Todd Standing maintains that Bigfoot is very real indeed. Image Credit: Roger Patterson / Bob Gimlin
Controversial Bigfoot expert Todd Standing has taken the government of British Columbia to court.
The tracker and filmmaker, who has been researching the mysterious bipedal hominid for years, maintains that the provincial government of British Columbia has "breached its stewardship responsibility" by failing to acknowledge and protect the creature known as Bigfoot.
Standing maintains that he has evidence "way beyond a reasonable doubt" and claims that by failing to acknowledge the creature's existence, the provincial government has damaged his credibility.
"They're trying to deny my evidence without even looking at it," he said. "They've gone at this with a sledgehammer. My lawyer is arguing that they at least need to hear the evidence before deciding."
According to reports, Standing also intends to file similar lawsuits in Alberta and Washington state.
"It's the discovery of the millennium," he said. "To understand a primate species has been in North America this whole time and we haven't been able to discover them."
"The reason for that is because they are trackers, because they are intelligent, because they're an incredible species."
Update:
During a courtroom appearance on Tuesday 14th, the provincial government of British Columbia asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the lawsuit on the basis that it was "frivolous".
"There is no reasonable claim because the claim lacks an air of reality," said Ministry of Attorney General articled student Marina Goodwin.
"It's possibly a matter for legislature or executive, but to determine whether or not the province should recognize a species of animal is, with the greatest of respect, not a matter for the courts to decide."
"Come out with me and I will show you a sasquatch. " Yeah. For 5 thousand dollars. If he is so adamant about "protecting" these creatures why and how could he not have gotten definitive proof by now? Especially if he wants the government involved. It's been years since I heard of this tool bag. All he has released is a few head shots that look like muppets and a few that show something scurrying around. "I have DNA." Where are the results of the tests? He thinks he's going to smoke the legal system with no proof. He should have truck loads of physical evidence if he knows exactly where they ... [More]
Judgement of the Supreme Court of British Columbia in the case of Standing v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations)
https://www.google.com/amp/s/calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/bigfoot-believer-claims-dna-proves-beasts-existence/amp According to this his hair sample was determined to be human, but his study of DNA sequencing has lead him to believe it's not. Both Les Stroud and Jeff Meldrum have gone out in the woods with him and saw no bigfoot. They heard noises. Apparently this dude isn't that great at finding these things. Years later he still can't prove ANYTHING. I don't know how anyone can still take him serious.
That's not quite correct. Meldrum does claim to have had a sighting while out with Standing: The well-known Sasquatch researcher said he might have laid his eyes on the creature during a 2013 trip to Canada. In the later part of that year, Meldrum was invited by Todd Standing to visit an isolated area in Alberta called Nordegg, a location known for its high volume of Bigfoot sightings over the years... ... a couple intriguing incidents that occurred while he was camping in Alberta with Standing and fellow researcher John Bindernagel, Ph.D. The first incident was Meldrum’s sighting of a tall,... [More]
In that same article, “That’s the curse of Bigfoot,” Meldrum said. “Electronics aren’t working whenever there’s a sighting.” Is this a familiar "curse" as far as the latest lore? Electronic devices not working near the creature? Or is it just a rationalization for the lack of physical evidence?
Thanks!! ‘[30] The test laid out in Imperial Tobacco at para. 17 therefore has not been satisfied by the plaintiff. As a result, the claim of the plaintiff is hereby struck out and dismissed, without leave to amend, as the claim has no reasonable prospect of success. Costs [31] The defendant is entitled to its costs, payable by the plaintiff forthwith after assessment pursuant to Appendix “B” as a matter of ordinary difficulty.’
Please Login or Register to post a comment.