47 47
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

Trying to play catch up here.  Do I understand all the posts correctly that the new analysis of the diatoms indicates a certain time frame for the arrival of the bills on Tina Bar, and that arrival time could not have been late November of 1971?

Yes, it suggests the money arrived from the river on TB around May/June... a delay between NORJAK and the money arrival.

IMO, per the Palmer Report, the money packets were found in the upper "fresher" debri layer.. the older more deteriorated debri layer was lower. This also supports a later timeframe. 

Kaye believes the diatoms could only have entered the interior of the packet when fanned out in the river in late spring/early summer.

 

The money packets spent some time somewhere between NORJAK and landing on TBAR.

 

"Objects in your TBAR theory are closer than they appear"

 

Share this post


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

Flyjack: Where is "somewhere"? Could somewhere be in a creek or upstream, etc?  Or does it lean more towards being in someone's possession, such as a stewardess?

It suggests the money went into and out of the Columbia in a very short timeframe around late spring/early summer.. IMO, within a few years of its discovery.

 

That does limit the theories... that could be human possession but not necessarily that simple.

I did come up with another theory long ago that actually fits. There was a dump called St John's Landfill just upstream W side of Portland on the Columbia Slough. It was a mess, people dumped stuff everywhere illegally. If the money were stashed or hidden in debris/garbage and thrown into the dump area it and made it into the Slough, it is an easy trip to TBAR..

 

https://www.oregonlive.com/environment/2011/03/portlands_st_johns_landfill_on.html

 

 

 

-a96eb81d0a9150f1.jpg.d058dfae9b0d53b9155770f619067142.jpg

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, RobertMBlevins said:

Possible, but if you hid the money in a messy dump, chances are you would never find it again. Dumps back then were also very public. Anyone could pay the fee and just drive in there, unload what they had. And the garbage is being moved around all the time as well. You may as well send it through a shredder, rather than trying to hide anything there. 

Tom Kaye thinks 'human intervention' was somehow involved in the money delivery to Tina Bar, no matter how it was done. 

No one has yet to come up with a plausible explanation on HOW a flight with so much cash on board...that somehow a portion of that money ended up a minimum of six miles away on a riverbank along the Columbia later. About the only way this could realistically happen is if Cooper went kerplunk into the Columbia as it passed over Portland. 

But the evidence shows Cooper jumped prior to the flight crossing the Columbia, in fact, several miles prior the flight reaching the river. The indicator light for airstairs flashing on when the door was opened, and then off for just a second when Cooper jumped, (stairs relieved of his weight)...the position of the flight at that time can be narrowed to at least a point NORTH of the river, probably by several miles. 

It's an enigma for sure. 

I will tell you how we dealt with this question in the movie script. The truth is...no one has the ultimate answer. We have KC and Geestman taking a side trip on the way back to Bonney Lake, and KC tosses some of the money into the Columbia. It ends up at Tina Bar. This may not match the diatom thing, but it's a simple explanation. However, I am holding out for another change in the script that has KC going to the river some time after the FBI gets their John Doe warrant in 1976. 

It was just a theory,,

but I am not suggesting the money was hidden in the dump to be retrieved.. that makes no sense. It could have been either intentionally discarded and thrown into the garbage to get rid of it or hidden somewhere in something that was eventually tossed into the dump..

An example might be hiding the money in a house wall, the house is torn down and the debri is tossed in the dump..  or something like that.

There are probably other theories that fit,, I still like the "Tina kept it theory",,, She handled money from the bag and she was a few miles upstream of TBAR a 1978/79.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


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

Requires an awful lot of process steps...has to be stored in a house...house must be torn down...no one notices cash coming up in the debris during the tear-down, loading up, delivery, and dump process...then you have to move it into the Columbia somehow...moving it miles from that dump...gets buried on a beach somehow, shards and all...it's a long chain of events. 

Speaking of theories, or even diatoms...

Never in my wildest dreams would I have thought single-celled algae would cause such a ruckus over at the DB Cooper Forum. They are nearly going to blows over there about it, filing complaints, and next will be eating their own young in frustration. I already suggested if they want answers to their questions, or solutions to the problem, they should consult a diatom expert. There aren't a whole lot of them, (let's face it, algae CAN be boring) but there ARE some experts to consult. 

This is why it is better to just sit around a campfire with a Bushmills and soda and discuss the case. People don't generally go crazy, and it's a lot more fun. B)

Standard bickering between a few of the same people.  However, that should not take away from the fact that this discovery is potentially very impactful.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

Requires an awful lot of process steps...has to be stored in a house...house must be torn down...no one notices cash coming up in the debris during the tear-down, loading up, delivery, and dump process...then you have to move it into the Columbia somehow...moving it miles from that dump...gets buried on a beach somehow, shards and all...it's a long chain of events. 

 

Actually it is a very plausible theory... the money finds its way into the dump/landfill either intentionally discarded or unintentionally hidden in something.

The landfill is right on the Columbia Slough surrounded by water with no sealing and environmental standards we have today.. and there was crap dumped everywhere. If something got into the Columbia Slough it is an easy downstream trip to TBAR.. I read a news report that TBAR fisherman would find garbage including shoes...  where did the shoes come from?? the dump?

Share this post


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

Mostly the same TWO people, Georger and Robert99. I don't think it's THAT big a deal, but they remind me of candidates in a Democratic debate sometimes. B)

Side Note: Not a real big deal but AB staff have finally 99.999% determined that the ugly comments that often appear on Bruce's news blog under the name 'Johnnie Greene' are actually posted by Georger. One way we determined this was to go back to screenshots of posts by Georger years ago at the Cooper Forum where he uses my name in his insults. We matched up several of them almost exactly to the ones he makes now, and those other ones were from YEARS ago. They are virtually the same, especially where he talks about our housecleaning business. One thing about Georger....he is predictable. It was actually Greg the Techie Guy who sent me the report, and did the work. I don't know why he bothered, but he did. 

This proves two things as well.

First, AB has a long memory. Second, we're pretty good at analyzing phrases and words and can often match them to a person. It's a skill you learn by a lot of reading, and editing more than sixty books. People write in a certain way, even if they don't realize it. And to someone whose business is all about words...sometimes it is like looking at fingerprints. Hard to explain, but it's true. 

As far as the comments, I couldn't care less. But the next time you see something from 'Johnnie Greene,' just think 'Georger' instead. This guy went to college? Taught students for years? What a laugh. I wouldn't hire the guy to teach fingerpainting in kindergarten, and neither would I trust him around young children. His online behavior is downright filthy. Thankfully, views and comments to Bruce's blog are WAY down. His last few articles don't have a single comment. (Johnnie will probably see this and 'fix' that LOL.) I'd post up 'Johnnie's' latest examples of immaturity here, but that's against the rules. Go look for yourself. (Sorry, Flyjack...but old Johnnie mentions you a couple of times as well. Guess Georger is angry at the both of us.)

As far as our cleaning business goes, we work a single house a day now, maybe four days a week. We still clear nearly $60,000 a year with the side work, like housesitting for folks. I never work more than six hours a day, either. When we were doing it two or three homes a day and five days a week, we were making so much money that we were able to put enough away for retirement and have never had a penny in debt since. Georger can swallow that for a while... ^_^ And anytime I wanted to take a break, a vacation, a camping trip...I never had to ask the boss. I just DID it. 

I agree with the idea that stashing the ransom money in a house, tearing down that house, transporting the debris to a dump, and the money somehow ending up in the nearby Columbia, and washing a few miles downriver to Tina Bar, etc...YES, it's a theory. Is it one hell of a big stretch? Also yes. 

Robert: I'd be willing to bet money that Georger is not Johnnie Greene. Not even close.  I have a thought of who it is, based on writing style, and other parts of posts.  Georger just does not write like that, he does not take stabs like that.  The individual who is Johnnie Greene clearly has an issue with you Robert, whether it is personal, or they feel like they need to target you.  My assessment is Johnnie Greene knows a decent amount about the case.  I don't have a positive or negative relationship with Georger, just the standard one that most people would have with a scientist/professor/meticulous type.

Johnnie Greene is not likely Georger or Robert.

If you're going to analyze text, look into a concept called stylometry.  Matching screen shots of posts is very different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CooperNWO305 said:

Robert: I'd be willing to bet money that Georger is not Johnnie Greene. Not even close.  I have a thought of who it is, based on writing style, and other parts of posts.  Georger just does not write like that, he does not take stabs like that.  The individual who is Johnnie Greene clearly has an issue with you Robert, whether it is personal, or they feel like they need to target you.  My assessment is Johnnie Greene knows a decent amount about the case.  I don't have a positive or negative relationship with Georger, just the standard one that most people would have with a scientist/professor/meticulous type.

Johnnie Greene is not likely Georger or Robert.

If you're going to analyze text, look into a concept called stylometry.  Matching screen shots of posts is very different.

Would a Stylometry analysis also reveal that CooperNWO305  blogs on Shutter's site as Andrade?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Robert99 said:

Would a Stylometry analysis also reveal that CooperNWO305  blogs on Shutter's site as Andrade?

R99: I don't know how effective stylometry is with all the posts out there.  There are complexities.  It is not just plug and play.  However, for someone that posts as often as Georger or a few others, it is hard to hide a certain style, and those of us who read the forum often, start to see patterns naturally.  Someone like yourself who has deep theories likely sees the patterns too.  The Johnnie Greene posts have a very different flavor than Georger's posts.  Possibly the same person, but unlikely.  And if Johnnie Greene is the same as Georger or yourself, then it has taken some effort to mask the comments. I just don't see it being you guys. 

Example: If someone pops up and starts talking a lot about microscopes, diatoms, titanium, then it might be Tom Kaye.  If it's about a western flight path, then maybe you or EU.  If it is about Klansnic, then it's likely one of two people.  But, the Johnnie Greene comments don't seem to have a lot of details about the case, mainly just attacks on one person, Robert Blevins. So it's hard to tie it to a specific person. I'm just guessing off some things I observed.  I don't have the time to compare all the comments and tie them to multiple screen names.

A similar concept was used in the Unabomber case.  

 

Share this post


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

R99: I don't know how effective stylometry is with all the posts out there.  There are complexities.  It is not just plug and play.  However, for someone that posts as often as Georger or a few others, it is hard to hide a certain style, and those of us who read the forum often, start to see patterns naturally.  Someone like yourself who has deep theories likely sees the patterns too.  The Johnnie Greene posts have a very different flavor than Georger's posts.  Possibly the same person, but unlikely.  And if Johnnie Greene is the same as Georger or yourself, then it has taken some effort to mask the comments. I just don't see it being you guys. 

Example: If someone pops up and starts talking a lot about microscopes, diatoms, titanium, then it might be Tom Kaye.  If it's about a western flight path, then maybe you or EU.  If it is about Klansnic, then it's likely one of two people.  But, the Johnnie Greene comments don't seem to have a lot of details about the case, mainly just attacks on one person, Robert Blevins. So it's hard to tie it to a specific person. I'm just guessing off some things I observed.  I don't have the time to compare all the comments and tie them to multiple screen names.

A similar concept was used in the Unabomber case.  

 

Let me ask you another question.  Do you know of software programs that could be used to compare several different and very short sequences of letters and determine what their differences and similarities are?  I have five sequences of letters with each sequence being about 60 to 70 letters long.  Three of these sequences are strongly related to each other and the other two are also strongly related to each other.  In addition, all five sequences are related in some uncertain manner at this point.  If you wish, please reply by PM on Shutter's site. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Robert99 said:

Let me ask you another question.  Do you know of software programs that could be used to compare several different and very short sequences of letters and determine what their differences and similarities are?  I have five sequences of letters with each sequence being about 60 to 70 letters long.  Three of these sequences are strongly related to each other and the other two are also strongly related to each other.  In addition, all five sequences are related in some uncertain manner at this point.  If you wish, please reply by PM on Shutter's site. 

If you just want to know the differences, Microsoft Excel can do it very easily.  If you want to figure out the patterns of the differences, that's a little harder to do, but possible.  PM me on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Robert99 said:

Andrade, can you add to the answers to my questions above?

I'm not an expert on stylometry, though there are apps online that analyze writing styles that you could use.

Regardless, I'm not NWO305. If you pm me, I can give you my personal email. I have been writing under my own name for 19 years.

Edited by Andrade1812

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, RobertMBlevins said:

No worries. I believe you. Only people with a side agenda do multiple online identities in the Cooper case. You also have a book out there on the case, and are unlikely to engage in stuff like that. I don't know much about you, but I never thought you had a side agenda going. B)

Cut it out Robert Blevins. We've been through this before.  Some people just want their privacy.  Your agenda has always been Kenny Christenson, so let's not start throwing rocks from a glass house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

There is nothing wrong with wanting privacy, which is different from anonymity. I screen my phone calls. I have a spam filter. No visitors (including media) to the house unless I invite them, or they make a request. I screen comments to my YouTube and WordPress. Only friends I approve can see my Facebook. That is privacy. Anonymity is different. But anonymity is the wrong approach if you plan to create a book or answer media questions regarding the Cooper case. Examples of people who realize this:

Geoffrey Gray
Skipp Porteous
Bruce Smith
Eric U 
Almost anyone who has done a Cooper-related book
Yours truly

I don't really care if people want to go anonymous, but if they plan on a book, or are asked to appear on a television show, or participate somehow in the creation of a feature film on the case...they are being silly. There is no credibility available to you in anonymity. You have no background, no website, no history, nothing people can check to see if you are a real person with credentials. But having said that, there is still nothing inherently wrong with it unless your only plan is to discuss the case ad infinitum with other anonymous (or known) people. 

The 'wrong,' if you can call it that, is when you use that anonymity as a crutch to attack others, i.e. sniping at people unfairly or very nastily, from behind a rock. Georger, aka Johnnie Greene, aka using other known characters in the Cooper case exploration, etc is guilty of that in spades. You have not seen his posts outside of Dropzone or the Cooper Forum, or the Bruce Smith site. He has been all over the damn place. (His comments to the Regina Winkles articles were SO bad, using several different names all with the same IP address...that Matt Mullenweg, the co-creator of WordPress, actually got involved.) He has called my house at nearly midnight...the same day he was banned from DZ for personal attacks. I let it go to voice mail. 

Have the online attacks taken a toll on people? Have they alienated one investigator from another? 

Is the Pope Catholic? Yes. Look at the reality of things. Several things now exist in that reality as a result.

Here is a partial list:

1) The Ariel Store will probably never reopen, and all the Cooper memorabilia there will end up in different hands, mostly by members of Bryan W's family, who are eager to sell off everything, as well as the property, and split it up. They believe they were unfairly treated in Dona E's will. (So far, Bryan has been able to fend them off, fortunately. But he has told me about this situation personally.) Absolutely NO ONE supported AB's efforts to help get that store back up again, even when my own mother proposed putting up over $100,000 from my trust fund. (I inquired with her about doing this the day after we did the fundraiser there in 2016 with Travel Channel.) Poison pen messages and lies by Bruce Smith, such as the one where he says I threatened him, caused me to cancel the whole idea. Most of this stuff came from Smith, Georger, and to a lesser extent, Shutter. Senseless. Shutter's excuse is that he had a blanket policy of non-support to anything done by AB of Seattle in the Cooper case. If we proposed a fundraiser on a Cooper campout and the money was going to Childrens' Hospital in Seattle...he would be against it. 

2) Shutter has a very big forum going on the case, but these days not that many people are paying attention. It doesn't help when people post up their latest podcast, or their latest evidence, or their upcoming book, and all the public gets to see is this:  "You are not allowed to view pictures or links. Register or Login." That is silly beyond belief by the way. Imagine if the same thing was going on at Dropzone, Quora, or WordPress. 

3) Online anonymous attacks, or attacks by people using the same usernames they have used for years, have slowed to a degree, but haven't stopped. I guess that is the GOOD news. 

4) Except for a small, very closed group of people, no one works together on practically anything, or supports anyone else's efforts with the public on the case. But the only result of that has been less public interest in the case. The one time I made all the details for one of our Cooper Campouts public, (the one we did last year south of Portland) Georger and his friends jumped out of the woodwork using (again) Bruce Smith's site and made threats against the event, saying they would show up at the gathering spot for the trip and cause trouble. As a result, Tom English and I (he's a friend from the Infamous Nissan support forum) had to move the meetup spot at the last minute. 

5) The attacks, the online non-cooperation, the refusal to share certain information, the lack of mutual support...all of this has contributed to some media types ignoring the crazies and the anonymous folks...and coming to people like Geoff Gray and myself instead. What Cooper investigators forget is that THEY aren't the only ones who see the 'bad stuff'. This has caused the hate meter to go off the scale occasionally with some people in Cooperland...but these people refuse to admit they were the ones who caused this situation in the first place. Now we approach the fiftieth anniversary of the hijacking, and my email box has been popping up with more messages on the case than ever before. Sometimes I get a media type who asks me 'who is an expert,' or 'who else can I talk to?' and I don't have a clue where to send them. Maybe Geoff Gray, but except for his participation in the movie, i.e. helping on the script for historical accuracy, he wants nothing more to do with Cooperland. And let's face it...he's helping on that because he's getting paid to do that. I like Geoff, but I wanted to help Bruce Smith instead, get HIM the job. God knows he could use the money. He foolishly rejected the idea, and now blames me, hates me even more than he did BEFORE I made him the offer. This could only happen in Cooperland. Bruce's mistake is that he thought I was BS'ing him about the offer from the production companies. When he realized later that I wasn't...he gets mad at ME about it. Go figure. 

6) Cooper conventions that should have been packed houses and REAL public events have been nothing but a few people showing up who mostly know each other anyway. I call them 'mutual back-scratching events'. On the last one, media coverage was less than the one held the year prior. Not a single picture was released of the crowd at the Kiggins Theater. When I inquired on this situation later, I was told by a solid source not THAT many people actually showed up. It was twenty bucks to get in, and you couldn't even buy tickets at the door. EU deliberately trashed our idea for holding the combination event in Portland, even though (looking back now) he would have done much better had he kept his word. He was offered the hosting job and the chance to introduce everyone he wanted to be on the speaker list, as well as some real celebrities. The Cooper Lookalike contest for those $1,000 in Amazon gift cards (donated by AB of Seattle) would have packed the house easily. He insulted a lot of people doing that, and had some secret support along the way, which was not revealed until later. As a result, I am no longer interested in participating in any future Cooper conventions. 

7) I know that if all the major players in Cooperland see this post, many of them won't like it, but....the result of all that has happened is very simple. You will all be left in the dust by the public. No one will care, nothing you want will get done. The store in Ariel is probably now history. Major conventions will never happen, and your books will continue to sell poorly. And you will leave me as the sole winner in all of this, and afterward I will be more than happy to extricate myself from Cooperland and move on to something else. For example, I just finished my movie script based on the famous novel by the late, great Marjorie Phleger, Pilot Down, Presumed Dead and it's a damn good story. I own all the rights to that book, assigned to me years ago by both the family and Harper Collins. This project is much more fun than Cooper and comes with far fewer headaches. I may even try getting an agent to approach Disney on it, due to the nature of the story. 

Cooperland these days is nothing to me but a big, fat headache that I wish to end as soon as possible... ^_^ LOL our final Cooper Campout is coming in June (if weather is okay). I may just do something I don't generally do on these trips. I may just drink myself silly and PASS OUT. Haven't done that since I was in community college. (*laughs*) 

Robert: My intent was not to be harsh, but mainly to say that you and most all of us have some sort of agenda, whether it is notoriety, wanting to get attention for a specific suspect, or just wanting to dig really deep into the case.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

You wrote the below:

But anonymity is the wrong approach if you plan to create a book or answer media questions regarding the Cooper case. Examples of people who realize this:

Geoffrey Gray
Skipp Porteous
Bruce Smith
Eric U 
Almost anyone who has done a Cooper-related book
Yours truly

______________________________________________________________________________________

I frankly see this as a little passive aggressive.  I've seen you go after a number of these people, but in this post you use them in a positive way.  You're all over the map on this.  Some days you hate them, but today you like them?

You have a bone to pick with Georger and others, but that does not mean that they should not be able to stay private or anonymous.  And, just because someone is writing a book or using their real name, does not mean they are above board or of good character.

My feeling on all of the anonymity/privacy is this:

1.  If someone wants to use a screen name that is not their real name, let them do it.  That's the internet.  If they want to use different screen names across different platforms (Shutter's site, here, Mountain News) then let them.  Who really cares?

2.  If someone wants to use their real name, then it does not make someone else less worthy who uses a screen name.

3.  If you are using a second screen name to lob attacks (Johnnie Greene), then I do have some issues with that. However, Johnnie seems to only be targeting you, so in your shoes, I'd be asking myself "Did I do something to deserve this?"

4.  You can write a book anonymously, it's been done many times, and in the Cooper world. And if you are posting anonymously, it does not mean you plan to write a book.  Frankly, writing a book in 2020 does not hold the same weight as it did even 10 years ago.

5.  Writing a book does not automatically make you a legitimate person, just because you use your real name.  If the book is filled with garbage, all you've done is used your real name to put garbage into the system.  I'm not going to give accolades to those people.  However, overall I think most of the books out there on Cooper are pretty good.  I think Bruce's and Martin's are the two best because they don't push a suspect, and they focus on the case.  Your focus on Kenny has been really good for the case, as has Rackstraw, and Reca.

That's my two cents.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/21/2020 at 10:27 PM, RobertMBlevins said:

The upcoming documentary won't go very far with the viewing audience if at the end the audience feels cheated, as they did in D.B. Cooper - Case Closed?

That was a complete fiasco because Rackstraw (smartly) refused to speak a word to them, and also because Tina Mucklow rejected Rackstraw as the hijacker. That show went from possible boom to an absolute bust at the end. NYT reporter Billy Jensen was a part of that production, and later distanced himself from it. I was emailing him back and forth for a while after the show came out. He said two basic things:  He was frustrated because the more senior members of that production were ignoring things that Jensen thought pointed to Rackstraw's innocence. His second 'big point' was that he wanted nothing further to do with the show, or the pursuit of Rackstraw as the hijacker. I don't want to go overboard talking for Jensen, so I won't add any further to this assessment. Truth is, he never ventured anything more to me than those two points. 

(Although let's face it...if we're talking about Rackstraw, he wasn't exactly Mr. Perfect LOL. He may have even killed his own stepfather and gotten away with it.)

But he certainly wasn't DB Cooper. 

The one thing I could never figure out with Tom Colbert and his team was how they came to the idea that a guy 29 years old with blue eyes was Cooper. Geez, Louise. Nothing told them they might be on the wrong track with that? They had to be led into the Reality Hotel by Tina Mucklow. She booked them a room on the top floor, penthouse suite, and went on her way back to Springfield.

It was also supremely foolish of them to offer up a six-photo array to Mucklow where NONE of the other pictures were of a DB Cooper suspect. Only Rackstraw's mug, and five unknown people. If they had laid out ALL the main suspects and Mucklow ID's someone other than Rackstraw as the hijacker...at least they could have taken credit for it. Instead, they bet everything on Rackstraw and got burned. I was able to get a screenshot from the show to show this is what they did...it's buried on either C or D drives somewhere, maybe one of the backup flash drives, but I did post it here once at Dropzone after (guess who) Shutter challenged me on it. It's back there in pages somewhere. 

This upcoming documentary featuring EU will attempt to prove that Sheridan Peterson is Cooper. EU will probably sprinkle in a few lies about Peterson here and there to 'prove' his point. Then you have some people boonie-crashing around the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge looking for 'evidence' in an effort that EU probably knows himself is hopeless. When they come up with zip, all it will do is make EU look more foolish than he already is now. We're probably looking at D.B. Cooper - Case Closed: The Sequel. 

I don't mind watching another Cooper documentary, though. I just don't expect much will come of it. If Eric Ulis has Candyland dreams of a movie pointing to Sheridan as the hijacker, he can forget it. I found out long ago that any movie that accuses someone of a crime, someone who has not been formally accused...and that person's family is still living...that studios won't go near such a project, especially with a private citizen...unless they can get a signed release from either the person himself (Sheridan) or if he is no longer living...the family. And I can assure you that Sheridan Peterson's family will sign no such document. Not in this life, not even in the next. I was required to get a release from KC's family in order for THAT project to move forward. EU will never get such a release from Sheridan's family. 

Why? Because Sheridan himself, as well as his family members, are PISSED OFF at anyone and everyone who has proposed he was Cooper. They know better, and they don't like it. And they know all about EU, I can tell you that with confidence. It's even possible that the legal eagles at the production company doing the documentary will tell the director that they can't bring up Sheridan's name publicly in the show. It invites an instant lawsuit, made easy by the fact that Sheridan was already investigated by the FBI, freely gave a DNA sample, and cooperated with them fully without asking for a lawyer. If the show is dumb enough to bring up his name...they would just be asking for it. 

I know I'm wasting my time responding to this, Robert, but the only conclusion I can come to is you did not watch the History Channel Cooper broadcast.

The show did not advocate Rackstraw as D.B. Cooper.  Quite the opposite. At the end, only Tom Colbert remained as believing that.  Not only did Tom Fuentes and Billy Jepsen not believe it, the rest of Colbert's staff also bailed.

 

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.

47 47