47 47
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

(edited)
41 minutes ago, dudeman17 said:

Just an objective observation...

I believe Robert is neither Canadian nor Latin American, yet he just indicated a phrase similar  to one used by some to infer that Cooper might have been foreign. Anything is possible, but sometimes such a phrase is used just for emphasis.

It isn't quite the same context,,  

A better analogy is walking into a US bank withdrawing from your account and using "US/American" money...

How many times did Robert mention money without the "US" qualifier...  many many more times...

 

but it isn't conclusive, it is rare.. I have always said that.

It doesn't indicate Cooper was Canadian or "Latin American",,  it suggests a foreign connection/influence,, could be an American.. 

The other factors to consider are that Cooper demanded to fly to Mex, and was described as Latin American/Mexican in features and characteristics,,, those also suggest a foreign angle but are not conclusive.

 

The pilots said "American currency" and Tina said "US currency"....  you have two references.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found this image of a North West Airlines  B-727,, It looks identical to the NORJAK plane comparing it to the sled test images.

It might be NORJAK but NWA ordered several so it could be a sister plane.

but this would be the view for the passengers looking back at Cooper.

I have been trying to get a measurement for the height below the storage rack and lights, I think Cooper would barely stand up between the light bars..

 

 

e56a76f84709f0e7ba7509922221d39a.jpg.5d45ede100434bffe0561be6e4cd9cfd.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
15 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

I think it is a geo grid...  

Agreed. Each of those annotations is in the lower left corner of a quadrangle bounded by degrees of latitude and longitude.

The notations NC, NO/NB, NA/XA and NQ/NO don't correspond to any map reference in the Operational Navigation Charts or theTactical Pilotage Charts of the Defense Mapping Agency.

WSHS 21494 NC quadrangle.jpg

WSHS 18967 NB quadrangle.jpg

FBI map NA quadrangle.bmp FBI map NQ quadrangle.bmp

Edited by DFS346

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Well Georger is finally getting it..

 

The diatoms enter when the bills fan out after entering the water,,, when they clump together the diatoms can't get inside.

 

That indicates the money first entered the water in Spring,,,

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Ulis is making a false claim,,, 

The June 1972 and June 1974 floods were NOT the only times the River reached the money find spot.

 

The money find spot was at the high water line in 1980,, only about 3-4 ft above the River level at the time. 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

I have explained Carr's money "bundle" error many times... 

Georger just ignores it..

 

The only difference is whether there were 2 bands holding the bundle or a single band..  both fan out.. the single fans out more.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

This is becoming a clown show,, Georger, Ulis and now Chaucer have the facts screwed up..

Georger has had it wrong for a decade, I have explained it many times and he is just impervious to facts...  I prefer if he stays ignorant.

Eric is mostly correct, a banded or strapped group of 100 bills is a packet.. can also be called a flat or a strap. Himmelsbach and the Bank confirm this in the FBI docs. Eric is wrong on two points, the bundles were randomized not the packets and it is not a fact that the packets arrived on TBAR separately.

The Bank called them packets.

Cooper was given the money in packets of 100 bills. Those packets were rubber banded into bundles,,,

get it, packets = 100 bills and bundles = a group of packets.

Carr claimed that the Bank guy he talked to said the bundles were made random. There are other references to the bundles being randomized to look hastily prepared.

Here is the problem, Carr also stated that the three bundles were each a random count, he was wrong, he confused the packets of 100 with the bundles of packets. Carr mixed up the terms. The packets were in 100's.

We know Cooper was given the money in packets of 100, those packets rubber banded into bundles of a random number of PACKETS...

So, if the TBAR money arrived as three separate packets they had to be removed from the bundles they were in when given to Cooper prior to landing on TBAR.

Also, the rubber band frags attached to bills were not documented, there is no way to confirm they were only holding packets and not the bundle or a combination.

The FBI claimed the money was from one bundle and in the same order.

Conclusion,,, it is NOT a fact that the 3 TBAR packets arrived separately and it is most likely that the 3 packets arrived rubber banded in a single bundle, as the rubber bands deteriorated the packets loosened and fell apart slightly.

 

Georger is wasting everyone's time with his nonsense. This has been explained to him many times and he just doesn't understand simple concepts... 

packet = a group of 100 bills

bundle = a group of packets

Carr got it wrong claiming the packets were randomized by the bank,, they were not. It was the bundles that was randomized, the number of packets in a bundle. Georger has been defending this error for ten years now even when it has been clarified.

I pointed the problem out on Shutter's site a while back because it didn't make sense,, How could the money go to Cooper in 100's and end up randomized.. they didn't.. Carr and Georger screwed up.

Then, I was mocked and told to shut up...   by ignorant people.

 

I always assumed Georger knew better but was being a troll,, no, he really has no clue.

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boeing records indicate 318 727-100's had the optional emergency release,,

91 727-100C cargo/passenger

164 727-100 all passenger

plus 63 modification kits...

 

Norjak did not have this system and there is no indication that the Hicks placard was used inside for this system on any 727.

 

1980..

727airstairemergency1a.jpg.3d3fda4ee1a3bcab175aaa521e3c7f82.jpg

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/8/2021 at 1:21 AM, FLYJACK said:

I think it is a geo grid

Thanks, got it now (thanks to andrade1812 on DB Cooper Forum). This site converts latitude and longitude to GEOREF and other grids: https://www.earthpoint.us/convert.aspx. 

So the four annotations NC, NB, NA and NQ (from north to south) correspond to the GEOREF quadrangles DKNC, DKNB, DKNA and DJNQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

The Hick's placard DID NOT come from inside NORJAK.

There was NO internal emergency system to pull a red handle..

 

After the FBI investigated the Hick's placard and had the blueprints from NWA they claimed the placard came from the outside and could have fallen off any passing 727. NO FURTHER INVESTIGATION

Eric keeps making the flase claim that the FBI confirmed the placard came from NORJAK, they DID NOT. The Sheriff made that claim and the FBI walked it back.

outsideaircraftdecal.jpeg.41d84227c4c52ae1978ecc82b7b7a4c6.jpeg

Before the placard find, in June 1978 the NORJAK 727 plane was sold to Piedmont.

Piedmont 727 Sept 1978 safety card. NO OPTIONAL EMERGENCY SYSTEM

safety-card-piedmont-airlines-boeing_1_864fe7be6713c083034daceb4ab2e812.jpg.682b2f2a8bf364e4d2b12fd5afd91dcd.jpg

 

NORJAK plane at RENO Nov 25, 1971, NO OPTIONAL EMERGENCY SYSTEM. Has two decals on the main door.

norjakairstairintadj.jpg.101eb661fecf711dbbd72639ce3ef981.jpg

 

NORJAK did not have any internal emergency system that matches the placard description to "pull red handle".

1768962146_touchedupstairs.jpg.909e12f6f64c198328d6bf49bb7ea2a1.thumb.jpg.9b33d50c3c49b333e697d205d5bfde4f.jpg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DFS346 said:

Thanks, got it now (thanks to andrade1812 on DB Cooper Forum). This site converts latitude and longitude to GEOREF and other grids: https://www.earthpoint.us/convert.aspx. 

So the four annotations NC, NB, NA and NQ (from north to south) correspond to the GEOREF quadrangles DKNC, DKNB, DKNA and DJNQ.

Now I recall,,, I have tens of thousands of docs and pieces of info I am losing track of stuff..

FBI doc confirms GEOREF plotting system.

pathupdate.jpeg.ecc2227871d8c02009b453696b104ced.jpeg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

7:19 in video

Himmelsbach.. Money was given to Cooper strapped in 100's and bundled with rubber bands..

"There were ten thousand twenty dollar bills assembled in straps of a hundred bills to a strap and individual straps held together with rubber bands."

 

FBI,, Bank advised that money was in a random sequence in packets of $2000 (100 bills) and held together with bank bands.

 

bankbandpackets.jpeg.8334a80932be81505d2ba776ec264536.jpeg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

If the money went to Cooper in packets of 100 bills which were rubber banded into random sized bundles then how did the 3 TBAR packets get separated??

They didn't,, it is more likely the TBAR bundles were from one bundle.

 

FBI Finds one bundle of loot

VANCOUVER. Wash. UPl - Only one money bunrdle from the $200.000 hijack ransom given master criminal D.B. Cooper eight years ago has been found, the FBI said Thursday. 

 
“It’s all from one bundle,” said John Pringle, assistant special agent in charge of the Seattle FBI office. “We found more bits and pieces, nothing more.: Cooper had been given several "bundles" of money, the agent said.
 
He declined to say how many, adding that “There is certain information known only to us and the hijacker."
Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eric seems to have thrown in the towel on the Placard, about time. That weakens his Western Flightpath argument to life support status.

But he blames the FBI instead of himself for not understanding the information and doing adequate unbiased research,,

The FBI investigation was consistent, the Placard was on the outside and could have fallen from any 727.

The Sheriff claimed it was from inside while at the same time the FBI rejected that.

Eric accepted the opinion of the Sheriff and rejected all the other evidence because it supported his narrative..

 

Likewise Georger fails to understand the money evidence and clings to perceived inconsistencies..

Those inconsistencies lie with Carr and Georger's perceptions.. not with the evidence.

 

Both Eric and Georger are blaming the FBI for their own inability to properly assess the evidence.

 

Now,, let's do Cooper's initial demand,,, Airstairs lowered inflight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Georger continues to make false claims..

He claims that my post above is my entire money argument and the basis for my view, it is not, there is much more.

Georger often uses this technique to discredit others.

By paraphrasing a partial, manipulated or even falsified representation of a contrary view he can more easliy attack it.

A straw-manning of sorts, wholly dishonest. He has done this for years...

 

Share this post


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

FBI doc confirms GEOREF plotting system.

Many thanks. The FBI stated that  "The first search area was calculated using a system of plotting known as "GEOREF" (i.e. Geographical Reference) which has a plotting error of plus or minus one mile. A new plotting system using a computer generated latitude and longitude has a plotting error plus or minus 1/2 mile."

However, if the FBI were using the term GEOREF as used today, to refer to the World Geographic Reference System, then their statement does not make sense.

GEOREF, as used today, is a system of definitions and has no intrinsic errors.

Errors only occur when something is measured. I imagine that the raw data from a radar plot would be expressed as two components: (1) a distance in nautical miles from the transmitter, and (2) a radial in degrees from e.g. true or magnetic north. For example, MALAY is 63.6 nm from SeaTac on the 197 degree radial (true); but an airplane at MALAY might be measured at a slightly different distance and radial, depending on the accuracy of the radar. The measurement error would carry over into any grid reference system that was used (e.g. MGRS or GEOREF), whether the translation was done manually or by computer; but the measurement error would not change.

So it doesn't make sense for the FBI to say that a different system, or using a computer, would reduce the error of the measurement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
1 hour ago, DFS346 said:

Many thanks. The FBI stated that  "The first search area was calculated using a system of plotting known as "GEOREF" (i.e. Geographical Reference) which has a plotting error of plus or minus one mile. A new plotting system using a computer generated latitude and longitude has a plotting error plus or minus 1/2 mile."

However, if the FBI were using the term GEOREF as used today, to refer to the World Geographic Reference System, then their statement does not make sense.

GEOREF, as used today, is a system of definitions and has no intrinsic errors.

Errors only occur when something is measured. I imagine that the raw data from a radar plot would be expressed as two components: (1) a distance in nautical miles from the transmitter, and (2) a radial in degrees from e.g. true or magnetic north. For example, MALAY is 63.6 nm from SeaTac on the 197 degree radial (true); but an airplane at MALAY might be measured at a slightly different distance and radial, depending on the accuracy of the radar. The measurement error would carry over into any grid reference system that was used (e.g. MGRS or GEOREF), whether the translation was done manually or by computer; but the measurement error would not change.

So it doesn't make sense for the FBI to say that a different system, or using a computer, would reduce the error of the measurement. 

Maybe the first translation was visual and not data driven. The plot would be an estimate within a grid reference. 

 

gridest.jpeg.db7ffdb2d0eeaea4bf45a21a8c180663.jpeg

Edited by FLYJACK
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CKRET, Carr said..

"The money was then transported by SeaFirst bank security to a Seattle police detective who then drove it to the airport and handed over to NWA. The money was bundled in various counts so that no bundle was the same. Each bundle was secured by rubber band and different counts so that it appeared the money was hastily gathered."

This is correct but it was the bundles (groups of packets) not the individual packets (of 100 bills)

 

CKRET, Carr said..

"The money was packaged in varying amounts, so one bundle would have $500.00 another $1,000.00, there was no uniformity to it. I have been searching for the evidence report from the lab but have not found it yet, lots of files to go through. When I get it you'll be the second to know."

This is wrong, Carr confused the bundles (groups of packets) with individual packets (of 100 bills)

 

This is why the terms packets and bundles need to be crystal clear... Carr got them mixed up.

 

When the Bank guy told him the bundles were rubber banded and randomized he was referring to the bundles, not the packets... 

 

The packets in rubber bands vs bank bands is a red herring.. we are trying to determine if the TBAR money arrived as one bundle or individually.

Because we know the money was given to Cooper in packets of 100 bills and the individual packets were in rubber banded bundles...  it is more likely the TBAR money arrived in the same condition, one bundle.

The TBAR money arriving as one bundle of multiple packets changes the analysis. 

Share this post


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

Now I recall,,, I have tens of thousands of docs and pieces of info I am losing track of stuff..

FBI doc confirms GEOREF plotting system.

pathupdate.jpeg.ecc2227871d8c02009b453696b104ced.jpeg

Follow up..

The GEOREF updated to include a new small area which was searched with negative results..

georef2.jpeg.cc253809e68fae774e7a9779afb33f8d.jpeg

newsearch1.jpeg.d8ff72a8c67869cb6bed349c0d3bae1e.jpeg

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Georger, you still don't understand the packet/bundle issue. 

It does not rely on Himm's statement, it does not even rely on the packets being in paper straps. Paper vs rubber bands is irrelevant. I have told you that before.

You are just creating a strawman..  because you have no argument.

You still ignore Carr's error, he thought that each of the 3 packets was made to a random count... they weren't, he was wrong. It was the bundles of packets. Get it, packets = 100 bills, bundles = a number of packets. Carr confused packets vs bundles.

This is so easy to understand even a University Professor can get it.

 

The conclusion is that the money most likely arrived on TBAR as one single rubber banded bundle of a number of packets of 100 bills.

 

I have several theories for how a single bundle got into the River upstream of TBAR during Spring.

But, once in the River in Spring the bundle of packets would fan out obtain the diatoms as it sunk.. the suspended bundle gets pushed along the bottom to the spot it was found.. at the time in Spring the water was well above the find spot. The bundle did not wash up onto the water surface or onto the shore, it was deposited to a spot that was effectively the River bottom at the time and became buried there. The normal River level was below the TBAR spot and as the rubber bands holding the bundle of packets together deteriorated the packets separated appearing to be independent.

 

It has been assumed and treated as fact that the money arrived on TBAR as 3 separate packets,,, that is not a fact. The money went to Cooper as a single rubber banded bundle of a random number of packets of 100 bills. The evidence indicates that it is far more likely that the money arrived as one single rubber banded bundle of packets..

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Georger,, how do you lie continuously like that..

Are you completely incapable of forming your own argument?

Nothing you ever say is accurate. You twist, contort, misrepresent and even manufacture evidence to win an argument..  it is pathetic.

You never add anything productive to the case, I only reference you when I have to correct your BS.

 

I never said that paper bands deteriorate in 8 years.

It would be about 3 months.

Paper bands are not made from the same material as currency..

 

and the paper bands has nothing to do with fact that the money was in packets of 100 bills..

 

Carr was wrong, you have been wrong for a decade,, suck it up, take the L and stop lying.

The term packet and bundle aren't even the issue,, the issue is that there are two different things, a single group of 100 bills and a group of groups of 100 bills..

Call them lemons and limes if you want,, the point is they are different and you guys mixed them up.. 

The group of 100 bills (packet) was not in random counts and they were rubber banded into bundles.

In Georger's argument a bundle is a group of 100 bills and is also a group of several bundles of 100 bills..  you need to distinguish between these different things to avoid confusion and the bankers do that,, they use the term packet for a group of 100 bills.

Funny, Georger can't seem to find a banker who uses the term packet.. even though it is right in multiple Cooper FBI docs..

bankbandpackets.jpeg.3f576d762ec32f310d8d88c5e157517a.jpeg

cooperbillsernumdel1a.jpg.58c7c637977f9b86dcc75165112af8bd.jpg

 

cooppacket2.jpeg.eab00def7c21d2e9e69bd9664cacceee.jpeg

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Georger, you are a serial liar, nothing you claim has any credibility... you should go back to your Unabomber theory.

Did you explain Carr's error to Tom...  of course you didn't. That's the whole point.

You have no idea what the issue really is.. Carr was wrong, that is a fact, you can't even admit that fact. 

Why should anyone take anything you claim seriously.

You don't even have an argument,, what is it?

Carr was right? Cooper didn't get the money in 100's which were rubber banded into bundles? The TBAR money only could have landed as three separate "groups of bills"? 

None of those things are true..

Do you dispute my conclusion that the TBAR money most likely landed as one single bundle?

 

 

Here is your lying in action, your modus operandi.. "distort, fabricate and misdirection (strawman)"

First you selectively misstate Tina's 302... the 302 statement "small packages with bank-type bands around each package." You claimed "she said bands",, that is the distortion.

then you claim she meant rubber bands. She was contacted and asked..   that is the fabrication.

then you selectively edit the 302 passage to fit your argument.  that is the misdirection.

 

You pull this crap all the time. It might fool the Cooper newbies but people who have been around a while know what you are, they avoid you to avoid the hassle. I use you as a foil...

 

Bank-type bands are not rubber bands.. 

of course your next claim will be that the FBI agents just made it up in the 302's and they made up packets too.... the FBI made it all up but Carr didn't get it wrong when he claimed that the 3 TBAR packets were all different bill counts. Of course he was wrong. Why, he conflated packets and bundles. When he learned that the bundles were made random and rubber banded, he assumed that was the packets. He was wrong and you have been wrong for a decade.

 

Georger's comment.

georgertinalie1.jpg.3606b43b17845f0fa2ba3cbc5bc61b0c.jpg

 

Tina's 302..

cooptinbankbakbands.jpeg.2b157b2c298bd2dcf8a260c782174fb1.jpeg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Georger dodges and weaves, spews misinformation...  TAKE THE L... Sourpuss..

 

You are making false claims.. it is your perception that is shifting not my argument or the evidence.

I have been saying the same thing the entire time.. and I have always said this does not rely on paper bands vs straps... that is not even relevant but the evidence supports paper bands for packets and rubber bands for bundles. It doesn't even rely on packets vs bundles,, that just explains the error. You can call them lemons and limes if you prefer the conclusion is the same but they are different and need to be defined as such.

 

The conclusion is that the TBAR money most likely arrived as one single bundle... Georger has NOT challenged that conclusion. It does NOT rely on paper/rubber bands or packets/bundles.

Georger, as far as I can see, is incapable of processing the issue. He is emotionally invested in being right. I don't recall Georger ever admitting he was wrong.

 

Carr stated...

"The money was packaged in varying amounts, so one bundle would have $500.00 another $1,000.00, there was no uniformity to it. I have been searching for the evidence report from the lab but have not found it yet, lots of files to go through. When I get it you'll be the second to know."

This is FALSE. Carr was wrong. 

Georger refuses to acknowledge Carr's obvious error. 

Georger claims the multiple references of packets (in 100's) in the FBI docs are wrong.

Georger claims Himm's money statement is wrong.

Georger doesn't seem to accept Pringles statement about the money from a single bundle found on TBAR.

Georger claimed Tina's "bank-type bands" actually means rubber bands. She was asked he claimed.. (LIAR)

Georger rejects logic. If the bank guy randomized the packets/limes right before going to Cooper (as Carr and Georger claimed) how did the TBAR money get back into the same order in 100's...   IT CAN'T.

 

Sounds like Eric's Western Flight Path Placard argument...  reject all the evidence and everyone is wrong except Carr who actually made a 100% false claim. Eric claimed as fact that the Placard was from inside NORJAK and the FBI confirmed it, it wasn't and they didn't.

 

What is Georger's argument? I am not sure but he seems to be rejecting all the evidence but putting up no conclusion or argument.

Is Georger claiming the packets/lemons were random counts?  

Is Georger claiming the TBAR money could not have been in paper bands?  

Is Georger claiming the TBAR money could not have arrived as one bundle/lime?  

 

I pointed this out long ago and got trashed by ignorant people.

I asked you guys over there to explain it... if the money was given to Cooper in packets/lemons of 100 bills then how did it get into random counts of packets/lemons on TBAR.  NOBODY could explain it and several people attacked me for asking that question. 

The answer was simple. The TBAR packets/lemons were not in random counts, Carr was wrong. Carr had conflated the packets/lemons with bundles/limes... 

It was NOT the packets/lemons that were made random as Carr believed, It was the bundles/limes that were made random.. 

The TBAR money was described as found with rubber band frags attached, there is no evidence to indicate if those band frags were from each packet/lemon or from the entire bundle/lime.

 

According to Georger, there is no difference between a group/packet/lemon of 100 bills bank banded or rubber banded.. and a bundle/lime of packets/lemons...

 

The evidence is that the money went to Cooper in packets/lemons of 100 bills each. Those packets/lemons were rubber banded into bundles/limes of a random count.

 

This example, 1 rubber banded bundle of 5 banded packets of 100 bills each. Cooper received packets of 100 bills each rubber banded into bundles of random packet counts.

1570083776_500000-prop-movie-money-bundles-in-duffel-bag-4copy.thumb.jpg.242a10aabb4fdd6a492714df5cdc20e2.jpg

 

Why is this important......

Georger has really become irrelevant in the Cooper case.. his case knowledge is stale and stuck in 2011.

His arguments display poor analysis. Cooper newbies confuse his arrogance with competence. 

I am using Georger as a foil to advance my argument and the Cooper case.

 

The conventional thinking has been that the TBAR money arrived as 3 separate "packets" which constrains how they could have arrived on TBAR.. In fact, that is an assumption, not a fact. 

The TBAR analysis has been constrained by an assumption which I argue is very unlikely.

It is more likely that the money arrived as one single rubber banded bundle of a number of packets of 100 bills each and theories and analysis should be pursued with that in mind.

Georger may not realize it but his ego is restricting the Cooper investigation within a false paradigm. That explains why Georger and a few others have not advanced this case in a decade. Assumptions and errors elevated to fact and used to reject evidence is just poor analysis. Eric Ulis.. Robert99.. Georger..

 

Edited by FLYJACK

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