Judge reserves decision in sasquatch tracker’s case
The provincial government has asked a B.C. Supreme Court judge to dismiss a sasquatch tracker’s lawsuit alleging the province has breached its stewardship responsibility in relation to the fabled primate, calling the suit frivolous.
“There is no reasonable claim because the claim lacks an air of reality,” said Marina Goodwin, a Ministry of Attorney General articling student, during an appearance in a New Westminster courtroom Tuesday afternoon.
Justice Kenneth Ball, who heard the province’s application to dismiss, has reserved his decision. He will provide it in writing at a later date.
Todd Standing, a sasquatch tracker based in Golden, filed his lawsuit in October, accusing the provincial government of damaging his livelihood and credibility by “non-recognition of sasquatch.”
He asked the court to require a government biologist to accompany him into “known sasquatch habitat” for three months to prove his claims.
The Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development filed a response in January that denied Standing’s version of the alleged facts and denied “that the plaintiff suffered or continues to suffer any loss, damage or expense as alleged in the notice of civil claim.”
In addition to saying the case is frivolous and lacks an air of reality, Goodwin argued in court that Standing has not provided evidence that his rights were violated, and that the court does not have jurisdiction.
“It’s possibly a matter for legislature or executive, but to determine whether or not the province should recognize a species of animal is, with the greatest of respect, not a matter for the courts to decide,” added Goodwin.
Goodwin asked that the entire notice of civil claim be struck, with no leave to amend and with costs.
Standing ’s lawyer, Troy Hunter, said if the case goes to trial, “compelling and substantial” evidence will be presented that will allow a judge to make the determination that sasquatch is an indigenous animal of B.C.
Hunter said protection of wildlife is at the centre of the case, but it also raises a serious constitutional issue: discrimination based on political or other beliefs. He said Standing has been ridiculed for his claims about sasquatch because the province will not back him up.
“This case is not frivolous. There is a substantial question to be tried, and there is a serious purpose involved,” he said.
Hunter said a positive judgment in the case would not only give Standing legitimacy, it would provide the province with means to consider protective legislation for the sasquatch.
“It is insufficient for the province to take the position that sasquatch does not exist, then do nothing about it when the public raises concerns and provides evidence that sasquatch exists,” he said.
He said the fact that a case is weak or unlikely to succeed is no reason to dismiss.
“Dismissing an action at a very preliminary stage can have very serious consequences,” Hunter said.
Although the judge didn’t make a decision, during Hunter’s submissions Ball suggested that the matter was an issue for the executive branch of the provincial government to decide, not the court, and wondered whether there was any instance of a court declaring an animal to be in existence.
Outside court, Standing argued that his case is not frivolous, saying that he has plenty of evidence that sasquatch exists and if he gets to trial he believes he can win.
“It’s far, far beyond a reasonable doubt,” Standing said.
He said his case is on the fringe and has no precedent, and he isn’t sure whether it will proceed.
“There are no primates here. If I’m right, this is the discovery of the millennium and it’s not wasting anybody ’s time” Standing said. “It’s an extremely important issue.”