Christina Pampalone: Releases New Pictures.

Christina Pampalone of East Northport has released new pictures of the Montauk Monster. She was kind enough to release two new pictures for Finally, new pictures have emerged. This is the tip of the iceberg and a exclusive.

This picture below is new, has not been seen before, and will hit the media tomorrow.

montauk monster

Below is a close-up of the Montauk Monster. This photo has also never been seen before.

montauk monster

This picture is the original picture taken by Christina Pampalone

montauk monster

Tags: , , , , , ,

73 Responses to “Christina Pampalone: Releases New Pictures.”

  1. Oh come on... says:

    As if those are photos… /rolls eyes

  2. I says:

    looks like a dead boar

  3. derek says:

    I think you’ll find it’s a dog. No question there.

  4. Mimmi says:

    Its a dog. Propably a amstaff or a pitbull. The decomposed nose and the angle of the first picture tricked people to believe it was some kind of unknown sea-creature.

  5. Darren Terry says:

    It’s just a bloated raccoon with part of it’s snout missing along with hair.

  6. robot says:

    the blue ones were taken before the red skinned ones you should point that old in ur post

  7. I’m almost convinced this is a hoax.
    Look at the evidence:

    Very few pictures. If this were real, wouldn’t there be hundreds of pictures taken? I mean, seriously, even with my crappy cell phone camera I take 5 of 6 pictures of the same thing; and if I ever ran across a dead animal that seemingly no-one else had ever seen… Yeah, I’d be snapping them left and right until the memory card was full.

    Quality of the photos. These two major photos, one showing this “monsters” on it’s left side and on it’s right, are all pretty high quality. What are the chances someone is going to have a high quality camera that can take that kind of an exposure on a beach? However, with that said, I’m not made of money and would never take an $800.00 camera to the beach and expose it to sand and salt air..

    The “thing” in the photo is dead. Where are the flies? Seriously, if this thing was decomposing and rotting with a horrible smell in the sun as the eye-witnesses have said, where are the flies or other carrion feasting bugs? I see a couple of flies, but surely there would be swarms of them right?

    Maybe I could snap some photos of a dead human and pass it off as a real legitimate zombie?

    Just my 2 cents,

    -Brian Hardin II

  8. Jennifer says:

    I do agree the first picture was very misleading. I am glad the other pictures were released. It most likely is a boar or may even be a rakali, an Australian water rat. Or a dog like someone else mentioned,

    The whole beak idea is silly. the carcass is decomposing. All in all it is sad to see any creature in that state.

    Hopefully, it has nothing to do with the Plum Island Animal testing site which is up that way.

  9. shannon says:

    Clearly this is a decomposing dog that is bloated from being in the water and has had some sort of trauma to it’s nose. Anyone who says that it is a shell-less turtle needs to look a little closer at the pics that clearly show FUR!

  10. Uh-hellooooo says:

    Sorry to burst your bubble, it’s a dog! No doubt about it.

  11. Jeremy says:

    Sorry, the lighting is all wrong for these pictures to be real. Besides, if they are real, it’s just a dog and not very cool at all. The first pictures looked much more real. And really creepy.

  12. Holly Depappe says:

    Its a dog. If the stories re. the boat fire a few weeks prior to this are true, then it makes perfect sense. It would be bloated from the water, most of it hair is gone due to the fire. Look at its ears! Its a dog.

  13. Casey says:

    Just a little note to zombiemall’s comment, I’d like to know if you have taken photography in college. If yes, I’d then like to ask what lowest pixel points you think could have caught these “high quality” photos. My little 5.0 pixel camera isn’t spectacular but it’s caught some decent photos. A 6.1 nikon (model, D40) is not the best camera, either. But when I view photos off my brother’s 6.1 nikon, the quality looks much better than the above “high quality” photos.
    Now, it’s possible that he may have spent $800 Canadian or more, I don’t know. But for real high quality, you want the best. That can tally up to $5000+ Canadian simply for a good nikon. THAT would be a camera you may like to keep off the beaches.
    I have no trouble whatsoever to think that people around a beach may have seen an animal they may, or may not, have initially recognized and pulled out a camera as they approached it. In fact, I would ask them to make sure to get photos. If it was clearly a murdered dog for instance, you would like to get proof in case they can find and charge someone for a criminal act. And while I am positive a lot of people would simply use their camera phones, there are people who may want to bring out a superior camera to catch something that really sparks an interest. And when it involves an ‘unknown’ creature, one that might indeed be proven to be a new species… I don’t know about you, but I’d like to have a decent photo of the discovery.
    Another reason you may find a high quality camera on a beach for any reason is that a lot of people paying “$800” for a camera are usually paying with money they spent comfortably. They may not care about repairs as quickly as you or I may worry about it. And I’d even bet you’d find a high quality camera along that beach because it is, in fact, a beach, and it is, in fact, tourist season. And commonly, tourists often capture vacation memories on more meaningful quality cameras, not cell phones.

  14. Brittany V. says:

    It looks like a baby wild boar to me.

  15. LX says:

    the pics arent of the same animal first of all the creatures position has changed from the 1st pic to the new ones recently taken. 2ntly if you look at the orignal pictures the beast has its limbs rapped together with rope and in the new pictures what happend to the rope? Im not saying that the orignal pics are of beast of unknown orgins, but rather that the new set of pictures are a hoax of a hoax.

  16. T Bizzle says:

    Looks like a boar/feral pig.

    The new pictures also look incredibly fake.

  17. T Bizzle says:


    There are flies on the rear hind leg in the new pictures.

  18. Casey, my point is something you hit right on. Cameras are everywhere in this day and age, and if this thing was splayed out on a beach for tourists to see… don’t you think there would be more than just 6 or 7 photos circulating around? When I refer to “high quality” I am speaking in regards to the fact that it’s a clear image, it’s not shaky, over exposed, under exposed, etc. It looks like someone too their time to “stage” this and photograph it.

    T Bizzle, yes, there are a couple of flies on there. If this was a real corpse in the hot sun, giving off horrid smells, there would be a SWARM of flies, not just one or two on it’s hindquarters.

    Just my $0.03

    -Brian Hardin II

  19. rae says:

    it is so weird it looks like a dog boar pig

  20. rae says:

    it looks like a bird a dog a boar a pig

  21. Lea says:

    I’ve dissected both dogs and boars and am 100% confident it’s a dog by the way its facial bone structure is.

  22. Jennifer says:

    I want to know why in the Plum TV interview with those girls that they only showed the “first” picture. If you guys are right and it is something they staged, that is pathetic. If it is the same animal, I wish those bimbos would stop saying “beak”… it is a decomposing nose of either a dog or racoon. And lea is right, about the dog bone structure, and yet those girls sad a scientist told them that that did not match up. and for goodness sake it cannot be a turtle, turtles don’t have fur…

    either way like i commented on the interview page, these “friends’ should take the remains to a qualified person and be done with it.

  23. Cassandra says:

    Sadly it looks like a dog, I don’t think it’s a hoax exactly, I think someone just found the body, thought it “looked cool” and took a bunch of pictures precisely with the aim of wipping up an interest like this.

    The real question people should be asking is who’s dog it is and be looking for them to arrest them for animal cruelty, in the first pictures released you can see it’s front legs appeared to be tied together to stop it swimming.

  24. Tom says:

    Is there any photo out yet on which you can compare the size of the corpse with another object ? Would be helpfull to have an idea of the real size. And if somebody tortured a dog or similar animal in order to get a scary picture, the police should be able to find the owner of it. I don’t think there are wild animals in New York. Regards and thank for an entertaining website.

  25. Zahnnie says:

    …so they turned it over to get another picture, what’s the big deal?

    And wasn’t it a private beach in a high-priced district? So there aren’t as many folks, and they have nice cameras. Big deal.

  26. LB says:

    Looks like a dog to me….Amstaff like build. I have to wonder if its there because someone was using it as a fighter and didn’t want to get caught…ditch it in the water and nobody will ever know…or so they thought. I’ve seen some pretty nasty pictures of pit bull fights….its sick what some very horrible ppl will do to these dogs. Seriously, check out some google images of American Staffordshire Terriers…they have a much different build than the average dog…add bloating and decay to that and I think it is entirely possible

  27. tammy says:

    It is a dog. Check out this website
    and you can see how the nose area is identical to the picture of the “so called monster”. These childish girls are trying to pull a big prank to get their names out here on the world wide internet. If anyone has a lick of sense in their brains they can google canine skeletal images and find out the truth. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

  28. Pete says:

    It defintely originated from one of the three “founders”…Helen Keller could see the resemblence. Or Plum Island in which all four could be recognized as candidates….Yikes on all four

  29. Like u need to no my name says:

    definetly a bulldog
    the salt water cased him to turn all icky lookin and it makes all tha full fall off
    it has the ears and the nose and tha teeth
    and its fat

  30. Miranda says:


  31. Miranda says:

    Why don’t you let a raw chicken set in the sun for a few hours on the beach, and then turn it over. Not only will you disturb the sand it had laid when you turn it; …but it would leave juicy sticky stuff behind especially if it had laid there a while decomposing, and … and wouldn’t sand stick to its rotting flesh?!! opposed to leaving behind a perfectly clean body? New photos hyped up by some (Really talented) college kid for publicity, when everyone started to figure out that it was some sort of common critter, like my Nutria idea, or a beaver or weasel or what have you. (Makes you wander if it isn’t something like PETA trying to put a stop to the testing at Plum Isle.

  32. gym says:

    i think it is a man bear pig half man half bear half pig

    i am wome

  33. gym says:

    i think it is a man bear pig half man half bear half pig

  34. tina says:

    I agree with the person above its a bulldog, not an English but an American bulldog. It is longer in torso and has a long tail. Its just bloated, nose cartilage gone and eaten up by salt water. Notice the feet a in the sand so we can’t see the paws.

  35. rob says:

    It looks like your mom

  36. Kelly says:

    It looks like a Boar that has decayed in the hot sun.

  37. aidan says:

    i think it is a man bear pig half man half bear half pig

  38. Chickaboom says:

    As a frequent driver along the highways & biways of Ohio, and as someone who just CAN’T look away from all the roadkill sprawled & splattered all over, I can definitively say this is NOT a raccoon. The paws are raccoon-like, all right, with the little gripping fingers, but could they be exposed tarsal bones rather than a fully intact paw? Anyway. The body is far too long to be a raccoon as are the legs, and the snout doesn’t look to be long or slender enough even if you picture it with a little cartilage on the end topped by a glistening black nose. And, who would bind or tie something on the leg of a raccoon?

    I think it’s a dog, too, with the flesh gone from its feet & muzzle. A pit or some other muscular, blunt-nosed breed. The ears lend to that theory, too.

    Whatever it is, I feel very sorry for it. It didn’t have a good, quick death.

  39. jaysen-nati says:

    i’m not a dog weiner expert, but that’s a big weiner for a little dog, if it’s only 2 -3 feet long…..also, it looks like those pig-cop guys from Duke Nukem 3D

  40. Brian says:

    It’s a racoon.

  41. Moonbaby says:


  42. ella says:


  43. Julie says:

    You people need to get a life!!! This is stupid. I have just spent 5 minutes out of my life looking at looking at a dead dog. those are 5 minutes I’ll never get back. WISE UP!! I did!

  44. amanda says:

    aidan is definitely right.

    i’m surprised it took this long for someone to notice that.


  45. Niarle says:

    This is the first time I commented here and I must say that you provide genuine, quality information for bloggers! Great job and thanks too.

  46. Martin says:

    It looks like a koala bear. Compare it with a pic of a koala bear.

  47. Martin says:

    you can see the nose is the same and the fur,as well.

  48. Animal Cruelty says:

    Ok, I fully have the same thoughts as Cassandra. It is a DOG! Period! Now where the hell is the owner/s of this dog that looks as though it was burned and had it’s face kicked in! But hey what a great way to cover up a brutal case of animal cruelty, with media attention of a supposed sea monster…hmmm no wonder the people who have the remains of this animal are not wanting to hand them over. Karma is a bitch and whoever did this to this dog will pay.

  49. sigridur says:

    i think that’s some kind of a pig or something :’)
    or not a pig , but it’s close to being a pig , can’t remeber the name…
    uhm its like pumba in lion king ! 😀
    yeah, i think so.

  50. just lookin says:

    Yeah, it was once a healthy, solid animal and it’s been drowned. That is what is so sad. It is very well-muscled in the torso and legs, which is consistent with the form of a dog. It may have been an abused, fighting dog, which would explain the problems/injuries to its muzzle and the binding (?) to its forelegs. Dogs can swim quite well, but not with their forelegs bound! In the olden days, t was common practice in some backwoods places to drown cats and puppies that you didn’t want… Animal cruelty is a crime for good reason.
    As the economy gets worse, many more animals will suffer and be abandoned! Adopt a terrific pet at a pound today!

  51. nicky says:

    This is a rotting dog. The beak-like thing is just the exposed skull. That’s about it

  52. JESSIC says:


  53. Josh says:

    I’d say it looks more like a boar than dog.

  54. jenn says:

    google rocky point monster…and you will find the photograph I took last year.

  55. Jill says:

    just for the record, a turtle cannot be shell-less. The shell is integrated into a turtle’s skeletal system, and the top half of the shell is integrated straight into the spine[google “inside turtle shell”]. So that is ruled out, because if it were indeed shell-less, there would be gaping, noticable wounds.

    i think this one was planted, because if you look at the sand that its on, its clean, dune sand. There is no trace of a water line or tide line anywhere in the vicinity, and it looks like that sandy area never gets wet. So how can something like that just wash up?

    If this isn’t a hoax, which i think these photos are, i’m willing to say its a pit-bull puppy, if you look at the second photo, theres a fly in it which can scale the size of the body, and the teeth are relatively sharp and not ground down or decaying. the face screams pitbull/amstaff/mastiff/bulldog or any mix type.

  56. Dave says:

    It’s easy to compare these photos with a photo of a dog skull. Matches perfectly.

  57. James says:

    I’m not sure about the earlier specimens, but this latest find is a dog (likely a Pit Bull). The shape and position of the teeth are almost identical to that of several Pit Bull skulls I found with a quit internet search.

  58. Brian says:

    Well to be honest i think this is just a boar or even a domesticated pig what its doing in the water i do now know but seems to be trying to gain something from this encounter. Take a look at what the author wrote for the “newer” montauk monster pictures. He is willing to SELL the corpse for profit. And also i dont think we have to worry about chemical warfare to be apart of this ordeal to be honest if another country wanted to send chemicals to america i think they would choose a more dealdy desise than just swine flu because remember most of the people in mexico that have been infected and died dont have insureance or the means to get drugs to counter act the flu. But then again this does have erie similarities to other creatures. The snout seems to be broken or at least missing a small portion if you disagree please say so i am intrested in feed back from other people.

  59. Ashley says:

    If this thing were a seacreature, wouldn’t it have gills and scales? Not hair and without gills? If someone said this already, I’m sorry. But really…
    It’s a hoax.

  60. gangsta shIt! says:

    this is probably a bull dog..

  61. Cat says:

    I got no problem with the quality of the photos, I have a $300 Canon and get much better quality shots with it. I also carry it almost everywhere and would certainly taken shots of such a thing seen on a beach I was at. My problem is that it is obviously a dead boar or maybe a big dog. I have no doubt about this at all. This is not something new, just a dead (Earth!) animal.

  62. lowlikebeingstoned says:

    This is a dog, clearly. The discoloration and bloating are from sea water.

    another thing to note: no flies/maggots or birds….. Beaches typically have a slew of insects such as “no see-ums” And seagulls? They may not have finished the carcass but, there would be evidence of consumption.
    and if this “creature” washed up on shore. where are the tide lines? kelp/seaweed? The sand is too smooth as if it were dropped on the spot rather than brought on shore by tide waters.

  63. WHOCARES says:

    Thats a freaken pig or a dog -.-

  64. Allie says:

    And of course people are selling the pictures! Would you rather do one thing for free, or the same thing for money? It’s like paparazzi photos, of course everyone is selling them.

  65. Yvonne says:

    after seeing these pictures i do believe that this is a dog that probably has some kind of disease and got bloated

  66. Brenda says:

    The first one from last summer looked like a mutilated racoon. This one looks like a mutilated domestic dog. The key word here being mutilated. It really doesn’t matter what type of animal it is, It’s clearly an animal, and clearly mutilated in some manner.

    There is someone out there with a sick mind, mutilating animals for attention. This is the beginning of a serial killer. All serial killers start with animal cruelty, abuse and killing. Proven fact. If we continue to give this cult attention, the culprit will move on to bigger targets for more attention. What needs to be done is the person responsible needs to be found, and quickly, before he or she has any more victims.

    I personally don’t want to read years from now, about a serial killer, who admits that his early work was the Montauk Monsters. Are the authorities even concerned about this? I’m sure that I’m not the only one who has thought about this.

  67. Keziah says:

    Excuse me … I just threw-up in my mouth … a lot!

  68. arv says:

    it’s pretty much obvious that the montauk monster you’ve talking is on a bull dog..

  69. Jade says:

    people,cant believe our country made this creature by experamental bio-hazards instead they are being allowed to expand inland ,to test out , how many more animales,or people can or will be afficed. if some one who has as little education as I can see it ,kansas will be there first inland geniepigs

  70. seraph says:

    well its a animal. duh. It might be a pig cant be a bulldog because its bottom cannines potrude way to far out the mouth might be a mutation of a pig but dog you gotte be dumb if you think a bull dog has that type of shaggy fur and color their mainly brindle,white with brindle spots, white , or blondeish brown . and they are a short straight hair breed. but whatever it is its a carnivore all the teeth are to sharp to eat plants . but its a mystery

  71. not buying it says:

    I agree with seraph on the pig theory. This looks like a wild boar that has been dead long enough to bloat and appear to have bluish skin…I would wager the skin is nearly black on the other side, where the blood has pooled due to gravity. This fur looks coarse, like a pig or wild boar would have, and those lower incisors could easily be lower tusks of a male boar (and there are definitely male parts on this thing). The haunch even looks like that of a pig and I would be at all surprised if the feet, which are conveniently hidden by the sand, have hooves. I’m guessing the missing fur is an indication that this animal was quite ill when it died and had lost its fur as a result. Definitely has pig ears and I imagine the nose, if it were intact, would also be snout-like. The tail is slender, like a pigs, and their tails actually do not curl on adults–so the tail laying prone behind the animal also supports this notion. Yes, it’s gross, but hardly a monster.

  72. Fernando says:

    monster of Montauk is a Brazilian tapir.

  73. Theory says:

    Anyone ever think about all these weird creatures washing up on shores all over the world have something to do with the ice caps that are thousands of years old, huge chunks of glacier fall off everyday.