10 10
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

"This is how people get locked up that are innocent. several times in life I was falsely accused. the last time was a hit and run. it all "made sense" to them..."

Nobody is on trial here.

This is a theory of many, a very reasonable one given the evidence. It needs to be explored.

Using personal bias and speculation to dismiss a theory is the reason cases DON'T get solved.

 

You dismiss theories with FACTS, not personal bias and speculation like she would have burned the money not thrown it in the river..  this poor application of logic will never solve this thing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Actually the published ransom bill list is sequential, 

but lots of info in this case has been wrong.. intentionally or not, who knows.

Carr got the randomized bundles completely wrong with Georger and that still won't die 10 years later. Carr claimed the 3 "bundles" (his word) on TBAR each contained random counts. He mixed up random bundles and random packets.. Bundles were randomized, packets were not.

The FBI files claim the tie was 1-2 years old after the FBI asked a store manager. The labels on the tie date it to about 1964.. The store manager went by the look of the tie, not deciphering the label.

but no doubt the FBI is holding back info, made serious errors and is engaged in propaganda to some degree. 

 

BTW, I just read in the new files that the FBI eliminated some suspects then reopened investigations on them..  then they weren't really eliminated,, right.

 

We aren't going to get anywhere using the same 50 year old thinking and hoping some new piece of physical evidence with suddenly pop up and solve it.

 

Sometimes you have to colour outside the lines to find them...

 

Some of the Cooper sleuths are still stuck in 2009...

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


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

The whole thing stinks to high heaven. Tom Kaye and his team, who were allowed to examine the other physical evidence in the case....have been denied access to the Amboy chute

You have been told repeatedly that this is false...they were not DENIED anything. Tom told me it never crossed his mind at the time to even ask...the same for the placard...

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


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

You dismiss theories with FACTS, not personal bias and speculation like she would have burned the money not thrown it in the river..  this poor application of logic will never solve this thing.

Has no personal bias to it..Sailshaw made the exact claim. 

You are saying it makes more sense to throw evidence in a river vs burning it? thousands of crimes are covered up with fire. Tina wasn't in the area till 79/80. why would she go back to the area of the crime to discard? it's a horrible way to try and get rid of evidence. cut it up into small pieces, shred it, toss it in a fireplace. lots of ways to get rid of something that small. why the river? she could of cut it up and thrown it away. bodies go into dumps and are never found. why even tell the FBI? it puts a spotlight directly on you. do you know if they were searched after the admission? I'm very skeptical of things because I've been accused of things that were completely wrong but "made sense" . I'm talking about legal issue's and not just words. 

The last accusation against me was a hit and run. I had a silver Dodge. the guy was hit by a silver dodge. my tag started with the three numbers given by the driver. the driver ID'd me.

Problem was the report said a Dodge 1500. that's a full size truck. I have a Dakota. the partial tag was my temp tag from 2008. it was 2015 when the hit and run occurred. I had a valid plate on the truck. the insurance measured both vehicles and my truck couldn't reach the dent in the back of his car. it was above my hood. he ID'd me from the police showing him a picture of my driver's license. no photo lineup. even when my lawyer showed the pictures and measurements and they still wanted to go to trial. a motion was filed based on the police failing to do a photo lineup and they could no longer use my name or myself in the trial. they dropped the charges. including a ticket for a expired tag.....yes, cop gave me a ticket for a expired 30 day 8 year old tag. I also tried to point out that a phone number in big letters with my company name was on the tailgate. they didn't care about that either. 

Cost me almost $3,000 to prove my innocence for a 10 mph accident I had nothing to do with. took almost six months to clear. the driver was trying to get $30,000 from my insurance company. he claimed two kids were in the back that his wife removed before the cops showed up. denied EMS twice on the report and months later wanted $10,000 for each person in the vehicle to cover hospital bills....so, bias has nothing to do with my conclusions...sorry. 

Share this post


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

Actually the published ransom bill list is sequential, 

but lots of info in this case has been wrong.. intentionally or not, who knows.

Carr got the randomized bundles completely wrong with Georger and that still won't die 10 years later. Carr claimed the 3 "bundles" (his word) on TBAR each contained random counts. He mixed up random bundles and random packets.. Bundles were randomized, packets were not.

The FBI files claim the tie was 1-2 years old after the FBI asked a store manager. The labels on the tie date it to about 1964.. The store manager went by the look of the tie, not deciphering the label.

but no doubt the FBI is holding back info, made serious errors and is engaged in propaganda to some degree. 

 

BTW, I just read in the new files that the FBI eliminated some suspects then reopened investigations on them..  then they weren't really eliminated,, right.

 

We aren't going to get anywhere using the same 50 year old thinking and hoping some new piece of physical evidence with suddenly pop up and solve it.

 

Sometimes you have to colour outside the lines to find them...

 

Some of the Cooper sleuths are still stuck in 2009...

Yes, the list of bills was published in sequential order.  It has been said many times by many people that the banks were looking for bills from a list that had no order to it, this is false.  If the bills actually went into circulation, the FBI could have found some, they either did not use the right technique, or were focused on other things, or the bills did not make it into circulation.

Share this post


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

You have been told repeatedly that this is false...they were not DENIED anything. Tom told me it never crossed his mind at the time to even ask...the same for the placard...

Why don't you ask Tom Kaye if he wants a look at the Amboy chute NOW? Instead of assuming for others what is false and what is not? I have an email from Kaye saying they have a standing offer to examine the Amboy chute. Every single media report says either nothing...or that the criteria for rejecting it as Cooper's is because it was made of silk. Even the FBI won't verify that repeated statement by Cossey. Then the chute is swept under the rug and declared 'evidence in an ongoing case,' to anyone else who asks about it. 

I didn't just drop off the apple cart last Tuesday. I know a whitewash job when I see it. :)

From Tom's own website, two current entries below:

Quote

'The Amboy parachute was not available during the inspection and it was not clear if that evidence was archived in the Seattle FBI office. We concur with others who originally forwarded the idea, that the Amboy chute is not silk but a first generation nylon parachute. The research team has a standing offer with the FBI to return to Amboy and excavate the location where it was discovered. To this date the only available information on the sewn-closed reserve chute that Cooper left the plane with, was that it was white in color. The Amboy Chute remains an item of significant interest...'

and this:

Quote

'To the best of our knowledge, author Robert Blevins first forwarded the idea that the Amboy chute was not made of silk on the Dropzone forum. Research shows that it is very likely a first generation nylon parachute that did not have the typical ripstop checkerboard pattern...'

Of course Kaye and his team are interested in the Amboy chute. Of course they would like the opportunity to examine it for themselves. Of course...they would love to be allowed to explore the area further where it was found. It is sensible to question the Seattle FBI's 'results' on the Amboy chute for a couple of obvious reasons. First, the main claim of 'silk, not nylon' and that's why it can't be Cooper's is frankly...a load of bullshit. On the day prior to them dumping it in Cossey's driveway, they were supposed to send it upstairs to their lab for further analysis. But it was the next morning when the agents showed up in Woodinville, WA at Cossey's house and dumped it in his driveway. Cossey tells media later, "I knew it wasn't Cooper's in less than ten seconds..."

But then he goes on to lie to a reporter about that, and claims it is silk and THAT'S why it can't be Cooper's. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out the whole investigation into that chute was a load of hogwash from start to end. 

Share this post


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

Why don't you ask Tom Kaye if he wants a look at the Amboy chute NOW? Instead of assuming for others what is false and what is not?

Robert, there is no assumption here. I asked Tom way back when you started your own assumption. it has nothing to do with today. you said they were denied. that's false. he didn't ask about the placard either but also said it wasn't there to see. it's possible both are no longer evidence and discarded or they were no longer at Seattle. doesn't imply any conspiracy or cover up.

Tom was very specific. he said it didn't cross his mind at the time nor did he see it. they brought out everything in boxes allowing them full access. pictures can be seen of them looking over the evidence. he was never denied access to anything except the suspect files due to having the names on the documents. he also stated they have three sets of 302's. we don't have half the access he had or GG. you keep giving the same old story about the chute. I guess it would take you hours to find out if you wrote a book or not? I can tell things in my field in seconds. I'm sure 10 seconds was a bit of an exaggeration to begin with and not subject to a stop watch. same for "I knew the second I seen him" or "I knew the second he opened his mouth" really, one second? you have no idea how long the chute was there or where it was located. you don't even accept people use them all over the globe for various reasons. if you follow some of the stuff Fly uncovered about the chutes it would clear Cossey of being a LIAR as you guys love to state. then what?

Share this post


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

'The Amboy parachute was not available during the inspection and it was not clear if that evidence was archived in the Seattle FBI office.

Exactly what he told me..it wasn't clear because he didn't ask....

 

Added: January 13, 2014

We never saw the chute. We didn't think to ask about it at that time because it had been dismissed.

TK

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

I have an email from Kaye stating he has a standing offer to the FBI (which he probably made later) asking access to the chute. They either gave him zero answer, or told him flat out no. You can always ask him about it. 

Do you believe Cossey's (and by association, the FBI's claim) that the Amboy chute cannot be Cooper's because it is made of silk, and not nylon? Obviously I am not the only person to question that claim. No one at the FBI had a lighter handy to do the simplest test? They just went along with Cossey's baloney-based claim?

Quote

'This is perhaps the best and most definitive test to find genuine silk. You can take a few threads from the material and burn it with a flame. Genuine silk burns with smell of burnt hair. When you burn the edge of real silk fabric, the flame is invisible and it will stop burning as soon as the flame is removed. Synthetics such as nylon will drip and form a black ball or black threads, and catch fire on their own...'

Pretty simple test. Name ONE criteria the FBI used (other than Cossey's silk claim) to determine the Amboy chute did NOT come from the hijacking. Just one. You can't, because they never gave an answer other than 'by a preponderance of the evidence...'

Yeah? What evidence? Cossey's silk story, which has been roundly discounted? The FBI's first statement on the chute was much more definitive. "It's the right size, the right color, and was found in the right place...' That statement appeared in almost every initial media story. 

And where is the container and harness? No one found them, yet it takes a human being to disconnect them, even on a cargo chute that reaches the ground. They are still attached. And why did someone take the time and trouble to bury the chute anyway? That's a fair amount of work, and this chute was found basically in a rural area in a recently-cleared property where a dirt road was being made by a property owner. It also happens to be in the prime drop zone for Cooper. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


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

I have an email from Kaye stating he has a standing offer to the FBI (which he probably made later) asking access to the chute. They either gave him zero answer, or told him flat out no. You can always ask him about it. 

Can you show the email.  of course it would be after the fact?????

He had access at one point. that doesn't give him permission to come and go. once again, it was an open investigation and they will limit the information, period...

Share this post


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

Has no personal bias to it..Sailshaw made the exact claim. 

You are saying it makes more sense to throw evidence in a river vs burning it? thousands of crimes are covered up with fire. Tina wasn't in the area till 79/80. why would she go back to the area of the crime to discard? it's a horrible way to try and get rid of evidence. cut it up into small pieces, shred it, toss it in a fireplace. lots of ways to get rid of something that small. why the river? she could of cut it up and thrown it away. bodies go into dumps and are never found. why even tell the FBI? it puts a spotlight directly on you. do you know if they were searched after the admission? I'm very skeptical of things because I've been accused of things that were completely wrong but "made sense" . I'm talking about legal issue's and not just words. 

The last accusation against me was a hit and run. I had a silver Dodge. the guy was hit by a silver dodge. my tag started with the three numbers given by the driver. the driver ID'd me.

Problem was the report said a Dodge 1500. that's a full size truck. I have a Dakota. the partial tag was my temp tag from 2008. it was 2015 when the hit and run occurred. I had a valid plate on the truck. the insurance measured both vehicles and my truck couldn't reach the dent in the back of his car. it was above my hood. he ID'd me from the police showing him a picture of my driver's license. no photo lineup. even when my lawyer showed the pictures and measurements and they still wanted to go to trial. a motion was filed based on the police failing to do a photo lineup and they could no longer use my name or myself in the trial. they dropped the charges. including a ticket for a expired tag.....yes, cop gave me a ticket for a expired 30 day 8 year old tag. I also tried to point out that a phone number in big letters with my company name was on the tailgate. they didn't care about that either. 

Cost me almost $3,000 to prove my innocence for a 10 mph accident I had nothing to do with. took almost six months to clear. the driver was trying to get $30,000 from my insurance company. he claimed two kids were in the back that his wife removed before the cops showed up. denied EMS twice on the report and months later wanted $10,000 for each person in the vehicle to cover hospital bills....so, bias has nothing to do with my conclusions...sorry. 

No, what I am saying is your logic is bad.. it is biased speculation used to reject a theory.

We need facts, not speculation to reject a theory. That doesn't mean you have to accept a theory.

You can't reject a theory because you think Tina would have burned the money instead of tossing it. 

Being skeptical is good, rejecting possibilities based on speculation isn't skepticism, it is a lack of reason.

You advance knowledge with theories, they get tested and confirmed or rejected with facts not opinions. 

Share this post


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

Can you show the email.  of course it would be after the fact?????

He had access at one point. that doesn't give him permission to come and go. once again, it was an open investigation and they will limit the information, period...

I'm not posting Tom's emails publicly. You know his address...just ask him. I don't know about property access or any of that, i.e. where chute was found. Tom said he had a standing offer to the FBI to be allowed access to the chute, but they either refused his offer, or ignored it. 

Why would the Seattle FBI release hundreds of documents on the case and then refuse to discuss a chute they dismissed as evidence in the first place. I contacted them twice on my own. I didn't ask to look at it. I asked for clarification on their criteria for dismissal, and pointed out that all reports said it was because of a silk chute claim...that was doubtful at best. 

Over the years, the Seattle FBI and I have gotten along as well as can be expected. They've even been nice enough to call me at my office and discuss this point or that, this question or that, and quite openly sometimes. But on the Amboy chute they were definitely keeping that under wraps. I can see no reason for doing that, since they dismissed it as evidence a full FIVE YEARS before my inquiry, and they knew exactly which parachute we were talking about. 

Don't try to justify their actions. That's ridiculous. Ask yourself why they would do that. My thought is they may have suspected the chute WAS Cooper's...and decided to keep that under wraps. You have to remember that the FBI has been claiming officially and un-officially that the Tina Bar money tells them Cooper is probably dead on Jump Night. If they had to admit he actually landed safely, and someone eventually found the chute...well, you can figure out the rest. It would be in their best interests to keep any conclusions about that private. Maybe it's why they went along with the Cossey/silk tale when they probably knew it was baloney all along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

TK and I have had a few exchanges over the years regarding the chute. Yes...he says he has a standing offer with the Seattle FBI. He also says his team asked to examine it...and they were turned down. I just read some of his messages. To show sort of what was going on, let me reprint one of my messages to him. That is allowed. 

Quote

 

Robert Blevins <adventurebooksofseattle@gmail.com>

Aug 29, 2017, 4:12 PM
to Tom

Hi Tom, I have a response from Agent Ayn Dietrich. I think you should wait about three or four days, and then put in another request for your team to be allowed to examine the chute. I am going to now copy over the text of the message I sent to Dietrich, so you'll know sort of what to say. Dietrich also says a team of agents in Seattle are still reviewing tips, and the message below was forwarded to them. You should send your request to Dietrich first, and let her forward it to the same guys. Sincerely, Robert. (Original message below)

 

Quote

 

Hello Agent Dietrich,

I know the DB Cooper case is a dead issue. That's a given. However, I also know the Seattle FBI was unable to identify the parachute found in the prime dropzone for Cooper, the one discovered buried in 2008 and investigated by Larry Carr. No one knows how to ID it. I think I have an idea how to either confirm that chute or discount it for good.

I found an article that gives all colors and details, including precise measurements of all C-9 canopies that have been produced. It is known that Cooper jumped with a C-9 canopy. But no one, including the FBI, has been able to ID the chute from Amboy.

Using the information in the linked article and a tape measure, the FBI should be able to either confirm the chute as a C-9, or discount it for good. The article is quite precise on details.

When I have inquired previously about the Amboy chute, I was told twice that it is 'evidence in an ongoing case,' which is strange because the FBI allegedly dismissed the Amboy chute back in 2008. Tom Kaye and his research team, aka Citizen Sleuths, have a standing offer to the Seattle FBI to be allowed to examine the Amboy chute. His team are the same people the FBI allowed to examine the other physical evidence from the hijacking. Armed with the knowledge in the article below, it would be an easy matter to ID this chute once and for all.

I would point out that the Amboy chute was discovered without its container and harness. This means a human being had to disconnect them and take them elsewhere, and then most likely, that same person buried the canopy. This same information about the article has been forwarded to Tom Kaye and his team. I have urged him to apply to the Seattle FBI again to be allowed to examine the Amboy chute. If the case has been closed by the FBI, and the chute was already dismissed as evidence, I see no reason why he should not be granted permission to examine it for himself. They did pretty well on the other evidence, i.e. http://www.citizensleuths.com

Article below.

 

Unfortunately, the article link no longer works, but these are the parameters for a C-9 canopy:

"There is no life limit on these parachutes. These are tough parachutes, Weight limits 254 lbs +, Speed Limits 180 mph +.

Specs: Type parachute-C-9 Flat circular, Nominal diameter-28 feet (8.5 m), Number of gores-28, Canopy material-1.1 oz. Ripstop nylon..."

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Robert, that was during the time the case was completely open. that's not the case now and they are finally releasing documents. they wouldn't do this before closing the investigation. you are mixing two periods into one. 1971 to 2016 the case was open and not subject to public demands. they would hold a press conference and that's the extent of it and how most, if not all in law enforcement deals with open cases. 

I will call Tom and ask him. he never mentioned it to me over the years we discussed this nor have you. I have a screenshot somewhere of you accepting Tom's email back in 2014 on this site. even if he did email them after the point of his visit. I doubt they would allow it. things like that don't happen often. it still doesn't grant the right to say he was denied. if I email Asking about the placard you can bet they will not answer, so do I say it's BS and start laying grounds for the placard being planted? 

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

I didn't say Kaye emailed them. I said he asked the Seattle FBI if his team could examine the chute while they were in Seattle with the other evidence. And they had a standing offer to check the area where it was found. The FBI said no to both those things.

I have been the one emailing the FBI. Tom said he thought it was hopeless doing that, but you can tell he has an interest in the chute as well. Sure...he would like to take a look at it and do measurements. Finding out the number of gores, their size, number of lines, size of canopy in total, etc is available on the internet. Armed with that information, anyone with a good tape measure could figure out the nature of the chute in minutes. Whether or not it was a 28 footer C9 or not. 

Until this happens, I'm not going to accept an explanation from a major law enforcement source (Seattle FBI) that is based on an obvious LIE. That is...they went along with the Cossey explanation without a word, probably because it was convenient for them. Maybe you and some of your friends don't have the access I had with the Seattle FBI. They were always cooperative, and very nice to me. They would return my phone calls, my emails, no problem. 

But like Tom Kaye found out...when it came down to the Amboy chute, they suddenly had nothing to say. Prior to that, they would answer just about any question I wanted, and very freely. For example, when I asked them if KC had been dismissed as a suspect in the case...they said no he had not, contrary to what Agent Carr said in early 2008. When I asked them in 2012 about this, they told me that not only was KC a suspect...but that 'some in this office think he's a good suspect. Others think there are better suspects..."  That's a pretty straight up answer. 

The Amboy chute? No container, no harness? Buried for some reason? Found in the right spot? 'Right size, right color?' Then it is written off days later with a bullshit 'silk' story? You must be kidding. 

 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


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

I would point out that the Amboy chute was discovered without its container and harness. This means a human being had to disconnect them and take them elsewhere, and then most likely, that same person buried the canopy. This same information about the article has been forwarded to Tom Kaye and his team. I have urged him to apply to the Seattle FBI again to be allowed to examine the Amboy chute

Parachutes are all over the planet. people use them for car covers, canopies, lines, no lines etc. no, it's not most likely the same person buried it. if Cooper buried it. the chute should of been balled up and small to bury easy, no? it should of come right out. you were not involved in 2008. I'm positive they measured the chute. why wouldn't they. they mention measuring another chute found in a 302? we don't have the full story. it's basically partial at most. 

When did Tom send this email. it had to be after you said Tom was denied or you would of mentioned this in the past when I corrected you. urging him doesn't imply he did..Tom never has a problem posting his emails...

What I see a is many of us conclude things far to early. we just don't have all the information and many try to fill in the gaps. 

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


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

I didn't say Kaye emailed them. I said he asked the Seattle FBI if his team could examine the chute while they were in Seattle with the other evidence. And they had a standing offer to check the area where it was found. The FBI said no to both those things.

did you read his email. he said nothing of the sort...

We never saw the chute. We didn't think to ask about it at that time because it had been dismissed.

TK

You are not showing any proof of Tom asking them then or later....you have no problem showing the email to the FBI or even a reply but not Tom's? I already know exactly what he is going to say....you have been saying he was denied since 2014. that's why I emailed and asked him. the proof is above. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

How are you positive they measured it? How do you know they did that using the parameters of a C-9 canopy? How do YOU know how it was buried, or how difficult was it to remove it from the ground after maybe 37 years since the hijacking?

You just have a bunch of assumptions going. I have been presenting facts. Silk is biodegradable by the way, not like nylon which can take a century to disintegrate. 

Why do you keep questioning me on a few emails between Tom and myself. They were nothing complicated. 

Yes...it was AFTER the Sleuths were turned down in Seattle. That is right. I didn't really start questioning the Amboy chute find until about 2011 (or so) because I didn't know much about it. Remember....they found the chute in April 2008 and that's when all the news articles were posted. Hell, I wasn't even involved in the Cooper case until after I contacted Skipp Porteous. (I just dug up my old Comcast mail account.) Shows my first message to him was mid-2009. I just never gave the Amboy chute much thought at first. Later...I started looking at the 2008 news articles and smelled a rat. 

EDIT:  Tell you what I will do. I don't like posting peoples' emails unless they are representing the FBI, or give me permission. But I will do THIS:  If you can show an email, and not just text of one...where TK says he never asked about the chute while the team was doing their work in Seattle...I will screenshot the mail Tom sent saying that they did ask, but were told no. I think that's fair enough. 

You keep asking about dates and emails. You keep ignoring the issues. If you are soooo in support of the Seattle FBI's explanation on the Amboy chute, you should explain why you are. Do you believe the silk story? If so, why? Those are the issues. Not whether Tom said this or that in an email or two we had regarding the chute. Tom can speak for himself. Maybe you should ask him to do so HERE.

The hard fact is that if Tom's team had been allowed to examine the chute, we wouldn't even be discussing this now. They would have easily determined the truth about it, i.e. whether it was a C9 canopy. You keep forgetting that is the main point here. 

Hate to say it, but you are sounding like Excuse Maker for the Seattle FBI. I'd say they have that job covered already. B| If you have real points about the Amboy chute, you should make them. Sounds more like you are trying to play 'gotcha' again just because I won't publish TK's email publicly. Call him up and let him give his own comments on the chute subject. I have no problem with that, and would be interested in what he thinks today. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


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

How are you positive they measured it? How do you know they did that using the parameters of a C-9 canopy? How do YOU know how it was buried, or how difficult was it to remove it from the ground after maybe 37 years since the hijacking?

How do you know it was in the ground 37 years? how do you know it was put there by the original owner. it would be odd they didn't measure it. even in 1971. then I read a 302 about another chute and they state to measure it as one of the things to do confirming what I suspected when I said they probably measure chutes. it's common sense. they don't need an expert to measure it. same for taking a picture. they don't need a professional? 

Whether you accept it or not is not the FBI's concern the way I see it. what it does do is it opens the door to conspiracies..you are not presenting facts. you never seen the chute other than a picture. you never touched it. you are the one assuming. you don't know what the FBI knows. you are reading from new articles. you don't even know where it was found. all I've said is it was probably measured and no way to tell how long it was in the ground. 

Share this post


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

Maybe a DZ jumper can recognize something with this chute??

 

 

Maybe. I have a bunch of blow ups done from the FBI's available pictures of the chute. My main problem, besides the others...regarding this chute is the fact that the Seattle FBI tacitly went along with the 'silk' explanation given by Earl Cossey. I have a REAL problem with this. That claim is 99.9999% NOT TRUE. 

So where does that leave any reasonable explanation? You have to look at the entire package, if you will, that the FBI did over about eight or nine days after the chute was discovered. This is a fairly accurate timeline:

  • Chute find is announced in the media and stories about it go national, some international coverage. 
  • Seattle FBI says it is the right size, the right color, and found in the right place. 
  • FBI says it will consult parachute experts. At the same time, a manufacturing date and a serial number are released on the chute, but nothing can be discovered as a result. 
  • FBI says the chute will be taken up to their research department in Seattle. It is a separate area in the main Federal FBI building in Seattle. 
  • The next morning, a couple of agents pile it into the trunk of a car and go to Earl Cossey's house. They dump it in his driveway, ask him to look at it. 
  • Cossey tells media the same day that he knew 'it wasn't Cooper's in less than ten seconds,' and claims the reason is because the chute the FBI brought is made of silk, and not nylon. And that the one he gave Cooper was nylon. 
  • Almost immediately, some skydiving folks who have seen the pictures dismiss it as being made of silk. They say it looks like either nylon, or ripstop nylon. There is also no evidence of rotting on the chute, something a silk parachute buried in the wet ground would have done. It's dirty, but not rotted. Silk is a natural substance, and biodegradable. Although old silk chutes have been discovered undamaged occasionally, they were still packed inside a container. 
  • After the weekend, the FBI announces that the chute is not Cooper's, but don't give a reason. They say, 'by a preponderance of the evidence,' and don't dispute Cossey's claim it is made of silk. 
  • Later, when asked what experts had actually examined the chute, the Seattle FBI admits no one except Cossey (as far as 'experts') were actually allowed to see it, and that consultations were done by phone. Some were calls that came INTO the FBI from people trying to help. There is no way for the FBI to really know who is an expert over the phone, and who is not. It is hard enough to figure out from the poor quality pictures. In my opinion, phone calls just won't cut it.
  • The Citizen Sleuths wanted to see the chute in 2011 (I think that's when they did their research), but at the time they didn't know if it was even available. But according to Tom Kaye's email...some mention was made about it. In any case, and for whatever reason...they were denied access to both the chute and the opportunity to do more digging in the area the chute was found. Kaye has said they have a standing offer, but it sounds as if they gave up on the idea pretty quickly. 
  • Even though the FBI dismissed the chute as evidence clear back in 2008, they continue to stand behind 'it's evidence in an ongoing case' even TODAY. Go figure. 
  • Why was the chute disconnected from its harness and container? Why was it buried? Both are good questions. 
Edited by RobertMBlevins
'container' not canopy

Share this post


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

.they were denied access to both the chute and the opportunity

I keep asking for proof and you keep claiming they were denied even after a email from the source proves the opposite of your claim...

 

We never saw the chute. We didn't think to ask about it at that time because it had been dismissed.

TK

???????????????

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

I worked at McChord AFB for over 20 years. One of my jobs was checking out reports of old plane crashes. I can tell you that finding an old parachute almost anywhere in Washington state means very little. the 62 MAW which is stationed at McChord has conducted cargo and personnel parachute drops all over the Pacfific Northwest for 50 years. It is not at all unusual to have a cargo chute separate from its cargo and drift for miles in an unexpected direction. And reports of old crashes are often inaccurate. I have investigated wreckage sightings and found aircraft several miles from their map positions. And when you factor in the number of skydiving clubs in the area, I am surprised that you can walk a mile in any rural area without tripping over an old parachute.

Dick Thurston

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personal opinions are completely worthless in the case of the Amboy chute. We're not just talking about finding a chute. It is the complete set of circumstances that went along with all that afterward. 

You said you were going to call TK (or email) and ask for his comments. I didn't mind quoting a bit of an old email, but I certainly won't speak for him on this issue. 

Here is where we differ. You buy the FBI's lame explanation on the Amboy chute, and probably Cossey's ridiculous 'it's made of silk and that's why it can't be Cooper's' explanation. 

And I don't. It is as simple as that. You want to believe those things? Okay. Believe them. 

And don't say you DON'T necessarily believe them. That is a cop out. Either you buy the Seattle FBI's story and Cossey's explanation as truth, or you don't. This has nothing to do with me, or even TK for that matter since he wasn't allowed to examine the chute. 

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
10 10