11 11
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

If any of you have a subject to present to the FBI - you will have to do your own research and hire your own investigators.

Has anyone looked at the costs of this investigation. DNA and prints to compare to WHAT? Evidence that has been tainted and evidence the FBI does NOT even know belonged to the Skyjacker.

The only way anyone is going to influence the FBI to continue the investigation on anyone subject is to provide the FBI with physical EVIDENCE. Evidence that in all probablility does NOT exist unless Cooper placed it in a safe place. Like a safety deposit box or some other hiding place.

Problem is - when it is found it is very deteriotated and the finder does NOT even know what they have found. Who pays attention to an old fight ticket and parking stub along with some yucky old ragged 20's...they take the 20's to a bank which replaces them with new bills and the bank doesn't check the bills. The rest is just junk that is tossed in the trash!

An old safe deposit box is closed, the bank is required to make copies of the items. Cash is just deposited into an account and then they run an ad. After so many yrs - they dispose of the items.

IF Weber opened a safe deposit box under the name of John Collins - how would one acquire the items if they could not prove they were the widow of John Collins. Just one example of evidence forever lost!

Not saying this is what happened only using it as an example.
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claim Numer 01-090648

Account Number 01733-1988-00281
Citizen & Southern National Bank of Florida
Savings Account.

Reported 241335

Not saying this was Weber's account but it was opened up in 1988 when we moved to FL.

There was also safety deposit boxes.

I could NOT apply to any of these because the FBI would not provide me with evidence Duane L. Weber was John Collins.

Weber had an active drivers license and ID for John Collins in 1988.
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robert99 says in part:

Quote

'Jo, If you bothered reading this thread, you would know that I don't think any viable suspect has been named here. In fact, I doubt very much if anyone has the slightest idea who Cooper was. And that includes you, Blevins, Sailshaw, Marla, and everyone else.

Robert99...'



'And everyone else' is a pretty bold statement. If you don't believe anyone here has the slightest idea, then why do you continue to post here?

Think about it. Maybe you should go to wherever the place is where the 'real' suspects are. You're obviously wasting your time here, right? (*laughs*) :)
No use hitting your head against the wall. :S

That post of yours gave me the best laugh I've had this month, no kidding.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


'And everyone else' is a pretty bold statement. If you don't believe anyone here has the slightest idea, then why do you continue to post here?

Think about it. Maybe you should go to wherever the place is where the 'real' suspects are. You're obviously wasting your time here, right? (*laughs*) :)
No use hitting your head against the wall. :S

That post of yours gave me the best laugh I've had this month, no kidding.




:D:D:S:)
Yea! Ever wonder why Robert99 posts on this thread. Whoever he is! Obviously he is WASTING his time or is that EXACTLY why he is here. Infiltrate and destroy from within! In fact I do NOT believe I can remember him making a positive statement about anyone poster!

WHO is Robert99?
WHY is he posting here?
WHAT is his purpose?
DOES he have a suspect?

Does ANYONE else know why Robert99 posts here - other than to make negatives about other posters. Has Robert99 made and productive posts about any part of this old crime. Perhaps I only remember the negatives and the digs.

Certain won't offer to go back and see what GOOD he has offered - he HATES me - so who is he. Perhaps he is just a WRITER posting here to get material for a book or maybe even a made TV spoof?

Who is Robert99 and what are his contributions to any subject or to the facts of the crime or even theories as far as that goes?
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Quote


'And everyone else' is a pretty bold statement. If you don't believe anyone here has the slightest idea, then why do you continue to post here?

Think about it. Maybe you should go to wherever the place is where the 'real' suspects are. You're obviously wasting your time here, right? (*laughs*) :)
No use hitting your head against the wall. :S

That post of yours gave me the best laugh I've had this month, no kidding.




:D:D:S:)
Yea! Ever wonder why Robert99 posts on this thread. Whoever he is! Obviously he is WASTING his time or is that EXACTLY why he is here. Infiltrate and destroy from within! In fact I do NOT believe I can remember him making a positive statement about anyone poster!

WHO is Robert99?
WHY is he posting here?
WHAT is his purpose?
DOES he have a suspect?

Does ANYONE else know why Robert99 posts here - other than to make negatives about other posters. Has Robert99 made and productive posts about any part of this old crime. Perhaps I only remember the negatives and the digs.

Certain won't offer to go back and see what GOOD he has offered - he HATES me - so who is he. Perhaps he is just a WRITER posting here to get material for a book or maybe even a made TV spoof?

Who is Robert99 and what are his contributions to any subject or to the facts of the crime or even theories as far as that goes?



If you have to ask who is Robt99 then maybe you
shouldn't be here! That's a little like asking who is
Sluggo, or Ckret, or 377, Amazon, or . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
After some overnight thought, I guess it's normal to check the box marked 'None of the Above' on the current suspects.

No one can prove that any of them were Cooper.

I am wondering if Robert99 has any theories about the suspect, though. For example, does he trust the majority of the work by Tom Kaye? If so, which parts?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Robert99 says in part:

'And everyone else' is a pretty bold statement. If you don't believe anyone here has the slightest idea, then why do you continue to post here?

Think about it. Maybe you should go to wherever the place is where the 'real' suspects are. You're obviously wasting your time here, right? (*laughs*) :)
No use hitting your head against the wall. :S

That post of yours gave me the best laugh I've had this month, no kidding.



Blevins, The above also applies to you. What are you doing here? You even admit that you don't know if your "suspect" is what you have claimed he is in books, internet articles, and your famous posts here on DZ.com.

As far as I can see, you haven't done anything to advance the search for Cooper. Your initial posts on this thread appeared to be solely to sell your book. And don't forget that you said about five times that you were leaving the thread. Nevertheless, in all but one case you were back the very next day and in two or three days in the other case. Were you just looking for love?

Sending the FBI and media a pile of rehashed baloney can best be viewed as a lame attempt to establish yourself as "a prominent Cooper researcher", a label you apparently covet.

Laugh on.

Georger has got your number.

Robert99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

:S:)
Yea! Ever wonder why Robert99 posts on this thread. Whoever he is! Obviously he is WASTING his time or is that EXACTLY why he is here. Infiltrate and destroy from within! In fact I do NOT believe I can remember him making a positive statement about anyone poster!

WHO is Robert99?
WHY is he posting here?
WHAT is his purpose?
DOES he have a suspect?

Does ANYONE else know why Robert99 posts here - other than to make negatives about other posters. Has Robert99 made and productive posts about any part of this old crime. Perhaps I only remember the negatives and the digs.

Certain won't offer to go back and see what GOOD he has offered - he HATES me - so who is he. Perhaps he is just a WRITER posting here to get material for a book or maybe even a made TV spoof?

Who is Robert99 and what are his contributions to any subject or to the facts of the crime or even theories as far as that goes?



Jo, I don't HATE you, but I do think you are NUTS (sorry JC).

Blevins is an easy study. But you are different.

The REAL mystery of the Cooper thread is Jo Weber. Despite your protests to the contrary, you are here for some reason and it doesn't seem to have anything to do with finding the "truth" about Duane Weber.

Level with us Jo, what are you doing here? There has got to be something in it for you and it sure isn't Duane.

Robert99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

After some overnight thought, I guess it's normal to check the box marked 'None of the Above' on the current suspects.

No one can prove that any of them were Cooper.

I am wondering if Robert99 has any theories about the suspect, though. For example, does he trust the majority of the work by Tom Kaye? If so, which parts?



Blevins, I do specifically recall having made some comments over the years about D.B. Cooper. But no comments about "the suspect", whatever you mean by that. You and Jo Weber apparently have zero retention about matters that don't support you candidates.

On the matter of Tom Kaye. I will defer to Tom Kaye and Georger on anything that involves a microscope or telescope. Otherwise, I will accept at face value anything Tom and Georger do until I have reasons not to.

However, I will not defer to Tom Kaye, Georger, Farflung, RobertMBlevins, or anyone else, on matters related to aircraft performance and flight dynamics.

And for the record, I am not aware of any disagreements between Tom, Georger, and myself on anything of substance.

Robert99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

After some overnight thought, I guess it's normal to check the box marked 'None of the Above' on the current suspects.

No one can prove that any of them were Cooper.

I am wondering if Robert99 has any theories about the suspect, though. For example, does he trust the majority of the work by Tom Kaye? If so, which parts?



Blevins, I do specifically recall having made some comments over the years about D.B. Cooper. But no comments about "the suspect", whatever you mean by that. You and Jo Weber apparently have zero retention about matters that don't support you candidates.

On the matter of Tom Kaye. I will defer to Tom Kaye and Georger on anything that involves a microscope or telescope. Otherwise, I will accept at face value anything Tom and Georger do until I have reasons not to.

However, I will not defer to Tom Kaye, Georger, Farflung, RobertMBlevins, or anyone else, on matters related to aircraft performance and flight dynamics.

And for the record, I am not aware of any disagreements between Tom, Georger, and myself on anything of substance.

Robert99



And I second that.

Good answer.

My feeling is Tom would approve also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There seems to be some lack of knowledge among several "prominent Cooper researchers" (by that, I mean Blevins, Jo Weber, Sailshaw, etc.) about how real research is done in the real world.

First, it is not a good idea to give your conclusions before you have done your research.

Second, look at all the "facts" (check your dictionary for the meaning) before drawing conclusions.

Third, don't write books about your "conclusions" before you have valid data supporting those conclusions.

Fourth, don't agree to appear on national television as an "expert" on some subject until you have at least some idea of what you are talking about. Marla, please note.

Finally, when valid facts emerge that prove you have been talking through your hat, it is an excerise in futility to keep repeating your BS with the hope that someone is dumb enough to give you the benefit of a doubt.

I'm sure that there are other qualified people on this thread who can add to the above.

Robert99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

There seems to be some lack of knowledge among several "prominent Cooper researchers" (by that, I mean Blevins, Jo Weber, Sailshaw, etc.) about how real research is done in the real world.

First, it is not a good idea to give your conclusions before you have done your research.

Second, look at all the "facts" (check your dictionary for the meaning) before drawing conclusions.

Third, don't write books about your "conclusions" before you have valid data supporting those conclusions.

Fourth, don't agree to appear on national television as an "expert" on some subject until you have at least some idea of what you are talking about. Marla, please note.

Finally, when valid facts emerge that prove you have been talking through your hat, it is an excerise in futility to keep repeating your BS with the hope that someone is dumb enough to give you the benefit of a doubt.

I'm sure that there are other qualified people on this thread who can add to the above.

Robert99



This is a great post. However, it will be completely ignored by the people it's aimed at. They have too much emotionally invested ...your other post also spot on when you said these two have zero retention on anything not related to their suspects.

Not sure quite how long I was away for, but it's been a long while, and it's quite depressing to come back to see Blevins sounding like a stuck record and Jo continuing to alternatively cast aspersions on people's motives/background or try get them to back off by feeling sorry for her. It's clear to me there's been progress on some things or theories at least judging from some of the discussion, but quite what they are is lost in the noise.

My husband can't believe I'm back on here :D
Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

There seems to be some lack of knowledge among several "prominent Cooper researchers" (by that, I mean Blevins, Jo Weber, Sailshaw, etc.) about how real research is done in the real world.

First, it is not a good idea to give your conclusions before you have done your research.

Second, look at all the "facts" (check your dictionary for the meaning) before drawing conclusions.

Third, don't write books about your "conclusions" before you have valid data supporting those conclusions.

Fourth, don't agree to appear on national television as an "expert" on some subject until you have at least some idea of what you are talking about. Marla, please note.

Finally, when valid facts emerge that prove you have been talking through your hat, it is an excerise in futility to keep repeating your BS with the hope that someone is dumb enough to give you the benefit of a doubt.

I'm sure that there are other qualified people on this thread who can add to the above.

Robert99



There you go again with that logic stuff...:S


Will you NEVER learn?? ;)










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



The REAL mystery of the Cooper thread is Jo Weber. Despite your protests to the contrary, you are here for some reason and it doesn't seem to have anything to do with finding the "truth" about Duane Weber.

Level with us Jo, what are you doing here? There has got to be something in it for you and it sure isn't Duane.

Robert99



You have never met me and you do not know me. If you did YOU would know I am here only because of the mystery involving Weber. His prior life, his life with me, the things in our marriage that cannot be explained and the fact that it all fits - but NOT one sole not even the FBI will fill in the very yrs that need to be addressed.

The only thing in any of this is about is resolution - with facts to support them. I do NOT believe in letting wrong doing go unpunished! You can take that statement to the bank. That applies to my own children as it does to Weber or anyone I have ever known. It is about TRUTH and HONESTY and that is what my life is about even though this thread seems to think otherwise.

Even though you some of you guys seem to be against what I am doing - every once in awhile a tidbit surfaces from the past all be it does seem to BY past certain individuals who only want the legend of Cooper to survive and not to really seek the truths.

Most of you swallowed what Carr stated here as FACT. NOT so!
I have to sign back in every few sentences because I have not been able to keep a connection to the thread for several months now. It take about 10 sign ins to make a post.
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orange wrote
Quote

My husband can't believe I'm back on here



Hey, when he married a jumper he shoulda known it wasnt gonna be a straight ahead fully predictable deal.

Didn't you fully disclose the risks?

He's lucky to have you and that your excursions are so harmless. ;)

377
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jo wrote
Quote

I do NOT believe in letting wrong doing go unpunished!



And how did you punish Duane for stealing coats, Kool Aid etc? I know I'm giving you a hard time, but I wanted to call you on your statement. I think you made a lot of exceptions for Duane.

Jo, you teased that the case would be closed soon. How soon and on what basis?

377
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

There you go again with that logic stuff...:S

Will you NEVER learn?? ;)



Yeah! What he said...



Care to elaborate? Is it the logic, the conveyor of, or ...?



Mostly, I second almost anything Airtwardo posts because he's so old and wise. Of course, that's not very logical but it does fit with the reasoning expressed by many here. You being an exception to the norm, of course.
Guru312

I am not DB Cooper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Jo wrote

Quote

I do NOT believe in letting wrong doing go unpunished!



And how did you punish Duane for stealing coats, Kool Aid etc? I know I'm giving you a hard time, but I wanted to call you on your statement. I think you made a lot of exceptions for Duane.

Jo, you teased that the case would be closed soon. How soon and on what basis?

377



The KOOL AID was during the very last few months of his life. I contributed it to his being bored, He was very crippled those last few month and a trip to the grocery with a little list gave him somehing to do. Durning the last few wks he was unable to drive and could not walk very far.

The coat thing was at a restaurant - he had done the deed when I made the remark that WAS not his coat. Yes, I jumped on him with disapproval. I now do not remember the place this occurred at. It was during the early yrs. He learned quickly I would NOT tolerate certain things. I would not know until after the fact on what most would call mischievious childlike pranks...some day I will tell the story about the 2 plates! I never knew How he pulled that off - if he bought them or if he stole them!

I watched him like a hawk - if I caught him doing anything I disapproved of - he was quickly reprimanded - like one would treat a child who took candy at the check out. Children you can take back into the store and make them return the item and punish them at home - just not the way it works with an adult.

Now that I know his record - I think back on it "keeping in practice" - I didn't know what that meant or why he would make such a statement.

Have you ever slapped a child's hands and used firm words with them! It is part of the learning process as a child - but Duane evidently never grew-up! Perhaps WHY he called me MOMMIE!

He would give me that little boy like grin that would melt my heart and I would let it go until the NEXT time. Of course I am sure the few times I became aware of wrong doing was a tiny fraction of the things he actually pulled off.
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Robert99 says in part:

'And everyone else' is a pretty bold statement. If you don't believe anyone here has the slightest idea, then why do you continue to post here?

Think about it. Maybe you should go to wherever the place is where the 'real' suspects are. You're obviously wasting your time here, right? (*laughs*) :)
No use hitting your head against the wall. :S

That post of yours gave me the best laugh I've had this month, no kidding.



Blevins, The above also applies to you. What are you doing here? You even admit that you don't know if your "suspect" is what you have claimed he is in books, internet articles, and your famous posts here on DZ.com.

As far as I can see, you haven't done anything to advance the search for Cooper. Your initial posts on this thread appeared to be solely to sell your book. And don't forget that you said about five times that you were leaving the thread. Nevertheless, in all but one case you were back the very next day and in two or three days in the other case. Were you just looking for love?

Sending the FBI and media a pile of rehashed baloney can best be viewed as a lame attempt to establish yourself as "a prominent Cooper researcher", a label you apparently covet.

Laugh on.

Georger has got your number.

Robert99



Okay...I probably deserved that, but there are a few things I'd like to mention in my defense.

First, I never claimed to be a Cooper expert, or even a Cooper researcher. I'm mostly a sci-fi novelist and book editor who reluctantly accepted the job of interviewing everyone that could be found who knew Kenny Christiansen. I have some experience doing interviews and having them published. Plus, unlike Skipp Porteous, I lived in the same area where these people lived who knew KC.

Second...I'm not here to sell anyone on the book. 95% of sales come through the Ingram Catalog, which is a private catalog (online and print) provided to wholesalers, retailers, and bookstore managers. The remainder of sales come mainly through Amazon. If a hundred people posting here each bought a book, I would make exactly a hundred bucks, (50% of total royalties) which isn't much after three years of posts, right? We get that much via Amazon alone in a week. Also...I've offered the book up for free to anyone who posts here as long as they email me. The file is too big to post in PDF here, because of the pictures.

Third, I think I have contributed in a few small ways to the search for Cooper. Remember, I wasn't the first one to investigate Christiansen. Geoff Gray did that. I only took it further. And I still don't completely buy the FBI's explanation on the Amboy chute and I think my article about it is solid.

Finally...the reason I say I don't know if KC was the hijacker is HONESTY. I just don't know for sure. Geestman's lies, along with the available circumstantial evidence, make me believe something is there, but without a smoking gun I have to be honest about it. I don't know.

NOTE: Sending the FBI the 16 documents, the pictures, and the PDF report wasn't 'rehashing'. Until I did that, I had not actually condensed the case against Christiansen into a solid document they could read in a reletively short time. And the reason I waited was because I had to check a few other things out until I felt we had all that we were going to get on Christiansen. It was an ongoing process.

I left a for a day or two a few times because I thought if I didn't cool off, I'd end up like Meyer Louie...who by the way I think should be allowed to return.

Sincerely, Robert


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

There seems to be some lack of knowledge among several "prominent Cooper researchers" (by that, I mean Blevins, Jo Weber, Sailshaw, etc.) about how real research is done in the real world.

Quote



:)Very seldom will you find me entering into the technical aspects of the crime.




Quote

First, it is not a good idea to give your conclusions before you have done your research.



:)
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

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.

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.

11 11