DB Cooper

[skyjump11 0]

Sir: For whatever it is worth, the FBI is still looking
for a 'Dan' Cooper and not a 'DB' Cooper.
It is an interesting read if you have the interest to
research it. This information will not 'stick.' Why?
Because, Sir, we live in a world of 'perception' and
not one of 'truth'.
grace, peace & blue skies
sep

[skyjack71 0]

Quote

wow!!!! what the hell happened here, train cars piled up, smoke filling the air.....

follow this link and you can here four DB Cooper experts blow hard for four hours, that should ease the pain. No assaults of any kind occurred on the plane, according to the witnesses.

http://www.stevenrinehart.com/pages/?section=2&page=9

Thank You for speaking up on the part about Tina. I say leave the girl alone.

What I think about that site:
They did a lousy job on Cooper - leaving out the 3 most important suspects - suspects who may in someway be connected or at least 2 of them.

I am not able to listen to these talk shows on my computer as I only have dial up, there has been new evidence - such as DNA on a tie, but this "evidence" is unreliable because because the chain of possession of the evidence was compromised. Both the cigarrette butts and the tie were collected in Reno, but the butts never made it to WA and by the FBI's own admission in they can't find the cigarrette butts and a prior agent of record has stated that the FBI LOST the butts - we will never know the truth on this but until the FBI produce the butts this is one FACT - there is no physical evidence on any of the suspects.

Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

[snowmman 3]

Quote

wow!!!! what the hell happened here, train cars piled up, smoke filling the air.....

follow this link and you can here four DB Cooper experts blow hard for four hours, that should ease the pain. No assaults of any kind occurred on the plane, according to the witnesses.

http://www.stevenrinehart.com/pages/?section=2&page=9

hmm...what makes one a Cooper expert? Isn't that the whole reason everyone can step in? there are no qualifications, other than maybe free time.

referring to the subject line: (The new Lincoln book), how come no one hopped on the Abe Lincoln book/Point Break/Ex Presidents connections?

The 4 masks used were
Reagan
Carter
Nixon
Johnson

Isn't it suspicious that a Lincoln mask wasn't used in the movie? The masks start with Johnson who was president from '63-'69.
Gerald Ford was not used, even though he was President from '74-'77.

Here's the real tell: Lyndon Johnson rubber masks are very difficult to find.

My theory: find an LBJ rubber mask, and you've found Cooper.

Anyone wants to call bullshit on this: post a url that sells an LBJ rubber mask.

[georger 197]

Quote

wow!!!! what the hell happened here, train cars piled up, smoke filling the air.....

follow this link and you can here four DB Cooper experts blow hard for four hours, that should ease the pain. No assaults of any kind occurred on the plane, according to the witnesses.

http://www.stevenrinehart.com/pages/?section=2&page=9

REPLY>

Thanks!

GeorgeR

[snowmman 3]

I've discovered quite a stunner.
While the actual movie has the guys in masks of
Johnson
Nixon
Carter
Reagan,

the original script was written as
Johnson
Nixon
Kennedy
Reagan.

There's always been the underlying chatter about JFK in this thread. I was amazed to find the link here too.
Why change from Kennedy to Carter, unless for some sinister reason?

So during the filming, Kennedy got swapped with Carter.
script is at http://www.awesomefilm.com/script/pointbreak.html
Nathaniel was supposed to be Kennedy.

BODHI
Here, you need this. You can't be
comin' through that door with your
dxxx in your hands, right?

UTAH
I can't do this.

BODHI
Sure you can! You may even like
it... it's a killer rush. You'll
see. Hey, don't I show you things,
Johnny U?

UTAH
Bodhi, this is your wake up call,
man -- I... am... an... Eff...
Bee... Eye... Agent!!

BODHI
Wild, ain't it?! See, we exist on a
higher plane, you and I. We make
our own rules. Why be a servant of
the law Johnny U... when you can be
it's master?

GROMMET
Fuckin' A!

BODHI
Ninety seconds, man, door to door.
A small price to pay for someone who
loves you.
(he looks up)
She does you know. It's not her
style to fall so hard... I don't
think she did with me.

[georger 197]

Quote

Sir: For whatever it is worth, the FBI is still looking
for a 'Dan' Cooper and not a 'DB' Cooper.
It is an interesting read if you have the interest to
research it. This information will not 'stick.' Why?
Because, Sir, we live in a world of 'perception' and
not one of 'truth'.
grace, peace & blue skies
sep

REPLY:

and so, how do rumors & missinformation get started? That's an easy one.

They get started in the vacuum of no official facts & information, even over 37 years! In a mass marketed media society that leads to a curse quickly. Anyone and everyone is free to speculate
endlessly, and Cooper may have even understood
that when he "targeted" 305 on 11-24-71, to make
his own personal point.

In the end given enough time, even officials have a hard time piecing the facts back together. The history
gets lost and becomes compromised.

I am constantly amazed how as time passes new
people emerge, with new sets of alleged facts and
new re-interpretations.

Of the original people involved fewer and fewer
survive every day. This means fewer and fewer
remain in a position to know the facts and work
with them, as time passes.

Sluggo uses the phrase "cultural goggles" but the
fate or nations and no war was decided by the DB
Cooper affair. The Coopper case has no Homer
and I seriously doubt it ever will. So perhaps it will merit some rhym in a fuiture children's book on
common sense: 'Don't Himmelsbach or your Cooper will find itself being Buzzarded" ?

George

[Ckret 0]

Snowmman,

I use that scene in my bank robbery presentations, i always bring the house down with my Jonny Utah "I...AM... an F....B....I.....AGENT"

I m gonna fire up the "PB" DVD tonight in your honor.

[snowmman 3]

Quote

Snowmman,

I use that scene in my bank robbery presentations, i always bring the house down with my Jonny Utah "I...AM... an F....B....I.....AGENT"

I m gonna fire up the "PB" DVD tonight in your honor.

There's a real Cooper connection with the ending. Some might think Bodhi makes it out, some might not. Utah leaves confident he knows. But does he?

I figured "The Fugitive" was your fave, from the love of train cars and smoke. My problem is that I remember the original David Jansen on b/w tv in the role. (1963-1967)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdgekgCaefQ

Hey, that reminds me...you pseudo-promised to see if you could transfer the film of the drop test to some modern day media we all could see.
Or was that a no-go?

No-go. No contract.
It's off. It's--

Will you explain to the lunkhead
that it's a no-go?

[georger 197]

Snow & Ckret:

Is it your understanding Scott revised his flight path estimate (in a discussion with H in 1980) to say he
was further EAST of his original estimate, - not WEST ?

TIA.
Georger

[snowmman 3]

Quote

Snow & Ckret:

Is it your understanding Scott revised his flight path estimate (in a discussion with H in 1980) to say he
was further EAST of his original estimate, - not WEST ?

TIA.
Georger

The only place I find the supposed 1980 Scott visiting Himmelsbach soiree, was in (edit) this link quoting the NORJAK book.

quoted at bottom of http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/scams/DB_Cooper/7.html
(apparently written in 2003?)

Himmelsbach, thru the NORJAK book, is quoted as saying Scott said they were west of I-5, not east of it.

Hey, there's a paper that crosschecks modern day FAA radar location repots for airplanes, with GPS readings, to give actual errors. I'll find it again.

[snowmman 3]

From this little summary of modern data (2005), I made the guess that the 1971 claim of +- 0.5 NM error in the radar was optimistic. Pilots can chime in on what the error bounds below are talking about.

from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel5/10454/33180/01563441.pdf?temp=x


Comparison of host radar positions to Global Positioning Satellite positions
Paglione, M.M.; Ryan, H.F.
Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 2005. DASC 2005. The 24th
Volume 2, Issue , 30 Oct.-3 Nov. 2005 Page(s): 12 pp. Vol. 2 -
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/DASC.2005.1563441
Summary: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air traffic control system relies directly on aircraft locations provided by the long range en route surveillance radars. The accuracy of the radars is an important factor in determining the overall performance of the system. To support the planned modernization of the air traffic control system a study was conducted to measure the accuracy of the radar tracking function of the current system. The aircraft radar tracks were compared to the positions produced by the Global Positioning Satellite System (GPS), which was considered the true aircraft position. The GPS data was available from the FAA's Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum Certification Program. Utilizing the host air traffic management data distribution system at each air route traffic control center that captures the radar tracking data, 265 flight's of radar tracking data were compared to their GPS positions. Three distance metrics were used. The time coincident straight line distance, referred to as the horizontal track error, and its two orthogonal components: cross track error (side to side error) and along track error (longitudinal error) were calculated. A total of 54,170 measurements were taken. This resulted in an average horizontal error of 0.69 nautical miles, an average (unsigned) cross track error of 0.12 nautical miles, and an average (unsigned) along track error of 0.67 nautical miles.

[snowmman 3]

I checked my Norjak book to cross check what the trutv link was saying up above about the Scott/Himmelsbach meeting.

I can't find in there. There's the meeting with Bohan talking about wind direction.


Maybe there's a newspaper article. I'm confused now..did the trutv article actually start a myth there?

(edit) Himmelsbach does recommend searching the Washougal area in his book, but that seems based just on a watershed that drains in the columbia upstream of the money find area, not based on any stuff from Scott. He mentions Bohan's conversation on being wrong on wind direction, (confirming his "hunches", H says...maybe hunch about wrong search zone?) but it's all pretty speculative on H's part.

Still can't find any Scott meeting in the book.

(edit) I'm starting to think the Scott/H meeting is myth.

[skyjack71 0]

It is my understanding - from a conversation with Himmelsbach yrs ago that the Pilot thought he was further East - how much further I don't know. This conversation resulted from a "witness" contacting me claiming to have to heard the plane, but Himmelsbach said it was not that far east (the area she was living in at that time) and what she heard was the loops done by the chase planes. The chase plane flew very fast so kept having to make loops.

This "witness" also talked to Himmelbach and he told her the same thing...but really didn't think she heard the Boeing 727 - but that the plane may have been further East than originally thought.

So there was a lot of "Mays" and "Thoughts" in this --- no claim or proof of any of what was said. Things that have been told to the public and the media in the past, therefore he was not divulging any priviledged information

Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

[snowmman 3]

Quote

It is my understanding - from a conversation with Himmelsbach yrs ago that the Pilot thought he was further East

If it was after 1980 that you talked to Himmelsbach, or after he wrote his book in '86, then yeah he was suggesting further east then (which is why he says Washougal)...but it's based on no information, really. He throws out the Bohan meeting as implying wind direction prediction was wrong.

I think it's myth that this idea of "further east" came from "the pilot". I think maybe it's all just muddied information. The trutv article thing was written in 2003, I believe.

If H. had information like you said, by 1986, how come it's not in the Norjak book? Can you find it in there Jo? I can't.

[skyjack71 0]

Quote

I checked my Norjak book to cross check what the trutv link was saying up above about the Scott/Himmelsbach meeting.

Himmelsbach does recommend searching the Washougal area in his book, but that seems based just on a watershed that drains in the columbia upstream of the money find area, not based on any stuff from Scott. He mentions Bohan's conversation on being wrong on I'm starting to think the Scott/H meeting is myth.

No, the Scott - Himmelsbach meeting is not myth, but somehow the faulty information you have was a myth. There was never any discussion of the plane being West of I-5. I also spoke to the Co-pilot yrs ago and nothing was said about being West of I-5.

It was due to the Money Find and there was lots of Speculation about WHY the money was found where it was. The only explanation they had was the Washougal so the myth was created to justify the Money Find.

Being West of I-5 is a myth or speculation by a reporter. As I have said before talk to the Co-pilot and rely on the reports made by the Chase planes and the communications taking place between the plane and the land.

I am unable to handle the technical language - since Sluggo left we do not have anyone who has the experience and knowledge to put this Myth to bed.

NOTE: I had no contact with Himmelsbach prior to 1996
June or July of 1996 was the first contact..

NOTE: Himmelsbach knows that some errors are in the book.
As you know someone else wrote the book with Himmelsbach. The very reason I fired and refused to work with certain writers who wanted to do a story about this.
They couldn't keep the facts straight...and this or that had to be said this way for such a story to sell....my decision was - it will be the truth or nothing.

Example:
Such as "he whispered on his deathbed" - that is NOT true. He didn't whisper and shouted very LOUD - the "OH F--- LET IT DIE WITH ME."

Writers and news reporters have a way of changing or ganishing the truth...just as the forum has different views and points - hence myth becomes truth in the eyes of the reader and/or truth and myth become so entangled that the truth is deeply buried.

Becomes Jambalya - put it in the pot and season it your way.

Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

[snowmman 3]

Quote

Quote

I checked my Norjak book to cross check what the trutv link was saying up above about the Scott/Himmelsbach meeting.

Himmelsbach does recommend searching the Washougal area in his book, but that seems based just on a watershed that drains in the columbia upstream of the money find area, not based on any stuff from Scott. He mentions Bohan's conversation on being wrong on I'm starting to think the Scott/H meeting is myth.

No, the Scott - Himmelsbach meeting is not a myth, but somehow the faulty information you have was a myth. There was never any discussion of the plane being West of I-5. I also spoke to the Co-pilot yrs ago and nothing was said about being West of I-5.

It was due to the Money Find and there was lots of Speculation about WHY the money was found where it was. The only explanation they had was the Washougal so the myth was created to justify the Money Find.

Being West of I-5 is a myth or speculation by a reporter. As I have said before talk to the Co-pilot and rely on the reports made by the Chase planes and the communications taking place between the plane and the land.

I am unable to handle the technical language - since Sluggo left we do not have anyone who has the experience and knowledge to put this Myth to bed.

Sluggo is just a random guy. He wasn't there either.

I've read your post and still am not sure what data you're sharing. You have nothing that confirms a H./Scott meeting right?

You're not saying H. told you he met with Scott, are you? If so, why isn't it in the book?

I'm totally confused about what you're saying. It sounds like you just have some hearsay stuff?

[georger 197]

Quote

Quote

Snow & Ckret:

Is it your understanding Scott revised his flight path estimate (in a discussion with H in 1980) to say he
was further EAST of his original estimate, - not WEST ?

TIA.
Georger

Thanks Snow. But surely not west of I5 during the
whole flight (SEA-PDX). Perhaps only near PDX
which might explain the four or five mystery X's
west of the penciled fp at Portland ?

In any event, the fp on the FBI map does intersect I5 at Portland, briefly

G.

• Quote

[snowmman 3]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Snow & Ckret:

Is it your understanding Scott revised his flight path estimate (in a discussion with H in 1980) to say he
was further EAST of his original estimate, - not WEST ?

TIA.
Georger

Thanks Snow. But surely not west of I5 during the
whole flight (SEA-PDX). Perhaps only near PDX
which might explain the four or five mystery X's
west of the penciled fp at Portland ?

In any event, the fp on the FBI map does intersect I5 at Portland, briefly

G.

I dunno. I updated my last posts here. Now I think the whole thing about flight path estimates being changed is all hearsay. I had never really doublechecked all this stuff about H./Scott etc, and took it for granted that there was some change of predicted flight path.

But now I'm thinking after looking at it now, that it's all a bunch of mixed up, bad articles, and misreporting after H. suggested further east (Washougal) based on no data.

In 1971, the news articles seemed to talk about Woodland and Lake Merwin/Amboy search area...so I guess I assumed there was fuzziness.
Woodland is right next to I5, at the columbia/lewis confluence.

I think that dual mention helped make me think there was fuzziness back then, when there wasn't?

• Quote

[snowmman 3]

Ckret has stated two theories that seem to have entered the myth/fact area

1) myth: That the bag was needed to protect the money and/or rubber bands, given it's condition.

There's no data that supports that. A thin layer of sand would provide equal UV protection, and physical support also. (to prevent wind or other motion-related damage). Both sand and bag would be wet, so decomposition rates should be similar, when comparing money+bag under sand, vs just money under sand. (same with rubber bands)

The real question should be how much sand and water covered the money over the years, and how it changed over time. More would delay composition more?

The bag is probably immaterial to any "protection" issues.

2) myth: The bag is needed to keep 3 bundles together when they arrive at Tena's Bar from some other DZ, by water transport.
We know single dollar bills stick together when wet. It's reasonable to believe multiple bundles might also stick together, especially if they decomposed together before moving. This would be supported by the statements from Ingram saying the bundles were on top of one another (although he described the bundle find in multiple ways)

Basically, I'm pointing out that Ckret focused on the need for the bag, without proving the bag was needed..i.e. he just assumed it was needed.

Since no bag was found, it's just as reasonable to decide, that the bag was never at Tena's Bar, and there is nothing that says it needed to be.

(edit) I welcome the mythbuster's episode that demonstrates the maximum size stack of dollar bills that will stick together and be moved in water by current flow. Pop Science Quiz: If 2 bills stick together, then why not 3? If 3 why not 4? If 4...continue to N.
What causes the limit when the resulting "mashup" is in water?

[georger 197]

Quote

Quote

I checked my Norjak book to cross check what the trutv link was saying up above about the Scott/Himmelsbach meeting.

Himmelsbach does recommend searching the Washougal area in his book, but that seems based just on a watershed that drains in the columbia upstream of the money find area, not based on any stuff from Scott. He mentions Bohan's conversation on being wrong on I'm starting to think the Scott/H meeting is myth.

No, the Scott - Himmelsbach meeting is not myth, but somehow the faulty information you have was a myth. There was never any discussion of the plane being West of I-5. I also spoke to the Co-pilot yrs ago and nothing was said about being West of I-5.

It was due to the Money Find and there was lots of Speculation about WHY the money was found where it was. The only explanation they had was the Washougal so the myth was created to justify the Money Find.

Being West of I-5 is a myth or speculation by a reporter. As I have said before talk to the Co-pilot and rely on the reports made by the Chase planes and the communications taking place between the plane and the land.

I am unable to handle the technical language - since Sluggo left we do not have anyone who has the experience and knowledge to put this Myth to bed.

NOTE: I had no contact with Himmelsbach prior to 1996
June or July of 1996 was the first contact..

NOTE: Himmelsbach knows that some errors are in the book.
As you know someone else wrote the book with Himmelsbach. The very reason I fired and refused to work with certain writers who wanted to do a story about this.
They couldn't keep the facts straight...and this or that had to be said this way for such a story to sell....my decision was - it will be the truth or nothing.

REPLY> Thanks for the help Jo. I agree a lot of
speculation followed the money find. No obvious way to link it given the facts at the time.

Georger

• Quote

[Ckret 0]

Quote

Ckret has stated two theories that seem to have entered the myth/fact area

1) myth: That the bag was needed to protect the money and/or rubber bands, given it's condition.

There's no data that supports that. A thin layer of sand would provide equal UV protection, and physical support also. (to prevent wind or other motion-related damage). Both sand and bag would be wet, so decomposition rates should be similar, when comparing money+bag under sand, vs just money under sand. (same with rubber bands)

The real question should be how much sand and water covered the money over the years, and how it changed over time. More would delay composition more?

The bag is probably immaterial to any "protection" issues.

2) myth: The bag is needed to keep 3 bundles together when they arrive at Tena's Bar from some other DZ, by water transport.
We know single dollar bills stick together when wet. It's reasonable to believe multiple bundles might also stick together, especially if they decomposed together before moving. This would be supported by the statements from Ingram saying the bundles were on top of one another (although he described the bundle find in multiple ways)

Basically, I'm pointing out that Ckret focused on the need for the bag, without proving the bag was needed..i.e. he just assumed it was needed.

Since no bag was found, it's just as reasonable to decide, that the bag was never at Tena's Bar, and there is nothing that says it needed to be.

(edit) I welcome the mythbuster's episode that demonstrates the maximum size stack of dollar bills that will stick together and be moved in water by current flow. Pop Science Quiz: If 2 bills stick together, then why not 3? If 3 why not 4? If 4...continue to N.
What causes the limit when the resulting "mashup" is in water?

I agree with you to a point but you have to also throw the other factors into the mix. If the money was buried there it had to have happened after 1974. there is nothing that points to that having happened, for it to be so you have to add human elements. If you do that you have to develope further motives, additional facts and so on......

[snowmman 3]

Quote

I agree with you to a point but you have to also throw the other factors into the mix. If the money was buried there it had to have happened after 1974. there is nothing that points to that having happened, for it to be so you have to add human elements. If you do that you have to develope further motives, additional facts and so on......

I didn't suggest the money was buried there by humans in my last post. I said the bag wasn't required for protection or transport by water.
You jumped to the conclusion I implied human burial (although I have said that before).

There's nothing that says the bag was needed for protection or transport by water. That's the myth you've created. You've assumed 3 bundles couldn't move together without the bag.

[snowmman 3]

I've mentioned this a couple of times but here's another article (from 2/14/80)

There were a number of reports, including supposed quotes from Himmelsbach, that the FBI found additional fragments of money when they searched after the Ingram find. There were even some reports they were found deeper. [than Brian's reported find depth]. The depth info may be wrong though...maybe a incorrect mixture of "3 foot deep digging" plus "money found".

In any case, here's another article from 2/14/80 (attached)

some interesting things
1) A photo of the [early period of the] dig that we already have in high resolution, is in the article.

2) There is a quote that one agent said he dug up a "formless, fist-size clump of money he described as 'a wadded up bunch of $20 bills'". This is hard to believe. But let's think about it: Maybe was describing the Ingram find. But when Ingram turned the money in, it was separated into 12 bundles. It wasn't a fist-sized clump. So that's interesting.

3) Himmelsbach is quoted as saying more money was dug up by agents Tuesday afternoon and Wednesday morning.

georger has commented on the lack of official fact. For instance the exact details of the dig. I bet no one knew that a backhoe on a tractor was eventually involved until I produced that AP picture. We knew deep trenches were dug. Early pictures showed college students with shovels and rakes. But that AP picture suggests that careful digging with shovels and rakes didn't produce the deep trenches. Which suggests that we don't know what else could have been there.

Basically, there's enough fuzzy information, that we can't make firm detailed analysis of what the money find tells us. (combined with the multiple descriptions Brian has provided of the bundle find).

(edit) Oh I just noticed. For all you Level 3 certified Cooper experts out there: this article is one of the few that reference Denise as being part of the money find. There was an interview elsewhere where Denise (5) claimed to have found the money and then Brian (8) got involved. So even the "brian found it first" thing is questionable.

[snowmman 3]

1) The Ingrams went to the FBI Monday? or latest Tuesday? I think it was?. Interestingly, the previous article I posted already mentioned the Washougal theory, based on the money find. That was printed for 2/14/80...just 2 days after Tuesday 2/12/80

So in 2 days, the FBI (Himmelsbach) formulated the Washougal theory. Obviously very little evidence could have been processed properly in two days. So any quotes by Himmelsbach about money grinding in streams, or Washougal, are total bullshit created in 48 hours or less.

2) Here's a new article. No new info, but interesting to read.
This is from 2/13/80. (Wed.)

(quote)
"I thought it was play money," said Denise Ingram, 5, of Vancouver Wash., in an interview after the FBI disclosed that the money was from the Cooper hijacking. She said she and her cousin, Brian Ingram, 8, "both found it. It was buried in the sand. I gave it to Brian, so he could hand it to my aunt Pat."

The child said she was on a family outing at a popular fishing sand bar for several Ingram relatives and their children.
(endquote)

The article goes on to say that the father Harold apparently told the story of Brian finding the money while scooping out the firepit.

(quote)
Brian's father, Harold Ingram, told reporters the family was scooping out a spot for a fire on the river bank when Brian pulled the wet and tattered bills out of the sand.
(endquote)

[Ckret 0]

Quote

Quote

I agree with you to a point but you have to also throw the other factors into the mix. If the money was buried there it had to have happened after 1974. there is nothing that points to that having happened, for it to be so you have to add human elements. If you do that you have to develope further motives, additional facts and so on......

Theory not a myth; I am not forwading as fact the money was in the bag, I am saying given the set of facts it is most probable.

I didn't suggest the money was buried there by humans in my last post. I said the bag wasn't required for protection or transport by water.
You jumped to the conclusion I implied human burial (although I have said that before).

There's nothing that says the bag was needed for protection or transport by water. That's the myth you've created. You've assumed 3 bundles couldn't move together without the bag.