard time not shoving my fist down his throat....

Hey QC, will you hit him for me?
:)

Our Wolf's Memorial Page

http://petsupports.com/a04/sakari.htm


#11    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 24 February 2014 - 11:43 PM

View PostSakari, on 24 February 2014 - 11:33 PM, said:

If I saw him, I would have a very hard time not shoving my fist down his throat....

Hey QC, will you hit him for me?
:)

No, but I'll hit him for his wife. :yes: :gun:
I hope she's his ex-wife.

Edited by QuiteContrary, 24 February 2014 - 11:46 PM.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#12    Sakari

Sakari

    Rob Lester

  • Member
  • 14,458 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Safford, Arizona...My heart and soul are still on the Oregon Coast.

  • Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Posted 24 February 2014 - 11:47 PM

View PostQuiteContrary, on 24 February 2014 - 11:43 PM, said:

No, but I'll hit him for his wife. :yes: :gun:

I am sure his wife is backing him 100%......Hit her also.

Our Wolf's Memorial Page

http://petsupports.com/a04/sakari.htm


#13    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 24 February 2014 - 11:58 PM

I'm not going to jail for a stuffed rug with a nose and lips. :no:
Even I have limits.

Edited by QuiteContrary, 25 February 2014 - 12:01 AM.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#14    keninsc

keninsc

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 3,234 posts
  • Joined:08 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The problem with people who have no vices is that generally you can be pretty sure they're going to have some pretty annoying virtues. Liz Taylor

Posted 25 February 2014 - 01:18 AM

Limits? You? Ha!


#15    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 25 February 2014 - 01:48 AM

View Postkeninsc, on 25 February 2014 - 01:18 AM, said:

Limits? You? Ha!

Ha!Ha!

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users