New Bigfoot Video From New Mexico?

Posted by: Craig Woolheater on September 29th, 2007

New Mexico Bigfoot Video Still

Picture from video of “Bigfoot”

2 Chattanooga Men Say They May Have Landed “Bigfoot”

Say Hulking Furry Figure Is On Video Shot In Remote New Mexico

Two Chattanoogans say they may have bagged the mythical “Bigfoot”.

Lindsay Lemmon and Austin McGee said after returning from a trip out west, they found that video shot out the window along I-40 in New Mexico has a glimpse of what appears to be a hulking furry figure walking.

Mr. Lemmon, a local contractor who specializes in historic homes, said, “I’m still skeptical, but it does look like a figure to me. If it was a prank, then it was awfully hot and it was out in the middle of nowhere.”

Mr. McGee, who shot the footage, is much more positive. He said, “I believe it whole-heartedly. Every time I look at it on the VCR I see a figure with real long arms hanging below the knees. He is walking and swinging those arms.”

He said a close examination of the figure reveals “a tan round face.”

Mr. Lemmon, who went to Las Vegas for filming of a Discovery Channel show on drag racing, has contacted his CPA and is in the process of getting all rights to the video.

Mr. Austin said he contacted two groups that specialize in Bigfoot lore – one from Atlanta and another from Texas. He said, “They were ready to come to my house right then. They were freaking out. They were trying all sorts of ways to get to see it.”

Mr. Lemmon said they plan to release the video after the copyright is in place.

He said they do not want to release the exact location in New Mexico, though they believe they can pinpoint it from a town sign that is earlier in the video. Also, an old abandoned shack is seen near “Bigfoot”.

Both men said they did not see the figure while they were passing by that spot in remote New Mexico. Mr. Lemmon was driving and Mr. McGee had the camcorder dangling out the window.

Mr. McGee said his sister noticed the figure when she was looking at what he had shot. She said, “Whoa, what’s that?”

Mr. Lemmon said afterwards that Mr. McGee, who works restoring old houses for him, called and exclaimed, “We caught Bigfoot.”

A local technician who transferred the video to a DVD said the figure “could be a horse. But when you see it you think immediately of the famous Patterson video of Bigfoot.”the

Austin McGee and Lindsay Lemmon

Austin McGee and Lindsay Lemmon

Photograph by John Wilson

About Craig Woolheater
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005. I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films: OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.

32 Responses to “New Bigfoot Video From New Mexico?”

  1. Cryptonut responds:

    So, any word on when we will be able to see a more definitive picture or video?? This smells of Johor……but of course I’d always like to think that one day someone will finally bring enough evidence to the table that will support the big guy’s existence


    Is there any place on earth where Bigfoot hasn’t been? I just hope Bigfoot boils his water before drinking it.

  3. Ceroill responds:

    I was about to wonder about the seeming conflict between the location indicated on the picture and the state of New Mexico. Luckily I thought to check, and yes, indeed Las Vegas, New Mexico does exist.

    Aside from that tidbit we have a blurry dark figure in a blurry landscape. Whee.

  4. CrimsonFox79 responds:

    Whatever it is looks very apelike from the picture given. But depending on how tall that grass is, it doesn’t look like a very big creature to me for some reason? Unless the grass is 5-6+ feet tall.
    Looks to me like a chimp.

  5. captiannemo responds:

    It just might be genuine!
    Can’t wait to see the video

  6. MïK responds:

    So Far, it’s the definitive Blobsquatch.

  7. ConstantReader responds:

    I can agree with the “local technician” about the figure possibly being a horse. If you look at the still, picture a very dark horse, facing in your direction, but with its head down to graze.

    The “arm” to the right of the figure could be the left hind leg of the horse.

    I could be way off the mark, but that’s what I see in this still.

  8. cabochris responds:

    I am always taken with people who randomly film from their vehicles. Perhaps I should give it a try? I must be missing something here? Who really wants to view hours of random and shakey countryside?

    But it would be wonderful if this were the real thing! “Ta Daaa!”. Perhaps this is actually a great idea? I live in the Pacific NW- Bigfoot Country, and love the outdoors. Perhaps when I travel the miles of backroads, I should mount multi-directional video cameras on my 4X4? That way should a Bigfoot just happen to bound across the road, he might just become a movie star? Might as well point one up in the sky too, huh?

    Anything is possible, so lets keep our fingers crossed on this one.

  9. bill green responds:

    hey everyone this is a very interesting new article about a possible new mexico sasquatch filmfootage but it needs more research study etc done to the photo & videofootage as well. i like the above opinions as well. good evening. bill green.:)

  10. i am sasquatch responds:

    If it is a horse, it’s an abnormally small one. Maybe a colt? But, yeah it does look reminiscent of a chimp. Looks actually a lot like a bili-ape.

  11. sasquatch responds:

    I’ve purposely had my wife shoot video through the windshield when we’ve traveled in suspected bigfoot country…Because the idea of seeing something and then grabbing camera, setting the pause button to play etc. would be too slow. So we have some extended footage of driving through Southern Colorado mountains- If something was gonna shamble across the road, we were already filming! Now, say something did walk across the highway and we filmed it…The first criticism would be; IT has to be fake because, Who films empty stretches of road just waiting for an animal to show up?” WE DO! Think about the P/G film now; The reason they caught the Sasquatch on film is because they were ALREADY filming stuff for their documentary. Even people that have cameras with them usually don’t have time (or even think) to film something they’re NOT expecting to encounter. You have to pre-emptively assume an encounter to actually document it on film., otherwise the moment comes and goes too fast. Almost all creatures run away (quickly)at human presence. And they almost always see us first, so again we’re at a disadvantage.

  12. jamesrav responds:

    driving on an Interstate at 70 mph, how much terrain gets covered in 1 second, assuming the camera is perpendicular to the direction of travel? 100 feet or so? so they cant have more than a second of footage in ‘that’ direction. It’ll be hard to discern much in 1 second. If the camera was pointed forward thru the windshield maybe they’d have more footage, but it sounds like it was “dangling out the (passenger) window”, so it had to be perpendicular. Sounds like an honest story, probably (as always) there’s a prosaic solution. Is Vegas NM near a mountain range, if this is smack dab in the middle of a desert it’s really not even worth bothering with.

  13. Ceroill responds:

    jamesrav- it’s 102.66666666 feet per second. According to the website for the Las Vegas, NM chamber of commerce it is “Nestled along the foothills of the Sangre de Cristo Mountains”. According to Wikipedia the longitude and lattitude for the town are 35°35′49″N, 105°13′21″W, if that helps any.

  14. harleyb responds:

    Looks real. I think it’s a winner, I want to believe.

  15. sasquatch responds:

    I’ve driven past Las Vegas NM. It is in a hilly, grassy region close to mountains, There is a lot of pinion pine. The area is North-East of Santa Fe close to border, not too far from Trinidad, Colorado.

  16. mystery_man responds:

    MAMMOTHPOOLGHOST- Bigfoot has been seen at some point or other in every state of the Union. I know what you are thinking, “even in Hawaii?”, and I’d have to answer that with apparently yes, even in Hawaii. Go figure. I’m not speaking for the veracity of the claims, just saying that sasquatch have been sighted in every state. Nevada has an incredible amount of open, little explored wilderness. It is so vast that planes have crashed out there whose wrecks have not been found. I don’t know what to say about a Las Vegas Bigfoot, but it’s as good an area as any for something to remain reasonably hidden.

  17. CrimsonFox79 responds:

    Does anyone know the height of those grasses or whatever he is walking through to get a size estimate of whatever the creature is?

    The shape still looks like a chimp to me.

  18. Savage30L responds:

    The still looks like a grazing horse to me, also, but I’ll wait for the film.

  19. CrimsonFox79 responds:

    Birds have probably been seen in every state too. Oh and some kind of deer and squirrel as well.

    Basically, if a creature is seen in more than one area- even every area- doesn’t mean it’s a faked sighting.

    Like rodents, canines, etc. perhaps there isn’t only one type of sasquatch. There can be different variations of a humanoid creature depending on the area it lives in b/c its appearance and structure would need to be ideal for that area (hence why the yetis are white to match their snowy regions like arctic foxes and polar bears) While the bigfoots in wooded areas are brownish to blend in with those areas like brown bears or gray foxes.

    So, like already documented animals, a cryptid can have diverse types that exist in all different areas as well.

    I am sure a lot are staged b/c every state wants its own cryptid. But its very possible that the same unknown creature can be sighted in multiple totally different areas.

  20. Imaginary Friend responds:

    I’m so intrigued by this, but why did they have a camera hanging out the window? It sounds a bit too convenient for the reason the film might be short.

  21. mystery_man responds:

    Crimsonfox79- I see what you are trying to say, but I don’t think it is accurate to compare a large, undocumented, bipedal primate to birds, squirrel, and deer. You are comparing known animals that are seen over a wide range of habitats and comparing them with a large creature that has not yet been verified by science. I would be skeptical that even some undiscovered type of bird or squirrel could be flourishing in every state avoiding discovery right under our noses, let alone a creature as large and as oft sighted as sasquatch. I find the fact that sasquatch have been seen in every state as curious.

    I do think that sasquatch could be out there hidden in the wilderness. I agree that sasquatch could be adaptable and might even be able to survive in a desert habitat. However, I think that it is somewhat unlikely that sasquatch could be so successful as to have spread out to every state and yet remain undiscovered to the degree that it has. I am skeptical of the idea that this large, bipedal creature could be flourishing across the country, being seen by so many people, and yet remain a total mystery to science. I absolutely think that sasquatch could exist, I’m just saying that I doubt it is living in every state, filling every biological niche, and I think that comparing sasquatch to known birds and squirrels is like comparing apples to oranges.

  22. treeclaw responds:

    Alright let’s take a look here. Assuming the so called sas is only 8 ft. The grass next to it appears to tower above the creature at least equal to its height. So we are looking at least 16ft tall grass.
    Let me tell you guys….that’s a lot of grass lol.

  23. dogu4 responds:

    Treeclaw, I don’t think that’s grass in the sense that you mean it. I can’t tell for sure but it’s probably creosote bush, salt brush, tamarisk or any number of other desert adapted shrubs or annuals. Having spent a bit of time in the deserts of the southwest I can believe that the habitat is there for a big predator, but if one’s experience in the southwest is the result of just driving through or spending time in the places where people mostly live, one would mostly see the flatter lower elevation lanscape, a habitat that’s easy to interpret as desolate, probably over grazed and highly impacted by the human activity. Once you travel through the rougher areas up in the higher elevations, you can see where water from rain, snowmelt, and the southwest’s annual summer monsoon rains, in the form of washes and arroyos, small rills, springs or vernal pools are more evident, a diverse community of desert adapted plants come to life in shorter bursts, providing for a surprisingly large population of bigger animals like deer, sheep, feral livestock and of course their predators, all tuned-into the annual cycles of the desert. One can also imagine a predator being nocturnal to avoid the heat and conserve water, like most other animals in the desert are, explaining the relatively infrequent sightings in the open landscapes of the desert.

  24. treeclaw responds:

    dogu4: As always I’d like to keep an open mind. Secretly I am wishing it to be all true. However, I do not wish to be suckered in by another prank.

    At the very least we need to identify the so called giant weeds. Then we can proceed with a few carefull deductions. But it does strike me a bit odd that these creatures seem to turn up just about every corner on this planet. Yet they are extremely difficult to document in spite of their huge lumbering size.

  25. bill green responds:

    hey craig ,loren, everyone i think you all should email the reporter who covered this story about new mexico filmfootage so we all can get details once in for all. this way we can research this vidofootage more properly when it does come available. thanks bill green

  26. things-in-the-woods responds:

    ‘could be a horse’ – says it all…

  27. DWA responds:

    treeclaw sez:

    “But it does strike me a bit odd that these creatures seem to turn up just about every corner on this planet. Yet they are extremely difficult to document in spite of their huge lumbering size.”

    Huge, maybe. Lumbering, most definitely not, if almost all of the eyewitness reports I’ve read mean anything. That they are most definitely not “lumbering” is one of the major factors making them “difficult” to document.

    As to the other factors:

    1. No one will believe you if you say you saw one; so most people don’t bother. They live with what they saw (and in many cases don’t care what anyone else thinks).

    2. They report – when they do, reports probably being only a tiny fraction of actual encounters – usually anonymously, to people who, sometime in the next two years, may get a weekend off from the day job to follow up.

    2. Most people who see them aren’t prepared, in any way, to document. As has been pointed out on this thread: if your camera is not out and running, you are not ready. Think about how many wildlife sightings you have had. On how many of them would you have come back with anything close to documentation, if it had been an animal not confirmed to exist? This obviously excludes animals accustomed to human presence (e.g., bison and elk in Yellowstone).

    3. Qualified observers such as scientists are gambling their future if they even contemplate talking about a sighting.

    Well…etc. I mean, I know all of this has been said here before. (I’ve said all of it myself.) The geographic range of sightings used to be a disqualifier to me. But no one has adequately explained to me – and no one will – how people all over the place, in areas that all sound rather similar in terms of basic habitat requirements, are describing consistent features of the same animal. Every sasquatch report I read reads like a sasquatch; and the more detailed the report, THE MORE IT READS LIKE A SASQUATCH. This incredible fact is given short shrift in sighting discussions. To pass it off, all of it, as even conceivably being hoax, lie, or most incredibly, misidentification or hallucination, is to contradict practically everything we know about human perception. Yet people routinely do it, and get away with it, because they (and we) cannot get to, much less past, their unconscious assumption that THIS JUST CANNOT BE REAL.

    Cows would be unconfirmed if people’s perception blockers operated with cows the way they do with the sasquatch.

    As incredible as it sounds, something far bigger and dumber than this, in far greater numbers, could pull this off – if no one wanted to see one, or to follow up when someone did.

  28. DWA responds:

    And yep I just saw my unusual numbering scheme in the post above. How about 2. and 2a?

    Which gives me the excuse to add something.

    I don’t see – except for two – any videos of alleged sas that so much as raise my eyebrows.

    This still didn’t do that. But close. I’d actually be interested in seeing the video – once all the usual shenanigans die down, if there’s still anything worth seeing by then.

  29. treeclaw responds:

    DWA: I don’t see anything I can dispute along your reasoning. You’ve already admitted many of the so called Sas pics lack veracity. And that’s what I am saying as well. Especially with pictures above. We have a perfectly clear picture of proud but questionable authors of the Sas pic. As for the pic itself it lacks so much information that it just about make it useless. And then there’s all that sensational hype about this stuff being transfered on to dvd ready for production. Anybody care to guess what the price tag will be? Somebody will be laughing all the way to the bank.

  30. species_disqualified responds:

    This is my first post here, though I’ve been reading your posts and following the happenings and subsequent opinions for over a year on Cryptomundo. Most of you seem quite well educated. More so than myself, I suspect 🙂

    There is one thing that strikes me as rather sad, though. I could not begin to assert any knowledge of grasses, regional demographics or primate anatomy that could attest to the validity of this or any other evidence so that handicap probably tends to hinder my skepticism, but…. Most of you seem so…. cynical. I apologize for the lack of a better word but I think if a genuine Bigfoot video were ever published, most of you would not believe it anyway.

    Personally, I want to believe. Even if it means I’d be “suckered” a million times. There seems to be more peace that way 🙂

    Thank you 🙂

  31. Goodfoot responds:

    Sasquatch (may I call you Sassy?), now you know what kind of quality image your wife will get… although filming towards the front would be much better. And Las Vegas, far from being “near the border, is probably at LEAST 150 miles from Trinidad, CO. I live in Taos, about 45 miles from the border, and LV is WAAAY to the SE of here!

    CrimsonFox79, about the “grass”, most of which you see is sagebrush, which generally runs 2-3 feet, but it sometimes gets higher.

  32. TheBigfootRockstar responds:

    I have lived in Las Vegas, NM, USA, for the past 11 years and always feel compelled to add the ‘USA’ designation when referring to my hometown. Why? Because sadly, many uneducated morons don’t realize that NEW MEXICO is a state in these United States of America, nor that we are home to beautiful, majestic mountains like those found in Colorado and other mountainous states. I can only assume that the clown who made the comment about boiling the water was making a reference to old Mexico. Hey, Moron: Try using Google for something else besides searching for porn!

Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest


Creatureplica Fouke Monster Sybilla Irwin


|Top | FarBar|

Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.