47 47
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

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...

Not to assume the recent discovery is legitimate, but If I were Cooper I would have tossed the briefcase out individually before jumping (especially if it was a fake bomb). Maybe some money came loose from the force of his throw and made its way down to the ground in the same area?

Share this post


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

Not to assume the recent discovery is legitimate, but If I were Cooper I would have tossed the briefcase out individually before jumping (especially if it was a fake bomb). Maybe some money came loose from the force of his throw and made its way down to the ground in the same area?

I have never heard anybody claim or even entertain the idea that Cooper jumped and landed with the briefcase...

He can't hold it, he would have to somehow tie it to himself and that doesn't make sense. 

Regardless, the buckle and hinge do not match an attache/briefcase and the about 10 feet thick of material has eroded since NORJAK..  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is Bruce Smith's photo of the card found in the chute returned to Hayden.

https://themountainnewswa.net/2011/10/25/db-cooper-case-heats-up-again-with-controversy-over-parachutes/

dbc-parachutes-hayden-card-pararchute-identification-4.thumb.jpg.70f1f3e4f4311299437186f1a446e218.jpg

 

The FBI couldn't read the card correctly.. 

The descriptor is below not above.

MAKE: Pioneer

TYPE: 26' Ripstop Conical

SERIAL NO: 226

DATE OF MFR: Sept 1957

 

Here, they get the descriptors wrong, TYPE, SN and DATE. 

They also get the descriptors for other card (60-9707) found in the chute wrong.

chutereno2.jpg.52e335db4b2950c8d80a21b07398c080.jpg

 

Those are two different packing cards both packed by Cossey same date May 21, 1971.

60-9707 found in the chute..

chutecardpocket.jpeg.8dce6ccda40837849553ed55be7cbfa9.jpeg

chuteinpestion2a.jpg.9d2b8a964e38b5ce3ce1af657d37c54f.jpg

 

Here the FBI never got Cossey's records.. Did he not have them or did he realize he gave them the wrong description?

Cosseyrecords1.jpeg.c646996f539513efc8d491f47c628ad4.jpeg

Cosseychuterecords.jpeg.b34583f442c0fcc9fbe57cb674d5e45c.jpeg

 

FBI claims they can't eliminate a chute based on the serial number, but they did have the two packing cards.

chutenosernumber.jpeg.b31bfb02b78159aa13afacd92272dbd3.jpeg

 

We have two back chute packing cards, packed the same date by Cossey both from the plane.. Tosaw's book claims that Cooper removed the packing cards and that claim supports the two cards being found.

So, the FBI had the packing card and SN for the chute Cooper took and It does not match Cossey's NB6 claim. Cossey's claim was the only evidence for Cooper using his NB6.

 

Share this post


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

A big takeaway for me from the show was that Tom Kaye's research showed that the diatoms did not penetrate through the sand. Like on the show I am still struggling to come up with a scenario for what happened to the money, nothing fits all the pieces...

Yes, but Tom Kaye said money was dry until Spring 1972.... not exactly.

Actually, it is at least Spring 1972, but the money could have entered the Columbia R in any Spring from '72 thru '79... 

The Diatom's indicate that the money entered the Columbia R first in a Spring from 72-79 and became embedded in the sand within a relatively short time.

I have 3 theories that fit this scenario.

Also, the money didn't float it sank within minutes so it is not likely it washed up to the surface of the River and got deposited on TBAR..  The money spot was at about the 5-7 foot water level and the River frequently went well above that with the seasonal high water in Spring.

You do not need the 72 and 74 record flood events to put the money spot under water.

It is most likely the money went into the River in a Spring (72-79) when the River was above the money spot and the money tumbled along the bottom to its spot (which was effectively the River bottom) where it became buried. 

Of course, where was the money between NORJAK and its Spring entry into the River. 

 

 

Share this post


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

No one seems to ask themselves the Big Question: If Cooper did not land in the Columbia River, (and the evidence heavily suggests he did NOT) then what would motivate him later to dump a bit of the cash into the Columbia? Might be the fact that the local media was building up the idea for months before November 24, 1976 that Cooper might be free and clear after that date.

https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19761125.2.20&e=-------en--20--1--txt-txIN--------1

According to this article, because Cooper was a fugitive, the statute of limitations would not apply to him. The John Doe warrant was more of a "just in case" move. Something else interesting from the article was the pair of trousers that were found 25 foot high in a tree. According to the article, the FBI believed the trousers belonged to the skyjacker. Although later in the article it says the FBI believed that he drowned in Lake Merwin. I had never heard of these trousers being found before. They were described as checkered blue-gray. I don't recall any descriptions of Cooper wearing such pants, so I don't know why the FBI thought they could be his?

Share this post


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

https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19761125.2.20&e=-------en--20--1--txt-txIN--------1

According to this article, because Cooper was a fugitive, the statute of limitations would not apply to him. The John Doe warrant was more of a "just in case" move. Something else interesting from the article was the pair of trousers that were found 25 foot high in a tree. According to the article, the FBI believed the trousers belonged to the skyjacker. Although later in the article it says the FBI believed that he drowned in Lake Merwin. I had never heard of these trousers being found before. They were described as checkered blue-gray. I don't recall any descriptions of Cooper wearing such pants, so I don't know why the FBI thought they could be his?

A person tossing a bundle of money into the River is a possibility but not with an expectation that it was going to be found. If it was tossed it was to get rid of it.

There was no statute of limitations for a capital crime.. per Cooper FBI investigators.

capitalcrime.jpeg.177e797f212d730c418042992199b122.jpeg

 

The trousers are mentioned in the FBI files and after investigating it was dismissed. 42" waist, too big.

 

rawimage-1515088315664240279.jpg.832ecb97385ab916dfd88d07ed45a58a.jpg

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
23 minutes ago, RobertMBlevins said:

If there was no Statute of Limitations on Cooper....

Then WHY did the FBI obtain a John Doe warrant at the very last minute...

Before the Statute of Limitations....which was discussed by the FBI prior to April 1976...expired. 

At the time of Cooper, the Statute of Limitations on air piracy was five years. It applies if they don't know the identity of the person they are looking for. If they DO know the person's identity, they can get a warrant, there is no statute, and they can keep renewing that warrant forever. Some time after Cooper, the US Congress passed a law making air piracy a capital offense. AFTER Cooper. 

That doc you quoted is from 2001.

Not so fast,,,

In 1976, the DOJ determined the Statute Of Limitations would not apply,,,

AND, the real reason for the John Doe warrant was for "publicity".

The "public" perception of perpetual leverage over a suspect.

slimpublicity.jpeg.4a4699c89f684035b4837b72d5ca7ac3.jpeg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


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

We're splitting hairs here. The FBI had to ask the DOJ's legal opinion. That means nobody was really sure what the hell the deal was. When this John Doe warrant application went up in front of any Federal judge, and the grand jury, it would be a matter of opinion on the judge's part with input from the grand jury. The statute applied after five years on air piracy, and is based on the actual statutes that were in place at Cooper's time. The possible sentence itself, including a possible death sentence, has nothing to do with this. But the FBI was able to argue sucessfully in Portland that day for a John Doe warrant, saying the five year limit was inherently unjust due to the possible sentence a defendant could receive, up to and including death. Usually, an application for a warrant needs no more than a judge's signature and can be done in the middle of the night if necessary at the judge's home. But this one had to go to the grand jury because of the conflicting issues involved here. Air piracy was a relatively new crime, a new phenomenon, and some of the questions and issues involved in it were quite esoteric.  

A defense attorney representing Cooper...if Cooper were caught or came forward after the five year period...would have a good argument saying that the statute had run on Cooper and it was too late for the Feds to prosecute. The prosecution would have countered with the possible sentence for the crime, saying the statute was justifiably moot in this case. No telling how it would have gone. Both sides would have an argument. 

If the Feds were not worried about this possibility, (that the statute would kick in on 11/24/76) they would not have talked about it, and they would not have gone in front of that Federal judge and a grand jury at the very last minute to get their John Doe warrant. But nothing is free and easy and clear in a case where someone could conceivably get the death penalty...yet never actually kills anyone. 

At the time of the Cooper hijacking, the Statute of Limitations on that crime was five years, and would apply if the FBI never identified their suspect. The DOJ's opinion is that because it is a crime with a possible death penalty, that the Statute would not apply. And if this had ever come up in a Federal court it would have been a very interesting debate indeed. After Cooper, the law was changed disallowing any Statute of Limitations on air piracy. 

Remember....the Statute of Limitations on certain crimes is also related to your Constitutional rights. That is the reason for its existence. 

 

Not splitting hairs..

The FBI does investigations and may recommend a case to the Prosecutor.. The Prosecutor decides whether the case should proceed..  not the FBI. 

OF COURSE THE DOJ CALLS THE SHOTS...

In theory, they proceed based on the probability of winning but in reality there are other (dubious) considerations.

In fact, the Prosecutor has no obligation to reveal any case that was rejected. 

If the FBI recommended charges for a Cooper suspect and the DOJ rejected the case we would never know.

 

The DOJ's opinion was that the statute of limitations did not apply, John Doe warrants are controversial and may not have been constitutional. 

 

The purpose of the John Doe warrant was for public perception and to create a point of leverage over a potential Cooper suspect. 

At the same time the FBI admitted they didn't have the evidence and required the cooperation of Cooper to bring a prosecution.

Share this post


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

Well, since you seem to know everything there is to know about this question, and I obviously do not...I will leave the answering of it up to you and just get out of your way. B)

No, I don't know everything, nobody does..

I do know that you have this wrong and doubled down.

When I showed you the 1976 DOJ stating that the SOL would not apply contradicting your claim, you tossed it aside and tried to discredit it instead of re-evaluating your position.

So, they knew the SOL didn't apply and went ahead with a last minute John Doe warrant.. maybe there was another reason for that other than the SOL.

 

But, I don't see this as very important.

 

The speculation that Cooper threw money into the River to be found to throw of investigators makes no sense whatsoever. Tossing money into the River would have zero expectation of being found. That is Ulis crazy.

 

Share this post


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

Robert says: At the time of the Cooper hijacking, the Statute of Limitations on Air Piracy was five years. This was changed later, AFTER Cooper. This fact was harped on time and again by Northwest media for at least two years prior to the expiration date of 11/24/1976.

Robert says:  The DOJ gave their opinion on whether the five year limit would actually hold up in court. That was an opinion based on the idea that if they caught Cooper after the five year limit, would they be able to prosecute? Their opinion was that yes...they could prosecute based on the idea that it was a capital crime...and such a prosecution might be successful. But it was still an opinion. The DOJ does not make court rulings. Judges do. If there were truly no statute of limitations on the books for Cooper, the FBI would not have bothered going up in front of a Federal judge and the Grand Jury to get a John Doe warrant issued. This was a 'just in case' move by the FBI. Just in case some hot shot lawyer could get Cooper off...should he be caught after 11/24/1976....based on the original statute. As I said previously....there was an argument on both sides here. A good defense lawyer could claim double jeopardy. He could say, "Capital or not, your honor...it is a fact that there WAS a five year limit on this crime when my client was arrested...and therefore according to the law that was IN PLACE at the time of the hijacking...my client should not be prosecuted." (Of course, later they could still charge Cooper under the Hobbs Act, but that is a different story.) The Hobbs Act is not in itself a capital crime. And believe it or not, neither is air piracy....UNLESS a death is involved...and there was no death in the Cooper caper of course. 

Robert says: Perhaps, but we're not really talking about the law here so much as we are MOTIVATION to do something. Cooper is out there. If he's any kind of guy, he is also seeing the parade of articles and TV news bits harping on the fact that the SOL is coming up on 11/24/76....just like everybody else is seeing. So he has to assume it is true, or all the news organizations wouldn't keep running stories about it, and sometimes speculating whether Cooper might come forward after the SOL date. 

Please don't compare me to Eric Ulis. I don't go around telling outright tales on a suspect to convince people he is guilty, as Ulis did with Sheridan Peterson. We're not even living on the same planet when it comes to the Cooper case. 

My opinion is that disposing of a small portion of the money, if it was done AFTER the news came out that Cooper would not be going free and clear after all...after the John Doe warrant was issued...make PERFECT sense. If you were Cooper, and realized the FBI had done an end-around on you with some friendly Federal judge down in Portland...and now the FBI would be hunting you for the rest of your life...would YOU just sit there and do nothing? Maybe Cooper decided to do something, and before he did he may have considered ways to take action. 

This isn't even a stretch of the facts. We already know Cooper didn't land in the Columbia. He bailed before that point, so if there isn't any conceivable water delivery path between where he jumped and where he found the money...how do explain how it traveled all that way without human intervention or human hands being involved? (From an old statement by Tom Kaye)

Toss a bundle into the woods? Even if someone finds it, and the FBI shows up to search, they will figure out pretty quick it was a plant and re-double their efforts to find Cooper. 

Into a lake? It would never be found anyway. 

Into the Columbia, not far from Tina Bar? Now that would definitely confuse everyone. No one could say for certain how it got there, just that it did. It would create more questions than answers. It might even make the FBI believe Cooper was dead. Those last four points by the way, are all TRUE. 

Now you triple down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was there really a " parade of articles and TV news bits harping on the fact that the SOL is coming up on 11/24/76"? I can't seem to find any. Perhaps Mr. Blevins could link a few?

Robert, I don't really understand why this is such a big deal to you. It doesn't really do anything to change your theory. Where your theory is concerned, what the FBI or DOJ thought doesn't really matter. If Cooper were alive, all that matters is what he thought. If he thought there was an SOL, then you still have your theory. Personally, I think it's a stupid theory, that makes zero sense, but this does nothing to change it. Cooper could have certainly thought there was a SOL.

Share this post


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

You only think my theory is stupid because I am the one WITH that theory. You aren't fooling anybody Parrot. You only drop by DZ when you either get bored, or want to drop another negative on me. If this theory was coming from Tom Kaye, for example, you would not call it 'stupid'. You would be eating it up with a big wooden spoon and asking for seconds.

 

Robert, to be clear, there are numerous theories out there from many different people about the money being planted or hidden on Tena Bar. I think they are all stupid. I think Eric's theory about Cooper coming back and wading out into the water and digging up the money is quite ludicrous. So no, you are wrong with your assertion. No one tosses or buries anything with the hopes that someone finds it.

Nice dodge to my question by the way. I guess your statement that there were a  "parade of articles and TV news bits harping on the fact that the SOL is coming up on 11/24/76", is just something you are saying and can't really back up.

Edited by ParrotheadVol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DOJ stated a fact,, no SOL for a capital crime.

Speculation is fine and necessary but all speculation is not created equal..

Speculation that Cooper threw money into the River with the intention of it being found to throw off investigators is Ulis level crazy speculation. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

This is interesting...

The TBAR shoreline right at the money spot looks to have been replenished before the famous 1974 dredge operation and after Sept 71.. 

Remember, the 74 dredge operation shows South of the money spot, this is exactly at the money spot.

No Georger, wrong again,, This change shown in the image is the beach, not where Ulis is digging. Georger is a perpetual source of misinformation. If you are going to steal my post at least get it right.

September 1971 on the left and Jul 1973 on the right.

1971-1973.jpeg.0da7a29339cc682cce2e0c96b47a3967.jpeg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Roy Rose, the FBI Cooper case sketch artist said that Cooper's unique feature was a protruding lower lip...

That is not captured in the front view sketches...

It would eliminate most suspects..

But, how prevalent is a protruding lower lip in the male population? I haven't found any data on that.

 

at 3:10 in video..

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


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

Not to pick on your latest post, Flyjack...but that video has been posted several times already here at DZ. 

A sketch artist can only go on what the witnesses can tell him, and the witness descriptions were all over the place. All three stews selected different combinations from the FBI's Facial Identification Catalog, and the passenger witnesses...well, it was mostly the same thing. I keep saying it's too bad stew Alice Hancock wasn't asked to inquire among the First Class passengers whether any of them had an Instamatic in their carry-ons. She could have removed the Flashcube on it, stuck it in between the First Class curtain quietly, and snapped a few shots of Cooper. They would have had something to examine, maybe try to enhance later or something. Once NWA agreed to cooperate, no one was really on the ball that evening. Plus the crew was probably tired from the long flight. 

 

You didn't watch the video and missed the point entirely..

This is a very important and overlooked clue, the sketch artist said the the stews (THEY) described Cooper as having a protruding lower lip. That protruding lower lip is NOT seen in the Cooper sketch because it is a front perspective. They did consider doing a profile sketch but one hasn't been released.

I posted the video so people could hear it precisely.. including you.

But you distract and minimize by claiming descriptions were all over the place. WRONG

 

The fact is the stews describing Cooper as having a protruding lower lip to the sketch artist Mr Rose means any suspect that doesn't have that has a really big problem.

 

and my question is how common or uncommon is a protruding lower lip.

 

and the original Cooper description was THIN LIPS

 

thinlipscooperoriginaldescription.jpeg.46788c61c832477090e894e879871cf5.jpeg

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That makes me wonder how many Cooper suspects we have clear profile pictures of to look at for the lips. 

There's Duane Weber of course, but his lips don't really fit the bill IMO. Not thin either.
spacer.png

There's also Don Burnworth who I'd say qualifies, not a very good suspect otherwise though.spacer.png

I'm pretty sure I remember seeing a McCoy profile shot out there before too, but I can't find it again.

Share this post


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

I have watched this video and more than once. It's been all over Cooperland several times over the years. And the long and short of it is that Geoff Gray (so far) has been the only person ever allowed access to the unredacted files regarding the testimony of the witnesses. He talks about their descriptions of Cooper in his book. And according to him, the witnesses hardly agreed on anything. It was the same thing with the passengers who got a good look at Cooper, no matter what you try to say now. It's right there in Gray's book, go see for yourself. 

This is not a surprise to me though...that the witnesses would not agree. Witness testimony can be beneficial in a criminal case. It can also convict people who aren't guilty, at least occasionally, and is notoriously unreliable. 

In all of your work that you have presented here at Dropzone regarding your suspect, I have not yet to date seen ONE SINGLE BIT OF WITNESS TESTIMONY from ANYONE who knew Hahneman. Isn't it about time you presented something, anything, other than trying to convict him for the Cooper hijacking because you believe the sketch represents Hahneman and no one else? At some point you are going to need something more than just 'he looks like Cooper'. 

When I have asked this before, you say you have these things but aren't willing to present them publicly. Okay, fine. We get it that you think Hahneman looks like Cooper. Now it's either time to move on to the evidence from either witnesses (their testimony) or anything else that can at least put him in the Northwest on 11/24/71.

Nice dodge, the point is the protruding lower lip which is backed up in the video, not the video itself. 

You still refuse to acknowledge it. That is a tell.

and it is not my responsibility to convince or share any of my info on Hahneman with you or anyone..

Georger tried the same nonsense.

Each suspect rises or falls on their own merits not the advocate.

Ulis is good salesman, he kept selling the Sheridan Peterson narrative to the media and even got a show made but Peterson is a terrible Cooper suspect when you look at the evidence.

I don't follow salesmen, I follow the facts.

The fact is that the stews told the Sketch artist that Cooper had a protruding lower lip..

That fact has been previously ignored by everyone. It seems to me it is a big clue.

They tried to depict it in the sketch,,, but it isn't really obvious until you hear the sketch artist claim of a protruding lower lip.

35599328-8942103-image-a-78_1605192538111.jpg.d010881e553ea14fbeaa9ce499ac023b.jpg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


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

Each suspect rises or falls on their own merits? Okay, I'll buy that. Where are the merits with Hahneman? So far you haven't presented a single bit of witness testimony, or the slightest bit of hard evidence that even puts Hahneman on the west coast of the USA at the time of the crime, let alone in the Portland or Seattle areas. 

He was also in Federal custody for ANOTHER hijacking for ten years...one he pulled off just a few months after Cooper...and you sort of gloss over that like it's no big deal.

Let me clue you in. When you are in Federal prison for a decade, convicted of air piracy, if the FBI even remotely suspects you were involved in a previous hijacking...the biggest unsolved hijacking ever to boot...they will move heaven and earth to find out if you are their guy. 

You sort of gloss over that like it's nothing as well.

What in the name of everything holy makes you believe the FBI would have missed that Hahneman, using a similar MO to Cooper...might also BE Cooper. Yet to date, with the thousands of pages already released by the FBI on the case, there is not one reference to him in those files. Even in files released after Hahneman was in custody and on his way to Federal prison.

Maybe they knew something about him that you don't know.

On top of all that, the FBI questioned Hahneman's neighbors, co-workers, family, and any friends they could find. The media was all over the case. His picture was splashed in papers coast to coast. Yet you expect people to buy into the idea that even though you can't present a single witness or one piece of hard proof...that by some miracle the FBI missed him completely for the Cooper case, no one else thought he might be Cooper...and only YOU figured it all out forty plus years later?

Hell...at least I had the decency to spend over a year traveling around doing interviews and taking notes with practically everyone who ever heard of, or worked with Kenny Christiansen. Witnesses were interviewed. One admitted Kenny lent her five grand he didn't have to lend only five months after the hijacking, and ID'd the tie clip as Kenny's. Another claims she saw him making the phony bomb only two weeks before the hijacking. Still another was caught lying about his relationship with Kenny and probably assisted in the hijacking. It goes ON and ON. They can't ALL be full of shit, or lying...and they are not. I released a 54 page report with pictures that has been downloaded well over 100,000 times. I did a 90 minute video presenting my case. Even went on TV a couple of times. Gee...the world didn't just go out of orbit and head for Pluto I can assure you. :handok:

I can also assure you that if Kenny Christiansen had hijacked a jet and was later caught and sent to Federal prison just a few short months after the Cooper Caper, it wouldn't take me a year to find out whether he was Cooper or not. It would have taken the FBI about a week at most, back in the day. They would have presented his picture to witnesses. Or they would have hammered on him week after week in the visiting room at Atlanta Federal or wherever they sent Hahneman for that ten years until they either got him to fess up, or dismissed him as not being Cooper. The trouble with your theory on Hahneman is that you don't give the media, the witnesses, or the FBI credit for anything. If Hahneman had also hijacked Flight 305 only a few months prior to the hijacking he was caught for...the FBI would have figured it out in short order. 

 

What a load of garbage..

Let me clue you in...

I don't owe you or anyone anything,, it is not my responsibility to do all the research for you, get it.

 

Now, you still ignore the FACT that the STEWS told the sketch artist that Cooper had a protruding lower lip..

 

 

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