Forums: Skydiving: Skydiving History & Trivia:
DB Cooper

 

First page Previous page 1 ... 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 ... 2111 Next page Last page  View All

sailshaw

Sep 27, 2012, 7:57 AM
Post #36451 of 52765 (19537 views)
Shortcut
Re: [377] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi 377

You mentioned:

Sailshaw is certain that Peterson is DBC. The FBI is just as certain that he isn't.
--------------------------------------------------------------

My answer is:

The FBI has fell for the "perfect alibi" that Sheridan came up with and Blevins believes too. The FBI also has what they think is DB Cooper DNA from the "tie" but they are not sure it really is BD Cooper DNA.

I believe Sheridan was planning the NORJACK ten years before the actual caper when living at my house for a month. Part of his plan would certainly be the "perfect alibi" and as far away from the scene of the crime as possible (Nepal). That way the FBI would have to go to great effort to come and see him and check out his story. Sheridan is a very smart guy and planned his caper so well as to fool the FBI for all these years. His mantra when at my place was "there is got to be a way to beat the system". That is also in one of the four letters "The system that beats the system".

The DNA under the stamps/envelope flaps of the four letters to the newspapers will give the FBI the big break in the case they need to finally solve the case. Truly the Smoking Gun that will blow the case wide open after all these years. What is taking them so long to get the DNA from the letters? Could it be the FBI thinks they will look bad for not have looked at this evidence sooner? I think the FBI would be so interested in solving the only hijacking case they haven't solved that any reasonable evidence would be looked into.

Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw@aol.com


georger

Sep 27, 2012, 10:50 AM
Post #36452 of 52765 (19522 views)
Shortcut
Re: [377] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If the FBI thought Peterson's Nepal alibi was airtight would they have subsequently insisted on a DNA sample? Nope. Peterson was ruled out on DNA. The FBI is very confident that they have a DBC DNA sample that can rule out suspects. If the DNA isn't really Coopers then all bets are off.

Peterson was certainly capable of making the NORJACK jump. He was an expert skydiver, ex Marine and former smoke jumper who had done night jumps, wilderness jumps and water jumps. He had a big grudge. He had worked at Boeing in tech documents. He was known for risky jumps (e.g. home made bat wing suit) that pushed the limits. Sailshaw is certain that Peterson is DBC. The FBI is just as certain that he isn't.

377

Using my usual flawless logic, or in this case:
Through the Lens of Goats: why dont you ask the
Peace Corps Volunteers who were also living in mud
and thatch huts, near the base of Annapurna, Nepal,
in 1971 ? I happen to know the PC guy, Jim, who
was in charge of that area in 1971, and his wife
Crissy Nam Duc'ta'puth, and two actual volunteers
from that place and era, Chick and Jim (a different
Jim) who would definately have known if some white
guy "American!" (non climber!) was living in the area
teaching procreation, and saying his 'nam miyo ho
renge kyo's'. That kind of thing is remembered!
Word of that would have reached Kathmandu, in fact
I find it difficut to believe some 'guy' could just pop
into that area without permission and plenty of
people knowing about it ? Have you got any idea of
the distances and terrain and issues involved in just
getting to this place, in 1970s !!!! Apparently not.

[we had to be taken in by helicopter!]

If Mr. Petey was there, in this place, people
definately knew about it!

Hey! Come to think of it, I know 'Chuck' who has
climbed Everest and Annapurna many times! Sherpa
Dan is also still alive ... Chuck's familiarity with that
area goes back to at least 1971 . . . not to mention
his network of climbers, support people, etc etc etc.
in the _______ Mountaineers, Inc.

Sometimes over-population of a third world mud
plain comes in handy! Its all one neighborhood.
Can you say: "Mud huts, caves, and Goats" ?
Can you say: "United States State Department"?

Nepal is a very beautiful and diverse place ... you
ought to go there some time. Its a place with a long
memory.

DB Cooper Shangri-la.

Nothing you do in Cooper Shangri-La, stays in
Shangri-La.


(This post was edited by georger on Sep 27, 2012, 12:23 PM)


BobKnoss

Sep 27, 2012, 3:31 PM
Post #36453 of 52765 (19472 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sailshaw] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

" Could it be the FBI thinks they will look bad for not have looked at this evidence sooner? I think the FBI would be so interested in solving the only hijacking case they haven't solved that any reasonable evidence would be looked into. "

That is beyond the realm. The FBI is fully aware of their involvement in Project Norjack and are not going to tell you idiots the truth and expose their little pet joke, embarrass the FBI, FAA, Pentagon, besmerch the credibility of their volunteers and the memory of the Great Richard M. Nixon.
Crazy
They will just snicker under their breath at the stupid crap that shows up on this forum by the Brainicrats egged on by the conspirators. This is funnier than "Married with Children." Amazing what a little knowledge can do to expose how funny you people really are. Smile


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Sep 27, 2012, 3:35 PM
Post #36454 of 52765 (19470 views)
Shortcut
Re: [BobKnoss] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
" Could it be the FBI thinks they will look bad for not have looked at this evidence sooner? I think the FBI would be so interested in solving the only hijacking case they haven't solved that any reasonable evidence would be looked into. "

That is beyond the realm. The FBI is fully aware of their involvement in Project Norjack and are not going to tell you idiots the truth and expose their little pet joke, embarrass the FBI, FAA, Pentagon, besmerch the credibility of their volunteers and the memory of the Great Richard M. Nixon.
Crazy
They will just snicker under their breath at the stupid crap that shows up on this forum by the Brainicrats egged on by the conspirators. This is funnier than "Married with Children." Amazing what a little knowledge can do to expose how funny you people really are. Smile

So you volunteered now?

Matt


mrshutter45

Sep 27, 2012, 4:11 PM
Post #36455 of 52765 (19464 views)
Shortcut
Re: [BobKnoss] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
" Could it be the FBI thinks they will look bad for not have looked at this evidence sooner? I think the FBI would be so interested in solving the only hijacking case they haven't solved that any reasonable evidence would be looked into. "

That is beyond the realm. The FBI is fully aware of their involvement in Project Norjack and are not going to tell you idiots the truth and expose their little pet joke, embarrass the FBI, FAA, Pentagon, besmerch the credibility of their volunteers and the memory of the Great Richard M. Nixon.
Crazy
They will just snicker under their breath at the stupid crap that shows up on this forum by the Brainicrats egged on by the conspirators. This is funnier than "Married with Children." Amazing what a little knowledge can do to expose how funny you people really are. Smile

answer the many problems with your story before you go calling people "Idiots"

just a few questions of many.....

why did you skew everything on your map? "common sense and the obvious" correct!! so it matches your story!

why do you claim Janets story to be true when you put Cooper on the ground way before she seen anything? common sense and the obvious? oops on Bob!

explain how you think the flight path is 15 miles off to the east? remember they wouldn't have to go around Portland anymore! common sense and the obvious...oops again!

explain how you rhink it's ok to use names such as Rataczak, Carr, O'Hara without there permission while stating they are lying? common sense and the obvious...correct...because they are not here to speak for themselves!

explain why you think a oil pipeline runs along the Columbia? "common sense and the obvious" I think not!

THE WHOPPER...explain how you think Matt is not being truthful about who you claimed TOG was! common sense and the obvious...correct again and busted again!

stop calling people names when you can't even get your own story straight !!


(This post was edited by mrshutter45 on Sep 27, 2012, 4:38 PM)


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Sep 27, 2012, 4:50 PM
Post #36456 of 52765 (19449 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mrshutter45] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
" Could it be the FBI thinks they will look bad for not have looked at this evidence sooner? I think the FBI would be so interested in solving the only hijacking case they haven't solved that any reasonable evidence would be looked into. "

That is beyond the realm. The FBI is fully aware of their involvement in Project Norjack and are not going to tell you idiots the truth and expose their little pet joke, embarrass the FBI, FAA, Pentagon, besmerch the credibility of their volunteers and the memory of the Great Richard M. Nixon.
Crazy
They will just snicker under their breath at the stupid crap that shows up on this forum by the Brainicrats egged on by the conspirators. This is funnier than "Married with Children." Amazing what a little knowledge can do to expose how funny you people really are. Smile

answer the many problems with your story before you go calling people "Idiots"

just a few questions of many.....

why did you skew everything on your map? "common sense and the obvious" correct!! so it matches your story!

why do you claim Janets story to be true when you put Cooper on the ground way before she seen anything? common sense and the obvious? oops on Bob!

explain how you think the flight path is 15 miles off to the east? remember they wouldn't have to go around Portland anymore! common sense and the obvious...oops again!

explain how you rhink it's ok to use names such as Rataczak, Carr, O'Hara without there permission while stating they are lying? common sense and the obvious...correct...because they are not here to speak for themselves!

explain why you think a oil pipeline runs along the Columbia? "common sense and the obvious" I think not!

THE WHOPPER...explain how you think Matt is not being truthful about who you claimed TOG was! common sense and the obvious...correct again and busted again!

stop calling people names when you can't even get your own story straight !!

Some of those names are "lurking" and speaking, out side this asylum.

Matt


mrshutter45

Sep 27, 2012, 4:53 PM
Post #36457 of 52765 (19448 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
" Could it be the FBI thinks they will look bad for not have looked at this evidence sooner? I think the FBI would be so interested in solving the only hijacking case they haven't solved that any reasonable evidence would be looked into. "

That is beyond the realm. The FBI is fully aware of their involvement in Project Norjack and are not going to tell you idiots the truth and expose their little pet joke, embarrass the FBI, FAA, Pentagon, besmerch the credibility of their volunteers and the memory of the Great Richard M. Nixon.
Crazy
They will just snicker under their breath at the stupid crap that shows up on this forum by the Brainicrats egged on by the conspirators. This is funnier than "Married with Children." Amazing what a little knowledge can do to expose how funny you people really are. Smile

answer the many problems with your story before you go calling people "Idiots"

just a few questions of many.....

why did you skew everything on your map? "common sense and the obvious" correct!! so it matches your story!

why do you claim Janets story to be true when you put Cooper on the ground way before she seen anything? common sense and the obvious? oops on Bob!

explain how you think the flight path is 15 miles off to the east? remember they wouldn't have to go around Portland anymore! common sense and the obvious...oops again!

explain how you rhink it's ok to use names such as Rataczak, Carr, O'Hara without there permission while stating they are lying? common sense and the obvious...correct...because they are not here to speak for themselves!

explain why you think a oil pipeline runs along the Columbia? "common sense and the obvious" I think not!

THE WHOPPER...explain how you think Matt is not being truthful about who you claimed TOG was! common sense and the obvious...correct again and busted again!

stop calling people names when you can't even get your own story straight !!

Some of those names are "lurking" and speaking, out side this asylum.

Matt


simply....PRICELESS Cool


RobertMBlevins

Sep 27, 2012, 8:57 PM
Post #36458 of 52765 (19414 views)
Shortcut
Re: [smokin99] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
1) His biography over the date of the hijacking is very detailed. HE WAS IN ASIA. There are names, places, babies being born, a wife, a doctor who assisted in at least one of the deliveries with Sheridan present, and other things that seriously preclude he could be the guy. Sheridan also held several medium-profile jobs in and around the general area of SE Asia and wherever the hell that mud hut was located. Okay, Tibet.

lol..I know you think that some facts are irrelevant and others just get in the way sometimes, but, how about this... If you don't know, then just stick with I don't know.

According to the Homecoming article, the mud hut was at the base of Annapurna, which is in Nepal. Additionally, to quote Peterson from the Rohnert Park, CA meetup group... "...spent.... two and a half years in Pokhara, Nepal writing a protest novel of the Vietnam War. That's where my children were born. We lived in a mud house near the base of Annapurna."

lol... Don't take my word for it. Check for yourself. AngelicSmile

You are right. Nepal, not Tibet. But I didn't research Petersen through a magazine article, but through his own words, a bio he provided when he ran for a board position in the Windsor Unified School District in California. An excerpt...note dates given, jobs worked, and possible witnesses. (Highlights in bold are mine)

Quote:
'In 1970 after working for the International Training Consultants developing curriculum on such topic as land reform, and village and hamlet finances, he and his Filipina wife went to Pokhara, Nepal where he wrote an eight hundred and twenty-six page novel protesting the Vietnam War. It was an eye-witness documentary detailing the grisly crimes committed by our troops and secret agents. Publishers would have nothing to do with it. The reading public did not want to know such things, they contended. Ignorance is bliss.

Peterson's two and a half years in Nepal were the happiest time of his life. He and his wife lived in a mud hut near the base of Annapurna. They had no running water, electricity, sewerage, nor heat. What's more they had no idea what was going on in the world, and he loved it. His two children were born in Nepal. Sheridan Jr. was born at the Sanabuwan Missionary Hospital in Katmandu. It was an ancient Rana Palace on a mountain top overlooking the city. His daughter, Ginger, was born at the Shining Mission Hospital in Pokhara. It was comprised of a dozen tiny British World War II Quonset huts. Peterson made the delivery. The British doctor, a very tough woman lib, declared that it was the duty of every father to deliver their child. Peterson insists that it was the most nerve racking experience of his life.

In 1973 broke, Sheridan returned to Vietnam and got a job designing curriculum for Lear Siegler Aircraft Ltd. at Bien Hoa Air Base...'

And that's just an excerpt. What it does is provide enough names, situations, bio details, and possible witnesses that any decent (see: funded) researcher or law enforcement agency could check his alibi. Birth records of his children, employment records, maybe the testimony of a Brit doctor and others who might be able to say where Sheridan was on 11/24/1971...and it probably WASN'T waiting for a twenty-dollar plane ticket from Portland to Seattle.


(This post was edited by RobertMBlevins on Sep 27, 2012, 9:24 PM)
Attachments: shiningmissionhosp.jpg (41.2 KB)


MeyerLouie

Sep 27, 2012, 9:16 PM
Post #36459 of 52765 (19405 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SafecrackingPLF] A Code in the Number? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Nice to hear from you, SafecrackingPLF. I understand about the anonymity issue, I just thought since some folks on the DZ know each other by their real names, someone might know your real name. Not necessary to know.
Your TTLOL series must have been a major undertaking, I applaud your efforts. I enjoyed the series, twice. I am always intrigued by how folks apply statistical logic and mathematics -- it's what I do, I'm a college math teacher.
No one's perfect; granted, you took some liberties, but you took on something that very few folks would even dare.
I was definitely intrigued by your application of the the normal curve/empirical rule to the timeframe for the Tena Bar money find the year before discovery(your discovery and money axioms), and the third paradox about the Tena Bar money: the money must have traveled in the money bag v. the money couldn't have traveled in the money bag. That's the one that's got me thinking.
If you create something new in the future, I'll check it out for sure. Best wishes.
MeyerLouie

There are a very few on DZ that know my RL name. It's not that it's a huge secret or anything, but who I am shouldn't really matter as much as what I say, IMO.

I appreciate your sentiments. There is one fellow on here in particular (you can take a stab at who that might be) that told me (and I could cut n paste the quote if needed) that doing the series would be a waste of time since everything I could possibly discuss had already been discussed here on DZ.

That was blatantly false, and I knew it.

There is more that I know which I'll discuss a little at the bottom of this post.

You did say
Quote:
True, there were contradictions.

I'd like to know what these were. I've found some mistakes in the series, but they're minor and would not lead to any different conclusions. Perhaps I've missed something?

When you first said that I used stats liberally, I wasn't quite sure what you meant. I knew you would be correct either way... a lot, sure used em a lot. The other way, as you put it, took liberties. That's putting it lightly, and in particular the instance that you noted with Palmer's one year opinion and the timeline.

What you'll notice when I take liberties is that it doesn't matter. I'm making a point and using some sort of reference to make the point. The references might be arbitrary or incorrectly applied... for example, I do not know for sure if we ran a hypothetical money find 1,000 times if Palmer's opinion would follow a normal distribution. The beauty as I said is that it doesn't matter, I was trying to illustrate a point which I think was shown very well using the bell curve.

SKyjack71 and I have spoken, through PM and what have you, enough since I've been away from this message board for me to understand where she's coming from.

It's a touchy thing to have a discussion with someone that may or may not be a witness. It's easy to accidentally tamper and ruin a source of knowledge. I've definitely had to proceed cautiously in that regard, but if you look closely you'll notice that her narrative has changed some in the last 3 years or so. Much of this has to do with my occasional phone discussions. I will tell you that the original narrative that she told me was totally incorrect. When I say narrative, I'm talking about her viewpoints and not events that she claims to recall.

TTLOL focused on looking at the evidence for the story it tells (or probable story it tells if you will). Biases and cognitive error have massively distorted public opinion, opinion of those that are interested in the case, and unfortunately investigators in the case. Removing those mistakes is what TTLOL was about.

FWIW, similar mistakes are prevalent everywhere and are not only found in the Cooper case.

The model (optimal solution as I called it) is one I've been working on for years. No one seemed to be too interested in it, so I worked on it alone. What I can tell you now is that the model is not only to be favored from a mathematical standpoint on the evidence alone, it's actually quite profound in the sense that I've made predictions with it and seemingly verified with Jo on the veracity of them. Those confirmations, if you will, have led to me to become 100% convinced that it not only should be favored, but that it is what happened.

If I've somehow misjudged this, I'm not incorrect in saying that the model explains the evidence perfectly where all other theories do not. When I stop and think about this, with some of those predictions, the hair on the back of my neck stands up. It's that strong.

I'm hopeful to explain all this down the road at some point, but time is a huge factor. I had a good 10 minutes to waste just now, thus the post... but to put this together will be an undertaking as you say.

It has kept me sleepless at times over the last 2 years in particular. The final breakthrough was achieved around a year ago, so I've made pretty much no progress on it since then. I believe that I know about 80-90% of what can be known. There are some people that have far more energy, time, and resources that could potentially fill in some of the remaining holes through a lot of hard work - but I'm not that person.

I'm more than happy to discuss things with you, especially since you're mathematically inclined. I'm also willing to discuss with any person of science given that they use the scientific method. I will not discuss anything with self proclaimed logicians that add nothing to the case and ride the coattails of their friends, nor with people off their meds, nor book writers. Use the PM. I'm not here often, but in time, I'll do my best to correspond.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Safe: any contradictions I noticed were quite minor, one responder to one of your TTLOL episodes noted a minor contradiction. I retract the statement, anything I noticed was minor and does not change my opinion of your work.
What's different about your work is you have developed a model, and from that model you search for suspects. Most folks here have done just the opposite -- they have narrowed in on their chosen suspect, then they have created a model (or theory) that fits the suspect. The suspect dictates the model or theory, rather than the model creating possible suspects. In spite of (overwhelming) evidence that contracicts their chosen suspect, and theory, they still stick to their guns.
And, as noted earlier, I see no problem with one making assumptions in statistical analysis. As long as you state your assumptions up front and live within the limitations of those assumptions, there should be no problem. I think you've done okay with that. And it's okay, as you have done, to take liberties when using statistics. You went out on a limb. That's what you have to do if you want to learn new things. You're trying to blaze a new trail for crying out loud! Be well. MeyerLouie


skyjack71

Sep 27, 2012, 9:20 PM
Post #36460 of 52765 (19403 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mrshutter45] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

 

In reply to:
Some of those names are "lurking" and speaking, out side this asylum.

Matt


simply....PRICELESS Cool

Matt you have been quiet for awhiled now, but as Shutterbug stated "PRICELESS".

"Lurking" and "speaking". I will never forget the last words the co-pilot said to me about 2 yrs ago - The statement started with "We".

Since I posted the Wavy Greene name - you have been rather SILENT regarding Weber! You seem to have access to privileged information and I asked you if WAVY Green's (spelling unknown) had a serial number so close to Duane's Army number the FBI agent could have made a MAJOR mistake with the information he provided to me Mar of 2000.

NOTE:
The FBI needs to make some explanations to me and the public. They had Duane's Army number, but claimed in 2000 the number belonged to Wavy Greene and I was HOLDING the actual files in my hands along with a letter the FBI made a copy of in 1997 with the serial number on it! I was HOLDING this letter and the Army record in my hands when I confronted the FBI agent on the phone. I have PROOF of that conversation.


A smart investigative reporter helped me OBTAIN the actual Army record for Weber which was the same number as the one in the letter Duane wrote to his mother from Camp Siebert, AL. So HOW and WHY did the FBI agent say the serial # belonged to WAVY GREEN - (THREE) yrs after they sent me a letter dismissing Weber based ONLY on prints? Prints Carr later claimed they took from the McNeil file. Yet the prior FBI agent in 2000 had claimed Weber was NOT in McNeil until I confronted him and then he stated Weber "only passed thru McNeil". The agent never would clarify that statement even when confronted in 2001 by media.


georger

Sep 27, 2012, 10:05 PM
Post #36461 of 52765 (19391 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MeyerLouie] A Code in the Number? [In reply to] Can't Post

What's different about your work is you have
developed a model, and from that model you search
for suspects. Be well. MeyerLouie
Why cant you or SafecrackingPLF state and share
the model here?

And if you cant or wont why are you posting here?

It began with Safecracking backing Duane Weber,
as the most likely (modeled) candidate. It ends now
in silence.

The Shadow knows!

Crazy


(This post was edited by georger on Sep 28, 2012, 12:53 AM)


georger

Sep 27, 2012, 10:16 PM
Post #36462 of 52765 (19390 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RobertMBlevins] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Quote:
1) His biography over the date of the hijacking is very detailed. HE WAS IN ASIA. There are names, places, babies being born, a wife, a doctor who assisted in at least one of the deliveries with Sheridan present, and other things that seriously preclude he could be the guy. Sheridan also held several medium-profile jobs in and around the general area of SE Asia and wherever the hell that mud hut was located. Okay, Tibet.

lol..I know you think that some facts are irrelevant and others just get in the way sometimes, but, how about this... If you don't know, then just stick with I don't know.

According to the Homecoming article, the mud hut was at the base of Annapurna, which is in Nepal. Additionally, to quote Peterson from the Rohnert Park, CA meetup group... "...spent.... two and a half years in Pokhara, Nepal writing a protest novel of the Vietnam War. That's where my children were born. We lived in a mud house near the base of Annapurna."

lol... Don't take my word for it. Check for yourself. AngelicSmile

You are right. Nepal, not Tibet. But I didn't research Petersen through a magazine article, but through his own words, a bio he provided when he ran for a board position in the Windsor Unified School District in California. An excerpt...note dates given, jobs worked, and possible witnesses. (Highlights in bold are mine)

Quote:
'In 1970 after working for the International Training Consultants developing curriculum on such topic as land reform, and village and hamlet finances, he and his Filipina wife went to Pokhara, Nepal where he wrote an eight hundred and twenty-six page novel protesting the Vietnam War. It was an eye-witness documentary detailing the grisly crimes committed by our troops and secret agents. Publishers would have nothing to do with it. The reading public did not want to know such things, they contended. Ignorance is bliss.

Peterson's two and a half years in Nepal were the happiest time of his life. He and his wife lived in a mud hut near the base of Annapurna. They had no running water, electricity, sewerage, nor heat. What's more they had no idea what was going on in the world, and he loved it. His two children were born in Nepal. Sheridan Jr. was born at the Sanabuwan Missionary Hospital in Katmandu. It was an ancient Rana Palace on a mountain top overlooking the city. His daughter, Ginger, was born at the Shining Mission Hospital in Pokhara. It was comprised of a dozen tiny British World War II Quonset huts. Peterson made the delivery. The British doctor, a very tough woman lib, declared that it was the duty of every father to deliver their child. Peterson insists that it was the most nerve racking experience of his life.

In 1973 broke, Sheridan returned to Vietnam and got a job designing curriculum for Lear Siegler Aircraft Ltd. at Bien Hoa Air Base...'

And that's just an excerpt. What it does is provide enough names, situations, bio details, and possible witnesses that any decent (see: funded) researcher or law enforcement agency could check his alibi. Birth records of his children, employment records, maybe the testimony of a Brit doctor and others who might be able to say where Sheridan was on 11/24/1971...and it probably WASN'T waiting for a twenty-dollar plane ticket from Portland to Seattle.

All of the places and some of the people mentioned
are very well known to many-many people, going
back to the period in question.


MeyerLouie

Sep 28, 2012, 4:33 AM
Post #36463 of 52765 (19358 views)
Shortcut
Re: [georger] A Code in the Number? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
What's different about your work is you have
developed a model, and from that model you search
for suspects. Be well. MeyerLouie

Why cant you or SafecrackingPLF state and share
the model here?

And if you cant or wont why are you posting here?

It began with Safecracking backing Duane Weber,
as the most likely (modeled) candidate. It ends now
in silence.

The Shadow knows!

Crazy
------------------------------------------------------------
By model, I mean Safe's TTLOL model -- based on Occam Razor's principle/the Law of Parsimony -- the simplest solution is usually the correct one, based on proposed subjective probabilities, his "Cracking the Safe" problem that proposes his Discovery Axiom and Money Axiom; his 7 proposed solutions, his 4 premises/quadrants, his 3 proposed paradoxes -- these are all the ingredients he's assembled to define and explain his model. Like it or not, it's a model. Disagreeing with the premise, development, and conclusion of a model does not mean it doesn't exist.
MeyerLouie


sailshaw

Sep 28, 2012, 8:02 AM
Post #36464 of 52765 (19344 views)
Shortcut
Re: [georger] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

Georger:

Do you think that Sheridan in creating the "Perfect Alibi" could have thought up a better story than in Nepal in a mud hut and delivering his own child? He could have made the circumstances fit the story and still did a quick trip to Portland for the caper. Remember his planning was over a long period of time with plenty of time to create the "Perfect Alibi".

The FBI bought the alibi but not totally or they would have not sent the two female agents to get swabs of his DNA not too long ago. 377 thinks that this shows the FBI don't really believe his PERFECT ALIBI.

When the FBI sends the four envelopes with stamps to the DNA lab they will be able to compare the DNA on the stamps/envelope flaps with Sheridan. I really believe they will find a match. Like I have said before, this will blow the case wide open and finally solve the case. We should know sometime this year if they do it and find a match.

Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw@aol.com


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Sep 28, 2012, 8:38 AM
Post #36465 of 52765 (19339 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

In regards to your; "facts", sure, I have ignored responding directly to them. Mostly since the truth isn't accepted by you, or another here.

So the FBI has stated to you they did not find Weber's prints on the plane? And the suspect did not wear gloves, yes?

We still do not have Weber in any verifiable freefall training. But he might look like a guy who has forestry service firefighter training, and may have been in a camp with smoke jumpers. He might be a guy, who maybe, went to the Army for Training (unknown if he actually started or completed it).

Wavy Greene, Wavey Greene, Wavy Green, Wavi Grean, etc yes a few of them do happen to be on the rolls.

Weber stole or used fake identities, why not this one too?
He was a crook after all, life long documentation of it, you even prove it.

Matt


skyjack71

Sep 28, 2012, 9:33 AM
Post #36466 of 52765 (19334 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

 
In reply to:
In regards to your; "facts", sure, I have ignored responding directly to them. Mostly since the truth isn't accepted by you, or another here.
(edited for space)
He might be a guy, who maybe, went to the Army for Training (unknown if he actually started or completed it).

Wavy Greene, Wavey Greene, Wavy Green, Wavi Grean, etc yes a few of them do happen to be on the rolls.

Weber stole or used fake identities, why not this one too?
He was a crook after all, life long documentation of it, you even prove it.

Matt



FrownMatt for someone who supposedly has access to information, you certain avoided the answer to my question with the answer you made above. My question was explicit and other than to defray the subject there was NO reason to go off on a defensive tangent other than YOU do NOT have the ACCESS nor knowledge you have projected yourself as having had in the past.

I have the ARMY stats for Duane L. Weber and a letter written home to his mother from Camp Siebert - so WHY evade the QUESTION I asked?

I WILL REPEAT THE QUESTION BELOW:

Since I posted the Wavy Greene name - you have been rather SILENT regarding Weber! You seem to have access to privileged information and I asked you if WAVY Green's (spelling unknown) had a serial number so close to Duane's Army number the FBI agent could have made a MAJOR mistake with the information he provided to me Mar of 2000.

The ARMY number for Duane L. Weber was - 35 608 905.
WHY did the FBI say this number belonged to WAVY Green - is this number that close to anyone with that name by any spelling?


THE QUESTION IS SIMPLE AND DIRECT!

NOTE THE FBI introduced the name of WAVY GREENE not Duane nor myself. The agents excuse was they had a number wrong and this conversation was in 2000 yet. they sent a letter excusing Duane based on prints in 1998.



SmileCause for another question:
Whose and what prints did the FBI actually use regarding Weber? It has been stated Cooper was print phobic, but I do NOT believe I have ever read this in an official accounting of the crime - just in Geoffrey Gray's book.

Wonder WHAT Gray's source was on this supposed information or if there was a source other than to leave the ending open...and to offer a feeble excuse for the FBI's short-comings on this investigation.


(This post was edited by skyjack71 on Sep 28, 2012, 10:16 AM)


skyjack71

Sep 28, 2012, 9:53 AM
Post #36467 of 52765 (19331 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71]Letter from NPRC [In reply to] Can't Post

National Personnel Records Center. Dated Sept 20, 2001.
I obtained this one AFTER I confronted the FBI.

The letter states;

Thank you for contacting the National Personnel Records Center. We are pleased to enclose the NA Forms 13038, Certification of Military Service. Since the military record did not contain a copy of a Report of Separation, the enclosed NA Forms 13038 are funrnished in lieu of the separation documents and will verify military service.

I requested additional information and WAS denied because I was NOT listed as a beneficiary. Hell I was only 3 yrs old when he was in the Army - but, the file was CLASSIFIED! The officer would give me NO information other than that I was NOT listed as a BENEFICIARY.

What I obtained was what Doug P. of US News and World Reports obtained - 2 yrs before. There WAS no breaking the barrier wall down...even by his widow...who personally went to the Veterans Office and made the second request. WHY is Duane's Army Separation Record NOT available to the WIDOW and EVEN THE DATE WAS left blank on the first paper that was obtained. I guess the records are just TOO old to access, but we had NO problem accessing the NAVY records...right down to the details.


Robert99

Sep 28, 2012, 10:55 AM
Post #36468 of 52765 (19324 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Letter from NPRC [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
National Personnel Records Center. Dated Sept 20, 2001.
I obtained this one AFTER I confronted the FBI.

The letter states;

Thank you for contacting the National Personnel Records Center. We are pleased to enclose the NA Forms 13038, Certification of Military Service. Since the military record did not contain a copy of a Report of Separation, the enclosed NA Forms 13038 are funrnished in lieu of the separation documents and will verify military service.

I requested additional information and WAS denied because I was NOT listed as a beneficiary. Hell I was only 3 yrs old when he was in the Army - but, the file was CLASSIFIED! The officer would give me NO information other than that I was NOT listed as a BENEFICIARY.

What I obtained was what Doug P. of US News and World Reports obtained - 2 yrs before. There WAS no breaking the barrier wall down...even by his widow...who personally went to the Veterans Office and made the second request. WHY is Duane's Army Separation Record NOT available to the WIDOW and EVEN THE DATE WAS left blank on the first paper that was obtained. I guess the records are just TOO old to access, but we had NO problem accessing the NAVY records...right down to the details.

Jo, Speaking as someone who has done my fair share of paper shuffling in the military, after hearing the story about Duane's reportedly receiving an Undesirable Discharge (which precludes any further military service, except maybe in the local stockade) from the Navy, assuming he was in the Navy in the first place, and then enlisting in the Army and also receiving an Undesirable Discharge from that organization, assuming that he was in it in the first place, I am not at all surprised to hear that there are some irregularities in his military paperwork.

I imagine that both the Army, Navy, and any other federal organization that had contact with Duane weber, would just like to forget that they had ever heard of him.

Based on the information that you have provided, there is no expectation that Duane would be eligible for any benefits as a veteran, so the Veterans Administration would have absolutely minimal records on him, or maybe none at all.

You are barking up the wrong tree when you try to get detailed military service records on Duane from the VA, assuming any exist in the first place.

Robert99


georger

Sep 28, 2012, 12:59 PM
Post #36469 of 52765 (19307 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sailshaw] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Georger:

Do you think that Sheridan in creating the "Perfect Alibi" could have thought up a better story than in Nepal in a mud hut and delivering his own child?

I dont know that it is an alibi - maybe he was there
or he wasn't, doing what he claims. That is a factual
issue which can be checked out (rather easily I
think).

Moreover, I have been to this area, and I have
friends who have spent considerable time in this
and related areas of Nepal and Tibet; so I know this
is not the closed remote informationless area some
picture it as being -

What I see in Petey is a person 'with lots of stories'
and a fertile imagination, idealistic, so his Nepal
story may be but one of a number of similar stories.
Either Petey was in Nepal at the time he claims, or
he wasn't. If he was there he was a known person -
for certain. He would be remembered and there
would be documents subtantiating his travel to and
presence in Nepal. That is the reality of this matter.

In the 1960s-70s it took considerable time and
planning to even enter this area - you didn't just
drop into this area from space. The usual route was
through northern India and travel permits were
required - a lot of paperwork and some luck.

If you know, tell me the route Petey took ... to enter
Nepal or Tibet ? Nobody travels by themselves in
these areas or escapes notice ... and survives.
This area is very tribal and people want to know who
you are and what you are doing, once your presence
is known. And your survival, especially longterm
living, literally depended on a network of people
and political conditions which often shifted. All of
that, just for starters - in the 60s and 70s...

His story is not impossible but would require a
network of support (in and out) and documentation
in one form or another, in the 1960s-70s.


(This post was edited by georger on Sep 28, 2012, 1:23 PM)


georger

Sep 28, 2012, 1:52 PM
Post #36470 of 52765 (19299 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MeyerLouie] A Code in the Number? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
What's different about your work is you have
developed a model, and from that model you search
for suspects. Be well. MeyerLouie

Why cant you or SafecrackingPLF state and share
the model here?

And if you cant or wont why are you posting here?

It began with Safecracking backing Duane Weber,
as the most likely (modeled) candidate. It ends now
in silence.

The Shadow knows!

Crazy

------------------------------------------------------------
By model, I mean Safe's TTLOL model -- based on Occam Razor's principle/the Law of Parsimony -- the simplest solution is usually the correct one, based on proposed subjective probabilities, his "Cracking the Safe" problem that proposes his Discovery Axiom and Money Axiom; his 7 proposed solutions, his 4 premises/quadrants, his 3 proposed paradoxes -- these are all the ingredients he's assembled to define and explain his model. Like it or not, it's a model. Disagreeing with the premise, development, and conclusion of a model does not mean it doesn't exist.
MeyerLouie
Well, all models of anything are subject to tests of
completness, suffiency, consistency, et cetera ... if
they are going to have any application in the real
world; and Safe's suppositions, and his whole model
fails to follow Occam's Razor!

The test of any model of the type you are
advertising, is predictability. I cant see that Safe's
model passes that test insofar as predicting " new
facts of the Cooper case", or even predicting the
known facts of the case.

http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/kk3n/ockham/Ockham.htm

Hell I would be happy if I could get this webpage to
just load and work, minute to minute, Occam to
Occam, !

Maybe Farflung will have something to say - ?

I cant see thsat Safe's supposition are any less
subjective and random than anyone elses, so far as
the Cooper case is concerned.

You say I am being unfair, throw dung against the
wall. Maybe you state what specifically Im missing -
in concrete terms ?

A simple statement of Safe's suppositions and
axioms and conclusions/paradoxes ... would be a
good place for you and Safe to start! We have been
waiting years for that, alone! Pending that, the
whole thing is just a game you play. Anotehr Cooper
Tease.


(This post was edited by georger on Sep 28, 2012, 3:49 PM)


skyjack71

Sep 28, 2012, 3:57 PM
Post #36471 of 52765 (19262 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Robert99] Letter from NPRC [In reply to] Can't Post

Regarding the Military Record:

REPEAT: What part of this DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

We have the detailed records from the NAVY with a bad conduct discharge - we have a very detailed record.

I have the letters HIS Mother received in reply to letters sent by her and their attorney trying to get the charges DROPPED from the NAVY.

SOMEHOW Duane was able to get into the ARMY, but when they found out about the Bad Conduct from the NAVY - he was then discharged from the ARMY as an UNDESIRABLE....but none of the papers on the Army are available just the fact he was there and originally had an open end date for discharge - ONLY after 2001 was there a close date added.

I was NOT trying to get BENEFITS. I was investigating my husbands past, but YOU WILL DO ANYTHING you can do OR SAY to make that enquiry look BAD!

I believe EVERYONE HERE GETS THIS but YOU! I had NO expectation of BENEFITS and WAS NOT APPLYING FOR ANY. JUST TRYING TO FIND OUT ABOUT MY HUSBANDS PAST.

YOU ARE A REAL JERK and as FAR as I am CONCERN - on the LOW end of the HUMAN RACE. YOU continue to throw out INSULTING ASSUMPTIONS to make it sound like I was trying to get BENEFITS and that Duane was SOME KIND OF ANIMAL. You are the ANIMAL here - you continue to attack honest hard work to obtain facts about the past of Duane L. Weber.

WHY DON'T you spend this kind of TIME MAKING ENQUIRIES into your OWN SUSPECT instead of trying to drive your opinion regarding Weber into the ground?[

This is the 3rd to 5th time you have attacked me on this very same thing. IN FACT every time I have mention the records!

BELOW IS PARTS OF YOUR POST!

Robbie stated:
In reply to:
I imagine that both the Army, Navy, and any other federal organization that had contact with Duane weber, would just like to forget that they had ever heard of him.

JO STATES:
What do you have on your suspect?

Robbie stated:
In reply to:
Based on the information that you have provided, there is no expectation that Duane would be eligible for any benefits as a veteran, so the Veterans Administration would have absolutely minimal records on him, or maybe none at all.

JO STATES:
Have I said ONE WORD about trying to get benefits?

Robbie stated:
In reply to:
You are barking up the wrong tree when you try to get detailed military service records on Duane from the VA, assuming any exist in the first place.

JO STATES:
DO you ACTUALLY READ the post you reply to?


(This post was edited by skyjack71 on Sep 28, 2012, 4:09 PM)


smokin99

Sep 28, 2012, 4:30 PM
Post #36472 of 52765 (19255 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RobertMBlevins] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
You are right. Nepal, not Tibet. But I didn't research Petersen through a magazine article, but through his own words, a bio he provided when he ran for a board position in the Windsor Unified School District in California. An excerpt...note dates given, jobs worked, and possible witnesses. (Highlights in bold are mine)

Lol....I give up. Follow closely.
What is the title of of the "bio"?

fwiw...The website that you linked has been posted on dropzone several times in reference to Sheridan Peterson. The "article" that Peterson wrote for the Sonoma County League of Women Voters is his autobiography. It is titled "Home Coming". http://www.smartvoter.org/...terson_s/paper3.html.

I see your point, but I also see the logic in 377's take on it.

However, my point was and remains - facts may be inconvenient or otherwise irrelevant to whatever point you are trying to make, but, jeez, if you're gonna put something out there that can be so easily checked, then check it. Otherwise just say you don't know.
It makes it so much easier and might give you more credibility when concerning facts that do matter. Now, go outside and play. SmileSmile


(This post was edited by smokin99 on Sep 28, 2012, 4:45 PM)


sailshaw

Sep 28, 2012, 5:48 PM
Post #36473 of 52765 (19241 views)
Shortcut
Re: [georger] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

Georger:

You say:
He would be remembered and there
would be documents subtantiating his travel to and
presence in Nepal. That is the reality of this matter.

----------------------------------------------------------------

The travel documents of 1971 were your passport and nothing else was kept of the record of leaving a country and returning to the country. So, if Sheridan wanted to show no record of leaving Nepal and returning after the DB Caper, he could get a replacement passport and travel to Portland and back on it with the only written record being on the replacement passport. He then chucks the replacement and produces the original for the FBI to look at showing he never left Nepal to do the DB Caper.

Today, that would not work as we have many computers that track when you leave and return using a passport. An alternate plan would have been to travel on a fake passport (easy to get in Asia for a few bucks).

Bob Sailshaw sailshaw@aol.com

PS1 Checking out the 40 year old alibi would be certainly more difficult than just checking the DNA from the four letters and their stamps/envelope flaps (the ones sent to the news papers right after NORJACK).

PS2 Big Jim Whittaker is a friend of mine and I could set up a lunch with he and Bruce Smith at my YC to discuss Nepal and Sheridan's story and the ends and outs of back in 1971.


georger

Sep 28, 2012, 8:51 PM
Post #36474 of 52765 (19219 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sailshaw] Common Sense and The Obvious [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Georger:

You say:
He would be remembered and there
would be documents subtantiating his travel to and
presence in Nepal. That is the reality of this matter.

----------------------------------------------------------------

The travel documents of 1971 were your passport and nothing else was kept of the record of leaving a country and returning to the country. So, if Sheridan wanted to show no record of leaving Nepal and returning after the DB Caper, he could get a replacement passport and travel to Portland and back on it with the only written record being on the replacement passport. He then chucks the replacement and produces the original for the FBI to look at showing he never left Nepal to do the DB Caper.

... just like going to Cassey's and buying a six pack.
(with a sheet over yourself for months!)

Have it your way - you will anyway, despite the facts
and experience of others (not to mention Nepal changing its border arrangements in 1971!).

Cooper promoters always stand alone, against the
world.


(This post was edited by georger on Sep 28, 2012, 10:45 PM)


Robert99

Sep 28, 2012, 9:05 PM
Post #36475 of 52765 (19212 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Letter from NPRC [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Regarding the Military Record:

REPEAT: What part of this DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

We have the detailed records from the NAVY with a bad conduct discharge - we have a very detailed record.

I have the letters HIS Mother received in reply to letters sent by her and their attorney trying to get the charges DROPPED from the NAVY.

SOMEHOW Duane was able to get into the ARMY, but when they found out about the Bad Conduct from the NAVY - he was then discharged from the ARMY as an UNDESIRABLE....but none of the papers on the Army are available just the fact he was there and originally had an open end date for discharge - ONLY after 2001 was there a close date added.

I was NOT trying to get BENEFITS. I was investigating my husbands past, but YOU WILL DO ANYTHING you can do OR SAY to make that enquiry look BAD!

I believe EVERYONE HERE GETS THIS but YOU! I had NO expectation of BENEFITS and WAS NOT APPLYING FOR ANY. JUST TRYING TO FIND OUT ABOUT MY HUSBANDS PAST.

YOU ARE A REAL JERK and as FAR as I am CONCERN - on the LOW end of the HUMAN RACE. YOU continue to throw out INSULTING ASSUMPTIONS to make it sound like I was trying to get BENEFITS and that Duane was SOME KIND OF ANIMAL. You are the ANIMAL here - you continue to attack honest hard work to obtain facts about the past of Duane L. Weber.

WHY DON'T you spend this kind of TIME MAKING ENQUIRIES into your OWN SUSPECT instead of trying to drive your opinion regarding Weber into the ground?[

This is the 3rd to 5th time you have attacked me on this very same thing. IN FACT every time I have mention the records!

BELOW IS PARTS OF YOUR POST!

Robbie stated:
In reply to:
I imagine that both the Army, Navy, and any other federal organization that had contact with Duane weber, would just like to forget that they had ever heard of him.

JO STATES:
What do you have on your suspect?

Robbie stated:
In reply to:
Based on the information that you have provided, there is no expectation that Duane would be eligible for any benefits as a veteran, so the Veterans Administration would have absolutely minimal records on him, or maybe none at all.

JO STATES:
Have I said ONE WORD about trying to get benefits?

Robbie stated:
In reply to:
You are barking up the wrong tree when you try to get detailed military service records on Duane from the VA, assuming any exist in the first place.

JO STATES:
DO you ACTUALLY READ the post you reply to?

Jo, YOU need to read both your posts and the posts you are replying to.

I did NOT say that you were trying to get any benefits from the Veterans Administration.

You apparently do not understand that the Veterans Administration and the military services are completely different organizations. If a veteran does not make any claims with the Veterans Administration, then the VA may not have any paperwork on him.

Since Duane's enlistment in the Army was fraudulent, and he was soon discovered and booted out of the Army, then there may be only very limited paperwork on him. And that paperwork would probably be at the military records facility in St. Louis, Missouri.

It is probably a legal question if Duane was actually in the Army in the first place in view of his fraud.

But don't blame the FBI, VA, Army, or any other governmental agency for a problem that Duane brought upon himself.

Robert99


First page Previous page 1 ... 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 ... 2111 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Skydiving History & Trivia

 


Search for (options)