49 49
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Slim King said:

My cousin is friends with the Cossey Family and has been since before the murder. A burglar doesn't send back the credit cards. And the chutes were tagged by Cossey correct? That's how we know he packed them.

Somebody may have found the wallet and sent it back, a murderer would not want stolen cards of his victim.

Chutes were not "tagged" by Cossey, his name was on the packing card as the last/first packer in May '71 for Hayden's...  So, Cossey hadn't handled the back chutes for 6 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Slim King said:

OK .. That's what I said ... His name was on the packing card.. LOL.  So whomever has the chute knows who packed it and when ... Correct?

The back chutes came from Hayden not Cossey, he packed them six months prior.. and they never met each other. There is no connection to Cooper.

Cooper thought the chutes were coming from McChord,,

494965818_ScreenShot2022-09-16at8_02_30PM.png.8c935bfd5b6d8dbe717663fdc91d13f4.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Hayden did say he thought his chutes were basically identical, Cossey was used by the FBI because the FBI thought he knew about the chutes. Cossey was wrong, he assumed his back chutes from Issaquah were used and never heard of Hayden. Cossey and Hayden never met, the shop that Hayden bought the chutes got them packed by Cossey.

Cossey lied to cover for his early chute mix up.. who knows why he was murdered, perhaps he startled a burglar.

I am guessing that the "owner" referenced in this 302 below is Hayden.  This is dated 2/3/1972, which is really early in the investigation.  What I still can't quite comprehend in the parachute analysis is that if the FBI have Hayden asking for his chutes back as early as 3 months after the hijacking, how is it that they continued to either think or allow Cossey to think and discuss that the back chutes were his, how did this information not get relayed, clarified or straightened out early on?  It's just hard to understand...it seems to me that it's the type of detail that a premiere law enforcement organization should not mess up. 

db-cooper-hayden-request.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JAGdb said:

I am guessing that the "owner" referenced in this 302 below is Hayden.  This is dated 2/3/1972, which is really early in the investigation.  What I still can't quite comprehend in the parachute analysis is that if the FBI have Hayden asking for his chutes back as early as 3 months after the hijacking, how is it that they continued to either think or allow Cossey to think and discuss that the back chutes were his, how did this information not get relayed, clarified or straightened out early on?  It's just hard to understand...it seems to me that it's the type of detail that a premiere law enforcement organization should not mess up. 

db-cooper-hayden-request.JPG

Hayden is acknowledged in the FBI files early on though some 302's state Cossey owned the chutes..

There are two reasons for the confusion.

Since Cossey first packed the back chutes, the assumption was that the chutes were owned by Cossey previous to Hayden. 

And Cossey never denied Hayden to the FBI, only in the media years later.. 

So, the FBI likely believed that Hayden had purchased Cossey's custom NB6/8 and Pioneer. That is why they relied on Cossey for chute id..

However,

Cossey never provided his packing records and even claimed he had. 

Cossey's description of the back chutes did not match the earliest description of the back chutes.

There were two back chute packing cards found on the plane, one was returned to Hayden and the other did not match Cossey's description.

Many years later, Cossey falsely claimed the chute left on the plane was returned to him. He told Carr and others the back chutes came from his house... He also said the back chutes came from Issaquah.. he also said that the chute Cooper used was his modified chute.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did Cooper get to Portland airport...

We don't know, but most likely, he took a cab. Most people took a cab.

The FBI showed bus/cab drivers sketch "A" but that sketch was bad... so nobody would be able to recognize Cooper from the sketch.

A cabbie could have dropped off Cooper been shown the sketch and never made the connection..

Having a bad sketch was worse than no sketch..

same applies for Hotels..

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walter Reca was not Cooper and is a complete waste of time,,,

The Walter Reca / Peca Cooper narrative is a scam, a fraud, a fictional story manufactured with no evidence and easily debunked by the evidence.

Walter Reca is probably the worst higher profile Cooper suspect..

Carl Laurin was researching the Cooper case prior to taping Walter Reca... unfortunately Carl was a terrible researcher. In the taped interview, Carl led Reca with case information he had researched and he probably discussed it prior to the taping with Walter. AND still they get most of it wrong. 

 

Carl tapes Walter Reca late 2008… his voice is a perfect match to the radio caller...  Carl is leading Reca in those tapes… and Carl is telling Walter what to say..  and they still get most things wrong. In early 2008, well before he tapes Reca, Carl calls into a radio interview with Larry Carr.

https://principiamedia.podbean.com/?utm_source=podnews.net&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=podcast-page

An incomplete list of obvious flaws..

Walter Reca flaws..

claims he asked for used $20’s,,,  Cooper never gave a denomination

claims he didn’t get all used bills,,, Cooper got all used/circulated bills

claims he drank scotch and water,,, Cooper drank a Bourbon and 7up

claims he didn’t pick a 727 and wanted to jump out the side door,,, never happened

claims the flight path went East to Cle Elum,,, never happened flight path went South to Portland then Red Bluff and over to Reno.

claims communicated only through stew,,,  Cooper did talk to cockpit through interphone

claims scribbled on napkin,,, never any evidence of this

claims he didn’t know the 727 had a rear door,,, Cooper and passengers entered the plane via the rear door

claims wearing penny loafers,,, that was a media error, the shoes were described by stew as ankle high and laceless

Does not recall when he ordered plane to Mexico.

Does not recall how long plane was on ground in Seattle.

Told them going to Reno,, never happened, Reno was later suggested by crew.

claims he asked for stall speed to keep plane slow for jump,,, never happened.


January 2008 recording... Larry Carr does the Steve Rinehart of K-TALK, 630 AM Salt Lake City

at 25:15 Carl (Laurin) calls in with some questions..

 

Rinehart, Carr interview..
SR: We have some callers. I want to continue asking you questions of my own, but let’s try to fit a couple of them in here, as we go.

LC: Sure.
SR: We got Carl on the Salt Lake county line. Carl, you’re on the air with Agent Carr.

Carl: Yeah, hi. The FBI put on the newspapers the composite drawings. Now, are these pretty accurate in terms of the people who actually came in contact with the hijacker?

LC: Yeah, you know everyone that came in contact with that gentleman in the interview with a sketch artist. They went about their process, developing all of the parameters of the individual’s face. They went back and constructed these sketches and then they were sent back out to the field. Each person looked them over. The three stewardesses involved looked them over, and there were some changes made to the original one. Once the stewardesses gave the thumbs up that this is the best representation, and that’s what was put out to the public.

Carl: Okay, and then these thousands of suspects you developed, did they fit the basic description then?

LC: Well, you know, a lot of them were ruled out basically on the physical descriptors of who D.B. Cooper was. Not necessarily the sketch, but basically the physical parameters; the dark complexion, or the olive skin complexion. Well, if your suspect’s fair skinned, and even if they weren’t solely ruled out on that, that’s one tick. Yeah okay, I guess if this person, if they were 5’7, as opposed to what was reported as 5’10 to 6’1, there’s another tick, that hey maybe this isn’t the right person. If they had blue eyes... Well, we’re pretty sure D.B. Cooper had brown eyes. So, you know, rule that off. Yeah, you know, a lot of the suspects were ruled because they didn’t fit the physical criteria.

Carl: Yeah, I mean, since the FBI, they have this belief that the man may’ve been killed in the jump or when he hit the ground. Did the FBI conduct a search among the missing person reports?

LC: Well you look at the databases back then, you know, long before the time of the computer, it was easier to connect the dots as far as missing persons go. So there was, of course, an effort at the missing persons database, but it just simply didn’t really exist back in that point of time. You know, it would’ve individual sheriff departments that would’ve collected the data, and someone had to do that. I couldn’t even guess how many sheriff’s departments there are in the United States, but I would imagine it was well into the thousands.

Carl: Yeah, you know, is it possible when the hijacker got on the plane he would’ve changed his appearance? Like wearing a wig or maybe wearing these thick soled shoes so, you know, it’d make it appear that he might be taller, or maybe colored his hair a different color. Is that at all possible?

LC: All that is possible, but when you look at how much time, especially Tina Mucklow, spent, the hijacker, shoulder-to-shoulder with him... You know, you can try these experiments yourself. Go ahead and put some makeup on your skin, if you’re fair skinned, and put enough on to swarthy, and then have someone sit next to you. You’re going to see that makeup, it’s going to be pancaked on to you. Same thing with a wig, it looked very unnatural, especially during 1971. So if someone’s wearing a wig, it’s going to be very noticeable.

Carl: What seat was he sitting in before he, you know, hijacked the plane?

LC: He was sitting in the very back, and I don’t have the file in front of me so...

Carl: Was he sitting next to somebody else with whom he had a conversation?

LC: No, he was sitting all by himself in a row of three. And, you know, ultimately, Flo Schaffner sat by him originally, and Tina Mucklow the rest of the flight.

Carl: What type of firearm did he have? 

LC: No firearm.
SR: And a grenade.

LC: No grenade. He had opened up his briefcase and there was either dynamite or road flares in there.

Carl: Yeah, well interesting case. I wish you good luck Agent Carr.

SR: Carl, thanks for the call. We appreciate it.

Carl: Yeah, thank you. Goodbye.

 

Edited by FLYJACK
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a readout from a Fairchild 5424 Flight Data Recorder.. NorthWest used them on 1970 era 727's, can't confirm this model was on NORJAK but very likely.

It records heading, airspeed, altitude and time. 

Norjak FDR was examined and used to establish Cooper's LZ.

Since it records heading, the path can be corroborated. It was never in question.

2078025682_ScreenShot2022-09-09at5_36_29PM.png.0e57ebab0290d53a956aa6a7ca2733bd.png

Edited by FLYJACK
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

This is a readout from a Fairchild 5424 Flight Data Recorder.. NorthWest used them on 1970 era 727's, can't confirm this model was on NORJAK but very likely.

It records heading, airspeed, altitude and time. 

Norjak FDR was examined and used to establish Cooper's LZ.

Since it records heading, the path can be corroborated. It was never in question.

2078025682_ScreenShot2022-09-09at5_36_29PM.png.0e57ebab0290d53a956aa6a7ca2733bd.png

with your permission . better quality larger version ? 

Screenshot 2022-09-17 at 22-25-38 DB Cooper.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Slim King said:

If you actually read this ... Cooper DIDN"T BELIEVE HER!!!!!! Cooper thought they were lying to him ... So do I....

You believe in an Eastern flight path and Reca, so you have less than zero credibility...

but Cooper was questioning the time, the delay.

They initially tried to get the chutes from McChord..  the crew wasn't lying to Cooper, they thought they were coming form McChord.. Due to the Thanksgiving eve they couldn't get in contact with an authority, so they called Cossey and Hayden..

Walter Reca Peca is done, over, thoroughly debunked.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, georger said:

with your permission . better quality larger version ? 

Screenshot 2022-09-17 at 22-25-38 DB Cooper.png

Sure,,

Here NorthWest 727 N274US had a Fairchild 5424 FDR... the 5424 was very common.

So, it is a virtual certainty they had flight 305's heading on the FDR which they examined and used to calculate Cooper's LZ...

1895651572_ScreenShot2022-09-09at5_39_34PM.png.830f7f308f480bdef51cbfca4fb0d67d.png

Edited by FLYJACK
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/16/2022 at 6:30 PM, Slim King said:

I'm sorry but you are wrong as FLYJACK pointed out.

No I am not wrong. And he can correct me on this part if need be, but I don't think Flyjack was saying that I was wrong. I sometimes make somewhat generalized comments based on my knowledge of parachutes, and Flyjack responds with more specific details as they apply to the Cooper case. He does this with many peoples' posts because he is good at it.

 

On 9/16/2022 at 6:50 PM, Slim King said:

I jumped with chutes you'd call not steerable.

Nope. You likely made your jumps on either a 35' T-10 or a 28' whatever-it-was. Those would likely have either 7-TU or Double-L modifications, which are drive slots in the back that give the parachute forward speed and steerability. Compared to what we use today, they are very low performance, but in those days the higher performance round canopies included Piglets, Papillons, and the popular Para-Commanders. Those were somewhat, but not a whole lot, speedier than the T-10's and 28 footers. And first-jump static-line students were not put out at 10k', because God only knows where they would land.

-------

BTW, Wendy's comments were correct.

 

Edited by dudeman17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dudeman17 said:

No I am not wrong. And he can correct me on this part if need be, but I don't think Flyjack was saying that I was wrong. I sometimes make somewhat generalized comments based on my knowledge of parachutes, and Flyjack responds with more specific details as they apply to the Cooper case. He does this with many peoples' posts because he is good at it.

 

Nope. You likely made your jumps on either a 35' T-10 or a 28' whatever-it-was. Those would likely have either 7-TU or Double-L modifications, which are drive slots in the back that give the parachute forward speed and steerability. Compared to what we use today, they are very low performance, but in those days the higher performance round canopies included Piglets, Papillons, and the popular Para-Commanders. Those were somewhat, but not a whole lot, speedier than the T-10's and 28 footers. And first-jump static-line students were not put out at 10k', because God only knows where they would land.

-------

BTW, Wendy's comments were correct.

 

I never claimed you were wrong..

David Slim King, however, just seems to get almost everything grossly wrong..

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This always bugged me,, the tie has a serious hole in it from a pin and it appears from long term use..

You wouldn't normally wear a tie with an obvious hole in it and use a tie tack that doesn't cover it....

So, why change it,, perhaps the tie pin was a company pin.

 

tiepin.jpeg.5850e15b8670b6c5e0bc7cc1b8f29ef7.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Slim King said:

I'd say it was simply  a tie purchased used or at a second hand store. Logically you wouldn't wear something all your friends had seen you wear before and certainly you wouldn't wear something you'd want to wear again so it was something disposable that you'd never worn before and would never wear again. This is the way of logical thought!!!!! I had a tie almost exactly like that one ... They were very commonplace. Almost a short fad that really didn't catch on. If jumping from a plane into the underbrush of Washington I wouldn't want something around my neck that could easily strangle me. LOL.. Hence a clip on .. Total logic.

Logically, if they were very commonplace then they wouldn't be uniquely identified.. and wearing it would not be an issue.  

Like a plane white shirt.. the tie is not unique.. my point is the tie tack is more identifiable and was likely not worn with the tie.. because of the tie pin hole, it was normally worn with a tie pin.

The second hand store is a guess with no evidence. The tie had very rare and unique particles, was very cheap and lots of dust in the knot..  

It has no steel on it so it wasn't worn by a welder... besides who welds in a tie.

It was an old tie, sitting not worn for years, normally worn with a tie pin. Bought around 1965 and worn in a very unique environment.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Slim King said:

And again you have NO EVIDENCE for anything you just typed. As a Mentalist I work with the most logical of theories. There is no real evidence left. Anything of value was lost or destroyed by the FBI. The tie wasn't Coopers for more than a couple days. He purchased it to commit the crime and got rid of it right afterwards. The Insulated underwear is a different story ... he kept those. After 50 years of failure you must see the Red Herrings that have been swimming around this case for decades...???

No, you have no evidence Cooper purchased the tie for the hijacking... and create a narrative from ignorance. You can't apply logic when you have poor case knowledge or have the facts wrong.

and you keep making false statements,,, 

The facts.. for what I typed.

There was significant dust in the knot, that indicates it was not used recently, but stored.

The labels confirm it was bought new around 1964/65.

The tie particles indicate a very unique and specialized technical environment.

The tie was $1.50 in 1965.

There was no regular steel on the tie.

There is a significant tie pin hole in the tie indicating long term use by a pin.

A black skinny clipon tie was very common for many years, not unique or identifiable.

 

So, you have a cheap, common, six year old, dirty, recently unused tie from a highly specialized environment. Zero evidence it was just bought for the hijacking.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Slim King said:

No one in their right mind would use their normal everyday clothing that they had worn before or intended to wear again. Just common sense. But it is your kind of thinking that has stalled this investigation for 50 years. Mentalism is solving it now. It is extremely vital to follow the trail of blood. It leads to the culprits behind this entire showcase.

Complete nonsense..

Mentalism is a self serving confirmation bias trick...

You can't apply logic and reason if you have the facts wrong,, and you have almost all of the facts wrong.. and in doing so you have constructed a completely false narrative.

And it is getting beyong tiring..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

This always bugged me,, the tie has a serious hole in it from a pin and it appears from long term use..

You wouldn't normally wear a tie with an obvious hole in it and use a tie tack that doesn't cover it....

So, why change it,, perhaps the tie pin was a company pin.

 

tiepin.jpeg.5850e15b8670b6c5e0bc7cc1b8f29ef7.jpeg

Interesting thought, that very well could have been a pin that identified him, a company, religious organization, veterans organization, etc.  You'd think he would take the tie bar off too though, but without any logo, maybe he decides its ok to leave it.

On the tie, I'm not convinced that the particles were all that special.  I'd still like to see some more samples tested from other clothing.

Steel is pretty common and every element in steel was found on that tie.:  "Steel is an alloy of iron and carbon, and sometimes other elements.  While iron alloyed with carbon is called carbon steel, alloy steel is steel to which other alloying elements have been intentionally added to modify the characteristics of steel. Common alloying elements include: manganese, nickel, chromium, molybdenum, boron, titanium, vanadium, tungsten, cobalt, and niobium.  Additional elements, most frequently considered undesirable, are also important in steel: phosphorus, sulfur, silicon, and traces of oxygen, nitrogen, and copper.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

Interesting thought, that very well could have been a pin that identified him, a company, religious organization, veterans organization, etc.  You'd think he would take the tie bar off too though, but without any logo, maybe he decides its ok to leave it.

On the tie, I'm not convinced that the particles were all that special.  I'd still like to see some more samples tested from other clothing.

Steel is pretty common and every element in steel was found on that tie.:  "Steel is an alloy of iron and carbon, and sometimes other elements.  While iron alloyed with carbon is called carbon steel, alloy steel is steel to which other alloying elements have been intentionally added to modify the characteristics of steel. Common alloying elements include: manganese, nickel, chromium, molybdenum, boron, titanium, vanadium, tungsten, cobalt, and niobium.  Additional elements, most frequently considered undesirable, are also important in steel: phosphorus, sulfur, silicon, and traces of oxygen, nitrogen, and copper.”

You wouldn't normally wear both a pin and a bar on a cheap tie.. one or the other.. the pin was used long term based on the significant hole. So, why use the bar at all. Maybe, he did expect to jump with it on and wanted it secured but he unintentionally left it behind. 

Once you have a hole in a tie, normally you keep using the hole and don't switch to a bar..

If the pin was identifiable he would have removed it. Or, if it was just an old tie he grabbed that he hadn't used for some time the pin may have already been removed. Logo pins have more meaning than a generic bar..

IMO, the tie (circa 1964/65) was normally worn with a pin for years, then stored for a time collecting dust before Cooper added the bar for the hijacking...

Tom said there was no regular steel on the tie and that makes it unique as most shop environments have steel.. The tie was not in a welding environment.

SS 300 and 400 and Titanium indicate a more specialized environment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Slim King said:

No one in their right mind would use their normal everyday clothing that they had worn before or intended to wear again. Just common sense. 

So he doesn't disguise himself in any obvious way to obfuscate his facial features yet he's worried about his clothing giving him away....

Yep, that's common sense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

Maybe, he did expect to jump with it on and wanted it secured but he unintentionally left it behind. 

 

My guess is that he was intending to just put it in his coat pocket and take it with him since that's what he did with everything else. As adult men, what's the first thing we do when we take a tie off? We just throw it on the bed or on a chair or whatever. I'm supposing that he did the same thing whenever he was putting his parachute on. It's almost a reflex the way you lay a tie down on the nearest object whenever you take it off. So he took his tie off and just threw it on the seat. I think he just forgot about it. If he wasn't in a rush and was actually thinking about it, I'm sure he would have taken it off, rolled it up, and put it in his rain coat pocket or whatever. 

Edited by olemisscub

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

49 49