4 4
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

(edited)

I will talk about Kenny any time I wish. it was brought to your attention while posting negative against Rackstraw when you fail to look at yourself. Kenny was 5' 8" and bald. lol. zero pictures of any hair piece that would pass for real hair in the 70's. you can spot them still today. see how this works. you can be negative about others but call foul when it points in your direction. it's called an example and not considered discussion....

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
23 minutes ago, mrshutter45 said:

I have to go to bed now. you stay up till 6 am pounding away at the board. even before "semi retirement" ever occurred. 

Yes, you can discuss Kenny anytime you wish. You can also resort to going personal on others, when you are unable to answer the question I posed to you. 

You posted up a whole string of names, a big argument on how great that History Channel show was, how you admire Tom Colbert and his team, etc. 

Yet you couldn't even answer a simple yes or no question about it, and resorted instead to going personal on me. You make comments about me, mostly derogatory, and yet we have never met and you live about 3,000 miles away. 

Perhaps you should hit the sack after all. Maybe the question was too tough for you. Maybe you just had a hard day. If so, my sympathies. :)

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

You don't follow very well at all Robert. I answered the question several times in the last couple days.

Tuesday 7:08 " I don't believe we are any closer to finding Cooper then we were in 1971"

14 hours ago "I also believe they will jump out of there seat if a picture of Cooper every gets shown"

6 hours ago " if you followed along I also mentioned that Cooper has not been found yet."

please show where I said the show was great? 

Did Tom put the team together for the show. not that I'm aware of?

You want people to work with you? that isn't going to happen Robert. you have done considerable damage. you write articles about people. you actually believed we would pay money to set up a conference to talk bad about Kenny that caused Eric to be kicked out of the country club he was going to have his conference at. you talk bad about people to producers and media outlets. this is just a few things. then when you want help you appear confused as to why it never happens. where ever you go this always happens. the thread gets stalled to talk about how bad things are for you. you threaten law suits that are not justifiable. you don't own Kenny Christiansen. you own the rights to your book. big difference. 

I also explained why I posted the names of the people Tom had on his team. you made a remark that you have done more than anyone else with the Cooper case. this had nothing to do with my beliefs towards Rackstraw or Tom. you made that assumption all by yourself which was completely wrong, as usual. 

I consider this matter closed. 

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
Quote

You want people to work with you? that isn't going to happen Robert.

I have suggested cooperation is better than failure on certain issues, yes.

Quote

you have done considerable damage. you write articles about people.

I write articles at WordPress about the Cooper case, yes. They are HERE, about fifty of them. No apologies. I call it like I see it. 

Quote

you actually believed we would pay money to set up a conference to talk bad about Kenny that caused Eric to be kicked out of the country club he was going to have his conference at.

I sent a letter to the Portland Yacht Club requesting that the same people scheduled as speakers, who were calling Kenny Christiansen a child rapist at Bruce's website (unfounded, and without a shred of proof), as well as YOUR website...be reminded not to do so publicly at a convention their venue planned to host. They canceled the venue on their own accord after they saw your public posts, and others. Not what I asked them to do, but I can understand why they saw it our way. You actually caused that situation by posting the things you (and some of your members) did at Bruce's Mountain News website. 

Quote

you talk bad about people to producers and media outlets.

I do NOT. If producers and media outlets have bad opinions about 'people' (whomever you mean) they came to those conclusions on their own. 

Quote

the thread gets stalled to talk about how bad things are for you.

Things are not 'bad' for me. Don't know where you got that one. 

Quote

you threaten law suits that are not justifiable.

The only time I actually considered this action seriously was when members of your website supported the illegal publication of Sheridan Peterson's book and the ignoring of his rights under US Copyright law. Then some of you received copies, while Sheridan's book became permanently ruined for VALID publication by issuing a falsely-obtained ISBN. Some of your members bragged about receiving copies to take to the last convention. You were all lucky that Sheridan was 92 years old, and easy to do that to. Instead of legit publication, it is now available at 25 dollars a copy in paperback. I feel sorry for Sheridan in this matter, but there is nothing I can do about it. 

Quote

you don't own Kenny Christiansen. you own the rights to your book.

Asked previously and answered. We not only own the rights to the book on Christiansen, we actually DO own his story. The rights to that story were signed over to us by Christiansen's family, and by his brother Lyle, the executor of Kenny's will. It was a requirement by the movie guys in LA anyway. I have told you this several times now. 

My suggestion is you quit worrying about me personally. Everything Cooper-related I do on my own, or with the public, has worked out great. Everything I have ATTEMPTED to do, or to advance the case with the public that included you somehow...went nowhere. Tell me where I actually need you guys for anything. I really do not. See you on June 21st. Be early. B|

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Actually Robert, you may think you own Kenny's story and you may even have something that says you do. But in reality anyone could write about Kenny or make a movie or TV show about him and you would have no way to stop them. 

Quote

And after you die, your life story rights do not fall to your estate. As entertainment law attorney Mark Litwak states in his book, Dealmaking in the Film & TV Industry, “A writer could publish a revisionist history of George Washington, portraying our first President as a child molester and a thief, and his heirs would have no remedy.”

 

Edited by ParrotheadVol

Share this post


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

Daily DB Cooper Bite. I discuss DB Cooper's selection of the Boeing 727.

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DBCooperChannel

 

 

The funky "P" was rolled out starting as the new retail store logo Nov 24 1963,,, the chance of that funky "P" getting incorporated onto the tie and sold in 1963 is virtually nil... your 1963 timeframe is debunked.

The time frame for the tie was 1964-65.. not 1963.

Evidence clearly indicates Cooper had aviation knowledge that doesn't mean he had to have worked for Boeing.

If he couldn't get the airtairs open it wasn't a jail cell...  at the time many hijackers were successful by going to Cuba, though I think it is self evident that Cooper was confident the airstairs could be opened in flight.

Share this post


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

The funky "P" was rolled out starting as the new retail store logo Nov 24 1963,,, the chance of that funky "P" getting incorporated onto the tie and sold in 1963 is virtually nil... your 1963 timeframe is debunked.

The time frame for the tie was 1964-65.. not 1963.

Evidence clearly indicates Cooper had aviation knowledge that doesn't mean he had to have worked for Boeing.

If he couldn't get the airtairs open it wasn't a jail cell...  at the time many hijackers were successful by going to Cuba, though I think it is self evident that Cooper was confident the airstairs could be opened in flight.

First of all, the updated JC Penney logo was fully implemented by November 1963. This wasn't done overnight. Items were produced before that date with the updated logo in preparation for the November '63 launch date. In fact, some items had already rolled out with the new logo.

Second, the patent for the new "snapper" contraption was filed on December 7, 1964. Remington did not manufacture the tie in 1965 utilizing the old snapper contraption. The tie was manufactured in 1963 or 1964.

Share this post


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

First of all, the updated JC Penney logo was fully implemented by November 1963. This wasn't done overnight. Items were produced before that date with the updated logo in preparation for the November '63 launch date. In fact, some items had already rolled out with the new logo.

Second, the patent for the new "snapper" contraption was filed on December 7, 1964. Remington did not manufacture the tie in 1965 utilizing the old snapper contraption. The tie was manufactured in 1963 or 1964.

The patent filing date does not = sale date.

Hence, the tie sale date = 1964-65. get it.

The logo was first introduced for retail stores Nov 24, 1963.

Where is your proof that the new logo was used before that on the tie or any items.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FLY, you really need to learn how to think critically as opposed to just being a naysayer. You and Georger, Group 4 residents.

I am breaking a cardinal rule here by even responding to your comment. I frankly don't like even acknowledging your type.

That said, the reason I say the tie was "manufactured" in 1963 or 1964 is for two reasons:

1) That's when it was "manufactured."

2) We cannot definitively determine when it was "sold." Apparently you can?

After all, the FBI visited JC Penney stores after the skyjacking, which was November 24, 1971, and learned that the store in Portland hadn't carried the tie for about one year. The Vegas store said about three years.

What this means is that it is theoretically possible that Cooper purchased the tie at JC Penney in Portland as late as November 1970, or thereabouts, even though it was "manufactured" 6 years earlier.

Now if you can pin down a "sold" date I'm sure we'd all be very interested to see that.

Cheers!

Share this post


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

FLY, you really need to learn how to think critically as opposed to just being a naysayer. You and Georger, Group 4 residents.

I am breaking a cardinal rule here by even responding to your comment. I frankly don't like even acknowledging your type.

That said, the reason I say the tie was "manufactured" in 1963 or 1964 is for two reasons:

1) That's when it was "manufactured."

2) We cannot definitively determine when it was "sold." Apparently you can?

After all, the FBI visited JC Penney stores after the skyjacking, which was November 24, 1971, and learned that the store in Portland hadn't carried the tie for about one year. The Vegas store said about three years.

What this means is that it is theoretically possible that Cooper purchased the tie at JC Penney in Portland as late as November 1970, or thereabouts, even though it was "manufactured" 6 years earlier.

Now if you can pin down a "sold" date I'm sure we'd all be very interested to see that.

Cheers!

I don't need to do anything you suggest.

You have avoided the question and thrown out some decoys flares... you claimed to know that the tie was produced before the funky "P" rollout, clearly you were um.. mistaken.

The FBI asked a retail manager a general question about the tie, they got an uninformed general response. The Penny's employee was responding to the tie as a general representation, not the specific production timeframe.

As we now know the tie can be dated within a range based on the labels. That makes the FBI Penny's investigation DOA and frankly a joke. 

 

The FBI missed this big time and screwed it up, their information is worse than useless it is wholly incorrect. Everybody thinks the tie was less than a couple years old.. 100% false.

 

That specific tie was sold 1964-65. Later ties may have looked the same but would have had different labels. The Penny's employee would not know that. The opinion of Penny's employee without the tie manufacture "date" context is meaningless.

 

1966 plus the tie labels were different. Nov 24 1963 the funky "P" was first introduced for retail stores. That leaves a 1964-65 timeframe for the sale. That means about 6 years for the environment and particle exposure. 

If anybody needs critical thinking it is you.

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
11 hours ago, ParrotheadVol said:

Actually Robert, you may think you own Kenny's story and you may even have something that says you do. But in reality anyone could write about Kenny or make a movie or TV show about him and you would have no way to stop them. 

 

Yes, that is true. (I read your quote from the book) And in the case of Hollywood stars, many different versions of their biographies have appeared. But the truth of the matter is, in regards to presenting someone's true, and rather controversial life story, especially on film, most production companies won't go near a single biography of a person with living family if they don't get a release from that family. This is why we had to have Lyle sign off, and his family sign off, on the idea of presenting KC's story on film. This came as an absolute requirement from the production company's legal department. They would not move forward, or offer a contract to us without it. It's all good, as they say. Each February 1 or so, they send a check to continue the option. At some point they will either make the movie or drop the option. Either way it's a no lose situation. It's all in their hands now, except I am consulting a bit on the film script. Last I heard was that two different screenwriters had been hired to do the treatments and the best one would get the script job. That's what they told me in April. 

If someone chose to do a book on Kenny, that is easy enough. If they presented slanderous material in that book, they could be sued. Not by AB of Seattle, but by the family. It's not something I worry about particularly, to tell you the truth. As far as a TV show on KC, that would be cool and I would fully cooperate with that effort. That has nothing to do with the upcoming movie, and would not violate our confidentiality agreement with the film studios. 

Here's what I worry about:  Whether so many people will show up in the parking lot of that mini mart in Estacada come morning on June 21 that I have to figure out (along with Greg and Tom E) what the heck to do with all of them. I told Tom yesterday that anyone crazy enough to pack up a load of camping gear and show up at 5AM might be serious. B|

I was happy to see we picked up another ten followers this week over at the Everything DB Cooper Space at Quora dot com. We now have 758 people currently getting the email updates, and copies of any new content. That's not bad. We only opened that site last November. Quora will award us our own domain name if and when we reach a thousand followers, they say. 

Quote

Joe Koenig and I discuss the Walter Reca confession tapes in the latest episode of The Cooper Vortex. Check it out!

Episode added to the flash drive holding the previous episodes. Folks attending the Cooper Campout send out their thanks. AB of Seattle staff call Reca 'Wrong Way Cooper' for obvious reasons, but that's okay. All episodes will be blasted out on a big portable stereo during the day, a few each day probably. At night we run regular movies or whatever Cooper stuff campers vote they want to see. Not my choice. I just stuff in the DVD's they pick LOL. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Survivors or descendants of the dead have no legal claim on behalf of a deceased relative’s good name, nor can they collect on behalf of their own interests relative to that person’s reputation. Likewise, the estate of a deceased person cannot be liable for the defamation of the dead.

Good luck trying to sue someone for liable against the dead. you guys are too busy accusing Kenny of being a terrorist. the court system would laugh you out of court. Kenny can't even defend himself against you guys..

 

 

Dead Cannot Be Defamed

"You can't defame the dead" is an often-repeated legal chestnut that restates the general rule that only the living can sue for damages to their reputation. The continued force of this rule explains why many defamatory "tell-all" biographies appear after a famous figure has died. Georgia's law is typical -- it recognizes no cause of action for slander of a dead person, but allows the person's family to continue to prosecute a legal action for slander that the deceased started before he died.

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


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

Survivors or descendants of the dead have no legal claim on behalf of a deceased relative’s good name, nor can they collect on behalf of their own interests relative to that person’s reputation. Likewise, the estate of a deceased person cannot be liable for the defamation of the dead.

Good luck trying to sue someone for liable against the dead. you guys are too busy accusing Kenny of being a terrorist. the court system would laugh you out of court. Kenny can't even defend himself against you guys..

Is there a point to your rather bitter post? I don't lose sleep over these things and I no longer have any control over what the production companies involved here do. They send checks. Maybe they will make the movie, maybe not. I don't particularly worry about these issues, and no one said Kenny was a terrorist. You are exaggerating.

It's not like KC is the only person ever named as a possible suspect in the hijacking, you know. I could check over at the Cooper Forum to find out, but I think over the years there have been a few people named as possibly being Cooper. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why of course there is :)

"Is there a point to your rather bitter post?" nothing bitter about countering something false said by you...

".If they presented slanderous material in that book, they could be sued. Not by AB of Seattle, but by the family"

Correction = bitter? I don't think so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Shutter, I never claimed to be a lawyer, especially in the realm of Hollywood. Besides, these issues you speak of are no longer my problem anyway. I signed the option over two years ago now. It's THEIR problem. You should be telling THEM this stuff LOL. I signed any possible media problems over to the production company and was glad to do it. Why? Because their checks don't bounce, to be frank about it. They said they wouldn't move on the picture unless I got a release from Kenny's family. So I did that.

Our active investigation on KC is closed, you know. Unless something new and dramatic comes along, of course. But with what we have both public and private about him, I doubt anything new will be discovered. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

 I never claimed to be a lawyer

 

You should look into these matters before tossing law suits around and making claims the family could sue as well. you have been told this multiple times but keep posting similar comments and threats. 

Now, I've said this multiple times as well. there is a "shred of evidence" suggesting Kenny's behavior was not normal. this started right out of the gate. it's documented that Kenny took in under age runaway's (boys). he bought them gifts, took them to restaurants etc. some, might suggest this would fall under the category of "grooming". the whole town was talking about it. personally, I doubt it was anything bad, but it's questionable. certainly not something someone trying to hide should be doing even with good intentions. also, in a lot of cases friends and families are the last to find out. Today? they would most certainly look into this matter. that's a fact. a lot has changed since 1971.

You have to realize that Kenny is not perfect either. he's subject to criticism just like the others. the very same one's you go after. 

 

This has noting to do with Producers. they have lawyers to make sure things are done right, most of the time...

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Blah, blah, frickin' blah. You made the same foolish posts over at Mountain News regarding Kenny...and you, Bruce, and a couple of others caused the venue to dump the convention. Then you all had the nerve to blame it on me and whine about it when you got dumped by the Portland Yacht Club.

Heard all this before, Shutter. Now you are back again with the same old moldy crud.

I already interviewed almost everyone Kenny ever knew. Family, friends, neighbors. Not a shred, not a whisper, not a bit of anything untoward in his behavior with boys. NOTHING. Dozens of interviews, and testimony from two people who actually lived with KC:  Kenneth MacWilliams, who lived with him for years until the day KC died, and the lady who with her husband was left KC's house. Zip, zero, nada on the inappropriate behavior. They lived with him for a few years and were there when he died. Same with Mac. 

You are engaging (again) in vague suppositions, innuendo, and attempted character assassination. Just because Kenneth Christiansen was gay doesn't make him a child rapist. In fact, most of those sickos are married, and HETEROSEXUAL, not gay. MacWilliams lived with Kenny from the time he was a kid until he was grown. He said Kenny had occasional NORMAL gay relationships, with ADULTS. Key word being 'adults'. 

Take your unsupported gossip elsewhere. Here's a quote from THIS ARTICLE for you. Get educated.

Quote

"Dr. William C. Holmes, Assistant Professor of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, authored a study in the December 1998 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association that indicated that 98 percent of all male perpetrators who had sexually abused boys were identified in their families and communities as heterosexual..."

EDIT:

Quote

"The whole town was talking about it..."

Not true. Except for a few of his immediate neighbors, no one even knew who he was. Sometimes not even the people he worked with. That is an outright lie on your part. Most people just said he sort of dressed like Farmer John and was a really nice guy. None of the people interviewed expressed any concerns over his behavior. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you all had the nerve to blame it on me and whine about it when you got dumped by the Portland Yacht Club.

You mean the letter you sent causing the country club to not allow Eric to hold the convention there. the one you apologized for doing, that one. yes, I remember it well. the one you apologized to Eric about.  that's a lot of apologizing for something you didn't do? 

What was the letter about. threats of a law suit. you are crossing the line here with honesty Robert. you know why it got shutdown. it was because of your actions. 

Share this post


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

Then you all had the nerve to blame it on me and whine about it when you got dumped by the Portland Yacht Club.

You mean the letter you sent causing the country club to not allow Eric to hold the convention there. the one you apologized for doing, that one. yes, I remember it well. the one you apologized to Eric about.  that's a lot of apologizing for something you didn't do? 

What was the letter about. threats of a law suit. you are crossing the line here with honesty Robert. you know why it got shutdown. it was because of your actions. 

No....that is not what happened. I sent an email to them, not a letter. I noticed some of the people and organizers making those comments we mentioned back there...were also either supporting and organizing the event, or scheduled to speak. 

I merely asked them to tell the main organizer, who I only knew as 'EU' at the time...to remind EU that slanderous and unsupported comments by speakers at the convention regarding Christiansen would not be tolerated, and we would hold the Yacht Club responsible.

For examples, I pointed them to you and Bruce's (and a couple of other people you know) posts at Mountain News. Same type as you doing now, except the ones at Mountain News were worse. 

It didn't take them long to decide a high-class outfit like theirs wanted nothing to do with the event, if such people were involved. I only apologized to Eric later because it wasn't HIS fault. It was YOUR fault. And as an example to prove I'm correct about all this...

You are doing the same thing. AGAIN. 
You may not believe this, but there are people out there who have common sense. The media person at the PYC was one of them. They didn't even answer my email. They just went to Mountain News and looked at those comments, many of them made by YOU. They made their decision to cancel based upon those comments.

I feel sorry for Eric. He probably didn't even realize what was going on, and the reason his event had to be moved. I would have contacted him directly, but at your website, where he was doing most of the advertising, only registered members can view any links, pictures, profiles, etc. I didn't even know exactly who he was until afterward. 

After the event WAS moved, I decided to let it be. I figured you learned your lesson, although I only asked them to contact Eric, not to actually cancel. But I'm not surprised they did. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Remember this part? something you had no authority to do? a little different to how you explain it above. you can't hold anyone liable for what you did. that's nonsense. you threatened them..

 

If we observe anything slanderous being presented, we will immediately file suit against the Portland Yacht Club for personal damages, and for supporting the presentation of such slander

 

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's free!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
4 4