Missing 411 lacks serious fact checking, contains misrepresentations of data, contradictions, and makes assumptions and draws outlandish conclusions through the use of cherry-picking facts from news articles. some of the cases contain all of these elements. This leads the reader attempting to distinguish the facts over fiction. I completely discount adults in both of his books, as they go missing all the time and why is only known to them. I was familiar with a few of the disappearances in the book. These include the Martin case in Tennessee, along with the Jay Toney case as an example of Paulides' flawed investigative methodology and model. I was also familiar with the Jamison's in Oklahoma, and the Michelle Vanek case in Colorado. I was somewhat familiar with the Thomas Bowman and Bruce Kerman cases in California. The Brennan Hawkins disappearance I looked into while scrutinizing the Vanek case in Colorado. I tried to be brief and where I could, noted sources for my claims. Paulides did source some of his cases, but that was the exception and not the rule. He also didn't annotate how he came by the information he presented, just the generalization of news reports, FOIA and interviews. I do find it noteworthy that Paulides went out of his way to tell me that he "put feet on the ground" and investigated all of these cases
The Martin case was disturbing on all levels. I am not diminishing the loss to the family of Dennis in anyway! Paulides failed to mention certain aspects of the case that misrepresents the data that is noteworthy and germane to the possible explanation as to his disappearance. I am not advocating that this is what happened; however, failing to mention this is a detraction that would give the reader the full picture, rather than the picture Paulides is trying to paint.
There were and still are old abandoned mines in this area. Prior to the parks opening mines were operated illegally a century ago. Paulides however in no uncertain and absolute terms informed me that ALL the mines were closed years prior to the Martin Case! The mine issue was brought to my attention by a geologist years ago. I don't recall him (Paulides) mentioning the mine issue in his narrative. I find this lack of inclusion distressing for a few reasons. If Paulides "put feet on the ground" and "investigated" this fact would have manifested. Secondly, if he did investigate this and failed to include it in his narrative then it goes to manipulating the data in an effort to shoehorn this case to make it part of his cluster. I am sure that the Tennessee department of mines did a great job of sealing the mines they knew of, but to absolutely state that ALL were closed is presumptuous at best and asinine at worse! A cursory search of the key words mines, Smoky National park resulted in quite a few results.
Secondly Dennis was a special needs child. To that end he could have hidden from searchers and succumbed to hypothermia or fallen into a shaft along with the other speculations as to what happened to him. I did find a news article on line that related a hunter who had found bones years after the Martin disappearance. Paulides was quick to remind me not to believe everything you read on the internet. I agree. This statement shows the level of contradiction and hypocrisy on his part by the assertion that the "documents he used to support the stories in these books were found through exhaustive searches of various periodicals' archives". So are we to believe that Paulides used a different source, from a different internet perhaps?
Another perplexing issue was Dwight's McCarters statement that there were wild men who lived in the park and were known to commit crimes. I found the lack of follow up investigation by Paulides as to what Ranger McCarter meant was seriously lacking any integrity or journalistic credibility, for example, did the park service attempt to go after these "wild men", and why were they allowed to remain in the park committing crimes? Then again this might have been a case of never stepping foot in the park or actually speaking with anyone. I have no idea what happened to Dennis, however, if left to the Author he would have you believe that there was only one explanation. On an ancillary note, if Missing 411 is truly about missing people I find it disingenuous that they are sold from Paulides' North American Bigfoot Search website and not his CamAm site.
SOURCE(S)
* Great Smoky Mountains National Park Geologic Resource Evaluation Report 2008
* March 20 2012 article on CBS News online.
* Article by Jim Balloch of the Knownews.com dated June 2009
Jay Toney was a diabetic who went missing in the Smokies and was found a day later 8 miles from where he was last seen. He was found on a bank near a creek wearing only a tank top and one shoe. He was eventually transported to a hospital, received medical attention and survived. Toney was quoted in the book that he wanted out of the Smokies! I found a few articles regarding Jay Toney. One wrote about him wearing pants contrary to what Paulides writes, the other didn't stipulate. BOTH articles quote Jay as being found at the same distance, 4 miles from where he was last observed.
According to Sarasota Harold Tribune article Jay was found by tracking dogs and handlers. They found a footprint near the stream and tracked the youth 4 miles in rugged territory until they saw a tennis shoe and a flattened spot in the grass. The article goes on to state that they had to transport him 8 Miles to Elkmont Campground then to park headquarters where he could be taken by helicopter to a hospital.
Paulides cherry picked this case as well, using both articles, choosing which facts to add for sensationalism. It's quite clear that he used the 8 miles it took to transport Jay as a linear distance he was found, not the 4 miles as reported; this is just utterly inconceivable and outright disingenuous! How can someone who claims they spent over 7000 hours investigating cases miss this? I don't think he missed it at all; he used what was good and cobbled the rest to make you think this was part of a cluster. There was nothing sinister or mysterious about Jay's disappearance. He became disoriented, lost his bearing and became lost, due to his weakened condition and lack of insulin, just exasperated the situation.
SOURCE(S):
* Sarasota Harold-Tribune May 28, 1982
* Ocala Star Banner Article 5B dated May 28, 1982
The Jamison case that he writes about is nothing more than purposely deceitful sensationalism augmented by cherry picking facts. There are many references to this disappearance throughout the internet. The Science channel's news program "Investigation ID" produced a documentary named "Paradise Lost" that showcased this families' mysterious disappearance. Paulides relates pertinent facts wrong and leaves out a whole host of others that could go to explaining what could have possibly happened. Paulides asserts as fact:
* 32,000 dollars was found under the front seat.
* Family dog was in the left inside the shell of their truck
* Picture of the daughter was found on a camera.
* No cell phone reception in the area
* Family was with a realtor looking at property.
What Paulides either missed or refused to print were the following facts, as outlined by Deputy Sheriff Israel Beauchamp on the Investigation ID documentary.
* 32,000 dollars was found under the back seat, hidden under a tool box.
* Family dog was inside the truck. It was a GMC with four doors, with an open bed.
* Picture of the daughter was found on a cell phone.
* Numerous calls were placed the day they disappeared.
* They met with a realtor the previous day, for GPS coordinates to the land.
Facts pertinent to the case that were cherry picked by Paulides as reported by Sheriff Beauchamp are as follows:
* 32,000 dollars was part of an accident settlement. The total was 100,000.00
* Sherilyn forced a live-in handy man off the property at gun point after he made threatening comments to Sherilyn
* The Handy-man was a white supremacist.
* Bobbie Jr. wasn't working due to a car accident.
* Jamison's installed a video surveillance system at their home for protection.
* Bobbie filed a suit against his Father over an agreement they had regarding a gas station the Bobbie Jr. worked at (for no wages).
* Sherilyn had a son that went to live with his Biological Father, taking any child support with him.
* Deputy Sheriff Beauchamp asserted that Bobbie and Sherilyn were living above their means
* Both Bobbie and Sherilyn were acting strange weeks before. They were seeing sprits and asking what kinds of bullets could kill them.
* Deputy Sheriff Beauchamp watched the surveillance video and related that for 20 minutes they made numerous trips back and forth to the truck not carrying anything. The only thing he saw was a brown satchel bag that was never recovered from the truck
* Deputy Sheriff Beauchamp was under the impression based on the video and the 20 minutes of erratic aimless walking back and forth, they were under the influence of drugs.
There are a number of potential explanations as to their disappearance, other than the one Paulides points towards.
I can reasonably say that properties that contain wells, abandoned or otherwise, generally are owned by the oil and gas companies that placed them there. Any sales of the land if at all would be a paperwork fiasco that would include EPA impact statements, title searches and other legal wrangling that wouldn't be conducted in a day and certainly not in cash. The same issue would go for a private sale of any properties that contained hydrocarbon bearing wells. Additionally, this meeting was arranged through Craigslist, and it was a known fact that both the Jamison's carried large sums of cash. I don't think it would be a stretch to infer that the Jamison's could have been the victims of a robbery scenario.
If Paulides conducted legitimate research on this case he would have uncovered the fact that both Bobbie and Sherilyn were unemployed, and living well above their means, and according to Israel Beauchamp "scammers". Who's to say that the handy man who was forced off the property at gun point didn't arrange for this meeting? He certainly knew of the LARGE settlement they received, and had a motive. It doesn't require a mystical imagination to potentially say that this could have been a scenario. Maybe they were lured there only to be taken to another location, relieved of their money and their lives and the truck taken back to the spot it was found. The brown satchel that was observed being placed in the truck the day they left was NEVER recovered. Could it have contained money and the remainder hidden under the back seat never found until they turned up missing?
I certainly don't know what happened to them and I find it absurd to say simply that they were abducted, the inference by the author is that were abducted by Bigfoot! That's simply incredible! How many Bigfoot's did it take, David?
It's also absurd that Paulides' spent three years that totaled some 7,000 hours of research and couldn't competently search or make the potential connections I have. How does someone legitimately research and fail to gather all the information that shows up for a case with a high profile such as this?
Finally, where did Paulides acquire the information he reported? The Latimer county Sheriff's office is the point of contact for this case. This is not a federal agency and as such is not subject to the FOIA. If he "put feet on the ground" who did he talk to, and how did he misrepresent the information presented in the documentary and ALL the information (which is consistent) available on line? Did he get it right and intentionally mislead the reader as to shoehorn this case as well, cherry picking facts to make his idea fit the theory?
SOURCE(S):
* Investigation ID documentary "Paradise lost"
* Google search subject and tag line Jamison, Missing in Oklahoma.
They're calling this guy "The Illuminati Whistleblower" 
