DB Cooper

[BruceSmith 3]

Quote

"...I also have a Cooper-related question, and it concerns Tosaw's book. (D.B. Cooper - Dead or Alive)
The question is THIS:

How accurate do you believe this book portrays events up to and including the actual JUMP by the hijacker? I would like some opinions on this, because I have recently read this book and was wondering if Cooperland considers it reasonably accurate, or was poetic license...."

Good question, Bobby, but it might be more useful if you identified exactly what parts of Tosaw's book you think might be poetically licensed.

I think that some of what he writes is probably a projective narrative, particularly what he says came from Tina. I never spoke with Tosaw about Tina, but I have heard repeatedly from Galen that Tosaw told him that Tina was in rough shape mentally, and that most of her responses were variations of "I don't remember..."

So, I think it's likely that Richard filled in the blanks.

But remember, Tosaw had some serious chops. He was a former SA and was an attorney.

He was also a nice guy and very cordial when I spoke with him on the phone just before his death in 2009, so I'm sure he got good stuff in his interviews.

Tosaw's brother Mike was also an FBI agent, and I believe he worked the Norjak case in Seattle for a bit, so I believe that Richard either got direct access to Norjak stuff from Mike, or got the inside scoop at family dinners.

Tosaw also knew what he was dealing with in terms of the turgidity of the Bureau, as evidenced by his suing them in court to get the money back for the Ingrams.

Note: that was the third lawsuit brought against the FBI by folks involved in the DB Cooper case - Tosaw and the Ingrams, Norman Hayden and his efforts to get his parachute back, and Galen's FOIA/equal access suit in 2005.

And only Gawd knows what the shenanigans were in SLC with Karen McCoy and the FBI, and the back room deals needed to make her happy with Russ and Bernie, while still owing her for getting the drop on McCoy in Virginnie.

So, Bobby, please remember the history of these lawsuits the next time you're tempted to tell me the FBI are working hard and really want the case solved, etc.

[skyjack71 0]

mrshutter45

Jo, do you mind supplying the information from the Lawyer that made me take down Galen's comments? I seem to recall you talking about doing that, but I took his comments down for my own reasons, and out of respect for you! I believe you thanked me several times dealing with his behavior.

I can't control who goes where Jo, I'm not a babysitter. I don't direct people either Jo. I don't have any remote control, or drugs to tell Robert99 what to do, or say, or where he should go, or any other poster for that matter.

Galen is long gone Jo, I tried to reason with him, but he just ignored my warnings. I never had any contact with him prior to coming to the forum. nobody evaluates posters here do they prior to joining? Galen was removed on September 18, 2014.

Why are you guys so obsessed with Galen? he can't post on either forum, does he have magic?

I have not taken anyone from here Jo. I have received PM's from here asking for the link. I've never contacted anyone who didn't contact me first. NMIwrecks joined, but I wasn't aware until I seen his comment here. 1000 thingy guy also joined, and was trapped in the spam circle. Sean Walsh contacted me through here, and others as well.

I didn't say "made you take them down". He is a personal friend who counciled me...he was able to see your site even when I could not. Yes, you took them down voluntarily & I appreciated that - the things GALEN stated were slanderous & entirely untrue. We had actually completed the complaint to the State of WA against Cook when you took them down. I kept them just encase.....Galen sure did straighten up REAL fast.


Galen's magic is his sneaky snake way of using of others...he attempted to manipulated me & did manipulate others. He spoke untruths which I could prove to be false....some with his own private communications to me.

Remember I knew he was Glacier Boy and then he couldn't figure out HOW I knew that. Galen could never figure out where I got all of my information on him. It pays to have "connections".

What his motive is or was - no one knows, but I think I do & I have stated it before, but I will leave that in the past since he is no longer involved in the Cooper story. What I have stated above was in this thread - so it is NOT like I am revealing anything new.

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

[skyjack71 0]

BruceSmith

I think that some of what he writes is probably a projective narrative, particularly what he says came from Tina. I never spoke with Tosaw about Tina, but I have heard repeatedly from Galen that Tosaw told him that Tina was in rough shape mentally, and that most of her responses were variations of "I don't remember..."

But remember, Tosaw had some serious chops. He was a former SA and was an attorney.

He was also a nice guy and very cordial when I spoke with him on the phone just before his death in 2009, so I'm sure he got good stuff in his interviews.

What I quoted above should give you your answers. Remember - this & it is the truth.

Tosaw and Duane's brother & wife knew each other and attended the same Bible classes & belonged to the same boat club.

Do you really believe everything Galen claimed? If so you are in deep doo doo.
With what you now know about Tina - do you not realize she is much more than you thought. YOUR lust for her was deplorable and sick.

Note that some of the flight tests for the 727's was done with the co-operation of individuals who would later be questioned about the skyjacking...At this time I can only tell you the one I have openly made public - one who had a family connection to Weber...Gilliam.

There were others also involved who were question & the all had connections to N.W as some time in their lives. Specifically more than one had Intermountain Communications contacts.

It took a ranger or the equivalent of to pull of the skyjacking....he had to know every element. He had to be someone NO ONE would miss.


You do know that from the very beginning the FBI suspected this was an inside job, but they were quickly put aside!

Two individual know to Weber were questioned - but how did Weber know those individuals. You already know Gilliam was one of them - but I am not at liberty to disclose the others. ALL of them had the same connections Weber did - but Weber was the unknown....there were 3 unknown individuals - but which one actually commited the crime?

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

[skyjack71 0]

The post you just made Robt99 is trash that has no place in the DZ.

Evidently everyone else is on board with having decent discussions - don't you think it is time you grew up & let go of the name calling. You are upset because you know that you do not have all the knowledge you claim & that you have knowingly made false statement.

Wonder why it is so important you discredit JO? Curious!

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

[Robert99 37]

skyjack71

The post you just made Robt99 is trash that has no place in the DZ.

Evidently everyone else is on board with having decent discussions - don't you think it is time you grew up & let go of the name calling. You are upset because you know that you do not have all the knowledge you claim & that you have knowingly made false statement.

Wonder why it is so important you discredit JO? Curious!

Jo,

That post mentions some of the actual claims that you have made against some people on this thread.

Now you are claiming that pointing out your negative remarks is somehow an attempt to discredit you.

Jo Weber has discredited herself and doesn't need any help from anyone else.

And Jo Weber is now saying that her own posts have no place on DZ.

That may well be her most accurate statement in 18 years.

Robert99

[Robert99 37]

RobertMBlevins

1) Due to a number of key statements made by the hijacker, it is almost certain he was either FROM the Puget Sound area, or had lived there for an extended time.

2) Unless Cooper went into a river or lake, it is likely some evidence of him on the ground would have turned up by now.

3) Working under the premise of Point 2, this narrows things down to one of two scenarios. Cooper died in water and was never found, or...Cooper made it to the ground and got away. The possibility he died on the ground is much less likely.

4) One of the biggest, and yet least-discussed mysteries is that of the missing non-working reserve chute. If it couldn't be attached or used, and wasn't found on the aircraft in Reno, then WHERE is it? This is also an item that would possibly float, even if it landed in the water. This is also the most likely item that would ever turn up in the future, perhaps stumbled upon by a hunter someday. The premise being: If it couldn't be attached and later came up missing, perhaps the hijacker just tossed it out the back of the aircraft before he jumped.

5) The hijacker's intention was to jump much further north than he actually did, otherwise he would not have requested that the airstairs be in the down position at takeoff. This is an added indicator he was probably from the Puget Sound area.

6) The parachutes provided to Cooper were not owned by Earl Cossey, nor did he deliver them to the airport. Cossey has claimed these things for years, and this calls into question why the FBI would use him alone to identify any possible chute finds. Since Cossey was not truthful on these points for decades, it also questions his motivation to correctly identify any chutes brought to him by the FBI. He either may not have been able to ID them, or may not have WANTED to.

7) Assuming that the REAL Cooper attended the annual celebration in Ariel at least ONCE over the years...someone out there probably has a picture of him and doesn't even know it.
8) If Cooper lived, the lowest point of his life was probably November 26, 1976...when the TV news announced that the FBI had successfully obtained a John Doe warrant (at the very last minute) that bypassed the Statute of Limitations.

9) If Cooper went into the Columbia River and died, the most likely place today where any evidence of him would be found is NOT the river. It would be along the coast near the mouth of the Columbia. For example, when you see those logs piled up on the shores along the coast, they come from the rivers, not from across the ocean. Items coming down rivers in Washington and Oregon have a habit of later washing up on the coast beaches.

10) There has never been any consistent agreement by the witnesses, or by law enforcement personnel on three basic items: What the hijacker looked like exactly, the weather the evening of the hijacking, and the hijacker's general demeanor while he was on board the aircraft. The descriptions do differ, and there have been reports it stormed that night, as well as ones saying the weather was moderate, and depending on who you talk to, that the hijacker was polite, or was abusive and threatening.

Replies to Blevins list above by number:

1. The only factual conclusion that can be drawn is that Cooper knew the approximate driving time from McChord AFB to SEATAC.

2. Evidence of Cooper did turn up on the ground. It is the money that he was seen tying around his waist and which later turned up at Tina Bar.

3. The simple fact that the money did turn up at Tina Bar, and at least a significant period of time after the hijacking, is evidence that he landed on solid (or reasonably so) ground and not in water.

4. Basically, what happened to the missing reserve parachute is meaningless. There is no evidence that it was a positive factor in the jump. If Cooper jury rigged it to the back pack parachute, it would have a negative impact on his survival. The same goes for the missing brief case.

5. Cooper apparently did want to jump relatively early and near the Seattle area. This does not mean that he was from the Seattle area but it probably suggests that he wanted to jump reasonably close to civilization.

6. I believe the FBI has stated that a number of means were used to identify the Amboy parachute (the one Blevins is obviously referring to). And the FBI had the parachute documentation paperwork and knew how all four parachute were obtained regardless of what Cossey said.

7. That assumption is beyond belief.

8. The assumption that Cooper was still holding some of the money five years after the hijacking is another real stretch. Basically, Cooper didn't have anything to worry about after five years. He was home free if he was still breathing.

9. There is no evidence to support any such scenario.

10. I believe that the FBI stated that the descriptions of Cooper given by each of the flight attendants were consistent. The weather on the evening of the hijacking was measured as usual by the National Weather Service and can be found in their records. The flight attendants are the ones who interacted with Cooper throughout the hijacking and their descriptions of his actions take precedence over that of others who were not involved with him.

Robert99

[smokin99 0]

RobertMBlevins

Five Questions for the Seattle FBI in the Cooper Case:

1) If your own file, created shortly after the hijacking, states that Earl Cossey did not own, or deliver to the airport, the parachutes he claimed he did...then why did you go along with this idea for years afterward and continue using him as the expert witness? (file attached)

2) Due to the previous item, how can you be sure that Cossey was motivated to...or ABLE to...correctly identify the parachute found in Amboy in 2008?

3) What criteria was used exactly to dismiss the Amboy parachute as possibly being Cooper's?

4) Is the 'flight path map' currently on the FBI's website, the one showing the alleged route of Flight 305, reasonably accurate?

5) Is there any possibility that Flight 305 was actually WEST of the flight path shown on the map, and overflew the Tina Bar area where the money was found in 1980?

I have other questions, but those are the first ones I would ask them.

1 and 2: Ultimately in this case, the relevance of being the one who owned or delivered the chutes vs the guy that packed the parachutes is essentially nil.

From 377: "As an FAA licensed rigger he would have filled out packing cards which remain with the chutes in special pockets designed to hold them. He would have entered, among other data, the date of the inspection/repack and his name and FAA number. The packing card would have listed the type and size of the canopy. He also would have threaded a ripcord pin and pin receiving cone with breakable twine and sealed the joined ends with a lead seal bearing symbols that would uniquely identify him."

Maybe the person that did all of that lead sealing that uniquely ids him as the re-packer considers all of his chutes "my chutes". Kind of like if I design an outfit, you may own the outfit, but I still consider it mine in a weird sort of way. Like, "Norm has one of my chutes".

You at least have to take into consideration that you might be hung up on semantics about ownership when it is quite possible that Earl Cossey, as a master rigger who handled and packed the chutes, knew more about the parachutes than Norman Hayden who, by his own account, had never used it.

but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

[377 20]

Cooper's rigs. Photo attached.

377

2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

[ParrotheadVol 70]

RobertMBlevins

EDIT: I'm sorry to hear about your problem with OSHA. Back in the 80's they fined my boss $1,000 because he made me stand on the top rung of a 28-foot ladder with my head stuck under the eaves of the house. I was shooting caulk into a gap at the roof peak.

During my 14 years with Comcast I did that many times. I've even had to stand on the very top of the side rails of a 28 foot ladder because a utility pole was so tall. OSHA would have made an example out of me for sure and I would have gotten fired. Don't matter though. The sons of bitches fired me anyway this past September. Best thing that ever happened to me.

"They were saying he was never gonna make it now, now that daylight had set in. But later that night, they were shining those lights back down on that mountain again." - Todd Snider

[skyjack71 0]

Robt99 can you learn how to be civil and discuss this without trashing anyone?

If not then please excuse yourself.

You are entitle to your opinion but you can't seem to do that in an objective way.

I have tried to deal with you as others have....if you haven't something positive to state - just stay over in that other place.

You ONLY come here to trash me and have NOT contributed anything on a positive note regarding the crime.....period.

My memory is intact and I tell what I remember - not from one trip but from a total of 3 trips to the area. The Fazios disupute your claims - and yet, you can go there yrs later and say what existed on the river in 1979 did not exist....now that is somewhat absurd.

I have WA locals that dispute your claims.
You are looking at ariels obviously not correctly logged. In 1971 to 1979 you have NOT presented pictures or proof of your claims...

Ariels can be tampered with and you need to go to the source in Vancouver to the actual court house records and pull the old pictures if they have not been destroyed.

Pictures used for property appraisal and county taxes....you might find a BIG ole surprise....then you can EAT your dismissive and rude posting.

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

[skyjack71 0]

Who is THAT woman...just curious? The equipment looks very new, but the car behind her is old...What is with that picture. They really have chutes with Cooper on the strapping?

Just curious question from an old woman who has never been near a chute other than an old military chute in a museum.

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

[377 20]

Jo,

The chutes are 60s era just like the car. They are military emergency chutes modified for skydiving.

The Cooper labeling is something added by the user, not a part of a stock military rig.

377

2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

[skyjack71 0]

377

Jo,

The chutes are 60s era just like the car. They are military emergency chutes modified for skydiving.

The Cooper labeling is something added by the user, not a part of a stock military rig.

377

Interesting! So what does the Name Cooper have to do with this pic.

The woman looked like a woman I met by the name of Jeanne - not sure of the spelling. The woman I met was in the early 1980's and she was connected to a very high profile person.

Where was that photo taken?

The woman I met still had that same hairdo, but she was older & heavier. I was 5'7" at the time & she was at least 3 inches taller than I was....she was what I considered stout, but not fat. She was very statuest...and very elegant at the same time. The woman I am referring to I met in the Ft.Lauderdale area and she was on a very very expensive yacht designed for entertaining.

There was 2 master quarters down stair - I didn't see them. A large cooking galley & entertainment area on the main deck - but also cooking facilities on the lower level...I was only on the main deck designed for entertainment...tables, chairs, bar.

I assume there was a crew area on the main deck I was on & perhaps also down below....this was a VERY large yacht.

Seeing that photo made me think about this all again. I am sure there is NO connection - but, since you said the picture was from 1960 - what was the reasoning for Cooper being on the straps. Was their last name Cooper or was their plane named Cooper or was Cooper a manufacturing company of chute accessories. If it was a personalization - why the name Cooper.

Just lots of STUPID OLE WOMAN questions!

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

[smokin99 0]

RobertMBlevins

1) Due to a number of key statements made by the hijacker, it is almost certain he was either FROM the Puget Sound area, or had lived there for an extended time.

Smokin99: Or it shows that he planned the hijacking and knew it from looking at a map. As Robert99 notes, the only factual conclusion that can be drawn is that Cooper knew the approximate driving time from McChord AFB to SEATAC. There is nothing that says how he knew this and you definitely have nothing to make this "almost certain". Speculation that he took the flight previously is only speculation that he took the flight previously. Tells us nothing about where he was from or his personal familiarity with the area. Plus maybe he did take a previous flight but maybe it was to familiarize himself with sights and distances so that he could make them THINK he was from the area?

Quote

2) Unless Cooper went into a river or lake, it is likely some evidence of him on the ground would have turned up by now.

For someone that lives in that area you should know that there have been numerous reports of whole planes going missing and have never been found. Google it.

Quote

3) Working under the premise of Point 2, this narrows things down to one of two scenarios. Cooper died in water and was never found, or...Cooper made it to the ground and got away. The possibility he died on the ground is much less likely.

See response to number 2 – in addition to planes, also google bones found in Washington and Oregon and how long the person had been missing/dead before they were found.

Quote

4) One of the biggest, and yet least-discussed mysteries is that of the missing non-working reserve chute. If it couldn't be attached or used, and wasn't found on the aircraft in Reno, then WHERE is it? This is also an item that would possibly float, even if it landed in the water. This is also the most likely item that would ever turn up in the future, perhaps stumbled upon by a hunter someday. The premise being: If it couldn't be attached and later came up missing, perhaps the hijacker just tossed it out the back of the aircraft before he jumped.

I agree with Robert99 – meaningless unless it turns up tomorrow in his boney hand. if he threw it out ahead of his jump, which is the only time that he could have thrown it out if he didn’t take it with him, what would this narrow down? If he threw it out when he first opened the door, it could be far away from where he finally jumped.

Quote

5) The hijacker's intention was to jump much further north than he actually did, otherwise he would not have requested that the airstairs be in the down position at takeoff. This is an added indicator he was probably from the Puget Sound area.

I agree that his intention was most likely to jump pretty soon after takeoff, and one indication of that could be that he requested that the stairs be down -- but it is not the only reason he might have made this request, and you definitely can't make the leap that this makes it likely he was from the Puget Sound area. You are making speculations and labeling them as probable truths based on nothing. Where he wanted to jump could have been solely based on what he had researched and planned to do and nothing at all with where he was from.

Quote

6) The parachutes provided to Cooper were not owned by Earl Cossey, nor did he deliver them to the airport. Cossey has claimed these things for years, and this calls into question why the FBI would use him alone to identify any possible chute finds. Since Cossey was not truthful on these points for decades, it also questions his motivation to correctly identify any chutes brought to him by the FBI. He either may not have been able to ID them, or may not have WANTED to.

Cossey, as a master rigger, and the one who packed the chutes was in the better position to identify the chutes than the owner, who says he never used the chute. I ‘ve already given logical rasons why Cossey said that they were his chutes, but that is really not relevant as to whether he was in the better position of describing and/or identifying the chutes. Additionally, the FBI did not “admit” to only talking to other experts by phone. That is something you claim from piecing together articles, and making supposition but it never actually says that. The primary articles say that “the conclusion was based on a totality of the evidence, and NOT just the opinion of Cossey, …..that several other experts who stepped forward after the find were consulted.” Please provide proof that the FBI ever admits that additional experts were “only” consulted by phone.

Quote

7) Assuming that the REAL Cooper attended the annual celebration in Ariel at least ONCE over the years...someone out there probably has a picture of him and doesn't even know it.

Speculation no doubt based on wishful thinking. It’s also been speculated that there are aliens in refrigeration at Area 51. Jeez for you to even put that on a list titled 10 things we can assume to be true is just plain silly.

Quote

8) If Cooper lived, the lowest point of his life was probably November 26, 1976...when the TV news announced that the FBI had successfully obtained a John Doe warrant (at the very last minute) that bypassed the Statute of Limitations.

I imagine the lowest point of his life if he lived, was that he didn’t get to keep all (or maybe any) of the money. If he did worry, which we have no way of knowing -- he has no doubt relaxed now since he still hasn’t been found. And I hate to tell you (from your response to R99 - but federal judges ave been known to bypass the Constitution more than a few times. That’s why cases are overturned in appeal and supreme courts.

Quote

9) If Cooper went into the Columbia River and died, the most likely place today where any evidence of him would be found is NOT the river. It would be along the coast near the mouth of the Columbia. For example, when you see those logs piled up on the shores along the coast, they come from the rivers, not from across the ocean. Items coming down rivers in Washington and Oregon have a habit of later washing up on the coast beaches.

Unless he is being held down by trees or other obstacles. Items that enter the Columbia River might wash up, but many are also just never found. Again – google Columbia River suspected drownings and boat wrecks and you will find multiple instances where the body and debris was never found.

Quote

10) There has never been any consistent agreement by the witnesses, or by law enforcement personnel on three basic items: What the hijacker looked like exactly, the weather the evening of the hijacking, and the hijacker's general demeanor while he was on board the aircraft. The descriptions do differ, and there have been reports it stormed that night, as well as ones saying the weather was moderate, and depending on who you talk to, that the hijacker was polite, or was abusive and threatening.

I will agree on parts of this one - there have been multiple witness descriptions of the weather . As to the hijacker's demeanor, I think only Himmelsbach subscribes to the theory that he was overall abusive and threatening (though I don’t remember if those are his words).

The crew makes reference to one or two instances when the hijacker was forceful and getting upset - example when he thought they were stalling, - but overall Flo and Tina spent the most time with him and they say that he was not the nasty character that Himmelsbach claims. I believe words like calm and polite were used.

As for the descriptions: the three attendants' descriptions - which I believe the most weight should be given to:
Flo said 6 feet - 6'1"". Tina said 5-ten to 6 feet. As for the suit – dark brown with a black stripe might actually look black to someone. I think we can safely say the suit was dark, the shirt was white, and the tie was black. Additionally, both Tina and Flo said straight hair – Flo said parted on left, Tina said narrow sideburns. We are not told whether they differed with each other on the sideburns and part. AS for dk brown or black - hair - again I think that this can be safely described as dark brown/black without any quibble. In certain light and to certain people, dark brown looks black. As a child my hair was so black that it looked blue. As I got older it changed to more of a darkest brown but people still called it black. Point being I don't think it would have made my description wrong if someone said black or dk brown- it had elements of both.

As for the eyes, I have been doing an experiment for a couple of years (unscientific I know -- but most people that I have asked (and I've asked quite a few) describe even dark hazel eyes as hazel though a few have said hazel brown as opposed to hazel green) - but no one has ever said that a person with any degree of hazel was brown - they always preface it with "hazel".

As for identikit differences, Geoff’s book only gives complete identikit info for Alice Hancock, I don’t think he gave complete info for Flo and none for Tina - though I'm basing that on memory.

I'm not well versed in each of the identikit numbers, are you? Is Gray? Gray alludes that the descriptions are different because of the different identikit numbers - but how do you or Geoff know that the numbers they chose aren’t virtually identical except for some small something?

As far as I know, there is nothing that Gray reports - other than the one other passenger description - that changes the basic / general description that was given out at the beginning. That’s what a composite is – you take the most relevant and most cited descriptions and go from there. But aside from that, I don't know if there is anything to suggest that the original description that the FBI originally put out was grossly incorrect.

Having said that -- when I first read the original article on KC by Gray, I thought he favored the composite. I still do, but I can’t make the descriptive stuff that doesn’t fit go away – nor can I or you do anything more than speculate about KC's role in a hijacking.

If we want to assume speculations as truth, then Tina probably saw the guy standing the most and in the closest proximity – plus she had herself as a measuring stick -- so by that reasoning, why not say that the hijacker had to be taller than 5’10?

Most of the 10 things you say that we can assume to be true are just pure speculation and no more or less probable than that. Really, don't you think this case has enough myths without proclamations of what "we" can assume to be true without any basis in fact.

but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

[smokin99 0]

RobertMBlevins

Smokin99 says in part:

Quote

'You at least have to take into consideration that you might be hung up on semantics about ownership when it is quite possible that Earl Cossey, as a master rigger who handled and packed the chutes, knew more about the parachutes than Norman Hayden who, by his own account, had never used it...'

Yes, I hear you on this. Here's a problem, though: Cossey also claimed for years he actually DELIVERED the chutes to SeaTac, and that is not true either. From all accounts, his only involvement was a phone call where he directed them to Linn Emerick. But he has claimed for years he owned the chutes that Hayden owned...and delivered them. Neither of those things are true. Why he did all that and continued feeding that line to the press for years is beyond my understanding. He also dismissed the Amboy chute in seconds when the FBI showed up at his house with it in the trunk of a car.

I've already given you a reasonable explanation for ownership - Show me in an article where Earl Cossey is "quoted" as saying I actually delivered the chutes in a vehicle to the airport.

I don't know for sure but I don't think that you can. And, if you can, tomorrow I will show you accounts of eye witnesses and or principals in this case and other cases who, as the years go by took on a higher profile in the case then was apparent at the time. As time goes on, our memories change, our egos expand every time we are called by a newspaper reporter or CBS news, and our part in the production gradually goes from being a grip to having a starring role. That is human nature, and if you think Earl Cossey or the co-pilot or anyone else that was eager or willing to talk to reporters was immune to it then you are likely wrong.

but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

[smokin99 0]

RobertMBlevins

Yeah...well when anyone decides anything at all is true, or has any basic parameters to offer on the case...make sure to let everyone know.

I think the biggest activity around here is to dismiss virtually everything, and mostly without question.

Question EVERYTHING. Even the Seattle FBI isn't perfect, although I think they do a pretty damn good job.

Don't be a drone.

The basic parameters have been offered - just because I object to someone proclaiming "truths" based on pure speculation on those parameters does not make me a drone.

I question plenty, as do others. -- but I don't insist my speculations must be "true" in order to skew the outcome.

but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

[smokin99 0]

RobertMBlevins

Quote

'I don't know for sure but I don't think that you can. And, if you can, tomorrow I will show you accounts of eye witnesses and or principals in this case and other cases who, as the years go by took on a higher profile in the case then was apparent at the time. As time goes on, our memories change, our egos expand every time we are called by a newspaper reporter or CBS news, and our part in the production gradually goes from being a grip to having a starring role. That is human nature, and if you think Earl Cossey or the co-pilot or anyone else that was eager or willing to talk to reporters was immune to it then you are likely wrong...'

Actually, there are plenty of examples where Cossey claims ownership of the chutes and says he delivered them to the airport. If you are willing to dismiss facts in the case and simply 'go along' with something, even if it is untrue, then you will get exactly nowhere finding any real answers.

QUESTION EVERYTHING.

Do you read anything that other people write or do you start forming answers before you are finished. People who can never listen will never be able to learn or interact successfully with other people who might also have opinions and know a little something. Why must you always assume someone else's motives. Do you not realize that this is why many people that used to be on this forum do not want to discuss anything with you?

QUESTION EVERYTHING: I asked you several questions and you didn't answer any of them. I don't go along with anything unless it makes sense. Answer my questions, You make the claim ...so show me an article where Cossey is quoted as saying "I delivered the chutes to the airport" Should be a simple thing if there are so many examples.

And then tell me about all yours and Grays certifications in identi-kits.

Google the other points I gave you and then tell me about things we can assume to be "true".

LOL....You are the one that is wanting to make up new facts out of speculation and I am QUESTIONING EVERYTHING!!

but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

[smokin99 0]

RobertMBlevins

Quote

'Do you read anything that other people write or do you start forming answers before you are finished. People who can never listen will never be able to learn or interact successfully with other people who might also have opinions and know a little something. Why must you always assume someone else's motives. Do you not realize that this is why many people that used to be on this forum do not want to discuss anything with you?'

That is their choice. People can be mercurial on the internet. Of course I read what people write. I've edited about sixty books in my part-time career doing that. You want an example on Cossey and the chutes and the claims that have gone for years? Here's one of the most recent. One of dozens in the media since God-knows-when.

***'While the plane was flying to Sea-Tac, an airport manager called a now-defunct Issaquah sky-diving school. Instructor Earl Cossey, now a retired junior high school teacher, packed a Navy-issue NB6 and delivered that parachute with three others...'

That one is from the November 24, 2014 article by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. This one even claims he packed a chute that was already packed, and actually in the possession of Norman Hayden at the time. Says he delivered all FOUR chutes. If you do a solid check, you'll also find that Cossey claimed these same things in telephone interviews over the years. If you don't believe the article(s) are accurate, then the place to go is the source who published the article and challenge its accuracy.

I don't just make this stuff up, you know.
Well You still don't get the point. That article was after he died so he could hardly have quoted anything. I can give you article after article that regurgitates the exact same narrative every year around November 24 and a lot of it is factually incorrect year after year. But they still go in and set the story up with the same ole stuff.

I don't need a source because I don't have a problem with Earl Cossey even if he did outright say this -- because I don't think he had to own or deliver them to be relevant to the discussion of the chutes. You make the claim -- Show me an article where it QUOTES Earl Cossey as saying " I delivered the four chutes"

I'm not saying he hasn't been attributed with delivering at least two and that he didn't evolve to probably believing he had a larger role.
I'm saying this because there is original documentation that shows he was instrumental in obtaining the chutes and maybe in his mind that is synonymous with supplying them . BUT... if you look at the articles of the time he is mentioned as the packer of the chutes to begin with and I do not know that I have ever seen an article from the day that quotes him as saying "I delivered chutes to the airport". Hey, maybe I'm wrong but I just don't believe you will find them. And if you do you will also find articles of the day that do not give him this role....And most of the older articles have other errors that we know today. As for present day articles -- writers go in assuming his role, and he might not correct them, but show me where he ever actually says it. Most of the writers assume prior knowledge of this case and most get a lot of stuff wrong.

So I'm not going to argue the point any longer because regardless of the truth or not of these semantics - no one that I know disputes the fact that he was a master rigger and he packed the chutes and had knowledge of same.

Just saying...I know people want to use "Cossey lied" to guide other discussions such as the ineptness of the FBI, or to question his knowledge of the chutes etc, but the fact that he possessed knowledge of the chutes remains.

but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

[BruceSmith 3]

RobertMBlevins

William Gossett as Cooper: I think at some point GC realized that he was flogging a dead horse. He used pictures taken years before the hijacking as comparison for Cooper.

See the attached picture. It shows Gossett at his retirement ceremony at Ft. Lewis, WA only 18 months after the hijacking.

Think he's Cooper? If an Army guy still on active service had pulled off the hijacking, the FBI would have figured it out long ago.

Active duty? Where did you get that, Bobby?

I thought Gossett was at Weber State College on November 24, 1971 and scheduled to teach his ROTC classes. His presence on campus has not been confirmed to my knowledge. I understand that he has been mustered out of the Army several months before.

You know differently? Please tell. Or is this the ram-jet parachute of Wolfie Truth-Telling?

Just askin'.

Wink-wink, Rikesie!!

[BruceSmith 3]

Quote

"...the Seattle FBI isn't perfect, although I think they do a pretty damn good job...."

Why do you say that, Bobby? What have they done a pretty damn good job of?

1. Record-keeping, like the details of the chutes or who sat in Row 18?

2. Maintaining up-to-date contact information on witnesses, such as Flo's phone number?

3. Processing leads, such as from Marla?

4. Transparency and appropriate dealings with the public, such as when they've been sued by the Ingrams, Galen, and Norman?

5. Securing evidence, such as the cigarette butts, or the shards from Tina Bar?

Just askin'.

[BruceSmith 3]

Quote

"...If he was mustered out 'months before,' (date of the hijacking) then why did they give him a retirement ceremony eighteen months after the hijacking? He's in uniform at the ceremony as well..."

I ain't advocating for Gossett, Bobby. I'm just asking for the facts of his DBC suspect-hood.

You said he was in active military service. I said, Hunh?!

[BruceSmith 3]

RobertMBlevins

My name isn't 'Bobby' and you should ask the Seattle FBI these questions. Always go to the source.

Don't any of you actually go out there and question sources, make inquiries, ask for clarification from these sources? This is not a real good policy if you're actually seeking the truth.

Bobby, you are driving me crazy! I am asking you about you and your observations!!!

You said the FBI was doing a p.d.g.j. and I asked why.

Can't you simply answer the question?

[BruceSmith 3]

Quote

Always go to the source.

I do.

You're the source. You made the statement that the FBI is doing a p.d.g.j and I asked why you said that.

[BruceSmith 3]

Quote

"...Well, he's wearing a uniform at his retirement ceremony in 1973. That is some time after the hijacking. You're asking the wrong guy. You should ask Cook for clarification. He's the expert on Gossett, and the one who published the picture on the internet, right?..."

Contrary to popular opinion, Galen and I rarely talk about Gossett. He wants to keep the juicy stuff for his book, and I'm not that ga-ga-goo-goo over Gossett, so I get all my stuff from John Craig. He says Weber State College on November 24, 1971.

[NMIWrecks 0]

smokin99

***
1) Due to a number of key statements made by the hijacker, it is almost certain he was either FROM the Puget Sound area, or had lived there for an extended time.

Smokin99: Or it shows that he planned the hijacking and knew it from looking at a map. As Robert99 notes, the only factual conclusion that can be drawn is that Cooper knew the approximate driving time from McChord AFB to SEATAC. There is nothing that says how he knew this and you definitely have nothing to make this "almost certain". Speculation that he took the flight previously is only speculation that he took the flight previously. Tells us nothing about where he was from or his personal familiarity with the area. Plus maybe he did take a previous flight but maybe it was to familiarize himself with sights and distances so that he could make them THINK he was from the area?

Quote

2) Unless Cooper went into a river or lake, it is likely some evidence of him on the ground would have turned up by now.

For someone that lives in that area you should know that there have been numerous reports of whole planes going missing and have never been found. Google it.

Quote

3) Working under the premise of Point 2, this narrows things down to one of two scenarios. Cooper died in water and was never found, or...Cooper made it to the ground and got away. The possibility he died on the ground is much less likely.

See response to number 2 – in addition to planes, also google bones found in Washington and Oregon and how long the person had been missing/dead before they were found.

Quote

4) One of the biggest, and yet least-discussed mysteries is that of the missing non-working reserve chute. If it couldn't be attached or used, and wasn't found on the aircraft in Reno, then WHERE is it? This is also an item that would possibly float, even if it landed in the water. This is also the most likely item that would ever turn up in the future, perhaps stumbled upon by a hunter someday. The premise being: If it couldn't be attached and later came up missing, perhaps the hijacker just tossed it out the back of the aircraft before he jumped.

I agree with Robert99 – meaningless unless it turns up tomorrow in his boney hand. if he threw it out ahead of his jump, which is the only time that he could have thrown it out if he didn’t take it with him, what would this narrow down? If he threw it out when he first opened the door, it could be far away from where he finally jumped.

Quote

5) The hijacker's intention was to jump much further north than he actually did, otherwise he would not have requested that the airstairs be in the down position at takeoff. This is an added indicator he was probably from the Puget Sound area.

I agree that his intention was most likely to jump pretty soon after takeoff, and one indication of that could be that he requested that the stairs be down -- but it is not the only reason he might have made this request, and you definitely can't make the leap that this makes it likely he was from the Puget Sound area. You are making speculations and labeling them as probable truths based on nothing. Where he wanted to jump could have been solely based on what he had researched and planned to do and nothing at all with where he was from.

Quote

6) The parachutes provided to Cooper were not owned by Earl Cossey, nor did he deliver them to the airport. Cossey has claimed these things for years, and this calls into question why the FBI would use him alone to identify any possible chute finds. Since Cossey was not truthful on these points for decades, it also questions his motivation to correctly identify any chutes brought to him by the FBI. He either may not have been able to ID them, or may not have WANTED to.

Cossey, as a master rigger, and the one who packed the chutes was in the better position to identify the chutes than the owner, who says he never used the chute. I ‘ve already given logical rasons why Cossey said that they were his chutes, but that is really not relevant as to whether he was in the better position of describing and/or identifying the chutes. Additionally, the FBI did not “admit” to only talking to other experts by phone. That is something you claim from piecing together articles, and making supposition but it never actually says that. The primary articles say that “the conclusion was based on a totality of the evidence, and NOT just the opinion of Cossey, …..that several other experts who stepped forward after the find were consulted.” Please provide proof that the FBI ever admits that additional experts were “only” consulted by phone.

Quote

7) Assuming that the REAL Cooper attended the annual celebration in Ariel at least ONCE over the years...someone out there probably has a picture of him and doesn't even know it.

Speculation no doubt based on wishful thinking. It’s also been speculated that there are aliens in refrigeration at Area 51. Jeez for you to even put that on a list titled 10 things we can assume to be true is just plain silly.

Quote

8) If Cooper lived, the lowest point of his life was probably November 26, 1976...when the TV news announced that the FBI had successfully obtained a John Doe warrant (at the very last minute) that bypassed the Statute of Limitations.

I imagine the lowest point of his life if he lived, was that he didn’t get to keep all (or maybe any) of the money. If he did worry, which we have no way of knowing -- he has no doubt relaxed now since he still hasn’t been found. And I hate to tell you (from your response to R99 - but federal judges ave been known to bypass the Constitution more than a few times. That’s why cases are overturned in appeal and supreme courts.

Quote

9) If Cooper went into the Columbia River and died, the most likely place today where any evidence of him would be found is NOT the river. It would be along the coast near the mouth of the Columbia. For example, when you see those logs piled up on the shores along the coast, they come from the rivers, not from across the ocean. Items coming down rivers in Washington and Oregon have a habit of later washing up on the coast beaches.

Unless he is being held down by trees or other obstacles. Items that enter the Columbia River might wash up, but many are also just never found. Again – google Columbia River suspected drownings and boat wrecks and you will find multiple instances where the body and debris was never found.

Quote

10) There has never been any consistent agreement by the witnesses, or by law enforcement personnel on three basic items: What the hijacker looked like exactly, the weather the evening of the hijacking, and the hijacker's general demeanor while he was on board the aircraft. The descriptions do differ, and there have been reports it stormed that night, as well as ones saying the weather was moderate, and depending on who you talk to, that the hijacker was polite, or was abusive and threatening.

I will agree on parts of this one - there have been multiple witness descriptions of the weather . As to the hijacker's demeanor, I think only Himmelsbach subscribes to the theory that he was overall abusive and threatening (though I don’t remember if those are his words).

The crew makes reference to one or two instances when the hijacker was forceful and getting upset - example when he thought they were stalling, - but overall Flo and Tina spent the most time with him and they say that he was not the nasty character that Himmelsbach claims. I believe words like calm and polite were used.

As for the descriptions: the three attendants' descriptions - which I believe the most weight should be given to:
Flo said 6 feet - 6'1"". Tina said 5-ten to 6 feet. As for the suit – dark brown with a black stripe might actually look black to someone. I think we can safely say the suit was dark, the shirt was white, and the tie was black. Additionally, both Tina and Flo said straight hair – Flo said parted on left, Tina said narrow sideburns. We are not told whether they differed with each other on the sideburns and part. AS for dk brown or black - hair - again I think that this can be safely described as dark brown/black without any quibble. In certain light and to certain people, dark brown looks black. As a child my hair was so black that it looked blue. As I got older it changed to more of a darkest brown but people still called it black. Point being I don't think it would have made my description wrong if someone said black or dk brown- it had elements of both.

As for the eyes, I have been doing an experiment for a couple of years (unscientific I know -- but most people that I have asked (and I've asked quite a few) describe even dark hazel eyes as hazel though a few have said hazel brown as opposed to hazel green) - but no one has ever said that a person with any degree of hazel was brown - they always preface it with "hazel".

As for identikit differences, Geoff’s book only gives complete identikit info for Alice Hancock, I don’t think he gave complete info for Flo and none for Tina - though I'm basing that on memory.

I'm not well versed in each of the identikit numbers, are you? Is Gray? Gray alludes that the descriptions are different because of the different identikit numbers - but how do you or Geoff know that the numbers they chose aren’t virtually identical except for some small something?

As far as I know, there is nothing that Gray reports - other than the one other passenger description - that changes the basic / general description that was given out at the beginning. That’s what a composite is – you take the most relevant and most cited descriptions and go from there. But aside from that, I don't know if there is anything to suggest that the original description that the FBI originally put out was grossly incorrect.

Having said that -- when I first read the original article on KC by Gray, I thought he favored the composite. I still do, but I can’t make the descriptive stuff that doesn’t fit go away – nor can I or you do anything more than speculate about KC's role in a hijacking.

If we want to assume speculations as truth, then Tina probably saw the guy standing the most and in the closest proximity – plus she had herself as a measuring stick -- so by that reasoning, why not say that the hijacker had to be taller than 5’10?

Most of the 10 things you say that we can assume to be true are just pure speculation and no more or less probable than that. Really, don't you think this case has enough myths without proclamations of what "we" can assume to be true without any basis in fact.

I pretty much agree with what the "99"s said (Smokin, Robert). As for the russet suit issue, anybody who spends any amount of time around vintage clothing via thrift stores and estate sales has seen sun faded black suits and tuxes. Black fabric, when exposed to sunlight, takes on a reddish brown hue over time. This can also happen with bleaching or over-washing. Maybe the Cooper suspect spent some time in a sunny climate, say Mexico. Or maybe his suit was older and had been washed many times.