DB Cooper

[FLYJACK 654]

Man, Georger proves he is a clown..

First, Georger argues Cooper said "American" to back up the Mexico demand.. but the Mexico demand was after Cooper received the money.. FAILED ARGUMENT

Then Georger as usual shifts the goal post and suddenly claims Cooper never said it.. but the crew added it, that was Bruce's argument. A better one actually but not conclusive. Georger is goal seeking to support his conclusion.. he even attacks me for having a suspect, but he doesn't address the argument or get the facts right.

This is what makes Shutter's forum so TOXIC..  no critical thinking, just goal seeking.

Proof, bookman's argument was never examined, just nodding, grunting and snorting  approval based on the conclusion,,, problem is, his examples prove the exact opposite to his conclusion. NOBODY CHECKED. Lazy...

 

"American" was transmitted by the crew, why would an American crew add "American"?? to Coopers demand,,,  It is possible but very odd. 

 

So, we look further, Tina said Cooper later told her circulated "U.S." currency, now we have "American" and "U.S." being used... did they both add it in, possible but getting very unlikely.

 

It is very likely Cooper used "American/US" currency and it would be very rare for somebody without foreign influence/exposure to do so..

Go down to your local bank and ask to withdraw some cash,, are you going say "American" or "US" Currency...  extremely unlikely or rare.

 

It is an over reach to say it indicates a foreigner, it just suggests somebody with foreign exposure/influence... still could be an American. May be military..

 

If you clowns over there don't get your facts and arguments straight you're just going to keep going in circles for another decade.

 

 

 

[FLYJACK 654]

2 minutes ago, RobertMBlevins said:

 

Believe or not, except for the Willamette river part, we agree on something completely. This is also the scenario I have settled upon over the years. As far as whether Cooper actually intended to go to Mexico, Reno, Yuma, or anywhere else that was mentioned, I say absolutely not. I don't believe Cooper had the slightest intention of remaining aboard the flight one second longer than necessary once the plane left Seattle. If he had, he would not have bothered putting on the chute right away. Those suggested destinations/refueling stops etc were just a ploy to try and throw off his real intentions, or any possible 'cops waiting on the ground' scenario. 

The longer he stays aboard, the more his chances he will be caught because it gives LEO more time to prepare. One thing he probably didn't know was about the indicator light in the cockpit showing that the airstairs door was open. Or even if he knew, that the act of jumping from those stairs would make the light flash, and tell everyone WHEN he jumped. Simply put, he probably figured they would know the door was open...but NOT realize his jump point because of the light flashing off for a second. All in all it was a pretty good plan. No one in the back to sit there and snitch to the flight crew saying he just departed. They fly along until Reno is reached...and no one would know the jump point. But the little red light on the flight engineer's panel gave him away. It was the only real flaw in his plan because if the light would NOT flash off from the stairs rebounding when he jumped, the truth is that no one would know WHERE he jumped all the way to Reno. They would have had the pressure bump, but without the light flashing, no one could be sure. Maybe the bump is just from the door opening. They would have to consider that. They would not know for sure the jump point. 

The truth is that one little flash of the indicator light told them quite a bit. 

 

You missed a big part of my argument..

Cooper's initial demand was non stop to Mexico and airstairs lowered inflight, there is no dispute here.. it is clear in FBI docs and transcripts.

When Reno was renegotiated, he wanted to jump ASAP and wanted the airstairs down on takeoff.

So, everybody is conflating Cooper's demands and mis-interpreting his intentions.

His plan changed.

Cooper would not demand the plane to fly to MEX nonstop unless he believed it would make it. He wouldn't make a demand he knew would be rejected and had to be renegotiated.. His first demand indicates he wanted to go to Mexico.. But when that was renegotiated to Reno his plan changed.. He wanted airstairs down on takeoff and to jump asap before the plane landed Reno. His intentions changed, he adapted. THIS IS A CRUCIAL POINT EVERYBODY MISSED.

Cooper did not initially demand airstairs lowered on takeoff.

[FLYJACK 654]

3 minutes ago, RobertMBlevins said:

I hear you on that, but why would Cooper possibly want to go to Mexico? Land in Mexico packing $200,000 in cash? With the Federales waiting for him? Mexican prison? They would have caught him easily down there, and he would not have been treated very well. 

The more likely scenario is that he told them Mexico just to spread out the possible search area to half the USA and beyond. Whoever Cooper was, he wasn't dumb. And I don't think he would be dumb enough to reveal anything about his real intentions on where he was going. 

Some hijackers...when the jet would make a planned refueling stop...suddenly found that jet had its tires shot out when they landed. Cooper jumped in WA because he wanted to. He was not only exit stage right long before Reno, but even before they reached Portland. 

I think, when he made his initial demand he wanted to jump south of the US border.. outside the US authorities,, he believed the plane could get to Mexico..  Remember, Cooper was described and swarthy, Mexican/Latin American.. and was not dressed for a PNW jump.

But, when Reno was in play, he wanted out ASAP...  

The speculation that Cooper just wanted the plane heading south is reasonable but doesn't really make sense in the context of his initial demands. Why nonstop in US, he could have said Phoenix or Yuma, and why make a demand that was going to be rejected.. unless he thought it was doable. Cooper was smart but that was dumb.. unless his demands were misunderstood.

 

 

[FLYJACK 654]

5 minutes ago, RobertMBlevins said:

Well, because of the way he was dressed, it is possible he really DID want to go to Mexico. And although some witnesses (although they didn't agree on a whole lot) said he was Latin or swarthy-looking, the FBI still classifies him as a white guy, not Hispanic. All three stews picked different combinations from the FBI's Facial Identification catalog. None of the witnesses actually said Cooper was Hispanic, either. As I have said, it is too bad that stew Alice Hancock didn't think to ask any of the First Class passengers if they had an Instamatic camera, which were quite common back then. She could have removed the flashcube and taken a few shots through the curtain. The FBI didn't think of sending a camera aboard either. They just gave Cooper practically everything he wanted. There is also the matter of the paper bag and what might have been inside it to help him. Whatever it was, it certainly was a part of his plan. 

The truth of the matter is that the Seattle FBI, the crew, and officials at NWA screwed the pooch and made it easy for Cooper to get away with it. 

 

Norjak pre-dates the wide adoption of the term hispanic.. it started in the early 1970's.

Latin Americans were considered white/caucasion unless Indian... Hahneman was noted as white but today he would be hispanic. The term hispanic was adopted by US gov for the census and became the norm.

For 1971, the lack of the use of term hispanic is irrelevant. 

 

I made this list a while back, I should update it with all the new released FBI files since, but it is clear...

Cooper was described as having an olive/swarthy complexion, but more..  a Latin, Mexican or Indian appearance, characteristics, descent.

 

EVERYBODY IS IGNORING THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM.... 

 

FBI PART 11 P 1922

FOLLOWING COMPOSITE TAKEN FROM INTERVIEWS OF WITNESSES WHO WERE IN A POSITION TO SEE UNSUB.

 

RACE, WHITE; SEX, MALE; AGE, MID FORTY'S; FIVE FT TEN TO SIX FT . , ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY TO ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY POUNDS, AVERAGE TO WELL BUILT, OLIVE COMPLEXION, LATIN APPEARANCE, MEDIUM SMOOTH COMPLEXION, DARK BROWN OR BLACK HAIR, NORMAL STYLE, PARTED ON LEFT, COMBED BACK; SIDEBURNS, LOW EAR LEVEL; EYES, POSSIBLY BROWN, 

 

FBI PART 11 P 1982

DESCRIBED AS WHITE, MALE, MID FORTIES, SEVENTY TO ONE EIGHTY, OLIVE COMPLEXION, OR BLACK HAIR, NORMAL STYLE, PARTED ON SMOKED RALEIGH CIGARETTES.

 

FBI PART 11 P 2036

Mr. MILNES said the hijacker was described as white, male, American, olive complexion, Latin appearance, black hair, normal hair style parted on left, age middle forties, six feet tall, 170 to 175 pounds, average build, brown eyes. He was wearing a black suit, white shirt, narrow black tie, black rain-type overcoat, black dress suit, and was carrying a dark briefcase.

 

FBI PART 11 P 2047

UNSUB described as white male, mid-forties, five ten to six feet, one seventy to one eighty, olive complexion, latin appearance, dark brown or black hair combed straight back in normal

style, parted on left, smoked Raleigh cigarettes.

 

FBI PART 11 P 2056

that he has average eyes, of Latin appearance, with a sort of disinterested look

 

FBI PART 11 P 2224

WHITE, MALE, MID 40's, 5'1011 TO 611 , 170 Tel 180 lbs., AVERAGE TO WELL BUILT, OLIVE COMPLEXION, LATIN APPEARANCE, MEDIUM SMOOTH, DARK BROWN OR BLACK HAIR, NORMAL STYLE, PARTED ON LEFT, COMBED BACK, SIDEBURNS, LOW EAR LEVEL, POSSIBLY BROWN EYES, DURING LATTER PART OF FLIGHT PUTr DARK, WRAP-AROUND SUNGLASSES WITH DARK RIMS. LOW VOICE, SPOKE INTELLIGENTLY; NO PARTICULAR ACCENT, POSSIBLY FROM MIDWEST SECTION OF THE U.S., HEAVY SMOKER OF RALEIGH FILTER TIP CIGARETTES, WEARING BLACK OR BROWN SUIT; WHITE SHIRT; NARROW BLACK TIE; BLACK DRESS SUIT;

 

FBI PART 11 P 1987

COMPLEXION: OLIVE, SWARTHY, THE LATIN TYPE

 

FBI PART 11 P 1841

COMPLEXION: OLIVE, LATIN APPERANCE, MEDIUM SMOOTH

 

FBI PART 18  P5497

RACE WHITE, SEX MALE, AGE MID FORTIES, HEIGHT FIVE FEET TEN INCHES TO SIX FEET, WEIGHT ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY TO ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY POUNDS, BUILD AVERAGE TO WELL BUILT, COMPLEXION OLIVE, LATIN APPEARANCE, MEDIUM SMOOTH; HAIR DARK BROWN OR BLACK, NORMAL STYLE, PARTED ON LEFT, COMBED BACK, SIDEBURNS, LOW EAR LEVEL; EYES POSSIBLY BROWN.

 

FBI PART 26 P 8545

He was unable to determine from the photograph the complexion of ______ but again emphasized the hijacker had a swarthy or Latin type complexion and it appeared to him might have such a complexion.

 

FBI PART 26 P 8574

OLIVE OR LATIN COMPLEXION·

 

Key witnesses generally agree that unsub had an "olive or Latin" complexion.- One witness indicated a Mexican-American or possibly Indian complexion and characteristics. In addition, unsub expressed a desire to go "anywhere in Mexico”.

 

FBI PART 26 P 8881

She thereafter remained in the cockpit where she prepared thirteen pages of notes concerning the hijacking and in which she described unsub as in his fifties. She later said he appeared to be of Latin descent.

 

FBI PART 19 P 5934

"Enclosed is an artist's conception of the hijacker who extorted two hundred thousand dollars from Northwest Airlines on November 24, 1971. This man is described as follows:

 

"Race-white; sex-male; age mid-forties; height-five feet ten inches to six feet; weight-170 to 180 pounds; build-average to well built; complexion olive, latin appearance, mediurn smooth; hair-dark brown or black; normal style, parted on left, combed back; sideburns, low ear level; eyes-possibly brown.

 

FBI PART 10 P 1683

said that the man appeared to be Latin descent

 

FBI PART 27 P 9104

To date 475 suspects have been developed based·on appearance, as well as other features. Many of the suspects were developed because of their resemblance to the artist's composite of UNSUB. A 9reat number of these suspects have turned out to be in their 20s or early 30s, with light or fair complexion. According to witnesses, UNSUB's age is in the mid-40s and his complexion is olive or Latin in appearance. The artist's composite clearly· looks like a man in his late 20s or 30s and his complexion is difficult to determine

from the black and white sketch.

 

FBI PART 27 P 9390

In NORJAK case, • witnesses describe subject's complexion as olive, Latin appearance, medium smooth.

 

FBI PART 9 P 919

ALL OFFICES ARE TO BEAR IN MIND WHEN CAPTIONED CRIME WAS ON NOVEMBER 11, 1971, UNSUB AKA. B. COOPER WAS DESCRIBED AS BEING A WHITE MALE, 5 ' 1 0 " TO 6 ' 0 “ , 170 POUNDS, OLIVE AND LATIN APPEARANCE.

 

FBI PART 27 P 9327

In view of the fact that unsub in this matter had a swarthy complexion and was tentatively identified by several witnesses as possibly having Mexican ancestry, the following lead is being set out:

 

FBI PART 13 P 3159

which he feels more closely depicts the nose and cheeks of the unknown subject, whom he feels was of Mexican-American dissent with posaibly lndian blood.

 

FBI PART 33 P 12115

indicated that the unsub's complexion was somewhat swarthy indicating that he might have possibly been an American Indian or Mexican American.

 

FBI PART 26 P 8882

believed unsub was a Mexican-American. She bad a short encounter with the unsub prior to her deplaning at Seattle

 

FBI PART 29 P 10072

similar Mexican-type facial features 

 

 

FBI PART 11 P 2135

CHEEKS TOO FLAT, SHOULD BE MORE ROUNDED TO GIVE MEXICAN-AMERICAN APPEARANCE.

 

FBI PART 28 P 9541

lacks the Mexican or Indian characteristics that ____  noted in the hijacker. 

 

FBI PART 28 P 9559

further advised that the hijacker definitely had some Indian or Mexican blood in him. He would guess about one quarter Indian or Mexican blood. 

 

FBI PART 28 P 10037

FACIAL FEATURES: Should reflect a Mexican or Indian ancestry

 

FBI PART 11 P 2039

Race: Caucasian, believed to be of Mexican-American descent wih possibly some Anerican Indian blood

 

FBI PART 34 P 13102

In view of the fact that UNSUB in this matter is possibly of American Indian decent, the following leads are being set forth pursuant to referenced communication:

[Chaucer 102]

For Cooper to survive the jump at the assumed drop zone near Battleground, but for the money to end up on Tena Bar requires a series of events to occur that are so far fetched that it is almost ludicrous. Cooper burying it as a red herring years later? Mucklow hiding it to assuade years of guilt? Cooper tossing out of the plane for reasons unknown? It requires an almost supernatural sequence of events. Sure, anything’s possible, but that doesn’t make it probable. 

Much easier to imagine Cooper and the money hitting the water and the money washing up downstream. That, in my mind, is the only reasonable way to square the money find with the jump. 

[FLYJACK 654]

24 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

For Cooper to survive the jump at the assumed drop zone near Battleground, but for the money to end up on Tena Bar requires a series of events to occur that are so far fetched that it is almost ludicrous. Cooper burying it as a red herring years later? Mucklow hiding it to assuade years of guilt? Cooper tossing out of the plane for reasons unknown? It requires an almost supernatural sequence of events. Sure, anything’s possible, but that doesn’t make it probable. 

Much easier to imagine Cooper and the money hitting the water and the money washing up downstream. That, in my mind, is the only reasonable way to square the money find with the jump. 

I never said Mucklow hid it.

 

Everybody and his dog has considered the Columbia R splashdown, it is nothing new.

The pressure bump did not occur over the Columbia. STRIKE ONE

Diatom timeframe. STRIKE TWO

Palmer report, money arrived within a few years. STRIKE THREE

Water landing  = death. STRIKE FOUR

 

Now, you can claim a supernatural sequence of events to explain those away but at the end of the day it is just a theory. A weak one that doesn't really fit the evidence.

 

It may be possible, but that doesn't make is probable.

 

 

[Chaucer 102]

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

I never said Mucklow hid it.

 

Everybody and his dog has considered the Columbia R splashdown, it is nothing new.

The pressure bump did not occur over the Columbia. STRIKE ONE

Diatom timeframe. STRIKE TWO

Palmer report, money arrived within a few years. STRIKE THREE

Water landing  = death. STRIKE FOUR

 

Now, you can claim a supernatural sequence of events to explain those away but at the end of the day it is just a theory. A weak one that doesn't really fit the evidence.

 

It may be possible, but that doesn't make is probable.

 

 

The location of the pressure bump is not confirmed.

The science on the diatoms is not confirmed, and it is impossible to draw any timeframe conclusions from that evidence.

Palmer report does nothing to eliminate the splashdown theory. 
 

Absolutely a water landing = death. Cooper either died in impact or drowned underneath the canopy. That doesn’t eliminate the splashdown theory.

Again, if Cooper hit land - either safely or as a lawn dart - how did the money end up in the river? 

[FLYJACK 654]

10 hours ago, Chaucer said:

The location of the pressure bump is not confirmed.

The science on the diatoms is not confirmed, and it is impossible to draw any timeframe conclusions from that evidence.

Palmer report does nothing to eliminate the splashdown theory. 
 

Absolutely a water landing = death. Cooper either died in impact or drowned underneath the canopy. That doesn’t eliminate the splashdown theory.

Again, if Cooper hit land - either safely or as a lawn dart - how did the money end up in the river? 

Wrong.

Exact location of pressure bump was not confirmed but it was not over the Columbia.

Diatoms suggest money went into and out of river in spring.

Palmer report found money in top layer with "fresher" debri, the conclusion was the money arrived within a few years of discovery.

Marty Andrade did work on water landing and it does not = death..

 

 

Actually if you apply probabilities, if Cooper did a river splash, the odds favour a Willamette landing vs Columbia since the plane was within landing/drift distance along the Willamette for more time.

Therefore, a Columbia splashdown is less likely than a Willamette splashdown.

A Willamette splashdown was one of my early theories.. I just don't think it is the best one. Low probability but higher than the narrow Columbia crossing path.

Edited May 14, 2020 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 654]

On the money coming from the river...

The heavily rounded off packets looks consistent with tumbling along a gravel bottom..

The Willamette has a gravel bottom, the Columbia has a sandy bottom.

 

It would be good to figure out some type of experiment.. but if the money was tossed into the Willamette near Eugene it might take 2-3 weeks to reach TBAR... rolling along the gravel bottom.

[FLYJACK 654]

According to this FBI 302 summary Cooper asked for small bills..

[Chaucer 102]

3 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Wrong.

Exact location of pressure bump was not confirmed but it was not over the Columbia.

Diatoms suggest money went into and out of river in spring.

Palmer report found money in top layer with "fresher" debri, the conclusion was the money arrived within a few years of discovery.

Marty Andrade did work on water landing and it does not = death..

 

 

Actually if you apply probabilities, if Cooper did a river splash, the odds favour a Willamette landing vs Columbia since the plane was within landing/drift distance along the Willamette for more time.

Therefore, a Columbia splashdown is less likely than a Willamette splashdown.

A Willamette splashdown was one of my early theories.. I just don't think it is the best one. Low probability but higher than the narrow Columbia crossing path.

There’s nothing to confirm that Cooper didn’t jump near the Columbia. Were talking 4 minutes or less from north of Battle Ground to the shore of Columbia. No one can say with any certainty where the pressure bump occurred or even if the pressure bump meant that Cooper jumped.

I have no quibble with the Palmer report. Whether the money arrived months after the hijacking or years is inconsequential. The point is that the money was in the water upriver from where it was discovered.

The analysis of the diatoms is incomplete so it would be irresponsible to draw solid conclusions from it. At this point, all the diatoms seem to indicate is that the bills had fanned out some time in the warmer months. They could have been in the water, tightly packed inside the pack before that happened. It could have easily spent the cold winter months tightly packed, avoiding formosa, until one spring when the pack broke open allowing the bills free to fan out. 

Certainly, a water landing doesn’t equal death, but an unexpected water landing at night in poor weather into cold water while wearing loafers and a business suit with several pounds of cash strapped to your chest certainly lowers the chances of survival. 

Regarding Cooper planting the money as a red herring: it isn’t logical to me. He had been avoiding detection and identification by the FBI for years. Why rattle the cage and draw attention by burying money is an out of the way location? How would that have “thrown off” the FBI? And why didn’t Cooper immediately launder the money? Or spend it? Either of those choses would have made more sense than Cooper taking a wild risk by burying money on the edge of the river with the very slim chance that someone would stumble on it. 

Regarding the Willamette:  this makes sense. However, if you suggest the Willamette, which is farther south than the Columbia, then why not just pick the Columbia? I’ll look into this further. 

We know Cooper jumped with the money strapped to himself. We know the money ended up in the water. The only logical conclusion is that Cooper also ended up in the water. 

 

[FLYJACK 654]

24 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

There’s nothing to confirm that Cooper didn’t jump near the Columbia. Were talking 4 minutes or less from north of Battle Ground to the shore of Columbia. No one can say with any certainty where the pressure bump occurred or even if the pressure bump meant that Cooper jumped.

I have no quibble with the Palmer report. Whether the money arrived months after the hijacking or years is inconsequential. The point is that the money was in the water upriver from where it was discovered.

The analysis of the diatoms is incomplete so it would be irresponsible to draw solid conclusions from it. At this point, all the diatoms seem to indicate is that the bills had fanned out some time in the warmer months. They could have been in the water, tightly packed inside the pack before that happened. It could have easily spent the cold winter months tightly packed, avoiding formosa, until one spring when the pack broke open allowing the bills free to fan out. 

Certainly, a water landing doesn’t equal death, but an unexpected water landing at night in poor weather into cold water while wearing loafers and a business suit with several pounds of cash strapped to your chest certainly lowers the chances of survival. 

Regarding Cooper planting the money as a red herring: it isn’t logical to me. He had been avoiding detection and identification by the FBI for years. Why rattle the cage and draw attention by burying money is an out of the way location? How would that have “thrown off” the FBI? And why didn’t Cooper immediately launder the money? Or spend it? Either of those choses would have made more sense than Cooper taking a wild risk by burying money on the edge of the river with the very slim chance that someone would stumble on it. 

Regarding the Willamette:  this makes sense. However, if you suggest the Willamette, which is farther south than the Columbia, then why not just pick the Columbia? I’ll look into this further. 

We know Cooper jumped with the money strapped to himself. We know the money ended up in the water. The only logical conclusion is that Cooper also ended up in the water. 

 

This case is about contextualizing facts and assessing probabilities...

True, nothing proves Cooper didn't land in the Columbia, it is possible. But, the facts suggest he jumped further North.

The highest probability is that the money came from the River upstream.

The money packets were a tight blob, extremely unlikely non motile fragile spring diatoms got inside.

A water landing does not equal death, you claimed it did. Now your argument has shifted probability.

Cooper planting the money is silly,, IMO

The Willamette is a higher probability than the Columbia for two reasons,, the plane was over/close to the Willamette for a longer period of time and the bottom is gravel which may account for the rounded off packets via tumbling.

 

This statement is completely false. 

"The only logical conclusion is that Cooper also ended up in the water. "

[FLYJACK 654]

You guys at Shutter's forum need to read my previous posts on the "American Currency"..

FBI docs are cited, but it is clear none of you actually understand the argument. 

The crew used "American" currency and Tina used "US" currency...

 

The point is it would be rare for somebody without foreign exposure to qualify a ransom demand with American/US..  It doesn't suggest Cooper wasn't American or even not born in the US.. it suggests he had some recent international exposure/influence, could be returning military.

 

And bookman's argument wasn't even checked, his examples CONFIRM an international context. The opposite of his claim. LAZY LAZY LAZY...

[Chaucer 102]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

This case is about contextualizing facts and assessing probabilities...

True, nothing proves Cooper didn't land in the Columbia, it is possible. But, the facts suggest he jumped further North.

The highest probability is that the money came from the River upstream.

The money packets were a tight blob, extremely unlikely non motile fragile spring diatoms got inside.

A water landing does not equal death, you claimed it did. Now your argument has shifted probability.

Cooper planting the money is silly,, IMO

The Willamette is a higher probability than the Columbia for two reasons,, the plane was over/close to the Willamette for a longer period of time and the bottom is gravel which may account for the rounded off packets via tumbling.

 

This statement is completely false. 

"The only logical conclusion is that Cooper also ended up in the water. "

If I stated that a water landing automatically means death, then I apologize. I don’t recall stating that, but if I did, it was a misstatement. What I mean is that a water landing in those conditions is highly dangerous - and if Cooper’s chute never deployed, then, well...

I feel that as more we discuss this, the more we begin to agree on certain facts. 

[FLYJACK 654]

19 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

If I stated that a water landing automatically means death, then I apologize. I don’t recall stating that, but if I did, it was a misstatement. What I mean is that a water landing in those conditions is highly dangerous - and if Cooper’s chute never deployed, then, well...

I feel that as more we discuss this, the more we begin to agree on certain facts. 

A water landing is a valid theory, I disagree that is the only or best theory based on my interpretations of the evidence and application of reason and logic.

[FLYJACK 654]

The money bank bands or rubber bands..

Georger is such a moron.. typical histrionics from clown boy.

He doesn't understand the evidence, but worse he misstates my position so he can attack a strawman.. 

 

There were always rubber bands involved per Brian.. it was never rubber bands vs paper bands.

YOU SCREWED UP THE PACKETS VS BUNDLES... for a decade..

 

Cooper rec'd packets of 100 bills, they were strapped and possibly rubber banded.

Those packets were RUBBER BANDED into BUNDLES.. (many packets banded together)

 

get it,, packets are 100 bills and bundles are groups of packets..

 

The TBAR money had frags of rubber bands, the question is,,, were those rubber bands from the BUNDLES or packets... the bundles were randomized NOT the PACKETS.

The FBI has claimed the money was in order and from one bundle.. (group of packets)

Georger has spent ten years getting this wrong and two years mocking me from a position of utter ignorance.

 

Like herding kittens...

 

The significance is,, if the rubber bands held together groups of packets then TBAR $ arrived as one bundle, just as it was given to Cooper. On the other side, if the TBAR $ arrived as 3 individual packets how did they get separated since they were given to Cooper grouped into random bundles. In other words, the rubber bands holding the groups of packets into bundles would have to have been removed. 

Georger still can't grasp the difference between a packet and a bundle.. Larry Carr got it wrong a decade ago and Georger still can't get it. 

 

Edited May 14, 2020 by FLYJACK

[ParrotheadVol 70]

5 hours ago, Chaucer said:

Regarding Cooper planting the money as a red herring: it isn’t logical to me. He had been avoiding detection and identification by the FBI for years. Why rattle the cage and draw attention by burying money is an out of the way location? How would that have “thrown off” the FBI? And why didn’t Cooper immediately launder the money? Or spend it? Either of those choses would have made more sense than Cooper taking a wild risk by burying money on the edge of the river with the very slim chance that someone would stumble on it. 

 

 

It's usually people with a suspect that push this idea. Their suspect supposedly had a sudden increase in wealth after the skyjacking, but they have to explain the Tena Bar money. Thus, Cooper planted it. The thing they tend to overlook is that NO ONE buries anything so that someone may find it. NO ONE throws anything into a river hoping someone finds it. People bury things and throw things into bodies of water because they don't want them to be found. I'm sure Cooper was a smart dude. But, he's not brilliant enough to have orchestrated the Tena Bar money find the way that some people want to say he was.

[Chaucer 102]

43 minutes ago, ParrotheadVol said:

It's usually people with a suspect that push this idea. Their suspect supposedly had a sudden increase in wealth after the skyjacking, but they have to explain the Tena Bar money. Thus, Cooper planted it. The thing they tend to overlook is that NO ONE buries anything so that someone may find it. NO ONE throws anything into a river hoping someone finds it. People bury things and throw things into bodies of water because they don't want them to be found. I'm sure Cooper was a smart dude. But, he's not brilliant enough to have orchestrated the Tena Bar money find the way that some people want to say he was.

Agree 100%. It isn’t logical behavior - especially years after the crime was committed. 

[Bookman Old Style 1]

12 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

You guys at Shutter's forum need to read my previous posts on the "American Currency"..

FBI docs are cited, but it is clear none of you actually understand the argument. 

The crew used "American" currency and Tina used "US" currency...

 

The point is it would be rare for somebody without foreign exposure to qualify a ransom demand with American/US..  It doesn't suggest Cooper wasn't American or even not born in the US.. it suggests he had some recent international exposure/influence, could be returning military.

 

And bookman's argument wasn't even checked, his examples CONFIRM an international context. The opposite of his claim. LAZY LAZY LAZY...

Hi Flyjack.  I appreciate you checking my examples.  I was hoping someone would engage my examples this closely.  I'm happy to be proven wrong, but in this case, I think we're just talking at cross purposes.  My argument is very narrow.  I'm saying that the use of the phrase "negotiable American currency," does not imply a non-native, or non-American, speaker.  It is not a clumsy, incorrect, or foreign-sounding phrase to a speaker of American English. This is demonstrated in my examples by its appearance in the work of multiple American-born and American-raised writers.  It IS a somewhat pedantic, technical phrase, no doubt, and context is always important.

 My argument was inspired by statements like the following, from the Citizen Sleuths website: "Since no American citizen would use those terms, it suggests that Cooper was not originally from this country." They don't seem to be referring to context at all, because lots of American citizens might use those terms, given the right circumstance.  They seem to be saying that no American citizen would say that, period.  To the extent that anyone thinks that, I'm disagreeing.  If no one thinks that, well then I'm barking up the wrong tree.

By the way, I think you cherry-picked my examples a little bit.  The "Car Life" example from 1963 doesn't appear to have any international context, and seems to use the fussiness of the phrase for humor.  It's entirely possible that IF Cooper said the exact phrase, he was also being humorous, or impatient, or sarcastic.  We know that he used the phrase "no funny stuff," which strikes many people as an awkward attempt to sound like an old-fashioned gangster. Maybe he fancied himself a suave, James Bond-like figure, too, and thought that "negotiable American currency" sounded impressive and sophisticated.  Who knows? Not me.

Finally, I don't understand your thinking on someone, possibly military, with "recent international exposure/influence."  Such as person, or almost any person, doesn't normally forget what country they are in. For instance, if an British soldier returning from years in Afghanistan were robbing a bank in London, they would not accidentally ask for a bag filled with "British currency." unless they were making some kind of joke, or were robbing the international currency exchange desk.

Edited May 15, 2020 by Bookman Old Style

[Chaucer 102]

3 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

Assumes facts not in evidence, as they say in the legal eagle TV shows...

This idea of a red herring has nothing to do with whether or not I have a suspect in mind. Of course I do. Sometimes people investigating this case forget Cooper was human. They talk about him as if he were a robot, or acted like Spock in everything. They forget Cooper was a regular fixture of conversation on TV news and other media in the Pacific Northwest for years. They assume Cooper didn't catch all these things every chance he got, or didn't know by the time late 1976 rolled around that he would be a free man on November 24, 1976. 

They ignore the HUMAN FACTOR. I do not do this. My thought is that Cooper, if he had a calendar for 1976, was probably marking off the days leading up to that date I mentioned. And then when that day rolls around...what does he see on the evening news? That the Portland FBI cheated the game and somehow convinced a Federal judge to issue a John Doe warrant against him. Can you imagine his reaction to that? Anger, depression, fury...just to name a few. It reminds me of the scene from the movie Midnight Express. Billy Hayes has 28 days or something before he is released. Then he finds out the High Court in Ankara, Turkey has overturned that and handed him a 30-year sentence. ("May it pass quickly...") They drag him away. And that's when he decides to try and escape. 

Cooper was somewhat in the same boat. What was supposed to be Happy Day turned into a realization he was NEVER going to be truly free and would be hunted for the remainder of his life. This is a VERY good motivator to do something to throw them off. And you can't say it didn't work...because it did work. It threw both the FBI and Cooper fans and investigators into complete confusion. The FBI started to back off active, boots-on-the-ground investigation of the case. The warrant was out there, but the FBI still doesn't know who Cooper is, and since they are cutting the budget for the investigation, at least SOME of the heat is off. 

Some folks believe Cooper went into the river. Yet they can present no corpse, no parachute, no other money. Most of the stuff that washes down Northwest rivers doesn't end up floating to Japan. It washes up along the coastal shores outside the mouths of the rivers. That's why the beaches are covered in driftwood and logs, and none of them are from Japanese trees I assure you. Yet nothing was ever found. Same for any finds on land. Absolutely nothing except an unexplained (as yet) parachute near Amboy, WA and a placard that may or may not be from the hijacked jet. Evidence leans much more toward the idea that Cooper lived, rather than died. The only certified physical evidence in the case is a packet, bundle, whatever you choose to call it...of the money. Just ONE. And that's it. And to me this is not enough to prove he died, and could be the only indicator showing he lived. 

If it is true that Cooper tossed some of the ransom into the Columbia in hopes it would be found at a later date, I call that an act of desperation, not some well-thought-out plan. The condition of the money also lends itself well to the idea that IF this is what occurred...that it happened AFTER the FBI cheated and went around the Statute of Limitations. 

 

Sorry. I disagree wholeheartedly. It doesn’t matter if the statute of limitations is encroaching. It’s been 5+ years. The FBI is no where close to catching Cooper. 
So, Cooper buries nearly $6000 in a remote area along the riverbank? I am effort to throw off the FBI? How does that make any sense? After 5 years, Cooper should have spent or laundered every penny. And as some said, no one buries obey hoping it’s found. People bury money to hide it. Let’s not even mention that the evidence shows that the money was IN THE WATER. Did Cooper soak it prior to burying it too? Come on, at some point, logic has to win out over agenda, right?

[FLYJACK 654]

9 hours ago, Bookman Old Style said:

Hi Flyjack.  I appreciate you checking my examples.  I was hoping someone would engage my examples this closely.  I'm happy to be proven wrong, but in this case, I think we're just talking at cross purposes.  My argument is very narrow.  I'm saying that the use of the phrase "negotiable American currency," does not imply a non-native, or non-American, speaker.  It is not a clumsy, incorrect, or foreign-sounding phrase to a speaker of American English. This is demonstrated in my examples by its appearance in the work of multiple American-born and American-raised writers.  It IS a somewhat pedantic, technical phrase, no doubt, and context is always important.

 My argument was inspired by statements like the following, from the Citizen Sleuths website: "Since no American citizen would use those terms, it suggests that Cooper was not originally from this country." They don't seem to be referring to context at all, because lots of American citizens might use those terms, given the right circumstance.  They seem to be saying that no American citizen would say that, period.  To the extent that anyone thinks that, I'm disagreeing.  If no one thinks that, well then I'm barking up the wrong tree.

By the way, I think you cherry-picked my examples a little bit.  The "Car Life" example from 1963 doesn't appear to have any international context, and seems to use the fussiness of the phrase for humor.  It's entirely possible that IF Cooper said the exact phrase, he was also being humorous, or impatient, or sarcastic.  We know that he used the phrase "no funny stuff," which strikes many people as an awkward attempt to sound like an old-fashioned gangster. Maybe he fancied himself a suave, James Bond-like figure, too, and thought that "negotiable American currency" sounded impressive and sophisticated.  Who knows? Not me.

Finally, I don't understand your thinking on someone, possibly military, with "recent international exposure/influence."  Such as person, or almost any person, doesn't normally forget what country they are in. For instance, if an British soldier returning from years in Afghanistan were robbing a bank in London, they would not accidentally ask for a bag filled with "British currency." unless they were making some kind of joke, or were robbing the international currency exchange desk.

You have the wrong argument.. the context..  I agree that the citizensleuths statement "non American" is a bit too strong. They may have got it initially from my posts years ago,,

I made this argument many years ago because I am Canadian and travel to the US often, I always qualify US money in normal dealings with "American" or "US" automatically without even thinking because I operate in two currencies.. 

My argument way back wasn't about the use of the term "negotiable" or "circulated" which everybody has focussed on but the use of "American" from the pilots and "US", Tina citing Cooper.

So, everybody has the argument wrong.

It would be very rare for somebody with no foreign influence/experience to qualify a ransom demand with "American" or "US"... I use them interchangeably when dealing with US money..

Would a local bank robber demand American/US currency?

Would a local granny go to the bank and ask to withdraw American/US currency?

I checked three of your examples and all three were in a foreign context. They support my argument. I didn't cherry pick, I only looked at three and knew you didn't understand the argument.

For Cooper, the context didn't seem to require qualifying the currency American or US.. unless he really wanted to go to Mexico. 

The point is a US resident with no foreign currency/influence exposure would not normally qualify the currency with the terms American/US.. it would be very rare.

 

To Cooper...

One argument is that the crew added "American" and Cooper never said it, possible, but the crew is also American why would they add the qualifier.. 

then Tina claimed Cooper later told her "circulated US currency",,, we have another example...

The other argument by Georger is interesting but actually supports mine. Georger often gets arguments messed up.

The argument is that he used American/US because he demanded to go to Mexico. Problem is his Mexico demand was after he received the money.. it indicates he may have actually wanted to go to Mexico. (initially)

The use of American and US indicate Cooper indicates Cooper has some foreign exposure/influence.. he has been in an environment where qualifying currency with American/US is necessary...  

It does not mean he wasn't American or not American born...

American money (global reserve) was is used in most countries all over the world alongside native currencies.. unlike the US where American/US currency is really the only one.

Cooper was most likely exposed to a recent environment that used non US currency.... a foreign exposure/influence.

It would be extremely rare for somebody who lived in the US their entire life and had no foreign currency experience to qualify the ransom demand with "American" or "US".

The reason Cooper would use American/US was because either he felt the context required it or he was recently in an environment that required it and it was just an automatic phrase.

 

Perhaps because most of you are Americans so you don't get this,, how often would you qualify to your own currency as American or US when the context didn't require it.

 

Edited May 15, 2020 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 654]

I am forced to check Shutter's forum to correct Georger's lies and persistent nonsense. Shutter thinks making a false claim isn't lying... he is in denial.

 

Georger just ignores evidence that doesn't fit his opinion... then blames others for his own incompetence and ignorance.. The "American currency" source was posted, Georger couldn't find it in the FBI docs and here after I posted it, and he ignores Cooper telling Tina "circulated US currency"..

For the rubber band vs bank bands, all the evidence has been posted over and over Georger just ignores it.. he even lies about it.. for years.

 

The bank employees claimed he randomized and rubber banded the bundles,, Larry Carr and Georger incorrectly assumed he was referring to the packets of 100 bills.. the randomized and rubber banded bundles were groups of packets.. the packets were NOT randomized, Larry Carr thought they were because he confused packets and bundles (groups of packets).

The money went to Cooper in packets of 100 bills = $2000 each, those packets were rubber banded into randomized bundles. Georger can't get this, it requires he admit he has been wrong for over a decade.

TBAR money found in three packet of 100 bills (one packet missing a few) in the same order as given to Cooper.. So, those packets were given to Cooper rubber banded into random bundles..  The rubber band found attached were fragments which have never been documented, they crumbled al fell apart..  So, my inquiry was.....  did those rubber bands hold each packet or did they hold all three in a single bundle. Contrary to Georgers strawman,, the discussion wasn't whether rubber bands were used, it was whether they were holding together a single bundle of packets vs a bundle of packets. Some FBI agents have said the money was from one bundle and Cooper was given the money in bundles (of packets), one report was that one TBAR packet had no rubber band frags,, but I looked for details on the exact location of the rubber band frags and couldn't find anything. Those rubber band frags could have been holding together a single bundle of packets.

Why important..

The common narrative is that the money arrived in three separate "packets" because it was found that way,, and the means by which money could arrive in three separate packets but together is limited. 

This isn't accurate, the money could have arrived as one rubber banded bundle (as it went to Cooper) the rubber bands holding together the three packets deteriorates and they fall apart slightly..  this opens up the means by which TBAR could have arrived.

 

The bank sent a letter to the FBI saying the money was in bank bands 100 bills = $2000 per packet. 

Ralph Himmelsbach “There were 10,000 twenty dollar bills assembled in straps of 100 bills to a strap and individual straps held together with rubber bands.” Straps are another term for bank bands.

Tosaw claimed paper bands and rubber bands..

Tina handled the money and said "bank type bands around each package".

Here Georger lies.. to win an argument, he first misquotes Tina saying "bank bands" then claims "Tina meant rubber bands. She was contacted and asked." 

This is a lie, Tina was not contacted, this is Georger's strategy to win an argument, lying is acceptable and winning more important than pursuing the truth.

 

After catching Georger in this lie and me requesting clarification Georger shifted to plan B.. discredit and defamation,, since then he has engaged in a long term persistent defamation campaign against me. I have recorded all of it... evidence of a long term persistent defamation campaign and Shutter is 100% legally responsible.

 

click to expand,, this is typical of Georger's lies (Tina comment)

Georger is intellectually bankrupt and should never be taken seriously. He is a toxic element in the Cooper case. Sorry Shutter it is true, everybody knows it but you. He has smeared and lied about almost everybody to discredit them.

 

Tina "bank type bands around each package"

 

Edited May 15, 2020 by FLYJACK

[CooperNWO305 146]

7 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

I never said he buried the money. The evidence shows it was dredged to the place it was discovered. 

The evidence is pretty clear on this, as far as whether the money went into the Columbia via Cooper. It is highly unlikely. Flight 305 was being tracked the second it left Seattle by SAGE radar, ATC radar, chase jets with radar, reports from the flight crew. They had plenty of time on the ground in Seattle to prepare to track the flight and get those jets airborne. A few hours. Have no illusions, they knew where that jet was every second after it left Seattle. (SAGE radar was very accurate, being the same system used to track incoming missile threats at that time.) 

In addition, Paul Soderlind (director of Flight Ops at NWA) and his team were seriously on the job for all this, and Soderlind is no slouch. He is in the Minnesota Aviation Hall of Fame and invented several concepts still in use by passenger aircraft to this day. Everyone's job was actually made easier due to Cooper's demands they fly with the flaps extended, at a speed of less than 200 knots. Flight 305 was a slug. 727 cruise is 500 knots.

All of these things led to the establishment of a reasonably detailed flight path map, and a search area later investigated by the US Army. They even ordered an SR-71 Blackbird to the search area, and these things were not done on a whim, or by guesswork. The only fly in the ointment was they found out searching SW Washington in winter was a bigger job than they thought. However, they were in the right area all right. And that area was north of the Columbia River. 

UPDATE: Eric Ulis, same guy who bullshitted people on the last Cooper Convention, is now offering a $25,000 reward for a Cooper bill not from the Tina Bar money. 

It's a stunt. Let Ulis post $25,000 cash in escrow and people will take him seriously. Otherwise it is no better than the reward offered in the Cooper book, Ha Ha Ha.

Eric Ulis. When he heard I was going to review all sixty of so of his 'Daily Cooper Bites,' he pulled the videos from YouTube the next day. I wouldn't trust him if he told me day was light and night was dark. 

 

Robert. From my perspective this $25,000 Reward is a great idea. There are many possibilities here. This is good for the DB Cooper case. 

[FLYJACK 654]

The $25,000 reward is a cool idea, there are already standing rewards out there but it gets PR for Eric and might produce a bill.. 

I have been looking for bills in the US and abroad.. I think I was even mocked for it when I mentioned it..

 

Interesting..

Eric claimed qualifying money with "American" or "US" was perfectly normal... he used it all the time. Nothing to it...

Why didn't Eric say $25,000 "American" or "US"..  because it would be out of context and rare.. just like Cooper.

Edited May 15, 2020 by FLYJACK

[Bookman Old Style 1]

Thanks for your explanation, Flyjack.  Since I'm so new to this, I don't know how widespread the idea is in Cooperland that the phrase "negotiable American currency," or just the qualifier "American" implies a non-American speaker.  I do think it could imply a number of other things, if Cooper did say it.  I'd put "trying to sound sophisticated" near the top of the list.  After all, Cooper said a number of wacky things. One I haven't seen discussed is his warning that radio transmissions might set off his supposedly battery-powered dynamite bomb.  I'm not an electrical engineer, but if Cooper was serious, he may have watched too many spy thrillers.

Also near the top of my list as a reason for saying the phrase is his physical appearance.  In a recent post, you enumerated the many, many witness statements describing him as "swarthy, olive complexion, possibly Mexican."  Maybe he was used to people being confused about his ethnicity and/or nationality, and was trying to avoid getting a bag full of pesos, even if he had not yet declared that he wanted to the plane to fly to Mexico.

 I would put "foreign influence" near the bottom of the list. I've been to Canada.  Before leaving, I might go to my bank and ask for "Canadian currency."  At the border, I might declare that I'm bringing in "Canadian currency." But at a cafe, I wouldn't ask for my change to be in "Canadian currency."  Come to think of it, though, did Northwest fly in and out of Canada a lot in 1971?  If so, was the onboard petty cash (for in-flight drinks, etc) available in both US and Canadian currency?  Maybe Cooper had flown practice dry runs on Northwest, and gotten Canadian money as change for a bourbon?  Along the same lines, since the ransom stash is said to have been pre-prepared and photographed, did the airlines serving Canada keep a similar stash in Canadian dollars?  Or did all skyjackers prefer American dollars?  

Edited May 15, 2020 by Bookman Old Style