47 47
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Andrade1812 said:

What I'm trying to understand is how Soderlind could expand the search zone all the way to the Columbia while pinpointing the actual time of the jump to within minutes with the FDR and the audio recording.

I can't recall the timing but wasn't that prior to the sled test. 

They had pinpointed the bump/oscillation time but were not sure if that was when Cooper jumped or went down the stairs.

They extended the LZ range to the Columbia on the assumption that the bump/oscillation time might not be Cooper jumping.. after the sled test they refined it from about the Lewis R to Battleground..

Share this post


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

I interviewed the lady shown in the picture below regarding the bomb. Her name is Denise and she is alleged Cooper accomplice Bernie Geestman's niece. 

Story is BS Blevins, 

She suddenly remembers an incident 40 years prior and conveniently times it two weeks before the hijacking..

People BS all the time. They are the least reliable form of so called evidence especially 40-50 years later.

and all your other so called witnesses, you have none. They just tell you what they think you want to hear. You are gullible to anything that fits your narrative because of confirmation bias.

These are not facts, these are opinions and claims. YOU HAVE NO FACTS.

The strongest evidence you have is that KC resembles sketch A, like more than tens of thousands of guys, but that sketch was revised to the more accurate sketch B and KC doesn't resemble that one. 

KC doesn't even match the basic Cooper description.

Kenneth Christiansen was not Cooper because there is no evidence to support it and the case evidence eliminates him.. KC is a joke of a suspect. Anybody who learns a basic understanding of the case knows it. The people who buy your book are those that have little to no case knowledge and don't know any better.

and Sheridan was not Cooper either, for the same reasons,, his book is irrelevant. You are just pissed at what Snow did but blame everybody else for it.

Serious people don't care about KC. The evidence eliminates him.

 

Duane Weber, Kenneth Christiansen, Walter Reca and Barb Dayton are all in the total nonsense category...  like Aliens and Bigfoot.

Sheridan was slightly better but easily eliminated. McCoy was a very good initial suspect but also eliminated in more ways than one.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

She suddenly remembers an incident 40 years prior and conveniently times it two weeks before the hijacking..

People BS all the time. They are the least reliable form of so called evidence especially 40-50 years later.

 

Agreed, typically, it would be something traumatic to trigger the recall. then the details given like it was yesterday is another red flag. the Decoded show is so outdated the evidence collection has been eliminated making there final conclusion even stronger. 

It's all BS. 

Kenny appears to have been a nice guy who voiced out his opinions about Northwest just as millions of others do surrounding work. even after the 70's his dedication to Northwest is obvious by not leaving to another airline or leaving the industry all together. the fear of leaving and being uncovered is more BS. the actual BS is Blevins and Lyle IMHO. 

Robert is self admitted to be in this for the money "it's all business" and has to try and keep his head above water which is really hard with a brick tied to his feet. (Kenny) :alien:

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


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

Easy for you to sit there as Cooper-invested people and make blanket pronouncements about Kenny, aka "The evidence shows he's not the guy..." etc. Well of course you are going to do that. That is the usual approach, because if the case were actually solved...there would be no reason for your Cooper-related existence.

No Blevins, the evidence eliminates KC, not those who point it out.

You just keep ignoring reality and manufacturing claims about those who point out the facts of the case, all to defend the nonsensical KC narrative.

You lack reason and self awareness. Like a brainwashed cult member who is immune to any facts that contradict their orthodoxy.

KC isn't Cooper, he does not match the basic description and there is NO evidence to support him.

Cooper was Latin/Mexican possibly native American blood in features and appearance including olive/swarthy complexion. He had a full head of dark hair, wavy/curly/marceled slightly receding. His lips were thin with a lower protruding.

If a suspect doesn't even match the basic description, he isn't Cooper.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, he rips into any suspect that pops up on these boards, that's ok, right? returning fire his way starts the jealousy and hate cards. 

NO, there is no evidence supporting Kenny being Cooper except wild and vivid statements from friends and family throwing him under the bus. sell outs, all of them.

Share this post


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

You guys can say whatever you wish, but the amount of evidence against Christiansen is *almost* overwhelming. The files on him and everyone he knew, everyone who either had a piece of the answer or was involved directly...are just far too many to ignore. 

My apologies, boys. But that's reality. 

That is your reality..

It is not the reality for anyone who actually knows the case evidence.

Share this post


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

That is your reality..

It is not the reality for anyone who actually knows the case evidence.

He's just pulling the wool over the public's eye's. they don't know much about the case and all you need to do is make something appear to add up to the crime and they suck it in like a vacuum cleaner. has zip to do with taking it personal..that's been his job since 2010. it's just another false projection..

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


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

Funny how you guys didn't point out that stuff to Eric Ulis when he was yapping on about Sheridan Peterson, even though you knew Sheridan was too short, didn't smoke, and had blue eyes. 

'Case evidence'? What is that? The same criteria that led law enforcement down the wrong road for decades on the Green River Killer? Ha. The available evidence is very slim on Cooper. Mostly a sketch and witness testimony that was all over the place, once people like Geoff Gray got a hard look at the actual original witness accounts. 

I challenged Ulis theories,, he attacked me, called me a troll and refused to acknowledge the facts I presented right from the FBI, just like you Blevins. Shutter challenged him as well.

Reca was debunked by many very quickly.

The case evidence is well known, you are the only one who is ignoring it.

You brag about not reading the FBI files.. there is a reason.

If you just reject the case evidence then anyone and everyone is Cooper.

Edited by FLYJACK
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Funny how you guys didn't point out that stuff to Eric Ulis when he was yapping on about Sheridan Peterson, even though you knew Sheridan was too short, didn't smoke, and had blue eyes. 

Lie 2,467..plenty of us did battle with Eric and Sail about Sheridan. you only see what you want and report falsehoods constantly to try and paint a hateful picture...

Share this post


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

I have read the FBI files. A great deal of them anyway. 

People who are vested in keeping the Cooper mystery alive, whether they are working on a suspect or running a website that's only purpose is to discuss the Cooper case...

Their opinions are worthless. Because their opinions are bound to be slanted. It's human nature. 

And some of these same people like to go anonymous away from the Cooper internet places where they usually hang out...and go after other people involved in the case...on a personal basis. 

They also believe that nothing they do, even when it's wrong, IS wrong. 

Sorry, but when folks do that sort of thing their opinions are not only biased, but they are not to be trusted. My program has worked just fine so far. The public events are modestly successful, the books continue to sell each month, and I have fun answering questions sent to me (mostly by email) from the public. 

Unless something new comes up, the investigation into KC and company is closed. However, I still don't mind discussing the case. 

You haven't read all the files, you didn't even know that they investigated KC in 2004. (after you solved the case)

We are beyond opinions, the case evidence rejects KC.. it is your opinions that rejects the evidence.

The KC case and dealing with your logic and spin reminds me of this..

 

Share this post


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

There ISN'T enough evidence to convict anyone, and neither is there enough evidence to say that Ken Christiansen and Bernie Geestman were not the perps here. In 2004...it was almost five years later before I even HEARD of Christiansen. I didn't contact Porteous until early 2009. 

That isn't the point..  you claim that there isn't enough evidence to eliminate KC but you haven't even read it all and you just reject what is known.

The evidence does eliminate KC. He doesn't match the overwhelming evidence of Latin features/characteristics etc. description. You just make up an excuse, he had a tan. He resembles sketch A like tens of thousands of guys but does not match sketch B.. which was the most accurate one... you claim sketches are unreliable. KC was also bald.. he wore a wig.. His profile doesn't match either. 

So, KC doesn't match the description or the profile at all.

And there is no evidence to support KC as Cooper.

What you have done is just rejected the case evidence that doesn't match KC and made up your own so that leaves virtually no suspect evidence.. now with virtually no evidence a hundred thousand guys can be made to fit as a suspect.

Then you top it with cherry picked indirect opinions 40+ years after the event.

If you reject the evidence, you could randomly pick guys about the right age, make a case and get better suspects.

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A burp sack is a throw up bag.

If Cooper checked the cards and those two cards belong to the two back chutes supplied to Cooper, chute 226 is a 1957 and 60-9707 is a 1960.. The newer 60-9707 chute is missing, he may have chosen it just because it was newer.

My view on the dummy chute is Cooper tossed it, he didn't use it..

If he had opened it to carry something there would have been a part left behind. Where did the canopy go. It doesn't make sense that he would toss just the canopy.

The harness didn't have D rings. Very hard to attach a chest pack. Can be done but not convenient.

The dummy chute was not sealed and did not have a packing card, the other three did. Reports are that Cooper checked the chutes and removed the backchute cards. 

Since the dummy was not sealed and had no card Cooper probably tossed it being suspicious of FBI tampering or a possible beeper. If he knew chutes he would have known it was a bogus chute.

Cooper most likely tossed it and didn't use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My concern is wondering why he would only throw out one of the two chutes not used why just the front chute and not the other two?

Actually, would be three chutes not used.he didn't need two back chutes and really couldn't use either front chute to work properly, no D rings..what made him toss one front chute?

 

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mrshutter45 said:

My concern is wondering why he would only throw out one of the two chutes not used why just the front chute and not the other two?

Actually, would be three chutes not used.he didn't need two back chutes and really couldn't use either front chute to work properly, no D rings..what made him toss one front chute?

 

The only thing I can think off that makes sense for him to toss it (whole) is that the dummy was the only one not sealed and did not have a packing card...

It was potentially tampered with.. 

Share this post


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

The only thing I can think off that makes sense for him to toss it (whole) is that the dummy was the only one not sealed and did not have a packing card...

It was potentially tampered with.. 

You have to wonder, sort of like the placard. when you look at the document from 2001 chute find they describe a front chute with white lines and a white canopy with "Norm D" inscribed on the container as part of the evidence or chutes used in the hijacking. we are obviously missing documents. this wouldn't be a mistake in typing something about the chutes. when that document was typed, they got the information from somewhere. Norm D is nowhere close to "Johnson" and nowhere close in color to the chute opened and cut by Cooper and yet it's a front chute that is suppose to be missing. news reports first said 3 chutes were on the plane. I don't know....was the dummy chute really there, only a few would know for sure...

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mrshutter45 said:

You have to wonder, sort of like the placard. when you look at the document from 2001 chute find they describe a front chute with white lines and a white canopy with "Norm D" inscribed on the container as part of the evidence or chutes used in the hijacking. we are obviously missing documents. this wouldn't be a mistake in typing something about the chutes. when that document was typed, they got the information from somewhere. Norm D is nowhere close to "Johnson" and nowhere close in color to the chute opened and cut by Cooper and yet it's a front chute that is suppose to be missing. news reports first said 3 chutes were on the plane. I don't know....

The Dummy chute being an error doesn't make sense to me.. 

Emerick said he grabbed it. Cossey said somebody grabbed it by mistake. He knew who grabbed it.

dummychute.jpeg.9892c8aaef199c86d52cafcd4bf6952b.jpeg

 

Very unlikely for Emerick to grab a dummy chute by mistake. It might have been intentional.

 

Cossey made the chute so maybe he knew it had "NORM D" on it..

cosseymadedummychute.jpeg.46547af466b55faa45a84027cb731197.jpeg.9d10451e2d7745f66073a51dffefe26c.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but it's funny how they explain a novice wouldn't notice the difference and yet a veteran didn't catch it either when he picked it up..a cardboard box is a cardboard box when you pick it up. if something is in it, you know pretty fast. if the chute was lighter and oddly packed it should of been caught by a veteran. this has bothered me for some time now. either it never really made it on the plane or they all new it made it on the plane and made it appear to be a mistake..just a hunch..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mrshutter45 said:

True, but it's funny how they explain a novice wouldn't notice the difference and yet a veteran didn't catch it either when he picked it up..a cardboard box is a cardboard box when you pick it up. if something is in it, you know pretty fast. if the chute was lighter and oddly packed it should of been caught by a veteran. this has bothered me for some time now. either it never really made it on the plane or they all new it made it on the plane and made it appear to be a mistake..just a hunch..

Rataczak said he thought the FBI sent the dummy chute on purpose... only his opinion of course.

I often wondered if they could have put a beeper in it because it was not sealed. 

There was that report of a faint beeper signal.. who knows.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, mrshutter45 said:

I think it was too late with the beepers. I don't think they were aware of them at the time from what I recall the 302 stated..

The FBI files quote somebody claiming...

"To the best of his knowledge they did not have bleepers."

he was referring to the backpacks..

 

They did have beepers in Hahneman's and McCoy's chutes.. 5-6 months later

 

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