This interview was conducted by Rob Schiltroth of the Arctic Radio Network on April 26th (or possibly 25th) - before the Current Affair fiasco.


I haven't had tim to double check the transcript - my typing isn't as fast as it could be




RS: Now er Bobby you guys took the videotape down to winnepeg correct?

BC: That’s correct

RS: where did you take it to?

BC: midcamera or someplace like that

RS: Was it specialists looking at it trying to enhance the video?

BC: He took a look at it and he said no he can’t do anything about it

RS: So it’s pretty unclear then?

BC: Yeah

RS: What does the video itself look like then I understand it was across the river and it was pretty early in the morning – 6.30 or so – was it pretty dark?

BC: No, there was a lot of light

RS: Can you describe it in your words what you saw?

BC: What I saw?

RS: Yeah

BC: Just this big dark figures – at first I guess I thought it was a moose standing there, but then it started walking – that’s when I grabbed my camera and recorded it. Pretty big – I figure its pretty big, so I dunno – large, just this large, dark object.

RS: Now Garnett…

BC: My brother

RS: Your brother – he was saying it looked like it could have been just from comparing it to the trees in the background, up to ten feet tall

BC: Yeah, it could be at least ten feet tall yeah

RS: It was pretty apparent it wasn’t walking on four legs it was on two legs

BC: It was on two, yeah

RS: When it walked back into the bush was it sprinting it just kind of er?

BC: Just walking, it was just walking into the bush – nothing fast.

RS: You must have been pretty shaken up when you saw this.

BC: It didn’t really bug me a lot until later that afternoon

RS: When you realised maybe what you had seen…

BC: What? Yeah, after I realised what I might have seen yeah – didn’t really affect me in any way. Not right off the bat, because of my duties at work I guess yeah. Just had to keep on working not to allow it bug me.

RS: I just have to ask you this because there are going to be a lot of sceptics, from what I have heard talking to your wife and your brother it seems pretty genuine, it doesn’t seem like you are trying to pull the wool over anyones eyes, and you are not saying one thing or the other, you are just trying to get some answers yourselves.

BC: Yeah, that’s for sure, yeah – we’re trying to get our own answers too.

RS: I imaging you have been contacted by more than just ourselves, you’ve heard from local newspapers in Winnepeg, and nationals?

BC: Nationally, yes, I’ve had a few phone calls, from California, Florida other places like that.

RS: Have you guys been receiving any offers?

BC: No, nobody’s making any offers, No. Told ‘em I was gonna keep the video and that was that.

RS: So you don’t have any plans to release the video. I’ve been getting a lot of questions, people calling in…….wondering if I knew anything… when the general public will be able to take a look at the video – is that a possibility. Is that something that you guys are just gonna decide on your own time?

BC: Its hard to say right now at the moment er… not really sure when I’ll be able to release it.. the video… as soon as they find out more about it

RS: Do you have more plans about taking the video elsewhere, getting different specialists to take a look at it?

BC: No, we haven’t had any yet, no.

RS: So you didn’t really find out much when you took it down to Winnepeg, they just told you they couldn’t do much with it

BC: The first one we went to there was er. Kinda tinkered with it there… I don’t think that woman even knew what she was doing.

RS: Oh really?

BC: Yeah. She was just some kind of editor or something like that. I’m not really sure. But she kept err talking about this other guy that she er works with I guess. Said maybe he could have done a much better job

RS: When you first got the tape were you kinda hesitant to tell anyone or ask questions?

BC: yeah I was, very, very hesitant to ask anyone about it.

RS: So what made you kinda come out and speak about it

BC: I don’t know – everything happened so fast everything is such a blur so I don’t really know.

RS: When you see something and you don’t know what it is you might be kinda scared to show it and receive some sort of backlash from some people. But from what I have heard you guys have shown the video to quite a few friends and family up in Norway House, and the response has been pretty unanimous, nobody really knows what it is. It doesn’t really seem like a hunter, a moose or a bear.

BC: uhu yeah

RS: what is your personal opinion? Do you put any stock in a mythical thing like a Sasquatch or Bigfoot? Do you think that is a possibility in your mind?

BC: Yes, I think so, yes.

RS: Yeah

BC: It’s um, I don’t think it’s the first time I have seem something like this, it’s the first time I have ever caught something on camera for sure.

RS: And a lot of people were asking why you had the camera with you.

BC: Oh now I just recently bought the camera for my wife at Christmas, and I just decided to take it, because I went out hunting er geese hunting out in the bush here and I taken it, I’ve taking it almost everywhere I go so far – you know, why stop taking it now?

RS: Can I get you to describe the events leading up to it? What you saw.

BC: What I saw. It happened so fast, that morning I can’t even recollect what really happened that morning even now ‘cause its so much pressure.

RS: Yeah

BC: So much media and everything else….

RS: I understand

BC: I’ll tell you what I tell everyone, I gone to work that morning, I went across to pick up a vehicle that showed up on the other side of the river, and I come back and I was outside in the back [unclear] I had an eerie feeling like someone was looking at me or something like that. I had to turn around and look around, then I saw this dark figure across the river, that was standing still there for a while. I see it walk and then er.. that’s when I run for my camera.

RS: And after you grabbed the camera, what did it seem to you notice you across the river?

BC: Probably, yeah – it probably noticed me yeah - why shouldn’t it cause I just went across and back on the ferry – its loud that ferry

RS: and then the animal just kind of walked back into the bush?

BC: it just yeah – just walked back in – that’s the last I saw of it.

RS: Pretty much a tall dark hairy figure – that’s what you saw?

BC: Yeah – very tall

RS: But either way it sounds like pretty fantastic footage of this animal…. Would you mind if we kept in contact with you.. if you find anything else, if we can just get updates from you?

BC: Yeah, sure – that won’t be a problem

RS: Okay

BC: It’s just a lot of people, phoning and err wanting interviews, and people asking me to send them the original video, saying they will do this editing and saying they will enlarge it up for free.

RS: Eventually you think you might take this video somewhere else and get more answers

BC: I’ll probably do that, as long as I get more money I don’t want anyone else’s money I guess you could say.

END



You can download the interview yourself if you prefer

From Scotto's telephone interview with Garnett Clark on April 20th:



Then Bobby's words in this interview on April 25th or 26th:



You would think that in 5 or 6 days they could have gotten their story straight. I'd say at least one of the Clark brothers is full of shit.

I was hoping someone other than me would spot that

This interview has all been posted before.

Regarding your point, consider this. Suppose I get a brand new car and I tell my brother that I absolutely love the thing. Someone asks why I drive it, and he tells them "because he loves the car". Then someone else asks me why I was driving the car and i said "To go to work". Why in the hell would I list every single reason that I'm driving the car? I wouldn't, just like Clarke didn't make out a massive list of reasons why he had the camera once he was asked. The most obvious thing probably came to mind and so he said that. Did you want him to say he had it in case bigfoot showed up? Then ya'll would be even more on his case.

I swear if Clarke ties his shoes wrong, then you guys will start a thread about it.

Not the same....
When you are around the area of bigfoot more, then you will
understand why i's must be dotted and t's crossed. And why analogies such as the one
you have stated don't work here. If any story is true...it wouldn't vary at all.


Belle

Driving a car can be done everyday & for many different reasons, so can a video camera but in Bobby Clark's case he said he was checking out very unusual screams which would NOT be a common thing especially if you grew up as a hunter familiar with the sounds of wildlife in your area & then after coming out of the toilet he said that he saw something that wasn't right on the TV program "A Current Affair". Filmed what he claimed was a Bigfoot. Now trying to video tape what was making those unusual screams & a Bigfoot is NOT in anyway a common happening that you would forget. Any other answer would in no way make sense, cause he specifically brought the camera for one purpose according to his story to find out what was making those unusual screams. He claimed the experiece shook him up, if it did why would he say he was just out hunting. Sorry, this is NOT nit picking.

Did Bobby say he had the camera because he was hearing screams or did his brother? If the main reason he had a camera was because he bought it recently for his wife and took it with him everywhere....for work to scope out hunting areas..it does not mean that on that day or days prior he also heard things he couldn't explain and thought the camera might come in handy again for that.
If any variation in a story makes it untrue then the P/G film would fail the same test.
I do not know if Bobby Clarke is unsure what he saw or is down right lying but the reason he said he had a camera THAT DAY is not all that important to me. He had a camera with him and he used it. If it was a real bigfoot and he just messed up the zoom he still has gotten closer to getting one on tape then anyone else recently. If it was a hoax it was awful becasue the blur is so inconclusive it serves no purpose at all. Don't forget this guy got called by local news, friends, people on this board and US news media. You don't always say the same thing the same exact way. the rest of what he says he saw, the details, from what I have seen have not changed that much....I could be wrong

You can HEAR the whole interview here.

I listened to this on my local radio station when it came out on April 26th.

Rob Schiltroth`s exclusive interview with Bobby Clarke.

Actually it would depend on WHY he's tying his shoes, and if he heard them squeek the week before or just wanted to keep from tripping.

I agree...... I think this guy has most likely filmed a sasquatch......it's just too bad the footage wasn't more clear. If it were clear pristine footage, would everyone still be arguing? I guess probably....... He's been spoken to by so many people in the last few weeks he's probably exhausted and stressed out. Just because he didn't say exactly the same thing verbatim to this interviewer doesn't mean he's lying.

I'm willing to cut him some slack......just my gut feeling on the whole thing......

I think alot of people are bitter and hurt that the footage was so blurry so they half to try and pick BC apart over every little thing....that is so sad its pathetic. I still lean toward it being a Sasquatch. Like everyone else I was very disapointed. But that does not give me a reason to cut BC down over every little detail. Question him, check out the details, research, absolutley. But people in this forum have burned him at the stake and labled him a lier and a hoaxer. :blacknblue: Right know all we know for sure is that hes guilty of being a lousy camera man. Until we have facts proving he hoaxed it then we should lay off the man.

I'm not aware that this interview has been transcribed elsewhere on the forum?

Where is the thread?

This link is already in my original post.

Paul, it's buried deep inside that thread that had 1,771 replies. I missed it also, but searched and found it yesterday. Imagine that, missing something in THAT thread!

This would be the thread that Human 84 was complaining was too long, and that no-one could find anything in it? Just before he complains about this transcript being posted in a different thread?

That's the one.

The guy has to bitch about something...Get used to it!