California sued for denying existence of Bigfoot

[William Parcher]

Bigfoot hunters sue state of California for denying existence of Sasquatch

Claudia Ackley and Todd Standing want to go to court on behalf of Bigfoot.

Ackley told the San Bernardino Sun this week that she and her two teenaged daughters came upon three of the legendarily hard-to-spot beasts during a hike near Lake Arrowhead, Calif., last March. She said the Sasquatches were “barrel-chested,” had larger-than-human heads and looked like they each weighed about 800 pounds. She said she got close to one of them.

“We were face to face,” she said. “He was 30 feet up in [a] tree.”

Ackley, a longtime Bigfoot enthusiast, says she couldn’t get forest rangers to take her sighting seriously. They insisted she and her daughters had seen bears.

So Ackley and Standing, a Canadian filmmaker who made a documentary called “Discovering Bigfoot,” did the American thing: they brought a lawsuit last month against the state of California.

“The lawsuit,” reported The Sun, “alleges the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the state Natural Resources Agency have been derelict in their duty by not acknowledging the existence of the Sasquatch species, despite a mountain of documented and scientific evidence. It has had a chilling effect on the study of the Sasquatch, considered illegitimate and relegated to the category of ‘paranormal research.’”...

http://www.oregonlive.com/trending/2018/02/bigfoot_hunters_sue_state_of_c.html

Ackley’s biggest concern is that the government, by not acknowledging Bigfoot’s existence, could be endangering the public.

“People have to be warned about these things. They are big,” Ackley said. “We’re totally vulnerable to these things.”...

https://www.sbsun.com/2018/02/12/cr...rrowhead-sues-state-to-get-species-recognized

 

[Porpoise of Life]

Ackley, a Bigfoot enthusiast and researcher of more than 20 years, teamed up with documentary filmmaker Todd Standing, the man behind the Netflix film Discovering Bigfoot, and sued the state in San Bernardino Superior Court on Jan. 18.

Cynical publicity grab?

Is there any kind of penalty against starting frivolous lawsuits in California, and any chance that she'd have to suffer that penalty?

 

[MikeG]

Let her go through with this, please! Oh please.

"Evidence, your Honour? Sorry, I don't understand".

 

[Whip]

Let her go through with this, please! Oh please.

"Evidence, your Honour? Sorry, I don't understand".

'so, you don't even have one picture.......?'

 

[theprestige]

'so, you don't even have one picture.......?'

https://xkcd.com/1235/

 

[Psi Baba]

Cynical publicity grab?

Is there any kind of penalty against starting frivolous lawsuits in California, and any chance that she'd have to suffer that penalty?

I believe California does has an anti-SLAPP law. Whether this would apply, I don't know.

Too bad this isn't in Pennsylvania, then they could get Judge John E. Jones on the case. (Dover School district intelligent design/Ken Ham nonsense).

 

[rjh01]

https://xkcd.com/1235/

Does that include all children?

 

[Resume]

“We were face to face,” she said. “He was 30 feet up in [a] tree.”

Unclear on the concept of face to face.

 

[Whip]

Unclear on the concept of face to face.

she must be really, really tall.

 

[Craig B]

she must be really, really tall.

Maybe BF had ripped off her head and carried it up the tree.

 

[HarryHenderson]

https://xkcd.com/1235/

He's on the right scent. The sheer number of cameras out there not capturing Bigfoot is itself approaching proof there is no Bigfoot. The planet now having the means with which to take trillions of pictures by billions of people and yet still come up completely short in the hairy manimal department could surely be considered 'absence of evidence'. And it's a compelling absence. Which could then be reasonably considered to be viable evidence of its non-existence.

Unclear on the concept of face to face.

I think they're unclear on a lot of concepts.

 

[theprestige]

I predict someone will ask why they didn't take any pictures.

And she'll say their camera phones were all out of order.

And then someone will find her public Facebook posts of pictures taken on that trip.

And then her story will magically change.

 

[William Parcher]

Cynical publicity grab?

Todd Standing will get publicity no matter what happens here. His best publicity might come if the suit is tossed out. "I fought the State and the State cheated."

Is there any kind of penalty against starting frivolous lawsuits in California, and any chance that she'd have to suffer that penalty?

I don't think they will be penalized. It will probably be rejected as being without merit. We will find out next month when they have the first hearing. If it's a go then it will become very interesting because Standing has already said that Gimlin and Meldrum will be brought into court as witnesses.

Can you imagine the sight of Meldrum bringing 400 giant plaster casts into court?

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

This lawsuit is brought to you by Todd Standing of the “Survivorman Bigfoot” and “Discovering Bigfoot” shows. Ackley is his client in the California case. He has a similar lawsuit in British Columbia. He says he has a lawyer in Canada and is looking for “some legal help…more legal help” in the U.S. (he says he has been calling lawyers in the U.S. for over a year and they will not assist him). He plans to files cases in more states. He is working on “Discovering Bigfoot Part 2” (Didn’t he discover Bigfoot the first couple of times around?)

His stated intent is to take fish and wildlife officers in California on an expedition to show them a Bigfoot. A months-long expedition. He says, “That’s what the court case is about.” That isn’t what the case is about. The isn’t how any of this works. He says he doesn’t know how the State of California could defend against the case. I’m sure the lawyers for the State of California have some ideas. That’s not a good position to be in.

This woudn’t be a SLAPP issue. I doubt the court will even consider it frivolous. There certainly could be a legitimate case of a rare species that needs protection that the State has, for some nefarious reason, refused to acknowledge. The court can’t take a prejudice position that Bigfoot doesn’t exist.

That doesn’t mean it will go to trial. The petition has all the hallmarks of a lawyer or someone with legal experience taking someone’s money to convert their rambling complaints into the form of a legal petition. It is not a cogent legal argument. It is a shotgun blast of statements and complaints ranging from habitant protection, to the way she was treated by a ranger, to the way Bigfoot believers are perceived by the public, to endangered species, to “conceivably” not being able to sell Bigfoot expeditions, to public safety. The causes of action cite one generic law and two statements from California websites. I can imagine why lawyers who want to avoid malpractice lawsuits might be wary of working with this client.

Some of the claims don’t even seem to make sense. Some could have issues with standing (pun intended). Others may have a problem with jurisdiction. I’m not sure the court can even grant the relief requested, which is basically is ordering California to “recognize Sasquatch…as an indigenous mammal living within the State of California.” I’m not sure that California is legally required to recognize a species other than game animals. Threatened and endangered species are another issue, but that requires a lengthy petition with substantial data and evidence. The lawsuit petition mentions no such petition being filed.

 

[GT/CS]

Pathetic.
Just absolutely pathetic.

 

[MikeG]

Pathetic.
Just absolutely pathetic.

Maybe. But it's a golden opportunity to rip Meldrum and Standing to shreds, in public, and on oath.

 

[paulhutch]

I believe California does has an anti-SLAPP law. Whether this would apply, I don't know.

AKAIK all the anti-SLAPP laws apply only apply when the defendant is part of the public (the first P in the acronym), governments are not covered.

 

[Belz...]

"We're totally vulnerable".

I'll say, Bigfeet are invulnerable, immortal, invisible and can teleport and erase your memories.

 

[GT/CS]

Maybe. But it's a golden opportunity to rip Meldrum and Standing to shreds, in public, and on oath.

Our court system has better things to do than get bogged down with this type of nonsense.

 

[fuelair]

May they be flayed over the suit and the ignorance it shows!!!!!