New Patterson-Gimlin Massacre Story Surfaces, And No One Is Biting


A new Patterson-Gimlin Bigfoot "massacre" story recently surfaced.

This strange story was originally posted on Stephen Wagner's page (About.com Guide) and has been re-posted on Cryptomundo and other forums. Most people who have read it believe it's full of crap. And if you haven't read it, it's an incredibly "Tall Tale" told by an Anonymous person.

Here's the gist of it all: 8 men walked into the woods at Bluff Creek, CA and killed a bunch of Bigfoots. Three cameras captured the whole thing on film. The film is now tucked away in a safe deposit box somewhere in Sonoma, CA.


It's been awhile since this happened, so I am telling it as best as I can remember.

In the summer of 2006, my cousin had phoned me from Los Angeles. He told me that his band had just signed a recording deal with a major label. We have always stayed in touch since he left New York and moved out to California. While I did the 9-5 thing in New York, he relentlessly chased a career in music and finally hooked up with a metal band out West.

I wasn't surprised when he informed me of the good news because I knew it was in his cards. Most of our phone call consisted of catching up on family and stuff. Toward the end of the conversation he added that the record label was throwing a promotional bash for the band and he wanted me to fly out West for the occasion.

So after talking for about 10 minutes I heard a voice (his roommate) on his end in the background say, "Did you tell him about the Bigfoot thing?" That's when my cousin said, "O, man! You have got to see this! Do you remember the Bigfoot video from the 1970s, the famous one?"

"Sure," I said. [The Patterson-Gimlin film.]
"The studio's sound engineer is this guy from Napa valley," he said, "and we've been working with him. He's sitting on a film that many people haven't seen."

"What of?" I asked.

"Remember the movie where Bigfoot walks past the screen and looks at the camera?," he said. "For years, when it was shown on TV, it was edited. There's a big piece missing. When they show it on television, it's shown out of context. This guy we hooked up with has a different film. An entirely different thing."

This is how my cousin explained the film to me:

The film starts off very shaky. After a few seconds the subjects come into focus. It starts off with a few of these creatures digging for something. Not just one. I remember him saying distinctly "three". They are also very far away from the camera. They start to walk down a trail or a path and then they stop by a pond or a puddle of water. They separate, but then soon regroup. It seemed like these creatures were just doing a surveillance of the area.

"Surreal" is the word he used because he was not sure what to make of this. The whole time the camera is on them and they don't know it. Then all of a sudden, a hail of gunfire comes from the tree line and blast these things cold. One of the creatures drops and another one bolts into the woods. The remaining one strangely just walks/staggers off. As one of the creatures walked off, someone kept taking pot shots at it from a distance. That's the creature you see in the popular film.

The whole time while he's explaining this to me, I was trying to envision a film that I hadn't seen in years. I vaguely remember it, but I certainly don't recall any violence.

He also said that there was another film, which was shocking as well as disgusting. It shows a bunch of men dragging one of the lifeless bodies and placing it on a tarp or a pool cover and then cutting it up. Obviously, there was no sound on these videos. I told him that if this was lost footage or something, then it would probably be worth something to somebody. (From here on I will refer to the owner of the film as John, which is not his real name.)

When I finally made it out to California, I had the pleasure of meeting John, the film's owner. By this time, I had done my homework and knew that if what he had is the real thing, this guy would be sitting on a goldmine.

I asked John how it all came to be. His response was, "Actually, it's not mine. It was my uncle's." His uncle, now deceased, wasn't even suppose to have it. It turned out that his uncle lived in Yakima at the time and he was buddies with one of the trackers who was going out looking for these things. He went along with the group. There were about eight men altogether. All heavily armed.

Somehow he ended up getting a copy of the film and then never mentioned a word to anyone. They had no idea what they would run into out there, so they brought enough manpower and firearms to start a small war.

There were roughly three cameras rolling at all times, so they had much more than the 50 seconds that they show on television. The problem was that all of those involved didn't know where they stood as far as the law went. They felt that authorities would have screamed "murder!" and then hung them out to dry.

John said that there was a person with money who wanted to have a look at the film and maybe do business at one point. He was a lawyer/businessman type. John also added that an eccentric named Eric Beckord, a researcher, was harassing him at one point. He threatened John by saying he would drag his ass into Supreme Court if he had to. He said that Mr. Beckjord came off with a sense of entitlement and claimed to be the rightful owner of all films related to Bob Patterson. Then he was never heard from again.

By now, John felt that too many people were getting wind of this and he became paranoid that someone was going to try and rip him off. The final straw was when he returned home after a short time away and found his apartment broken into. The investigating officers said that "it was clear and certain, whoever broke in only wanted one thing." Which, by the way, they didn't get.

That's when he rented a safe deposit box and that's where it sits to this day. As far as I know. I didn't get to see the films because they were safe and secure in Sonoma and we were in L.A. He did promise me that if my cousin and I ever trekked our way toward his area, he would let me view the films. He only asked that I give him a day or so notice.

To be honest, I really don't believe in Bigfoot, and the topic doesn't grab my interest all that much. I understand that there are people all around the world who take this subject seriously and that's fine. So for those who believe in such, I thought you might find this interesting.

[via paranormal.about.com]

Comments

  1. So, Patty was a wounded, staggering bigfoot?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Will someone please look at the picture above, enlarge it and tell me if anyone else sees a large face right above the "d" in the word "and". Please.

    Also I see big toes and a foot under the "b" in the word "blood".

    Could this be a costume?

    I'll say this if there was a massacre that was not good.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Face looks like Jack Black..lol

      Delete
    2. Why I believe I can see a resemblance. LOL

      Delete
    3. Look at the distance between the "face" and the camera. That head would have to be the size of a VW Beetle. Some hoaxer made it large enough to be seen from that distance. Skin and blood? Maybe. Skin and blood from a Sasquatch? I seriously doubt it. M.K. Davis "jumped in with both left feet". Why? Only he knows.

      Delete
    4. I have always admired the work of M.K. Davis, but he has strayed far from credibility. He sees a dreadlock on Patty's head. He sees a pouch of some kind supported by a lanyard hung over Patty's neck. He reminds me of the person who talks seriously about Sasquatch braiding the hair on a horse's mane.

      Delete
  3. OMG! I do see that fact. Very creepy.

    sbizkit38

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks it's very evident in the picture.

      Delete
    2. I do see that face( that is what a tried to type)
      sbizkit38

      Delete
    3. If the massacre film is locked in a safe deposit box, where did the photo come from related to this article?

      Delete
    4. The photo is hidden somewhere at a McDonald's in Maryland.

      Delete
  4. Also to anyone who can see what I see there if it was a costume it was huge, if it was real the face is very human looking and the size is tremendous.

    What could it be on the right side slightly above midway? I don't have to enlarge it to see it but enlarging it really makes it stand out. Truly surreal!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Blondie its an.illusion from the shadows the bushes and old pictures. That head is bigger than Barry Bonds.

      I have heard the theory that there were numerous Squatches and a lot of them were massacred and buried but I seriously doubt this to be the case.

      Bigfoots Broski

      Delete
    2. Thanks Broski. Let me preface this with I have not been drinking but I stated below and you might be too young to remember but to me it looks like the Shoney Big Boy with his eyes closed.I could not figure out why such an inappropriate characterization of a Bigfoot head would be there. I've even been looking up old Bigfoot movies to see if anything matched like Bigfoot fighting Big Boy, LOL.

      By the way after looking at all the different Bigfoot costumes through the years I must Harry was a great costume and make-up deal.

      I guess the feet could be a costume unless they are an illusion too.

      Delete
    3. Or the creatures from Where the Wild Things Are.

      On a funny note my lovely lady and I were channel surfing after the Lakers lost and on Cinemax there was a B rated movie where a women was getting it on with a Squatch. These people were Bigfoot hunters and the Squatch fell in love with the women hunter and they hooked up!

      What has Finding Bigfoot done! Lol!

      Oh Bigfoot was supposedly from another planet in the movie! Can't make this stuff up!
      Bigfoots Broski

      Delete
    4. Was that the one where she went back by herself to find him?

      Delete
    5. Blondie,
      Love the Shoney Big Boy! Too bad he is no longer affiliated with Shoney's (what's left of Shoney's).
      I am actually from Tennessee, so we are neighbors (you are in NC, right?) We still have the Krystal here thank goodness, a southern treat!

      Delete
  5. I've heard of the massacre theory and read about it. I have never heard about this particular part before, it's very interesting.
    Unfortunately, once again, there is a person or people with Bigfoot information, yet those involved refuse to release such information.
    Blondie, I believe I have seen the same comments made elsewhere about this photo. It has also been stated by some that the colour correction was over compensated, and that's why so much red appears in this picture. I'll check my folders and see if I have another version of this photo.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks that would be great. I'd heard the story before but it's the picture that's interesting to me.

      Delete
  6. This story deserves zero attention for all the obvious reasons.

    Chuck

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Alpha Dog I would not want you as a detective working on my case...lol

      Delete
    2. The picture is what I'm interested in. That foot is huge compared to the dog close to it.

      Delete
    3. Where do you see a foot Blondie?? Is that dye seeping into your brain? A foot? Really???? For real? There's no foot!

      Delete
    4. Yes I'll be the first to admit it could be the highlights (don't do the full dye) or the age. How I wish it was due to a few good margaritas.
      sigh.....

      Delete
  7. A portion of the first paragraph in the article says, "Most people who have read it believe it's full of crap." That about sums it up.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This story is a 10 on the asinine meter.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's so very long ago. almost 50 years. If you check out BFF this week you will see a poster named Parnassus (with a reat repuation on the site) write that he has "inside and confidential" info the PG film is a hoax...add Biscardi's recent update on his website...news that "will shatter the BF world" along with a photo of the guy who wrote the "hoax book" (sorry not realling name) and so on....if those guys are r ight then this can't be and on we go.... it seems we can squeeze $$ or ego or whatever it is BFers desire by revisiting this very old film. Where the heck is the Erickson Project footage?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Let me play Devil's advocate here for a minute. Patty does have what looks like a wound on her right upper leg. The fact that she looks hurt, by the way she is walking and her slow speed. The whole look on her face, which I always seemed a mix of scared, hurt, and maybe even confused. I don't think there is anything to this story, if for no other reason than this; when is the last time 2 people kept a secret for more than 20 minutes. I don't think you had maybe up to 8 guys out in the back cuntry, killing something that most think does not even exist. Its not human nature to keep something like this bottled up all this time.
    sbizkit38

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Truth, that. No way so many could keep it a secret when for the past 20+ years, people would pay good money to read/hear your testimony of such a massacre.

      Delete
    2. Are you kidding me 75% of America laughs at peole who believe in Bigfoot. This would be the easiest secret to keep !

      Delete
  11. Dammit! Now I have to start a metal band, called "Squatch"! Or is that too close to "Botch"?
    David from the PAC/NW

    ReplyDelete
  12. There are 8 to 12 men who know the truth, and know what horror they did, the infants, the innocent lives they took, the skinning of the bodies, the taking of trophies, and we think they are the "savages". Those that have blood on their hands know who they are....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Okay, eight heavily armed outdoorsmen/hunters open fire on Patty and she just walks away? You people are imbeciles.

      Delete
    2. It didn't happen that way either, imbecile. A reel is missing yes, but it's unlikely it features any flying bullets and dead Bigfoots.

      Delete
  13. Nonsense. You know why it's nonsense? Because nobody would ever do that, the cutting up part, that grisly way of thinking is reserved for those already of the opinion this species is just an animal. That's why I doubt it because they're not.

    If any gun firing took place shooters would soon realized their victimes were in fact of a human species, rather than ape. Would the happily film that? I don't buy this massacre story, there's evidently a scene change in the famous film revealing possibly two different Sasquatches as MK Davis found, I highly doubt a killing.

    The face that Blondie keeps talking about is just the ground, like the way you can sometimes make out faces in the clouds, etc. Sasquatches are huge, but not that huge.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Funny how this guy only remembers certain names and cetain times, but doesn't remember any of the pertinent information. He can tell you the researcher's name, but not the name of the businessman who actually owns the film. He can tell you there were 8 heavily armed men, but can't tell or remember how his cousin got a copy of the film. He says the "Topic of Bigfoot doesn't grab him much", but yet, he remembers the Patterson/Gimlin footage from years earlier. Paaaaleeeese! Another idiot looking to stir up controversy.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I thought it was too huge.I'd like to think it's just the ground but seriously you know what that head reminds me of...the Shoney Big Boy.( I'm sure some of you are too young to remember him but to me it looks like the Big Boy with his eyes closed even the hair) If that is pareidolia with the head I don't think the feet are my imagination.

    Could someone have played around with the picture? We didn't have photoshop back then.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Lol. Absolute dreamers. There was no massacre. In fact there was no "Bigfoot". Its bob hieronimous in a suit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fact ?...lol Uh oh, it's a credulous JREF footer. I bet you also believe that clown on the BFF who says he found the suit, don't you ?

      Delete
  17. I don't buy it. 8 guys kill 1 and wound 2? Let them walk away without tracking the blood trail? Bull. They immediately start hacking up the dead one? Bull.
    Whoever made this stupid story up obviously knows nothing about hunters and how they operate. Most hunters respect their prey, they would never wound an animal and abandon it without at least trying to find it. And you certainly would not find 8 willing to. Everything about this story rings untrue to me.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I don't get where that photo comes from. How did anyone get that photo? The article says that the film is locked in a safety deposit box.

    That "bigfoot head" is just a log that happens to look like a face (the face of Moneymaker?). If you look just to the right of the letter S in Titmus, you can see the face of the Creature From The Black Lagoon.

    The second paragraph of the article says that three cameras captured the whole thing on film. Really? Three cameras? Why would there be three cameras? Later in the article it refers to "the camera" singular.

    People, this story is a line of bigfoot BS from top to bottom.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That photo is a still from the Blue Creek Mountain film footage ...and that anyone is MK Davis.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N33SgtUlcKQ

      Delete
    2. I'll add: I don't believe that is Bob Titmus in that Mk still.

      Delete
  19. Wasn't Patty proven to be injured? Some lump on her leg or something? This made it more credible. Why fake an injury?

    ReplyDelete
  20. I'd be a little more confident in a Bigfoot massacre knowing I was with a dog named White Lady.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Bigfoot Broski the name of that movie was The Geek.It was made in 71.It has been said that's Bigfoot's first porn role.

    ReplyDelete
  22. What's interesting to note is that the people first perpetuation this alleged massacre (John L Johnsen & M. K. Davis), have a vested interest in the findings now.

    Since they came out with their story a few years back nothing ever materialized, now their credibility is near nil~~~John L left M.K. and no longer prescribes to the theory...

    John L's progression reads like a 15 year old girl who just saw blood between her legs and mom never talked to her about the birds and bees... He's totally messed up, and airs his thoughts daily in public. Also like a teenage girl.

    He went from crying about being hoaxed (over and over); to leaving the bigfoot world altogether, along with selling Grendel films; to working with his savior and new mentor one "C Thomas Biscardi", Oh, and for the ultimate flip flop and back stabbing to his friend M.K. him and Biscardi are now doing a film calling Patty a HOAX~~~If Biscardi and Johnsen have any credibility between them it would fit in a thimble... Johnsen is just one more example of a teenage girl in a grown up man's body and someone that wants to make money off the Bigfoot world. No wonder he's working with Biscardi.... LOL... What does that say about M.K. Davis? Probably a similar person to John~~~~Usually these people need their wild theories and headlines to perpetuate what they want to do~~~~They don't care if those headlines are good or bad, as long as they get them...

    It's not credibility they are after it's headlines and ultimately money.

    ReplyDelete
  23. chances are that if it was 100% true nobody would believe it, nobody wants to believe anything if its not their own experience. believing in Bigfoot is like believing in miracles, its always personal, rarely documented properly.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Just like Sasquatch....
    I'd love to see it.
    And just like anything else Sasquatch....There are many comments above saying "it's BS" or "If this then that".
    Bottom line is.
    Nobody has seen anything or has anything to present. Yet all seem willing to pontificate on the subject.
    It's all talk

    ReplyDelete
  25. This is spooky. It sounds like it would be a good creepypasta

    ReplyDelete
  26. why do people even spread this garbage. ..and try to sensationalise lies...this is tabloid garbage. .at its worst

    ReplyDelete
  27. So 8 guys who were doing everything they could to prove that bigfoot exists killed a few of them, buried the bodies, & kept their mouths shut.

    Got it.

    ReplyDelete
  28. It's not easy to kill a sasquatch. This story is beyond ludicrous. John Green was still out to kill a sasquatch for proof long after this. I spoke to him. This story is 100% BULLSHIT! and started with the most infamous bigfoot bullshitters, Ivan Marx!!!

    ReplyDelete
  29. Did you even get to see anything? What a waste of reading time!

    ReplyDelete
  30. Try keeping a dog away from blood and meat. The dog is as white as those clean golf shirts. I smell bullshit.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story