Article content continued

“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.”

jensaltman@postmedia.com

twitter.com/jensaltman

— With files from Glenda Luymes

Related

CLICK HERE to report a typo.

Is there more to this story? We’d like to hear from you about this or any other stories you think we should know about. Email vantips@postmedia.com