47 47
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, CooperNWO305 said:

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. 

Seems like whenever Bill tells the story he sort of puts his hand on his neck and rubs up and down. To me that indicates more of age related turkey "gobble" as opposed to a double chin. The statement about "flabby skin" also seems to hint at more of the "gobble" as opposed to the "double chin" that someone who is overweight might have. Cooper was also seemingly a fit looking individual, so that would seemingly lower the likelihood of this being a weight induced double chin. 

turkey.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW, found out some interesting stuff on the DAN COOPER comic,, found a list of all the editions that were printed in Mexico in Spanish for Latin America...  

but it looks like the fictional Canadian test pilot DAN COOPER was inspired by aka "copied" from a real US test pilot from 1945-1973 named George Cooper who was the chief test pilot at NASA. They changed the character to be Canadian to be more acceptable internationally, never published in english or officially distributed it in the US.

Much more on this later...  there is a nexus..

https://history.arc.nasa.gov/hist_pdfs/cooper_bio_20120724.pdf

1176215239_ScreenShot2023-01-22at9_34_33AM.png.2117c5afe3c68ac4b46615d4706506d8.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

WOW, found out some interesting stuff on the DAN COOPER comic,, found a list of all the editions that were printed in Mexico in Spanish for Latin America...  

but it looks like the fictional Canadian test pilot DAN COOPER was inspired by aka "copied" from a real US test pilot from 1945-1973 named George Cooper who was the chief test pilot at NASA. They changed the character to be Canadian to be more acceptable internationally, never published in english or officially distributed it in the US.

Much more on this later...  there is a nexus..

https://history.arc.nasa.gov/hist_pdfs/cooper_bio_20120724.pdf

1176215239_ScreenShot2023-01-22at9_34_33AM.png.2117c5afe3c68ac4b46615d4706506d8.png

Flyjack, Dan Cooper was not based on George Cooper.  I never met George Cooper but I did meet Robert Harper on several occasions in connection with USAF contracts that the organization I worked for had with Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory in Buffalo, NY which is where Harper worked.  Those two fellows produced what is now known as the Cooper-Harper ratings that are mentioned in the link you provided.

Also, I happened to work with an ex-P-47 pilot years ago who was credited with four German fighter kills in WW2.  He told me that all of his dogfights were below 7,000 feet in mountainous terrain and two of those kills involved getting the German aircraft into situations where they couldn't avoid crashing into a mountain which is exactly what they did.

 There is nothing magic about the term "randomization" as used in the Cooper money.  The Cooper money came from a specially set aside group of money that was reserved for just such incidents.  The money was selected from bills that had been circulated and was not arranged in numerical order.  As Carr points out, the bills for Cooper were packed in different size bundles to give the impression that they had been hastily assembled without recording the serial numbers.  Of course, the serial numbers had been previously recorded.

Share this post


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

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.

 

Nothing personal about it!

You are correct. Tina said "bank style bands", not "bank style straps". The Ingrams observed only rubber bands, not straps. A bank employee told Carr straps were omitted for security reasons - rubber bands only.

It's entirely possible different people at Seafirst gave various agents and news people different versions. The Ingrams said the 'money came out in pieces'. This is consistent with cemented or congealed 'bundles'. Of varying counts/thickness ? One bundle askew from the next confirmed by TK? Before each bundle has had a chance to become a unitised piece? ..... early in the history at Tina Bar.

Tom has always said he thinks the money was at Tena Bar a long time, but he has never explained why he thinks this or how the money could have come there so early in the Cooper history?

You have offered your version of events and facts at Tena Bar. Others have offered their versions. The story continues! 

     

Edited by georger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Robert99 said:

Flyjack, Dan Cooper was not based on George Cooper.  I never met George Cooper but I did meet Robert Harper on several occasions in connection with USAF contracts that the organization I worked for had with Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory in Buffalo, NY which is where Harper worked.  Those two fellows produced what is now known as the Cooper-Harper ratings that are mentioned in the link you provided.

Also, I happened to work with an ex-P-47 pilot years ago who was credited with four German fighter kills in WW2.  He told me that all of his dogfights were below 7,000 feet in mountainous terrain and two of those kills involved getting the German aircraft into situations where they couldn't avoid crashing into a mountain which is exactly what they did.

 There is nothing magic about the term "randomization" as used in the Cooper money.  The Cooper money came from a specially set aside group of money that was reserved for just such incidents.  The money was selected from bills that had been circulated and was not arranged in numerical order.  As Carr points out, the bills for Cooper were packed in different size bundles to give the impression that they had been hastily assembled without recording the serial numbers.  Of course, the serial numbers had been previously recorded.

Why do I have to read this patronizing nonsense... Georger's post are incoherent enough.

The Dan Cooper comic test pilot "character" was initially based on or inspired by test pilot George Cooper.. that doesn't mean the stories are about him.

 

Everybody knows the money was circulated $20's and in random serial number order..

They were in packets of 100 bills per packet = $2000 per packet. NOT A RANDOM COUNT.

The evidence indicates those packets were wrapped with paper bank bands, but rubber band frags were found on the money.

Carr INCORRECTLY believed that the packets of 100 bills ($2000) were randomized in count, so there may be $500 or $1000 per packet, he claimed. THIS WAS COMPLETELY WRONG.. This false belief meant that Carr assumed they were rubber banded because the bank guy said he rubber banded the bundles into random counts. Carr screwed this up and the ignorance and confusion just won't end.. The bank guy was referring to the bundles not the packets. The rubber bands were used for the bundles not the packets.

Carr was correct that the money was randomized in count but he was wrong claiming the packets were randomized.

So, you might have random number 3, 4, 5 or 6 packets of 100 bills ($2000) per packet rubber banded into a single rubber banded bundle..   The bundles of several packets were randomized NOT the packets of 100 bills.

 

How many times do we have to go through this 3 stooges whose on first skit.

 

 

 

Share this post


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

Why do I have to read this patronizing nonsense... Georger's post are incoherent enough.

The Dan Cooper comic test pilot "character" was initially based on or inspired by test pilot George Cooper.. that doesn't mean the stories are about him.

 

Everybody knows the money was circulated $20's and in random serial number order..

They were in packets of 100 bills per packet = $2000 per packet. NOT A RANDOM COUNT.

The evidence indicates those packets were wrapped with paper bank bands, but rubber band frags were found on the money.

Carr INCORRECTLY believed that the packets of 100 bills ($2000) were randomized in count, so there may be $500 or $1000 per packet, he claimed. THIS WAS COMPLETELY WRONG.. This false belief meant that Carr assumed they were rubber banded because the bank guy said he rubber banded the bundles into random counts. Carr screwed this up and the ignorance and confusion just won't end.. The bank guy was referring to the bundles not the packets. The rubber bands were used for the bundles not the packets.

Carr was correct that the money was randomized in count but he was wrong claiming the packets were randomized.

So, you might have random number 3, 4, 5 or 6 packets of 100 bills ($2000) per packet rubber banded into a single rubber banded bundle..   The bundles of several packets were randomized NOT the packets of 100 bills.

 

How many times do we have to go through this 3 stooges whose on first skit.

 

 

 

No need to insult people Flyjack. This is a historical scientific problem, not a personal test with you at the centre!

You can dismount your HIGH HORSE and your THRONE any time.

We dont have Carr here to question. Carr previously said bank paper straps were avoided for security reasons so no bank would be identified to the hijacker. That is either true or false. The bill count per banded bundle is another matter.

Edited by georger

Share this post


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

Nothing personal about it!

You are correct. Tina said "bank style bands", not "bank style straps". The Ingrams observed only rubber bands, not straps. A bank employee told Carr straps were omitted for security reasons - rubber bands only.

It's entirely possible different people at Seafirst gave various agents and news people different versions. The Ingrams said the 'money came out in pieces'. This is consistent with cemented or congealed 'bundles'. Of varying counts/thickness ? One bundle askew from the next ? Before each bundle has had a chance to become a unitised piece? ..... early in the history at Tina Bar.

Tom has always said he thinks the money was at Tena Bar a long time, but he has never explained why he thinks this ?

You have offered your version of events and facts at Tena Bar. Others have offered their versions. The story continues! 

     

It isn't my view, it is the evidence that you seem to ignore.

Many sources said the money was in 100's ($2000) per packet.

but it makes no sense for the packets to be randomized.

The FBI said the TBAR money was in the same order and packaging as given to Cooper..

The FBI had the micro which was in physical order made long before NORJAK,, If the packets were "randomized" then there is no way the order would match the micro.

The packets were not randomized and in 100 bills = $2000..

If the packets were not randomized then it could only have been the bundles of several packets..

and those could only be held together with rubber bands.... the rubber bands found on the TBAR money.

There is no way around this.

Check Mate.

 

 

Share this post


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

No need to insult people Flyjack. This is a historical scientific problem, not a personal test with you at the centre!

You can dismount your HIGH HORSE and your THRONE any time.

I am done with you guys.. such a waste of time.

I have explained this so many times and you guys still don't grasp the issue, you can't even articulate a counter argument addressing the facts. You use a logical fallacy claiming Carr the authority when he was clearly wrong about randomized packet counts.. the bill count error PROVES that Carr didn't understand what the Bank guy meant. You even lied about evidence.

I cannot fathom the sheer ignorance going on here and for so long over this..  

why? to maintain your dredge theory? who cares..

It is so ridiculous I almost think you guys are faking it.

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Math of Insects said:

I can overlook some confusion around the rubber band/bank strap issue. But mixing up the Three Stooges and Abbot and Costello? Unforgivable.

Funny, the 3 stooges was top of mind and an inside joke from Shutter's forum.. When I called them the 3 stooges R99, Georger and Meyer Louie were ganging up on me trying to get me kicked off the forum for bringing up the rubber band issue.

Meyer threatened to beat me up, Georger and R99 lobbied Shutter to have me removed.. Shutter actually sent me a message telling me to shut up about the rubber bands.. Cancel culture Vortex style..

at that time they all thought each of the 3 TBAR "packets" were a random count and rubber banded but I knew that based on the evidence that didn't make sense.. they couldn't understand the difference between packets and bundles.

For the record I don't actually claim they are the real three stooges.. but the rubber band issue is a never ending who is on first episode..

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dudeman17 said:

A few days ago I came across an old episode of 'Mission Impossible' (the TV show) from '72. The bad guy's name was Cooper. At one point he mailed a letter, and it appeared to have Flyjack's stamp on it.

SHHHH, don't tell anybody..

Actually that stamp was a common one from 1972..  A few of the "Cooper" letters to the FBI had the same stamp, maybe because it looks cool with a plane on it.

Share this post


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

My understanding is that the "no identifying marks" line by the Bank manager/security officer is a reference to the fact that employees will put their initials on bands when they make a packet. 

 

bandsquestion.png

326846448_5632169633547386_4479372983281320226_n.jpg

Please identify where these 302s items are. Part and/or DBC number ?  Since Carr refuses to comment, I wonder if he saw these 302s ?

I guess its time to look up Ckret's actual posts on this matter - his socalled interviews which are now being questioned by FJ. I mean Carr had sources of some kind or he just made shit up:  302s, interviews of bank employees, etc ?  Pat Ingram told me Carr had called her. So I know he was talking to people. But I dont have easy access to posts he made on this subject. Maybe FJ has already reviewed Carr's posts on this subject but just hasn;t posted them ?

This potentially goes beyond mere historical accuracy. It changes the physical structure of the money packages and how these packages would act, in Nature. It potentially renders Tom's band/bundle experiments pointless and wrong. It raises questions about what the Ingrams saw and reported. It raises questions about Tina's story: Cooper can't just reach in and grab a bundle ($2000?) and offer it to Tina, as Tina reported. Cooper must first disassemble a 'package' of bills, remove rubber bands, to get to a single 'bundle' or 'strap' or whatever the individual packages were called. Or did Cooper reach in and grab a bound package of three bundles then offer that?

By changing the structure of the money packages you change other related narratives. FJ knows that but he has avoided that issue so far. We have the new issue of paper straps dissolving. Nobody has tested that.

"Mucklow recalls that at this time while the passengers were unloading, in an attempt at being humorous, she suggested to the hijacker ‘that there was obviously a lot of money in the bag and could she have some’! The hijacker agreed with her suggestion and reached in and took out one package of the money, denominations not recalled by Mucklow, and he handed the bundle of money to her! Mucklow states that she laughed and gave the money back to the hijacker stating ‘she was not permitted to accept gratuities’, or words to that effect. "

Mucklow uses the words 'package' and 'bundle' in this passage. 

No lab report reports finding remnants of paper straps with the money. No shadows of protective bank straps across the middle of any bills ... at least not in natural lighting.

It's entirely possible FBI agents talked to bank spokes-people who werent even involved in the actual packaging of the Cooper money!  I seem to recall Ckret or somebody saying something along those lines, years ago when this matter was fresh at DZ. That was one reason Ckret wanted to talk to the people who actually packaged the money.

It's an interesting dilemma. Did Carr or Kaye or anyone ask Tina about this?

1_14_05_14_7_22_23.jpeg

Edited by georger

Share this post


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

Please identify where these 302s items are. Part and/or DBC number ?  Since Carr refuses to comment, I wonder if he saw these 302s ?

It's an interesting dilemma. Did Carr or Kaye or anyone ask Tina about this?

 

I'm attaching a PDF that has all of these particular 302's in them regarding the money and how it was packaged and transported. 

NickyB reached out to Tina's "handler", Dawn Bierschwal and she gave a dumb answer in response. 

Also posting Nicky asking Al Lee's secretary about it. 

About the paper bands leaving marks, as I posted previously, Chaucer reproduced Kaye's "will it float" experiment with a bundle since Tom used a packet. The thought being that maybe the fanning out of the bills is what caused the money to sick. As mentioned, the bundle floated about 7 minutes and then sank. He immediately pulled it out of the water and set it out to dry. A day later the paper bank bands were already disintegrating. I don't believe the paper bands would have lasted long enough to left any shadows. Similarly, what tiny fragments of paper could have still been left is likely to have escaped the Ingrams' notice. Why would they have cared about such a thing? 

IMG_4675.JPG

326412305_897039704822393_1648318494005683399_n.jpg

Bank-302s.pdf

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2023 at 11:19 PM, FLYJACK said:

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.. 

 

 

Why are you making this personal?  Georger's ego has nothing to do with this. This is simply a factual issue in the Cooper case. Either Carr talked to the bank employees, or he didn't. The world is waiting .  . 

There is nothing more I can do or say. That is a relief to me!

Share this post


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

I'm attaching a PDF that has all of these particular 302's in them regarding the money and how it was packaged and transported. 

NickyB reached out to Tina's "handler", Dawn Bierschwal and she gave a dumb answer in response. 

Also posting Nicky asking Al Lee's secretary about it. 

About the paper bands leaving marks, as I posted previously, Chaucer reproduced Kaye's "will it float" experiment with a bundle since Tom used a packet. The thought being that maybe the fanning out of the bills is what caused the money to sick. As mentioned, the bundle floated about 7 minutes and then sank. He immediately pulled it out of the water and set it out to dry. A day later the paper bank bands were already disintegrating. I don't believe the paper bands would have lasted long enough to left any shadows. Similarly, what tiny fragments of paper could have still been left is likely to have escaped the Ingrams' notice. Why would they have cared about such a thing? 

IMG_4675.JPG

326412305_897039704822393_1648318494005683399_n.jpg

Bank-302s.pdf 901.82 kB · 2 downloads

I think you are missing the options! What if the money is not in water - what happens to paper straps then? 

Are you saying straps trapped between bills dissolve also?  Or are they cemented in to become part of Kaye's congregated mass?

You are missing the options! Why not claim the absence of straps in the money means/proves: the money went immediately into the Columbia River, ie. water., the moment it fell to Earth on 11-24-71. Dissolution started immediately - instantly. Now all FJ has to do is tell us where in the Columbia, at say 8:30 pm pst !  

Why hasnt all kraft paper on Earth dissolved by this point in history? I had no idea bank strap paper was so vulnerable! You should inform all art galleries and museums to beware! All schools, all paper vendors, all children and banks, .......... 

If the bands stuck to money paper, why not to paper straps? Perhaps the straps had dissolved right underneath all bands before the band could stick to them, like Houdini removing his pants in a tank of water!

I can see why Carr isnt responding. Especially if he has any contrary news. Who wants to go up against FLYJACK! 

Or, you can just watch the movie.

And, we can erase Ckret totally as being a reliable source for any information about the DB Cooper case, or is that too extreme?. Tom Kaye may be next. People here have developed better more reliable sources !  Maybe they have a competing movie in the works ? 

Edited by georger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found Ckret's original post about bands vs straps - its pretty much as I recalled it. It is also my recollection that Ckret followed up his contact with the Seafirst Security person (and this DZ post) by finding and talking to a bank employee who was actually involved in packaging the money. I recall Ckret saying that person confirmed everything the security guard had said. Carr corroborates my version also, that he called Brian Ingram and then Brian's mother in this matter, as I did also. Here is Carr's post in full:

   

 


Ckret

 

Jumps
License
In sport

:  
:  
:  


May 1, 2008, 9:33 AM

Post #1637 of 21284 (5589 views)

Copy Shortcut

Registered: Sep 7, 2007
Posts: 522

Re: [maurico] float time [In reply to]

Can't Post


         And so I shall Maurico,

Sorry, I have been crazy busy but I did make some progress. We could not find a photo (yet) of the bag used for the money but I was able to confirm it was like the one I posted, a simple money sack.

As for the "shocking " information about the money, I spoke with the individual who carried the money from the bank to the airport the night of the hijacking. When I was talking with him he recounted that they were in the vault running the money through the counting machine and strapping the
bundles. I didn't catch it at, first but later in our conversation I caught on to the strapping part and said, "wait a minute." "you were strapping the $20.00 bundles with $2,000 paper straps?" He said "yes" and I almost fell out of my chair.

So I then started putting calls into Brian Ingram. He called me back and we spoke about the discovery of the money. What I found was that the money was not recovered near the water but about 20 to 40 feet from the edge. He said he found it in an area that had recently been covered in water. So I thought, "well not really much of a difference." I then asked for the details about the condition of the money when he found it and he confirmed, after speaking with his parents, that the money absolutely had rubber bands around the
bundles. This makes sense because there is no way paper straps would have kept the money together over the years.

So this all means, on face value, that if the money given to Cooper by the bank had paper straps and the found money had rubber bands....... well you could see how I was a bit perplexed. This would mean that either Cooper lived and repackaged the money or someone found the money and repackaged it. Which would be "par for the course" with regard to this case.

I then went back and re-interviewed the bank security manager and found out that he wasn't directly involved in packaging the money, only carrying it to the airport.

He was relaying what their ‘normal procedure’ was for processing and packaging money for shipment.

The funds that were given to Cooper were not pulled from their circulating cash but from a security fund that was prepackaged for these types of incidents. This money was not
strapped because the bank did not want any subjects to know where it came from so it was packaged with rubber bands. My head was spinning for a few days until I could get it straight.

Ckret may have posted one more time about this matter, after he found and talked to the second bank employee. I will look for that. If someone has that post, please post it.

At the time this matter came up, it had nothing to with randomised vs nonrandom counts per package of money, which has been FJ's concern. The issue at the time was about rubber bands vs paper straps, and nothing else as Ckret's post conveys. 

So far as I know, there is no 302 or book passage or movie or Tosaw script, that even covers what the SF Security guard conveyed. His testimony seemed to be unique at the time.   

Edited by georger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ingram report:

'As he did so, the boy turned up three bundles of money wrapped with rubber bands, which was a short distance below the surface of the sand.'    'The money came out in pieces'. - Pat Ingram.

A $6000 bundle wrapped with 2 or more rubber bands, or, three bundles @$2000 each wrapped with rubber bands ?

2-4 bands or 6+ bands ?

'Harold's brother spent a long time working on the kitchen table picking pieces of stuck rubber bands off the money'.  

 

Share this post


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

I think you are missing the options! What if the money is not in water - what happens to paper straps then? 

Are you saying straps trapped between bills dissolve also?  Or are they cemented in to become part of Kaye's congregated mass?

You are missing the options! Why not claim the absence of straps in the money means/proves: the money went immediately into the Columbia River, ie. water., the moment it fell to Earth on 11-24-71. Dissolution started immediately - instantly. Now all FJ has to do is tell us where in the Columbia, at say 8:30 pm pst !  

Why hasnt all kraft paper on Earth dissolved by this point in history? I had no idea bank strap paper was so vulnerable! You should inform all art galleries and museums to beware! All schools, all paper vendors, all children and banks, .......... 

If the bands stuck to money paper, why not to paper straps? Perhaps the straps had dissolved right underneath all bands before the band could stick to them, like Houdini removing his pants in a tank of water!

I can see why Carr isnt responding. Especially if he has any contrary news. Who wants to go up against FLYJACK! 

Or, you can just watch the movie.

And, we can erase Ckret totally as being a reliable source for any information about the DB Cooper case, or is that too extreme?. Tom Kaye may be next. People here have developed better more reliable sources !  Maybe they have a competing movie in the works ? 

There are many options. I don't even like speculating on Tena Bar. It boggles the mind and is a waste of time, in my opinion. It doesn't get us any closer to Cooper. 

However, words matter. Tina's 302 says "bank type bands" were on the cash. So if there were no paper bands on the cash, then that means that either Tina Mucklow or SAC Harold Campbell or SA Hinterliter, who would have dictated their notes to a secretary, refer to rubber bands as "bank type bands". That seems unlikely. Also, the fact that it says "bank TYPE bands" sounds like a direct quote. If that's the case, then that quote came directly from Tina mere hours after she saw the cash.

Thus, we are left with two possibilities: 

- A 22 year old from Philadelphia calls rubber bands "bank type bands"; or

- The cash had paper bank bands on them. 

It's important to remember that the paper bands and the rubber bands are NOT mutually exclusive. It's not an either or proposition. Perhaps Tina just failed to mention the rubber bands and we don't have a 302 where they discuss the bundling with rubber bands. 

Given the physical evidence (money had rubber bands) and the contemporaneous 302's (bank bands/straps/bank type bands), it's reasonable to assume that they had both.

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Georger,

You don't understand the evidence or the issue, you never have.. are you now claiming the money never got wet.. the crap you make up to maintain your position up never ends,,

There were rubber band frags on the money, they were from the bundle not the packet. Ingrams confirm existence of rubber bands.

The rubber band vs paper bands on the packets is largely irrelevant..

The takeaway is that the packets had to be in 100 bills each.. they were not a random count as CKRET believed.

That means the money went to Cooper rubber banded into randomized bundles of several packets. Confirmed by Himmelsbah and bank 302's.

And that means the money that landed on TBAR was one single bundle as the FBI claimed.

that changes the means by which the money arrived on TBAR..

 

If the packets were in a single bundle and not individual,,

The money did not have to arrive in a container like the money bag.

The dredge theory is extremely weak and virtually eliminated...

The premise for the human burial theory is gone... that is why Ulis is still fighting this.

 

So, now we need to look at TBAR theories that fit..

The money arrives as one single bundle.

The "FBI" flightpath is maintained.

Cooper jumped between the Lewis R and Battleground.

and the diatoms indicate a delay with the money entering the River in a Spring.

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


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

There are many options. I don't even like speculating on Tena Bar. It boggles the mind and is a waste of time, in my opinion. It doesn't get us any closer to Cooper. 

However, words matter. Tina's 302 says "bank type bands" were on the cash. So if there were no paper bands on the cash, then that means that either Tina Mucklow or SAC Harold Campbell or SA Hinterliter, who would have dictated their notes to a secretary, refer to rubber bands as "bank type bands". That seems unlikely. Also, the fact that it says "bank TYPE bands" sounds like a direct quote. If that's the case, then that quote came directly from Tina mere hours after she saw the cash.

Thus, we are left with two possibilities: 

- A 22 year old from Philadelphia calls rubber bands "bank type bands"; or

- The cash had paper bank bands on them. 

It's important to remember that the paper bands and the rubber bands are NOT mutually exclusive. It's not an either or proposition. Perhaps Tina just failed to mention the rubber bands and we don't have a 302 where they discuss the bundling with rubber bands. 

Given the physical evidence (money had rubber bands) and the contemporaneous 302's (bank bands/straps/bank type bands), it's reasonable to assume that they had both.

  

Wasting your time,, there is no new evidence,, Georger was given all the evidence and the argument years ago.. his stubborn ego just just won't accept it. He actually lied and made up evidence to maintain his position. He claims Tina meant rubber bands.

The evidence supports paper bands but is not even the real issue.

The point is simple, based on the evidence the money had to be in packets of 100's, if the money was made random in count that could only have been the bundles of several packets rubber banded together. Exactly what Himmelsbach said. So, the money went to Cooper rubber banded into bundles of random packet counts. That is consistent with how the TBAR money was found,, one single bundle of several packets. 

TBAR as one single bundle is the parameter by which theories should evolve.

 

For Georger to maintain his position he must prove the money was not in packets of 100 bills.. he can't because they weren't. He doesn't even understand that is the keystone.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


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

I'm attaching a PDF that has all of these particular 302's in them regarding the money and how it was packaged and transported. 

NickyB reached out to Tina's "handler", Dawn Bierschwal and she gave a dumb answer in response. 

Also posting Nicky asking Al Lee's secretary about it. 

About the paper bands leaving marks, as I posted previously, Chaucer reproduced Kaye's "will it float" experiment with a bundle since Tom used a packet. The thought being that maybe the fanning out of the bills is what caused the money to sick. As mentioned, the bundle floated about 7 minutes and then sank. He immediately pulled it out of the water and set it out to dry. A day later the paper bank bands were already disintegrating. I don't believe the paper bands would have lasted long enough to left any shadows. Similarly, what tiny fragments of paper could have still been left is likely to have escaped the Ingrams' notice. Why would they have cared about such a thing? 

IMG_4675.JPG

326412305_897039704822393_1648318494005683399_n.jpg

Bank-302s.pdf 901.82 kB · 5 downloads

Nice, credit to NickyB for trying,,,

but Tina may have reasons for not being truthful. We'll see and we'll know.

Share this post


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

 

So, now we need to look at TBAR theories that fit..

The money arrives as one single bundle.

The "FBI" flightpath is maintained.

Cooper jumped between the Lewis R and Battleground.

and the diatoms indicate a delay with the money entering the River in a Spring.

 

The truth is probably something so completely random i.e. Cooper hitchhiked a ride from someone and as he was getting out of the car thought it would be cute to hand the guy a bundle of cash as a thanks. Driver is like "WTF?" but drives off. Later as he is driving down Lower River Rd he hears the news, freaks out, and throws the bundle out the window near the river. Spring flooding pushes it along to its eventual spot on Tena Bar. 

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