Missing Sasquatch remains afoot
Nicole Hosack still hasn't had her beloved Bigfoot statue returned to her store, but she knows that a Ford City man has been charged with stealing it.
Joshua E. Duncan, 32, of Ford City waived a theft charge to Armstrong County Court. He is free without bond.
Police said Duncan and others, including two soldiers on leave, on June 16 took the 30-inch Sasquatch from Hosak's Niki's Quick Six store. It's made from a material that makes it look like carved wood.
Police said the Bigfoot was pilfered under one of the culprits' coats as joke.
But it upset Hosak and a large number of her customers.
"Many people visited the store to have their photo taken with it," Hosak said. "We had a couple from Philadelphia divert from their trip to see it."
Bigfoot is worth about $100, but its sentimental value is much greater because it was a gift from her husband.
Police think the statue was taken to a military base in North Carolina.
Hosak said Kiski Township police gave Duncan three weeks to return it without charges being filed.
"At one point I was told they would FedEx it," she said.
That didn't happen. Instead, all she got was an excuse.
"I was told that a foot was broken off and I said, 'OK, give it back anyway.' But he didn't."
Attorney Jim Wray, who is representing Duncan, said an agreement was offered to Duncan "but for some reason it didn't happen."
The theft sparked media attention.
A Bigfoot society sent her a T-shirt. Someone else mailed her another Bigfoot shirt.
Someone from Derry in Westmoreland County sent her a plaster cast of alleged Bigfoot footprints.
"Bud" Barr Jr. of Flat Rock Road, Kiski Township carved her a 6-inch replica out of wood -- little Bigfoot.
She appreciates the concern, but said people still ask about the "little Bigfoot's big brother."
Said Hosak, "We just had a little girl ask her father, 'Daddy, what happened to the big statue?'"
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.