47 47
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

No, I am not.. 

For this diagram.. I am assuming the money went into the River when the water level was at the money spot and floated on the surface to the money spot. Somebody could have tossed it in the River in Spring... or whatever..

IMO, It is far more likely the money went into the River further away and sank to the bottom.. but for the money not to sink it had to go into the River within that lower left quadrant.

I am not suggesting this happened, it is a what if analysis.. beyond that circle the money would have sunk..

Flyjack, this is even worse.  You either have the money moving uphill or else you have the money landing on solid ground from the jump.

Tom Kaye's analysis suggests that the money was not exposed to water for a rather lengthy period of time following the jump.  This is consistent with the money landing on high ground in the vicinity of Tena Bar but then being washed downhill during the spring runoff which is a realistic scenario.

But once the money gets into the river water proper, it is not going to get out of there by natural means.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Robert99 said:

Flyjack, this is even worse.  You either have the money moving uphill or else you have the money landing on solid ground from the jump.

Tom Kaye's analysis suggests that the money was not exposed to water for a rather lengthy period of time following the jump.  This is consistent with the money landing on high ground in the vicinity of Tena Bar but then being washed downhill during the spring runoff which is a realistic scenario.

But once the money gets into the river water proper, it is not going to get out of there by natural means.  

Huh,, no..

First, I just posted the area in the River that the money had to have landed to arrive on TBAR without sinking. That is the upstream lower left quadrant of that circle. 

Tom suggested the money was not exposed for months/seasons..  money landing in Columbia could have travelled along the bottom to TBAR within days or weeks. Not very long.

Money has some buoyancy on the bottom of the river, it isn't as heavy as a rock so it has some suspension on the bottom. Current passing over it can lift it like a wing.. The current pushes it along the bottom and if the water level is above the money spot then that spot is essentially the bottom of the River. There was debris in the same layer as the money.. Rivers deposit debris all the time.. I read a paper that showed how the current accelerates up near the shore and pushed debris.. but the TBAR slope into the River is very gradual.. no problem.

For your scenario the money had to be on land directly above TBAR where there is no real runoff.. the only way it could move down is during a receding high water event.. but you have to explain how the money got on the land above TBAR.. 

The most likely scenario is that the money went into the River, sank and within days or weeks was pushed along the bottom to its spot when the water level was above it.

Share this post


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

Huh,, no..

First, I just posted the area in the River that the money had to have landed to arrive on TBAR without sinking. That is the upstream lower left quadrant of that circle. 

Tom suggested the money was not exposed for months/seasons..  money landing in Columbia could have travelled along the bottom to TBAR within days or weeks. Not very long.

Money has some buoyancy on the bottom of the river, it isn't as heavy as a rock so it has some suspension on the bottom. Current passing over it can lift it like a wing.. The current pushes it along the bottom and if the water level is above the money spot then that spot is essentially the bottom of the River. There was debris in the same layer as the money.. Rivers deposit debris all the time.. I read a paper that showed how the current accelerates up near the shore and pushed debris.. but the TBAR slope into the River is very gradual.. no problem.

For your scenario the money had to be on land directly above TBAR where there is no real runoff.. the only way it could move down is during a receding high water event.. but you have to explain how the money got on the land above TBAR.. 

The most likely scenario is that the money went into the River, sank and within days or weeks was pushed along the bottom to its spot when the water level was above it.

You're just guessing. You have no evidence. There is no evidence because the forensic people handling this case dont have the faintest idea what "evidence" would be! So they look at the obvious and nothing more. That leads to more guessing. What this case needs is a forensic person who knows what he or she is doing, and actual evidence to examine! Fifty years later that is asking for the Moon!  All that is left is politics from the various players who have staked claims on the case supported by the Media. Its a dance of fools. There is no direction in the case. Only gridlock and victims and podcasts.

For example, rubber band chemistry is completely independent of all theories about this case. But no effort was ever made to find and examine rubber band fragments. That is one of the first things TK should have done! The state of the rubber bands is directly tied to the money's history along well defined parameters. That has always been known and a fact ignored, in this case. Any forensic person could have told FBI agents that!  There are other markers in this case that were ignored and continue to be ignored.

This case was ready made for the theory makers. So that is what we have today, endless theory making. Its a dead end that only has orphans!

Edited by georger
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, JAGdb said:

Went back to re-read Tom's rubber band tests on the CS web site.  He performed a water submersion test and a sand burial test.  For the water test, all the rubber bands broke by 234 days, (some broke earlier).  For the sand test, all of the bands broke by the 355th day, (some broke earlier).   

Tom's tests were relatively static and ideal in the sense that they weren't subjected to movement on the bottom of the river, rubbing against sand and other debris, dredge forces, etc.  So the integrity or life span of the rubber bands might be even less in the actual Columbia River. 

So if we accept Tom's results, there's less than a year in the best case, where once the rubber bands were out in the elements (oxygen, water or buried in sand) for them to be able to hold the three packets together long enough for the money to come to rest at Tena Bar as it was found.  When did that ~one year clock start ticking ? 11/24/71 ?  Or did someone deposit it at some later point in time ?  

Based on this, I'm kind of skeptical that the rubber bands could have held the three packets together very long in some of the dynamic conditions it would have been exposed to in the river.  For example, could it really have been resting on the bottom of the river for several years and still be able to be sucked up and spit out ?  or carried by a flooding ?

The one wild card for me is the congealing or solidifying of the money into a single brick like mass.  Under what conditions and how long does it take a packet of 100 bills to stick together like they were found?  Once in this state, could they survive the forces of a suction dredge ? Could they survive the forces of a clam shell bucket digging it out of the bottom and then dumping it on Tena Bar ? But even if the solidified packets could, wouldn't rubber bands have snapped or washed away ?

Another question, were the three packets stuck together into one 300 bill packet when found ?  

The rubber band lifetime chemical history began the day they were made. Then shipped to bank. Bank uses them eventually for the Cooper bundles. Band chemistry continues to unfold based on environmental factors, starting Nov 24 to Feb 1980 and discovery. Those band fragments detail that history ........ can be analysed!  Fifty years later that history is probably frozen in time ......... sitting in someone's evidence folder. I tried to explain that to Ingram but he didnt seem to understand or care. I dont know - maybe he would have responded differently to Tom Kaye. Then we believe Jerry Thomas intervened and told Ingram to have nothing to do with us ... or Tom Kaye! ....... we did all we could do commensurate with people's feelings and wishes ... they held all the cards. Nothing else we could do. So here we are today and people still dont comprehend that the rubber band fragments could be one key in this case! You do what you can do and move on . . . its like looking for water in a dessert!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, georger said:

You're just guessing. You have no evidence. There is no evidence because the forensic people handling this case dont have the faintest idea what "evidence" would be! So they look at the obvious and nothing more. That leads to more guessing. What this case needs is a forensic person who knows what he or she is doing, and actual evidence to examine! Fifty years later that is asking for the Moon!  All that is left is politics from the various players who have staked claims on the case supported by the Media. Its a dance of fools. There is no direction in the case. Only gridlock and victims and podcasts.

For example, rubber band chemistry is completely independent of all theories about this case. But no effort was ever made to find and examine rubber band fragments. That is one of the first things TK should have done! The state of the rubber bands is directly tied to the money's history along well defined parameters. That has always been known and a fact ignored, in this case. Any forensic person could have told FBI agents that!  There are other markers in this case that were ignored and continue to be ignored.

This case was ready made for the theory makers. So that is what we have today, endless theory making. Its a dead end that only has orphans!

It isn't guessing, it is deductive reasoning.. that is the best you have without physical evidence.

Tom said he looked for rubber band evidence and found nothing.

I have always said TBAR won't be solved beyond theories, but you don't need TBAR to solve the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ryan, you keep spreading false information..

Hahneman's draft cards were 5' 8" and 5' 9".. witnesses had him from 5' 8" to 6' but the average was 5' 10".. Hahneman was about 5' 10" in shoes.. 

He did put on sunglasses early on..

A news report said 40, but the FBI had his age as 45-49 from witnesses.. I think the newspaper should have written 40's... not 40.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NickyB and Ryan,,

The rubber band thing is NOT new, we have gone over this for years.. the controversy goes way back to CKRET on DZ...

I have always argued that the evidence supports paper bank bands on the packets.

Now, you guys sloppily created a red herring.. the FBI did NOT ever say they randomized the bundles.. the FBI has stated they didn't have anything to do with the money.. The bank did it.

So, if the bank randomized the bundles they had to use rubber bands. 

The money was pre-recorded and kept in order to match the film. It was not paper banded right before the hijacking. The typical size for a bundle would be 5 packets, that is 20 bundles. It would take very little time to randomize 20 bundles with rubber bands.

 

Ultimately, the argument comes down to whether the bundles were randomized or not.. if they were they had rubber bands.

 

The evidence indicates they were,,

Larry Carr...

336959836_ScreenShot2023-01-21at5_53_50PM.png.6f11c33ec8e9e7682b893ea71a28c53e.png

 

Baker does not say the FBI did it..

964361863_ScreenShot2023-01-21at5_51_34PM.png.b74ed2e81b20fba816fdc6b63a680e40.png

 

The packaging and sequence indicate... the same as given to Cooper..

657102947_ScreenShot2023-01-21at5_48_39PM.png.a3e3623f7230cfa552ac9e158f73116d.png

 

Money was the same as given to Cooper.

549697146_ScreenShot2023-01-21at5_54_18PM.png.9100b8e446e4e5483df29e78d1924357.png

 

Pringle said many times the money was from one bundle.

1678087961_ScreenShot2023-01-21at5_49_55PM.png.8165dc24c8606491fe4fd01fd7608132.png

 

Himmelsbach described it.. he said bank bands on the packets and rubber bands held the individual packets together (bundle). 

He was not influenced by the money find. It didn't match the money find, it was more detailed and precise.

 

 

tbarmoneyorder copy.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what Flo actually said...

..lower lip gave a "pouty" appearance,, Sketch B has too much flesh toward the corners of the mouth. She advised that the middle of the lower lip appears larger due to the slimness of the corners of the lower lip..

In other words the middle of the lip appeared pouty due to the corners being slim...

 

Cooper's had a slightly protruding lower lip with slim corners..

 

1420607123_ScreenShot2023-01-21at7_44_42PM.png.7d2a2e4435db1af5b29b8f4311ac4f14.png

Share this post


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

NickyB and Ryan,,

The rubber band thing is NOT new, we have gone over this for years.. the controversy goes way back to CKRET on DZ...

I have always argued that the evidence supports paper bank bands on the packets.

Now, you guys sloppily created a red herring.. the FBI did NOT ever say they randomized the bundles.. the FBI has stated they didn't have anything to do with the money.. The bank did it.

So, if the bank randomized the bundles they had to use rubber bands. 

The money was pre-recorded and kept in order to match the film. It was not paper banded right before the hijacking. The typical size for a bundle would be 5 packets, that is 20 bundles. It would take very little time to randomize 20 bundles with rubber bands.

 

Thanks for the clarity on Baker's statements. 

I'd still like to find a pre-Tena Bar statement about the rubber band bundling. I'm not disbelieving of it. It's always been, and still is, my understanding that the money consisted of banded packages that were bundled. Perhaps you can find something? I've come up empty the past few days. 

I believe if you are only seeing the Beeson interview, you are missing some context as well. Most of our discussion about the paper bands is centered around Ulis' resistance to the idea that there were paper bands on the money. It's basically been the entire Facebook group vs. Ulis the past few days because it's his contention that Tina was referring to rubber bands when she said "bank type bands". Of course, literally everyone else thinks that's silly. But he's entitled to his opinion and that's fine. Nevertheless, most of our discussion about the paper banding was a reference to this ongoing Group vs. Ulis fight about it. 

Share this post


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

This is what Flo actually said...

..lower lip gave a "pouty" appearance,, Sketch B has too much flesh toward the corners of the mouth. She advised that the middle of the lower lip appears larger due to the slimness of the corners of the lower lip..

In other words the middle of the lip appeared pouty due to the corners being slim...

 

Cooper's had a slightly protruding lower lip with slim corners..

 

1420607123_ScreenShot2023-01-21at7_44_42PM.png.7d2a2e4435db1af5b29b8f4311ac4f14.png

That's Tina. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Thanks for the clarity on Baker's statements. 

I'd still like to find a pre-Tena Bar statement about the rubber band bundling. I'm not disbelieving of it. It's always been, and still is, my understanding that the money consisted of banded packages that were bundled. Perhaps you can find something? I've come up empty the past few days. 

I believe if you are only seeing the Beeson interview, you are missing some context as well. Most of our discussion about the paper bands is centered around Ulis' resistance to the idea that there were paper bands on the money. It's basically been the entire Facebook group vs. Ulis the past few days because it's his contention that Tina was referring to rubber bands when she said "bank type bands". Of course, literally everyone else thinks that's silly. But he's entitled to his opinion and that's fine. Nevertheless, most of our discussion about the paper banding was a reference to this ongoing Group vs. Ulis fight about it. 

I went through this for years...  

The evidence clearly indicates paper bank bands for the packets... so we agree on that..

You guys were dissing the idea that the packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles.. using unfounded arguments.

Why would they do that, there is no good reason? the FBI had nothing to do with the money? Himmelsbach was influenced by the money find... etc..  

We don't have a 302 stating rubber bands were used for the money..  so we can only use what we have and in total it indicates that the packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles at the bank, not by the FBI. 

These agents aren't going to make it up...

 

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, FLYJACK said:

I went through this for years...  

The evidence clearly indicates paper bank bands for the packets... so we agree on that..

You guys were dissing the idea that the packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles.. using unfounded arguments.

Why would they do that, there is no good reason? the FBI had nothing to do with the money? Himmelsbach was influenced by the money find... etc..  

We don't have a 302 stating rubber bands were used for the money..  so we can only use what we have and in total it indicates that the packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles at the bank, not by the FBI. 

These agents are going to make it up...

 

Am I disagreeing with you? I want to rule out the possibility that there may have been post-hoc assumptions about the rubber bands due to the money find. If the physical evidence has rubber bands on it, then sure, it seems safe to assume that the money was rubber banded, even absent proof that it was given to Cooper that way. However, I'd like to rule out that this is a post-hoc assumption by finding pre-TB evidence. If I never find it, then oh well, I guess I'll go to my grave assuming that it was rubber banded AND paper banded. Which is what Himmy says on Unsolved Mysteries. Tosaw says this as well. 

Share this post


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

Am I disagreeing with you? I want to rule out the possibility that there may have been post-hoc assumptions about the rubber bands due to the money find. If the physical evidence has rubber bands on it, then sure, it seems safe to assume that the money was rubber banded, even absent proof that it was given to Cooper that way. However, I'd like to rule out that this is a post-hoc assumption by finding pre-TB evidence. If I never find it, then oh well, I guess I'll go to my grave assuming that it was rubber banded AND paper banded. Which is what Himmy says on Unsolved Mysteries. Tosaw says this as well. 

Ckret talked to two bank employees about rubber bands vs paper straps. Rubber bands and the reasons why only rubber bands, were confirmed. and so the story goes. Ckret communicated his findings to a number of people.

Im curious why TK is always silent on this!  I guess TK knows nothing about it. Nothing!  Strategy.

Im equally curious why a person who interviewed no one, knows so much about this!  He uses different methods and sources ?  He eliminates the need to talk to the people who packaged the money by relying on quotes by dead people, several crew interviews, and reports and words in 302s. And the paper straps magically vanished down to the last molecule because of the paper bank strap eaters at Tena Bar, that eat only paper straps and nothing else!  How convenient can it be!

And strangely, FJ has yet to tell us what printing if any was on those straps. It takes years to devise the right answer. :$

Edited by georger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Am I disagreeing with you? I want to rule out the possibility that there may have been post-hoc assumptions about the rubber bands due to the money find. If the physical evidence has rubber bands on it, then sure, it seems safe to assume that the money was rubber banded, even absent proof that it was given to Cooper that way. However, I'd like to rule out that this is a post-hoc assumption by finding pre-TB evidence. If I never find it, then oh well, I guess I'll go to my grave assuming that it was rubber banded AND paper banded. Which is what Himmy says on Unsolved Mysteries. Tosaw says this as well. 

Obviously we want solid evidence that rubber bands were on the money when it was given to Cooper. There is a ton of stuff we could use... that rubber band issue has been going for over 10 years..

 

But you know this is the nature of Cooper case, you don't get it easy..  we even have 302 errors..

As a listener, both you guys were dismissing the information we DO have.. that is what I disagree with.

The info we have is very strong.

Himmelsbach. Tosaw.

Agent statements during TBAR find. Money was from one bundle,, money was randomized,, money was in the same condition as given to Cooper.

Larry Carr. Bundles were randomized.

The fact that the money was found with rubber band frags.

 

I always thought it was a huge deal... it changes means by which the money could arrive on TBAR.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

Ckret talked to two bank employees about rubber bands vs paper straps. Rubber bands and the reasons why only rubber bands, were confirmed. and so the story goes. Ckret communicated his findings to a number of people.

Im curious why TK is always silent on this!  I guess TK knows nothing about it. Nothing!  ???

Im equally curious why a person who interviewed no one, knows so much about this!  He uses different methods and sources ?  He eliminates the need to talk to the people who packaged the money by relying on quotes by dead people, several crew interviews, and reports and words in 302s. And the paper straps magically vanished because of the paper goblins at Tena Bar that eat only paper straps and nothing else!  How convenient can it be! :$

 

Larry thought the packets of 100's were randomized. He mixed up the term bundle..

189345766_ScreenShot2023-01-21at9_10_06PM.png.ab6509cd03524e90ab559e9055e06991.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, georger said:

And the paper straps magically vanished because of the paper goblins at Tena Bar that eat only paper straps and nothing else!  

 

You really think paper is still going to be there 9 years later? An experiment was done recently to see if a bundle would float (as opposed to a packet) and the paper straps were already tearing apart and disintegrating after being in the water for only 7 minutes.  

323323149_540340791389208_8411642623084755516_n.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, olemisscub said:

You really think paper is still going to be there 9 years later? An experiment was done recently to see if a bundle would float (as opposed to a packet) and the paper straps were already tearing apart and disintegrating after being in the water for only 7 minutes.  

323323149_540340791389208_8411642623084755516_n.jpg

Georger's ego will never allow him to understand, I have explained this to him dozens of times over the years..

Like Ulis he insists Tina's "bank type bands" means rubber bands.. 

 

 

Share this post


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

Obviously we want solid evidence that rubber bands were on the money when it was given to Cooper. There is a ton of stuff we could use... that rubber band issue has been going for over 10 years..

 

But you know this is the nature of Cooper case, you don't get it easy..  we even have 302 errors..

As a listener, both you guys were dismissing the information we DO have.. that is what I disagree with.

The info we have is very strong.

Himmelsbach. Tosaw.

Agent statements during TBAR find. Money was from one bundle,, money was randomized,, money was in the same condition as given to Cooper.

Larry Carr. Bundles were randomized.

The fact that the money was found with rubber band frags.

 

I always thought it was a huge deal... it changes means by which the money could arrive on TBAR.

 

 

 

 

It would be easier just claiming that Carr and nobody else talked to the bank employees who packaged the money ............  or that Carr didnt understand what the employees said. That Carr got it wrong and cant admit mistakes ........

With Kaye fiddling while straps dissolved right in front of his eyes! 

Brian's reaction to all of this surfacing was interesting. Brian was curious and wanted to know - he didnt remember anything. Brian was fully cooperative and curious. We will probably never have the full story about who and why this suddenly surfaced (in 2010) out of nowhere. Only Ckret knows ? 

Maybe it was Ulis! ???  Eric of Portland as he was known then? Ulis wasnt even known back then.  Or maybe it was Jerry Thomas who raised the issue? Why did this suddenly surface in 2010 and who brought it to the surface and why, that caused Ckret to suddenly get excited about it and communicate about it? Ckret isnt talking.

Since Ckret actually talked to bank employees and Pat Ingram and actually posted his findings, and FJ hasnt, the weight of real evidence is on Ckret's side so far as I am concerned. 

Edited by georger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, georger said:

It would be easier just claiming that Carr and nobody else talked to the bank employees who packaged the money ............  or that Carr didnt understand what the employees said. That Carr got it wrong and cant admit mistakes ........

With Kaye fiddling while straps dissolved right in front of his eyes! 

Brian's reaction to all of this surfacing was interesting. Brian was curious and wanted to know - he didnt remember anything. Brian was fully cooperative and curious. We will probably never have the full story about who and why this suddenly surfaced (in 2010) out of nowhere. Only Ckret knows ? 

Maybe it was Ulis! ???  Eric of Portland as he was known then? Ulis wasnt even known back then.  Or maybe it was Jerry Thomas who raised the issue? Why did this suddenly surface in 2010 and who brought it to the surface and why, that caused Ckret to suddenly get excited about it and communicate about it? Ckret isnt talking.

Since Ckret actually talked to bank employees and Pat Ingram and actually posted his findings, and FJ hasnt, the weight of real evidence is on Ckret's side so far as I am concerned. 

Carr was wrong, he thought the packets were randomized,, and Pat Ingram has nothing to do with this...

You still don't understand the issue and never will..  

Screen Shot 2023-01-21 at 9.10.06 PM.png

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, Pringle,,

"It's all from one bundle".. (3 packets)

"Cooper had been given several bundles" declined to say how many... (about 20)

"There is certain information known only to us and the hijacker" (the packaging)

Well, was Cooper given 100 packets or about 20 randomized bundles??

If he wasn't given 100 individual packets of 100 bills then rubber bands had to be used for the randomized bundles.

 

933659757_TimesNewsIdahoFeb151980pA8CooperOnebundle.jpg.cbe72c02db4778ebc0406d45de70a077.jpg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


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

Carr was wrong, he thought the packets were randomized,, and Pat Ingram has nothing to do with this...

You still don't understand the issue and never will..  

Screen Shot 2023-01-21 at 9.10.06 PM.png

So the people who found and saw the money, inspected it, picked bands off the money, etc .... have nothing to do with what they saw and touched?  You are the first to eliminate the Ingrams from the money story! Hilarious! :ohmygod:

If you want to prove there were paper bank straps involved, find evidence of a paper strap! Its pretty simple. Your assertion that paper straps would all be dissolved, is a huge assumption and hogwash. Give us some evidence that paper straps dissolve at Tena Bar ! Give some evidence from a bank employee that paper straps were used.

You have lucked out so far on one point: Carr apparently is no longer willing to discuss it!   Likewise Tom Kaye! And so far, nobody has posted Ckret's previous posts on this matter - all of his posts vs the few you selectively post to bolster your self.

I dont have the faintest fucking idea whats going on here, except a lot of people have dropped the ball with this, and their brains and their integrity along with it! Carr could clear this up in 2 minutes if he chose to! Likewise Tom Kaye. IMHO somebody is letting you run with this for some reason. Carr could come here and agree with you if that is the case !!! 

The fact is: Carr and Kaye were the principle investigators in this matter. Either they speak or the issue belongs to Fly Jack!  ^_^

Edited by georger

Share this post


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

Finally figured out this 302. 

 

D.B. Cooper Part 69 ocr 289.jpg

Where does chin end and neck begin? We’ve usually talked about the neck, but not usually brought in the chin. Is it under chin where an uppercut would go or front and sides of chin? I’ve put the turkey gobble further down the chin more on neck. 

Share this post


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

So the people who found and saw the money, inspected it, picked bands off the money, etc .... have nothing to do with what they saw and touched?  You are the first to eliminate the Ingrams from the money story! Hilarious! :ohmygod:

If you want to prove there were paper bank straps involved, find evidence of a paper strap! Its pretty simple. Your assertion that paper straps would all be dissolved, is a huge assumption and hogwash. Give us some evidence that paper straps dissolve at Tena Bar ! Give some evidence from a bank employee that paper straps were used.

You have lucked out so far on one point: Carr apparently is no longer willing to discuss it!   Likewise Tom Kaye! And so far, nobody has posted Ckret's previous posts on this matter - all of his posts vs the few you selectively post to bolster your self.

I dont have the faintest fucking idea whats going on here, except a lot of people have dropped the ball with this, and their brains and their integrity along with it! Carr could clear this up in 2 minutes if he chose to! Likewise Tom Kaye. IMHO somebody is letting you run with this for some reason. Carr could come here and agree with you if that is the case !!! 

The fact is: Carr and Kaye were the principle investigators in this matter. Either they speak or the issue belongs to Fly Jack!  ^_^

This screed proves once again that you don't understand the issue.. 

Nobody is challenging the fact that the Ingrams claimed rubber band fragments were found on the money.. that is not the issue. The issue is where did they come from, the packet or the bundle.

Carr talked to bank guy who said the bundles were rubber banded,, but Carr believed each packet of 100 was made random and rubber banded,,, this is false, he got packets and bundles mixed up.

You are correct, you have no idea what is going on.. you don't understand the issue and the evidence.

Carr, Kaye or the Ingrams can't help you..  they do not know and can't reconcile the evidence supporting paper bank bands and the rubber band frags found on the money...

The only logical answer based on the evidence we have which was also confirmed by Himmelsbach is that the packets of 100 were paper bank banded and those packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles..

With no evidence you claim there were no paper bands at all and even claim that Tina's "bank style bands" means rubber bands... and Himmelsbach was wrong and Tosaw was wrong and Pringle was wrong and the 302's were wrong...  but Carr who got the randomization of the bundles completely wrong is the authority on this...

You have no argument, none, because you haven't got a clue what is going on. So, you still attack me personally.. but unlike the last few years,, now everybody, not just me, believes they were paper bank bands except you and Ulis.. Good luck.

 

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