This post is one of the most important and significant posts of my blog. I'm going to provide direct evidence suggesting the only witness who officially spoke out against my walleye provided false or inaccurate statements to the investigator.
Matthew Knuth
Matthew Knuth was the only witness who provided an official statement believing my walleye was foul-hooked. Knuth did this through three separate statements. He admitted he was't sure the walleye was foul-hooked and "never saw the hook" on the walleye, but "later put 2-and-2 together" and believed in part the walleye was "snagged in the tail" because it "didn't fight quite right."Knuth's Arrival at the Heart River
Knuth arrived at the Heart River at 2:45pm which was less than nine minutes before I started fighting my record walleye.The time he arrived was verified by images and his own official statement to the investigator. Knuth was standing upstream from where I was fishing (approximately 40 feet from where I first started fighting the record walleye and nearly 200 feet from where it was netted).
Knuth's 1st Statement: Email to Game and Fish
Knuth sent an email to Game and Fish at 9:59pm on April 21st. Knuth's email read, "I was two guys down from the record that was caught and it was being pulled in by the tail when she would come to the surface. His buddy said the hook came off in the net and it was wrapped in the line but I'm positive it was a snagged I seen a lot of fish snagged out their and the snagged all came to the top and we're dragged in from the side and tail and this fish came in from the tail and didn't really fight as much as you would of though a fish that size would of."- Knuth wrote, "I seen a lot of fish snagged out their..."
- Knuth wrote, "this fish came in from the tail."
- Knuth stated the walleye "didn't really fight as much as you would of though a fish that size would of."
What direct evidence did Knuth provide to corroborate his statements?
Many people often describe big walleyes fight like a “log” as they are being reeled in. In fact, those are the exact words Neil Leier used to describe how his record walleye fought: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/05/23/whopper-walleye-breaks-north-dakota-longest-standing-fish-record. Leier stated, "It hit, and it hit hard, but it didn't fight a lot. Took me about a minute to bring it in. It just drug in like a log."
Knuth's 2nd Statement: Voice Message to Game and Fish
If you read the investigation report by Game and Fish, it referenced only two individual statements made by Knuth (an email and phone interview). Here is Knuth's voice message he left for Game and Fish which was intentionally left out of their Investigation Report: https://youtu.be/YDSs0F020Ww.- In summary, this is what he stated, “I’m almost like 100% positive it was snagged in the tail. They were snagging fish all day. I didn’t put 2-and-2 together until later that day. I’m 100…like 99.5% sure it was snagged. The North Dakota state’s record probably shouldn’t be a record…so, I don’t know...”
Knuth stated, "They were snagging fish all day." Who is "they?"
Knuth arrived at 2:45pm. I landed the record walleye at 3:00pm. I left the river by 3:04pm.
Knuth himself made statements which implied he wasn't sure my record walleye was foul-hooked and implied reasonable doubt. He stated, "almost positive, 99.5% sure, didn't put 2-and-2 together until later, probably and I don't know." Someone should not have to put "2-and-2 together later that day." A person should either know or not know what occurred at the time.
If you want to provide a witness statement during an investigation, you better be 100% certain of what you witnessed - not 99.5%.
I suffered damages because of false statements and false perceptions.
Game and Fish had this recording and intentionally left it out of their Investigation Report. Why? Is it because the only official witness who spoke out against my walleye wasn't sure it was foul-hooked? Did Knuth's statements in his voice message impact his credibility as a witness?
Knuth's 3rd Statement: Call with Game and Fish Investigator
Knuth's final statement was over the phone with Scott Winkelman the lead investigator for Game and Fish. Here is the recording to his entire statement: https://youtu.be/FRH3sFjwhPA. I have summarized a few points from his statement and put together a couple of sound clips below:- Knuth stated, “I seen him unhook a couple fish…he let his kids reel in a couple little fish…and they bring in the fish…and the hook would be in the back fin…or center of the fish…I seen em pull two fish in before that which were 2 pounds…4 pounds and they both had the hook in the top fin...the fish aren't biting at 3 o'clock...” Here is a sound clip of him saying some of these things: https://youtu.be/DcUZMCUJN48.
The two walleye Knuth referenced as "hooked in the back fin" were hooked in the mouth verified by photo evidence with Knuth standing in the background.
 |
| Screenshot of the photo taken of my son holding up a walleye hooked in the mouth with witness Knuth in the background in red. The timestamp on the picture proves it was taken at 2:49pm. |
 |
| Closeup image proving the hook was in the mouth contradicting what Knuth stated. |
 |
| Screenshot of the photo taken of my kids holding up two walleye hooked in the mouth. The timestamp on the picture proves it was taken at 2:49pm. |
 |
| Closeup image of the walleye my daughter reeled in proving the hook was in the mouth which contradicts what Knuth stated. |
Knuth's Statements about the Record Walleye
Knuth stated, "I didn't see exactly where the hook was at on the fish but I seen em pull two fish in before that which were 2 pounds…4 pounds and both had the hook in the top fin."
Knuth stated, "I didn't see exactly where the hook was at on the fish but I seen em pull two fish in before that which were 2 pounds…4 pounds and both had the hook in the top fin."
Knuth admitted he didn't see the hook in the big walleye, but based part of his conclusion my walleye was foul-hooked on his false perception of the two walleye we caught before that. The two walleye he stated were foul-hooked when they were actually hooked in the mouth.Considering Knuth did not see the hook in my record walleye and stated he believed it to be foul-hooked because it "didn't fight quite right," let's take a look at what Knuth stated about how my walleye fought:
- Knuth stated, "...didn’t hear the rod zinging out…fish acted like a log…could see no head shake in the rod...no head fight.” Again, here is a video of the record walleye fighting: https://youtu.be/7d1njtAZtlg.
- Knuth stated, “…fish was netted it was head downstream…tail towards the rod…being pulled backwards...had a good visual.” Again, here is a video of the walleye being netted: https://youtu.be/gtqJLYUIgQ0.
Knuth based part of his conclusion my record walleye was foul-hooked based on the way he perceived the walleye was fighting.
Knuth’s perceptions were wrong.
Video evidence proves the rod showed head-shakes and the walleye pulled drag, stayed underwater, fought with the head upstream, and was netted with the head upstream.
Knuth stated, "The guy who netted the fish was out on the sandbar but I had a good visual."
Considering Knuth's false perceptions and statements made earlier, did he really have a "good visual?" The image below was taken at a distance of 140 feet after the walleye was netted.
Knuth was upstream from my wife at an estimated 60 feet further from where the image below was taken placing Knuth at approximately 200 feet away at the time the walleye was netted.Did he really have a good visual considering he was standing 60 feet further away from where the image below was taken?
 |
| Image taken of my walleye being netted on the peninsula at a distance of 140 feet. |
If Gibbs didn't have a good visual when he netted the walleye, and I didn't have a good visual standing within 90 feet of the walleye, how could Knuth have a good visual at over 200 feet away?
Knuth admitted he didn't know what was going on.
Knuth admitted several times he didn't know what was going on and stated, "I didn't put 2-and-2 together until later." Let's see what his perceptions were which lead him to put 2-and-2 together:- Knuth stated, "I didn't really know what was going on...everybody was excited and all hyped."
- Knuth stated, "I'm thinking it got snagged...didn't see the hook...but thinking it was in the tail end of the body."
- Knuth stated, "I didn't put 2-and-2 together until later..."
- Knuth stated, "The fish aren't biting at 3 o'clock..."
- Knuth stated, "I should have grabbed the net and ran over and netted it...that way I would have felt better about myself."
- Knuth stated, “people on the side bank…they were booing him…never heard so many people boo a guy…they were just ‘BOO BOO LET IT GO! LET IT GO’…the crowd went ecstatic booing him…were booing the fish like crazy…people on the bank were booing him saying let it go.” Here is a sound clip from Knuth's official statement about booing: https://youtu.be/gUBBSQTtb7g.
If my big walleye would have been caught and hooked in the tail, the taxidermist would have been able to find a hole in that area. There would have been some damage. Instead, the taxidermist report confirmed what I had been saying all along, there was no hole or damage from a hook in the tail, body, fins or back.If a witness admits to the investigator they really didn't know what was going on and had to later put 2-and-2 together, how credible is that witness? Should this witness even be providing a statement to law enforcement during an investigation after admitting these things?
Knuth contradicted himself.
Not only did Knuth provide false statements based on false perceptions, but he contradicted himself numerous times throughout his statements. Here was just one example:- Knuth stated, "Everyone was like Boo. Boo. Let it go. Let it go. You know. I was like, why? I was like...he just caught this massive fish. This is just such a...such a epic moment for this guy. He's with his family and he's all happy...but everyone else and me, we didn't quite know what was going on..." Again, here is the recording from above where he made these statements: https://youtu.be/gUBBSQTtb7g.
Knuth admitted he didn't know why people were saying "Boo. Let it go."
Knuth admitted to the investigator I "caught this massive fish" and it was such an "epic moment" and how he "didn't know what was going on."
Considering what Knuth just stated, how could Game and Fish use any part of Knuth's witness statements against me? Knuth admitted I caught the fish, it was an epic moment and that he didn't know what was going on.
Before a witness provides any kind of a statement against someone else during an investigation they need to be 100% certain of what they witnessed and should never have to put 2-and-2 together later. Again, I suffered damages because of Knuth's false statements and false perceptions.
Knuth appeared upset and jealous.
Why did Knuth make his false statements? Was it maybe because he was jealous? Was he upset because I was fishing in the spot before he got there and was catching more fish than he was? Was he upset I didn't release the record walleye because it was full of eggs? Listen to what he says in his official statement: https://youtu.be/xxZWS4ZRHPk.- Knuth stated, "I kept seeing all these fish come in...I only got about four out of there."
- Knuth stated, "I didn't really know what was going on...everybody was excited and all hyped...I didn't know how people were reeling in all those fish."
- Knuth stated, "I should have grabbed the net and ran over and netted it...that way I would have felt better about myself."
- Knuth stated,"To me it wasn't caught right...I was like...I get kinda emotional about it...it shouldn't be counted...you going to cone off the area?"
- Knuth stated, "We've been applauding these guys that have been letting them go."
- Knuth stated, "I'm seeing multiple snags on these fish...having chunks taken out of them...and they are getting hurt...they don't want to live anymore...they're not swimming away...thought the area should be coned off."
- Knuth stated, "I want to feel decent about myself...I don't want to feel like man, I snagged a bunch of fish and it wasn't really actually fishing...it was just kinda like shooting fish in a barrel..."
Have jealousy and false statements been an issue for Game and Fish in the past? Let's listen to what the director of Game and Fish stated about jealousy: https://youtu.be/gieQdBFJk7A.
The Director of Game and Fish admitted in short people always make false claims.
The Director of Game and Fish admitted in short people always make false claims.
If jealousy and false claims have "always" been an issue, why wasn't there a better process used to verify my record fish documenting the hole in the mouth?Why wasn't a better investigation conducted and more people interviewed? Why wan't I considered innocent until proven guilty? Why did Game and Fish side with the false statements made by Knuth without having any physical, direct evidence to support the false claims? Why didn't Game and Fish use the evidence they did have in their possession to prove the claims false, like the image of my son holding up the walleye with the hook still in the mouth...or the Witness Video showing how the fish flopped in the net and how there wasn't anyone booing? Why didn't Game and Fish review their own images and videos showing there was no damage to the body, back or tail of the walleye?
What evidence did Knuth provide?
What direct evidence did Knuth provide to Game and Fish to corroborate his statements proving beyond reasonable doubt my walleye was foul-hooked?
Did he provide any pictures or videos documenting where the hook was located prior to my fish being caught? Did he provide any evidence proving my walleye didn't get wrapped in the string as it fought?
I suffered damages to my reputation because of Knuth's false statements and false perceptions. Did Knuth commit Criminal Defamation or False Information? Can I file a suit against Knuth for what occurred to me and seek damages?
Changes
To the people who provide statements during an investigation, if you witness something you are unsure of and you have to put "2-and-2 together later," it is best NOT to provide any kind of a statement during an investigation especially if you have a previous record of providing false statements during an investigation. Providing false and inaccurate statements during an investigation is a crime. And as you can see, your statements will be used against someone causing damages.
Providing false statements during an investigation is illegal and can open you up for a lawsuit. You need to be sure of what you witnessed before providing a statement against someone.
The Director himself stated, "anytime a big fish is caught, you hear that all the time...there is always someone who says they did it wrong, they did it illegally." If this happens all the time, why wasn't there a better process in place to verify my walleye? Why wasn't there a better process in place to provide transparency and confidence to the citizens? Game and Fish has done little to nothing to solve or prevent jealousy and false claims.
Game and Fish stated jealousy, rumors and false claims have always been an issue yet, they have done nothing to prevent them.
One change Game and Fish could make would be to create and implement a robust procedure for verifying record fish.This process could include documenting any damage to the fish. It could include images and videos released to the public. It could include a hook location and verification process. It could include witness statements and a public report. The public has very little confidence in how records are verified because of how things have been handled in the past. Anyone who catches a potential record fish will continue to go through what I went through until things changes. This is why I will NOT be submitting any more fish for a record - although a part of me would love to see how social media would light up after that!
Game and Fish needs to create and implement a procedure to verify record fish.
False claims and rumors will continue to be a problem until Game and Fish starts citing individuals for providing false statements during an investigation.There is direct evidence proving the only witness who officially spoke out against my walleye provided false and inaccurate statements to the investigator. Game and Fish pointed out in a response how the state law provides protections for witnesses who provide false statements during an investigation by including the word "knowingly" yet, it is not included in Game and Fish's regulations to protect the angler. I asked them specifically to change the regulation on keeping a foul-hooked fish to state, "It is a noncriminal offense to knowingly keep a foul-hooked fish." When I asked for this simple change which reflects state law, they refused to make the change. Why is this so important? Because there are protections in place for witnesses who provide false statements but NO protections in place for someone who is falsely accused and can't prove their innocence. This is why it is so important to make this change. It gives the benefit of the doubt to the angler and supports the principle of "innocent until proven guilty."
The word knowingly needs to be included in the regulation to protect the angler.Game and Fish had a lot of evidence in their possession which could have been used to prove Knuth's statements as false. Why was this not done? Why were the false statements by Knuth not removed from the investigation report before it was published by the media?
It is illegal for a state agency to publish inaccurate and false statements in a report to mislead.
False statements published with blatant disregard to the truth is the definition of Criminal Defamation. These actions by Game and Fish need to stop.
Is this blog making more sense to you now? My blog was NOT created to get you or anyone on my side about how my walleye was caught. It was NOT created as a way to put more attention on myself. It was created to point out areas for improvement so this doesn't happen to you or anyone else! Game and Fish is a public agency created by the people for the people. It is time we we demand some oversight and changes.
Is this blog making more sense to you now? My blog was NOT created to get you or anyone on my side about how my walleye was caught. It was NOT created as a way to put more attention on myself. It was created to point out areas for improvement so this doesn't happen to you or anyone else! Game and Fish is a public agency created by the people for the people. It is time we we demand some oversight and changes.
#northdakotaslargestwalleye #volkswalleye #justiceforthelargestwalleye
Comments
Post a Comment