47 47
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

(edited)
3 hours ago, dudeman17 said:

 

Maybe but not necessarily. Changing or moving a ripcord handle isn't that unusual. If indeed Cossey used that rig for putting out students and wanted to get the handle further from their potential grasp, that would make sense. The BS part is that it would make the rig 'too difficult to use'. As you and I have both said, if that was the case, he would never give it to a pilot (such as Hayden). It would be too easy to change it back.

Also, as I said 'over there', if indeed that handle was mounted 'outboard', that could be the very reason that Cooper chose that rig. It would better get the handle out from under things he may have tied to his chest.

Cossey has a history of let's say extreme embellishments....

I agree that he likely modified his chute, but selling/packing a modified "too difficult to use" chute to Hayden, no way. Cossey must have told Carr one of his embellishments..

There are two problems here.. 

Cossey never mentioned the modification being too difficult until Carr interviewed him. Initially, he claimed the opposite. Cossey, could he have made it,, "oh yeah..."

Now, Carr/Ulis are running with this nonsense to support a no pull theory... classic

Also, the missing chute Cooper used was initially described by the FBI as an Olive Drab container with a Tan cotton harness. Then during Cossey's first interview on Nov 26, he stated it was a Sage Green container with a Sage Green nylon harness based on being told that the Pioneer was left behind. Did Cossey get it right or the FBI??

So, how did that go so wrong.. the other back chute description was accurate.

Perhaps the mismatched packing cards fit in here..

Cossey packed those chutes six months prior to NORJAK and he failed to provide any records to the FBI..

He was going by recall.. What if he misremembered the Hayden chutes from six months prior. 

Hayden claimed they were identical. Cossey's chute is not.

He has nothing to go by but a six month old memory. Cossey and Hayden never met.

Everything from Cossey needs to be corroborated. Hard to sort out now.

Every chute found was rejected by Cossey based on his identification of Cooper's chute. One that didn't match the FBI's initial description. What if Cossey was making comparisons to the wrong chute.

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Andrade1812 said:

Eric U is now a no-pull guy?

No-pull was Carr's belief based on the "hard to pull" nonsense from Cossey and assumptions about the rejected chute instructions, Eric dropped Sheridan and is now quoting Carr's "hard to pull" narrative from an inside source (probably Carr).. that implies Eric will be a no pull guy,, though he hasn't stated it yet that is where it looks like he is going. 

Eric plants elements for his narratives in advance... it looks like he is planting a new narrative for a suspect from the NE after dropping Sheridan as a suspect. Prepping the ground with potential "no pull" evidence is how Eric rolls.. 

Ask him where he is on a no pull...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The case for Sheridan as Cooper was ridiculously weak and desperate.. Sheridan was a nonsmoker and Ulis had claimed he faked it to throw off investigators, convenient right.

The FBI files show that Cooper had cigarette stains on his right hand aka long term smoker.

Ulis claimed the smoking thing caused him to accept Sheridan was not Cooper... perhaps an excuse.

I really wished he kept going with Sheridan, now everybody will get another bogus narrative run through the media patched together by Ulis..

I predict a narrative based on a missing person from the NE who worked in a titanium machining environment who got road salt on his tie... That means Cooper was a no pull near TBAR on the Western Flight Path and best of all, it can't be proven wrong. Ulis spins the wheel in the Vortex another time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

 

I have figured out a scenario that best fits the evidence… it was staring right at us the whole time.

THIS IS HUGE.. IF TRUE. Bigger than Eric's ego..

This is a not a claim of fact so Georger shouldn't get his panties in a knot.

 

The Conclusion first.. 

Cooper didn’t jump with Cossey’s ex-personal NB6 Sage Green container/Sage Green nylon chute.

Cooper jumped with one of Hayden’s chutes.…

 

It was,,

PARACHUTE IDENTIFICATION

 

MAKE: Pioneer Parachute Co.

TYPE: 28' Ripstop Conical (Hayden quoted as 28', chute inspector 24’, one is a typo/error)

SERIAL NO: 60-9707

DATE OF MFR: July, 1960

INSPECTED BY: May 21, 1971 by E J Cossey on  riggers license number 159638

PACKING CARD: listed Brown Engineering Company, Post Office Box 1436, Patterson, California, 95363.

Chute was described by Hayden as 28 FT white chute with an Olive Drab container and Tan cotton harness.

 

 

 

The receipts…

Hayden sent in two back chutes he claimed were identical,, (both cards = Pioneers)

 

Cossey and Hayden never met but we know Cossey packed both of Hayden’s back chutes on May 21, 1971. Cossey claimed he never heard of Hayden. Cossey also failed to give the FBI any records for the chutes.. The FBI stated that Hayden described the chute Cooper took as 28 FT white Olive Drab container and Tan cotton harness. On Nov 26 Cossey is informed that a Pioneer was left on the plane whereupon he described the chute Cooper took as an NB6 Sage Green container and Sage Green nylon harness, his ex-personal chute. If Cossey never heard of Hayden, how can he be certain that was the chute Hayden got 6 months earlier. Cossey assumed that was the chute Hayden got, there is no evidence to support Cossey’s claim. We need to consider the sole source and the potential that Cossey’s chute assumption was wrong. Perhaps somebody else got chutes packed around May and Cossey mixed them up. If he had never heard of Hayden how does he know which chutes went to Hayden.

Cosseyinterview1126.jpeg.401b27077aa9c93ec33dd1b64b714f12.jpeg

Let’s proceed with the assumption that Cossey got the chute wrong.

 

Hayden described the two back chutes he sent in as,,

Number One: Civilian Luxury type, tan soft Cotton Material outside, 26 ft white canopy inside. Has a military chute inside of it. One or two burp sack in folds. Has foam pad cushion, and a frayed mark down the rib on the back, from rubbing on metal.

(CHUTE NUMBER ONE MATCHES THE ONE RETURNED TO HAYDEN)

 

Number two: Military back pack chute, standard military olive drab green on outside. 28 foot white canopy on inside, two burp sacks in back. Foam pad cushion. (elsewhere also states tan cotton harness)

(CHUTE NUMBER TWO DOES NOT MATCH COSSEY'S, THE ONE COOPER TOOK)

The description of burp sacks in both lends credibility to Hayden’s description.

chutesnov25.jpeg.f11ec3d7b51dcc65a887377c4ab28552.jpeg

chuteolivedrab1126.jpeg.0727d8fb500c004e7deb55420532f5a6.jpeg

The chute left on the plane was examined and a card in the pocket indicated it was a Pioneer (24’) ripstop conical, SN 60-9707, manufactured July 1960 packed by E J Cossey May 21, 1971, rigger number 159638.

The only discrepancy is the 28’ from Hayden vs 24’ from the person reading the packing card, probably a typo/error.

chuteinpestion2a.jpg.88ea6a702d66ed9957aacd515769ed22.jpg

chute609707.jpeg.e724a40a87c8ca383233f72494112d3d.jpeg

 

The chute Hayden got back (left on the plane) was a different chute but similar,

 

The card confirms it to be...

PARACHUTE IDENTIFICATION

MAKE: Pioneer Parachute Co.

TYPE: 26' Ripstop Conical 

SERIAL NO: 226

DATE OF MFR: Sept, 1957

INSPECTED BY: May 21, 1971 by E J Cossey on  riggers license number 159638

PACKING CARD: listed Brown Engineering Company, Post Office Box 1436, Patterson, California, 95363.

dbc-parachutes-hayden-card-pararchute-identification-4.thumb.jpg.bd6ea9881e82bbe7827cb7a496dd8804.jpg

dbc-parachutes-hayden-rigging-card-cossey-signature-3.thumb.jpg.1e6dbbd7ae42254382ecda3d73551525.jpg

 

What happened??

Here is an explanation,, the card found in the pocket of the chute left in the plane and returned to Hayden was from the other chute and placed there, probably by Cooper. Speculating, Cooper has both back chutes in front of him, he pulls out both cards, picks the 60-9707 chute and stuffs that card in the chute he left behind. You end up with the packing card from the chute Cooper took in the chute he left behind, The chute inspector found the card for 60-9707 in the wrong chute.

 

Hayden got the chute back with the correct card so it must have also travelled with the chute and been replaced back later. Is the FBI aware of this? or just an error?

The bottom line is the chute that Cooper jumped with may have been identified right in front of us the entire time. The ramifications are huge as Cossey would have been rejecting found chutes based on false criteria. The Cooper chute may have already been found and falsely rejected. One that stands out as important is the one found in the south Fork Lewis River within a mile of Heisson, a few miles E of the FP and about the 8:12 timeframe,, the sweet spot. That chute was rejected and never followed up on.

 

This may be the identification for the actual chute Cooper used..

 

PARACHUTE IDENTIFICATION

MAKE: Pioneer Parachute Co.

TYPE: 28' Ripstop Conical (Hayden quoted as 28', chute inspector 24’, one is a typo/error)

SERIAL NO: 60-9707

DATE OF MFR: July, 1960

INSPECTED BY: May 21, 1971 by E J Cossey on  riggers license number 159638

PACKING CARD: listed Brown Engineering Company, Post Office Box 1436, Patterson, California, 95363.

Chute was described by Hayden as 28 FT white chute with an Olive Drab container and Tan cotton harness.

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


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

 

I predict a narrative based on a missing person from the NE who worked in a titanium machining environment who got road salt on his tie... That means Cooper was a no pull near TBAR on the Western Flight Path and best of all, it can't be proven wrong. Ulis spins the wheel in the Vortex another time.

Interesting. I went through the NamUs database, didn't see any new matches, not from New England anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
4 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

Late Edit: Flyjack says in part: 

Flyjack: Norman Hayden did NOT buy his chutes from either Cossey or from Sky Sports. He bought them from a supplier of used chutes down near Boeing Field. It is no longer there, but that's where he bought them. The store where he bought them were the folks who arranged for the repacks, because it was required before they could be used. Hayden paid these repack fees directly to the store. They sent them up to Sky Sports for the repacks, and THEN Hayden picked them up at the store after they were returned to the store. This is from Hayden's two-part, two-day phone interview I did with him. He said he purchased them in 1968, or maybe a bit earlier, but right around that time. (After I saw your post, I checked my interview notes.) 

The chute you described is the same one sitting in the WA State History Museum today. Cooper jumped with the NB6. Both of them belonged to Hayden. Both of them are backpack bailout rigs. Hayden had no need of a belly pack, and he never bought one. 

As Val Kilmer said in Red Planet:

Your interview with Hayden is important.

When you read the Detlor to Hayden did you read the descriptions at the bottom. Did he confirm?

The Olive Drab/Tan harness.

The early chute descriptions for the chute Cooper took doesn't match Cossey's NB6 description.

My theory is the first and more accurate description came from Hayden. Later on the 26th Cossey described it as an NB6 Sage Green/Sage Green nylon.. completely different.

Did Hayden ever confirm Cossey's description of an NB6.

So far, the only source for the NB6 Sage Green/Sage Green is Cossey, that may be wrong.

Cossey may have misremembered the Hayden chute,, that would mean that Cossey's NB6 description is wrong and all the chutes he rejected are back in play...

Hayden also claimed the chutes were the same.. that does not support Cossey's NB6 claim.

Further, the second Pioneer packing card found would have to belong to the chute Cooper used.

I am particularly interested in the chute found in 1980 in the Lewis R near Heisson that was rejected and never looked at.

It was found about 4 miles E of the flightpath at the 8:13 time.

I got a feeling that was Cooper's chute.

Bonus points, the chute was found about a mile from the Heisson store and just 200ft from the rail tracks.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ParrotheadVol said:

Not that it matters, but if that is true, then Dan the man didn't choose the wrong chute after all....

Yes, if this is what happened lots of things suddenly make sense including the FBI not being able to ID any found chute... relying on Cossey alone for the chute ID potentially undermined the case.

That second Pioneer packing card found in the chute left behind had to be Hayden's other chute that Cooper used... there is no other reasonable explanation.

It doesn't help with suspects but all the found chutes need to be re-evaluated. Hard to do after such a long time.

 

Share this post


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

Norman Hayden did NOT buy his chutes from either Cossey or from Sky Sports. He bought them from a supplier of used chutes down near Boeing Field.

There's a pretty limited market for parachutes. If that store used Cossey for repacks, it's possible that they also got used gear from him, possibly the ones Hayden bought. Not saying that's what happened, but it's not far-fetched.

 

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

That second Pioneer packing card found

There were two chutes found left on the plane, the unused backpack and the 'real' reserve that he cut lines from. Each should have a packing card. Was there a third card found? I know there are some different numbers in the reports, but I don't think I heard of a third card?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
On 7/27/2021 at 8:34 AM, FLYJACK said:

 

I have figured out a scenario that best fits the evidence… it was staring right at us the whole time.

THIS IS HUGE.. IF TRUE. Bigger than Eric's ego..

This is a not a claim of fact so Georger shouldn't get his panties in a knot.

 

The Conclusion first.. 

Cooper didn’t jump with Cossey’s ex-personal NB6 Sage Green container/Sage Green nylon chute.

Cooper jumped with one of Hayden’s chutes.…

 

It was,,

PARACHUTE IDENTIFICATION

 

MAKE: Pioneer Parachute Co.

TYPE: 28' Ripstop Conical (Hayden quoted as 28', chute inspector 24’, one is a typo/error)

SERIAL NO: 60-9707

DATE OF MFR: July, 1960

INSPECTED BY: May 21, 1971 by E J Cossey on  riggers license number 159638

PACKING CARD: listed Brown Engineering Company, Post Office Box 1436, Patterson, California, 95363.

Chute was described by Hayden as 28 FT white chute with an Olive Drab container and Tan cotton harness.

 

 

 

The receipts…

Hayden sent in two back chutes he claimed were identical,, (both cards = Pioneers)

 

Cossey and Hayden never met but we know Cossey packed both of Hayden’s back chutes on May 21, 1971. Cossey claimed he never heard of Hayden. Cossey also failed to give the FBI any records for the chutes.. The FBI stated that Hayden described the chute Cooper took as 28 FT white Olive Drab container and Tan cotton harness. On Nov 26 Cossey is informed that a Pioneer was left on the plane whereupon he described the chute Cooper took as an NB6 Sage Green container and Sage Green nylon harness, his ex-personal chute. If Cossey never heard of Hayden, how can he be certain that was the chute Hayden got 6 months earlier. Cossey assumed that was the chute Hayden got, there is no evidence to support Cossey’s claim. We need to consider the sole source and the potential that Cossey’s chute assumption was wrong. Perhaps somebody else got chutes packed around May and Cossey mixed them up. If he had never heard of Hayden how does he know which chutes went to Hayden.

Cosseyinterview1126.jpeg.401b27077aa9c93ec33dd1b64b714f12.jpeg

Let’s proceed with the assumption that Cossey got the chute wrong.

 

Hayden described the two back chutes he sent in as,,

Number One: Civilian Luxury type, tan soft Cotton Material outside, 26 ft white canopy inside. Has a military chute inside of it. One or two burp sack in folds. Has foam pad cushion, and a frayed mark down the rib on the back, from rubbing on metal.

(CHUTE NUMBER ONE MATCHES THE ONE RETURNED TO HAYDEN)

 

Number two: Military back pack chute, standard military olive drab green on outside. 28 foot white canopy on inside, two burp sacks in back. Foam pad cushion. (elsewhere also states tan cotton harness)

(CHUTE NUMBER TWO DOES NOT MATCH COSSEY'S, THE ONE COOPER TOOK)

The description of burp sacks in both lends credibility to Hayden’s description.

chutesnov25.jpeg.f11ec3d7b51dcc65a887377c4ab28552.jpeg

chuteolivedrab1126.jpeg.0727d8fb500c004e7deb55420532f5a6.jpeg

The chute left on the plane was examined and a card in the pocket indicated it was a Pioneer (24’) ripstop conical, SN 60-9707, manufactured July 1960 packed by E J Cossey May 21, 1971, rigger number 159638.

The only discrepancy is the 28’ from Hayden vs 24’ from the person reading the packing card, probably a typo/error.

chuteinpestion2a.jpg.88ea6a702d66ed9957aacd515769ed22.jpg

chute609707.jpeg.e724a40a87c8ca383233f72494112d3d.jpeg

 

The chute Hayden got back (left on the plane) was a different chute but similar,

 

The card confirms it to be...

PARACHUTE IDENTIFICATION

MAKE: Pioneer Parachute Co.

TYPE: 26' Ripstop Conical 

SERIAL NO: 226

DATE OF MFR: Sept, 1957

INSPECTED BY: May 21, 1971 by E J Cossey on  riggers license number 159638

PACKING CARD: listed Brown Engineering Company, Post Office Box 1436, Patterson, California, 95363.

dbc-parachutes-hayden-card-pararchute-identification-4.thumb.jpg.bd6ea9881e82bbe7827cb7a496dd8804.jpg

dbc-parachutes-hayden-rigging-card-cossey-signature-3.thumb.jpg.1e6dbbd7ae42254382ecda3d73551525.jpg

 

What happened??

Here is an explanation,, the card found in the pocket of the chute left in the plane and returned to Hayden was from the other chute and placed there, probably by Cooper. Speculating, Cooper has both back chutes in front of him, he pulls out both cards, picks the 60-9707 chute and stuffs that card in the chute he left behind. You end up with the packing card from the chute Cooper took in the chute he left behind, The chute inspector found the card for 60-9707 in the wrong chute.

 

Hayden got the chute back with the correct card so it must have also travelled with the chute and been replaced back later. Is the FBI aware of this? or just an error?

The bottom line is the chute that Cooper jumped with may have been identified right in front of us the entire time. The ramifications are huge as Cossey would have been rejecting found chutes based on false criteria. The Cooper chute may have already been found and falsely rejected. One that stands out as important is the one found in the south Fork Lewis River within a mile of Heisson, a few miles E of the FP and about the 8:12 timeframe,, the sweet spot. That chute was rejected and never followed up on.

 

This may be the identification for the actual chute Cooper used..

 

PARACHUTE IDENTIFICATION

MAKE: Pioneer Parachute Co.

TYPE: 28' Ripstop Conical (Hayden quoted as 28', chute inspector 24’, one is a typo/error)

SERIAL NO: 60-9707

DATE OF MFR: July, 1960

INSPECTED BY: May 21, 1971 by E J Cossey on  riggers license number 159638

PACKING CARD: listed Brown Engineering Company, Post Office Box 1436, Patterson, California, 95363.

Chute was described by Hayden as 28 FT white chute with an Olive Drab container and Tan cotton harness.

 

I explained the packing cards before.. there are three cards.

1 found in the opened front reserve.

The opened front chute left on the plane is not part of this. It's card was 24 ft rip stop, SN DA 58-53912 yr Oct 1959 packed by Cossey Sept 16, 1971.

1 found in the back chute left on the plane.

Pioneer SN 60-9707, July 1960 packed by Cossey May 21, 1971

1 in the back chute returned to Hayden.

Pioneer SN 226, Sept 1957 packed by Cossey May 21, 1971

 

We are ONLY dealing with the two back chutes. Two cards and two chutes. One left behind and one missing.

The card found in the back chute left on the plane did not match the chute and card returned to Hayden.. both noted above..

 

Both back chute packing cards were packed the same date May 21,1971. they must both represent Hayden's two chutes. The one Hayden got back now at the museum matched one of the cards,,, the other card MUST be from Hayden's other chute, the one Cooper used.

It was staring right at us the entire time. 

 

My theory is that Cooper removed the cards and placed the one from the chute he took into the one he left behind.

 

This is huge, they were looking for the wrong chute. This case is wide open now.

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


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

Don't you guys ever go to the AB of Seattle Staff Page? B) I always thought you guys watched my every move like a hawk.

I don't know about the others, but I don't watch anyone like a hawk. (Well, except my AFF students, and that is somewhat literal.) So I guess I did miss your split. I just figured you were moving to that house you posted pictures of a while ago. As for Cooper stuff, I just peruse here and the forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watched the new Expedition Unknown,,, Tom Kaye was good and the guys at the beginning discussing suspects was good, should have had Hahneman in the suspects but nobody (but me) really has enough info on him.

The Walter Reca stuff was nonsense.

The Eric Ulis stuff was ridiculous. 

Maybe the briefcase parts find was staged.. Josh has been known to do things like that..

 

But, Ulis claim is wrong.. it is 100% false that the Columbia River reached the money spot only in ’72 and ’74…

The money spot was about the 5 to 7 foot level which was easily reached without the River at flood stage. The ’72 and ’74 flood levels were about 21 feet..

So, in June '72 the money spot was 12-15 feet underwater..  when Ulis claims Cooper was digging it up.

The briefcase find is a joke, the money spot has lost maybe 10 feet of material depth to erosion.. the money spot plus 10 ft deep of material is long gone.

I assume it was a plant for dramatic effect.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Reca nonsense has to end..

Somebody named Carl called in to the Steven Rinehart show 2008 during an interview with Larry Carr. Carl’s voice sounds exactly like Carl Laurin. The interview was in 2008 and Carl claims he taped his conversation with Walter Reca in 2008/2009. The tapes with Reca clearly show leading questions. Carl Lauren researched the case and fed info to Reca for the tape recordings. Reca sounds like he has early Alzheimer's in those tapes. Unfortunately, Carl’s research was poor. and he got some things wrong. The Reca narrative relies on him knowing info only the hijacker would know, that is not the case. All the info was available and Carl was researching it as evidenced by his questions to Larry Carr..


Carl at 10:39
 



Carl on our Salt Lake County line...

Aug 2008  -  interview of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) field agent Larry Carr by Steve Rinehart of K-TALK, 630 AM Salt Lake City, discussing the FBI's ongoing investigation of the NORJAK hijacking by Dan Cooper,


Carl’s voice..

@ 25:22

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErCM9LSFrl0


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

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

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

LC: Yeah, you know everyone that came in contact with that gentleman in the interview with a sketch artist. They went about their process, developing all of the parameters of the individual’s face. They went back and constructed these sketches and then they were sent back out to the field. Each person looked them over. The three stewardesses involved

looked them over, and there were some changes made to the original one. Once the stewardesses gave the thumbs up that this is the best representation, and that’s what was put out to the public.

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

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

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

LC: Well you look at the databases back then, you know, long before the time of the computer, it was easier to connect the dots as far as missing persons go. So there was, of course, an effort at the missing persons database, but it just simply didn’t really exist back in that point of time. You know, it would’ve individual sheriff departments that would’ve collected

the data, and someone had to do that. I couldn’t even guess how many sheriff’s departments there are in the United States, but I would imagine is was well into the thousands.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Carl: What type of firearm did he have? LC: No firearm.
SR: And a grenade.

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

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

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

Carl: Yeah, thank you. Goodbye.

Share this post


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

Watched the new Expedition Unknown,,, Tom Kaye was good and the guys at the beginning discussing suspects was good, should have had Hahneman in the suspects but nobody (but me) really has enough info on him.

The Walter Reca stuff was nonsense.

The Eric Ulis stuff was ridiculous. 

Maybe the briefcase parts find was staged.. Josh has been known to do things like that..

 

But, Ulis claim is wrong.. it is 100% false that the Columbia River reached the money spot only in ’72 and ’74…

The money spot was about the 5 to 7 foot level which was easily reached without the River at flood stage. The ’72 and ’74 flood levels were about 21 feet..

So, in June '72 the money spot was 12-15 feet underwater..  when Ulis claims Cooper was digging it up.

The briefcase find is a joke, the money spot has lost maybe 10 feet of material depth to erosion.. the money spot plus 10 ft deep of material is long gone.

I assume it was a plant for dramatic effect.

 

The hinge and clasp look like they are from a guitar case, not a briefcase.

Musicians I know get their guitars stolen often... it is a big problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Ulis is claiming the buckle and hinge were a legitimate find,,, that makes it worse than a plant..

Do they not realize that about 10 feet DEEP of material is completely eroded from that area..

The money spot isn't actually 15 feet into the River on the bottom, the River didn't rise the bar has been completely obliterated.

and does anyone actually believe that Cooper jumped and landed with the briefcase...

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

There was never any means to a prosecution.. the FBI knew they didn't have enough evidence without a cooperating suspect.

 

In 1976 the FBI held their own CooperCon and concluded that a prosecution was extremely difficult if Cooper was uncooperative. Eyewitnesses were weak and limited physical evidence.

witnessesweak1.jpeg.8d41d93fd69c12e4cfc0e33e9645cc46.jpeg

coopercaseweak.jpeg.0222aba95720c68df86f8eb9adf4afc4.jpeg

 

All latents lifted form the hijacked aircraft of no value... 

"this case considered closed"? 1987

printsnovalue.jpeg.130f04acfee3031005d2619dd45de0d4.jpeg

 

 

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