SY1.jpg (u)
[Hide] (17.1KB, 728x410) 3,_Negro.jpg (u)
[Hide] (12.3KB, 480x360) Rechecking the thread it seems one of the recent and most famous images of a supposed Satch is not around.
Here it is, the Scott Yeoman incident, so the story goes that some dude bought some land in Colorado and made a cheap trailer house with the usual small stilts under it like americans do to avoid flood damage.
After making most of the big changes and decorating it, one day in 2017 Scott was working some details in a room and he suddenly smelled something awful as sin, described by him as "rotting animal flesh, vomit, and excrement". He noticed something moving outside the window and quickly grabbed his "Kodak Digital Sports Camera" (the EasyShare i guess? that's a rare pick for a wildlife shooter) thinking it was a bear or an elk, when he started composing a shooting he realized it didn't look like neither and he started shitting himself. He then started recording video instead of shooting photos and just stood there while the thing glanced and peeked once in a while.
Some minutes later his wife came into the room asking what the hell was he doing, when she realized there was a giant negro with red eyes outside she started screaming, ran to the bedroom and called the cops; meanwhile the thing outside got nervous and the dude grabbed a gun just in case.
The thing ran away and the sheriffs came around soon, the marriage told them the story and when they quickly deduced it was a bear our boy Scott pulled a dirty trick and presented them video (as in "btw check this out") and they shat themselves but in the end they simply said "bear" and ran away too.
Now the controversy, like there always is, appears when the skeptic/atheist community found some important facts about our boy Scott here. Now i'm not against the skeptics as i am one but some guys expect everyone to be an infallible machine against paranormal situations with full societal credentials yet "naturally" messy and unprepared, still it seems Yeoman has dirt on his tracks like many rednecks do.
He was in a remote area with no internet and still no PC (he was moving) so he dumped the video files in his mother's house. Her house got burned down in a freak accident but he snapped some pics from the video to share with friends, also it seems his wife died years before the date he mentioned, the property he mentions is not currently owned by him and it seems he can't own a gun because he's a felon, that's right the man touched a kid back in the mid 90's. He's also accused of having a camera near him with memory and battery when this happened along with not naming the sheriffs that went to his "property" and waiting so long to tell the story.
Those were enough bullet points for the eternal skeptic community to dismiss the guy, a camera-ready pedo that could've not possibly owned a gun when this happened, along with the images presenting too much moire effect, meaning heavy editing/old monitor.
Now the thing is the guy did not own a property near the place (Bailey, CO) in 2017 but his wife did in 2007 (maybe he fingered a 1 instead of a 0?, Kodak digital cameras were more popular back then) the extra moire can be due to monitor shot + window screen placed against mosquitoes, which is very normal thing to have, and it's not strange to have a camera near you in the living room if you usually take images of wildlife while living near the wilderness.
The felon claims that make most disregard the guy has some grounds but falls into the "criminals never see anything strange" argument many glownogs tend to use, for all we know he could've possessed an illegal/gunshow weapon and was caught banging a 17yo when he was 25 at the time of his process (born 1966, processed 1992). The strange thing here is that the guy presents some obvious signs of getting gov blackballed as his mother's house fire did seem to happen, his wife died suddenly at a relative young age, the property sold off and he has the worst charge a man can have (child molestation) yet he doesn't seem to be in the sex predator database. Not knowing who the law enforcement officers were is just being silly and a further charge on him, harassment and verbal attack in 2008, can mean just about everything from a bar fight to getting stalked by somebody and responding to it.
What's the worst thing of all of this? none of the claims has anything to do with the fucking thing outside a window that clearly shows advanced facial structures that would either mean quite an advanced mask/sculpture due to the eye mechanisms, a rented/rogue circus gorilla being used to take some pictures at night for no reason other than tell a cool story years later or merely just a Bigfoot checking what's cooking. Although it is funny how similar the thing is to the first image here >>69, either the same mask or the same dude.
The motivation to do all this charade also doesn't seem to make sense, why do all of this if you are not going to make a dime out of it? also why present the story with your full name when you are felon? a pedo felon to top it all off and he didn't even change his name so why seek fame when in theory you should be modest? It doesn't make sense other than someone trying to relieve one of his stories just for the kicks.
And the skeptics mostly claim this is a mask or costume, i doubt the guy made one as it isn't his trade so he probably bought it, if so then what's the commercial origin of it? i'm not saying there isn't a costume like that because i have not searched but these skeptics are just rabid mad to discredit anything without valid counter points and reputation hunting.