POST 34: Investigation Report - Page 5 Referenced Media Statements

The Game and Fish report referenced some of my statements to the media.

Please remember, I was excited to tell people how I caught my record walleye and wanted to provide more details. It is important to recognize my statements to the media were NOT an official statement and included my perception of events. In an official statement, I would be very clear as to what are the facts and what are my beliefs and perceptions. If my words were pulled out of context, it would not provide the full picture of what I was trying to convey.

Interview by Mike McFeely

On the top of Page 5 of the Investigation Report, it referenced my first interview with Mike McFeely with the InForum.

Page 5 of the Investigation Report by Game and Fish referencing the article by McFeely. 

During my interview with McFeely, I stated, "the walleye had wrapped itself in the fishing line and was coming in sideways." What direct evidence did Game and Fish provide to prove my walleye didn't get wrapped in the string as it fought? Because they opened the investigation, it was their duty to prove this didn't happen.

It was never proven my walleye didn't get wrapped in the string as it fought. And, there is no direct evidence to prove my walleye was foul-hooked at the time it was caught and netted.

There was a fresh tear in the mouth of the walleye, string burn on the cheek, and no damage from a hook to the body, back, fins or tail. These facts support the walleye was caught legally, in the mouth.

Podcast with Mike McFeely

The second section on page 5 of the Investigation Report references the podcast I completed with McFeely. See image below:

Page 5 of the Investigation Report by Game and Fish referencing the podcast with McFeely.

My podcast with McFeely lasted nearly 15 minutes. In this podcast, I made several statements about how the walleye "bit" my bait and how I "could feel it tunk the jig" and how it was "mouth hooked, absolutely." I even stated there was a "huge hole in the mouth."

I also made statements about how I "didn't know what was going on" when fighting the fish because "it was fighting so strong." If you have been following my blog the entire time, you may have already seen and heard this, but you can listen to a few clips from this podcast with McFeely here: https://youtu.be/Fs1F48Ybvuw. Or, you can listen to the entire podcast here: https://www.inforum.com/entertainment/podcasts/1009442-McFeely-Mess-podcast-Angler-who-caught-N.D.-record-walleye-was-so-excited-he-couldnt-breathe.

Comparison

If you read what was in the Investigation Report and compare it to what I actually stated in the podcast, the investigator intentionally left out nearly all of my statements which supported my belief the walleye was hooked and caught legally. My statements such as, "They were aggressive. When that fish bit, you could feel it. Very aggressive. You can feel the ‘tunk’ on the jig. It stayed down. Felt the big head shakes. Rolled or flipped in the current…or something. Goes back down. After about 6 or 7 minutes, it finally gave up. Kind of surfaced. Kind of coming in sideways and backwards so I thought for sure I foul-hooked this thing because it was fighting so strong. I couldn’t budge this thing…so thought for sure I foul hooked it…said must have got this by the tail…I don’t know what the heck’s going on. It was mouth hooked, absolutely. I am probably the one starting that rumor when I was reeling it in because it was so hard to reel in. You have the hole in the side of the mouth. When I was looking it over to get it mounted, you can see there is a huge hole in the side his mouth where it had been hooked."

When the investigator took my comments out of context, it did not accurately convey my beliefs and did not provide the entire picture of events. 

Some of my statements made in the podcast were inaccurate. The video evidence documented how the walleye's head remained upstream and was netted with the head upstream. The walleye did not appear sideways or backwards.

I stated several times in the podcast, I "didn't know what was going on." This may be because, I never fought a nearly 17 pound walleye in fast moving water from shore before. I never fought a walleye as it rolled down rapids.

Changes

I spoke on behalf of Gibbs to the media. This was wrong of me to do. I believed at the time of my media statements, Gibbs was more specific about what he stated to me over the phone and in text messages. Lesson learned. I put Gibbs and me in a bad spot by speaking on his behalf. From now on, I will let others speak for themselves and will try to state the facts and only the facts. If there is something I believe, I will make that clear. Gibbs is a good guy and an honest one. I made us look bad, and I'm sorry for that.

It was not my intention to mislead anyone with my text message and statements.

The facts are, if you listen to both my wife's video and the Witness Video, you can hear Gibbs's reaction to the fish being caught. Gibbs asked several times if I was going to get the fish mounted and stated, "you got to get this mounted." In Gibbs's official statement, he stated we "didn't foul-hook any walleye." And stated, the big walleye fought "normal the entire time" and that he "had no doubts." He stated the fish "was staying under" and you "could see the head-shakes." It was "ripping drag" and "fighting like a normal-hooked walleye." He stated the fish was netted with the "head upstream" and that he "never saw it coming in tail first" again repeating it was fighting "like a normal-hooked walleye." He stated, he "didn't see the hook in the fish anywhere as it fought or when it was netted" because he "wasn't looking for the hook." He was just trying to "make his way back to the shore without falling" and had the "net over his shoulder." He said he didn't have to "unwind" any string but also stated he "couldn't see the string because it was dark string." He stated there was a "huge hole in the mouth of the fish" and asked why Game and Fish "didn't do a better job of inspecting it" when they had it. He stated, "Tom's saving the fish for you guys. He wants this to be legit." 

From now on, I will let others speak for themselves and will try harder to clarify my statements.

Back to the Investigation Report, Game and Fish intentionally left out nearly all of my statements which supported my belief the walleye was hooked legally - such as how it bit the hook, how it shook its head, how it flipped in the current or something, how it didn't appear on the surface until it gave up and how there was a hole in the side of the mouth where it had been hooked. Why did the investigator leave these statements out of the report?

Information was intentionally left out of the investigation report to mislead. These kinds of actions need to stop.

After listening to the podcast, I can see why there were questions about the legality of my catch. Lesson learned. When I made my comments to McFeely, I wasn't worried about an investigation or how I thought the fish fought.

The physical condition of the walleye supported it was hooked legally. 

There was no damage from a hook in the back, body, fins or tail of the walleye. There was a fresh tear/hole in the mouth from my hook and string burn on the cheek. The only place my walleye could have been hooked was in the mouth.

This is why I stated, "It was mouth hooked, absolutely."

Why were only some of my statements included in the report? The statements I made which supported my belief the walleye was hooked and caught legally were intentionally left out of the investigation report.

In a court of law, all of my statements would have been considered by a jury - especially my statements about the "huge hole in the mouth where it had been hooked" and "it was mouth hooked, absolutely."

#northdakotaslargestwalleye #volkswalleye #justiceforthelargestwalleye