DB Cooper

[CooperNWO305 146]

 

This conversation from a couple of weeks ago indicates that a number of witnesses had issues with the A sketch. 
 

Farrell may have made a mistake. But I feel like it is a jump to say there would have been no B sketch because of it. 
 

Also, some sketch artists if not all are trained to help witnesses remember details and to tease out little tidbits and build the sketch piece by piece. I have to assume the FBI knew that memories fade, and figured that into things. They believed the B sketch was the better representation. Whether Farrell made a mistake or not does not change that in my mind. 
 

If someone likes A, they are going against what the FBI truly believed. Do we know something the FBI doesn’t know? I don’t think so. 

[FLYJACK 654]

10 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

 

This conversation from a couple of weeks ago indicates that a number of witnesses had issues with the A sketch. 
 

Farrell may have made a mistake. But I feel like it is a jump to say there would have been no B sketch because of it. 
 

Also, some sketch artists if not all are trained to help witnesses remember details and to tease out little tidbits and build the sketch piece by piece. I have to assume the FBI knew that memories fade, and figured that into things. They believed the B sketch was the better representation. Whether Farrell made a mistake or not does not change that in my mind. 
 

If someone likes A, they are going against what the FBI truly believed. Do we know something the FBI doesn’t know? I don’t think so. 

The checkmate is that Flo's KK5-1 was about age,, the sketch was redone for age and complexion and others criticized age.

It is absolutely clear that the sketch was not ONLY based on Flo's KK5-1 comment.

 

[olemisscub 463]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

Don't act 12..

Your response to criticism is to post a childish joke.

I found your criticism to be a petulant joke 

[olemisscub 463]

37 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

The checkmate is that Flo's KK5-1 was about age,, the sketch was redone for age and complexion and others criticized age.

 

This is so dumb. You think Roy Rose needed a mugshot to properly age a drawing up? No. He did not. KK5-1 was sent to Rose because the FBI thought Flo was saying the Bing sketch needed to look more like that. This isn’t complicated

You absolutely know I’m right and are just being belligerent because I discovered something that you did not. Grow up. 

[FLYJACK 654]

4 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

I found your criticism to be a petulant joke 

It wasn't a joke,, 

[FLYJACK 654]

14 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

This is so dumb. You think Roy Rose needed a mugshot to properly age a drawing up? No. He did not. KK5-1 was sent to Rose because the FBI thought Flo was saying the Bing sketch needed to look more like that. This isn’t complicated

You absolutely know I’m right and are just being belligerent because I discovered something that you did not. Grow up. 

You are making assumptions with no evidence..

The FBI wanted to do AGE and COMPLEXION...

Flo's KK5-1 had nothing to do with complexion. CHECKMATE

Flo's KK5-1 was not the ONLY reason for the revised sketch.

Why is this so hard for you to grasp.

 

KK5-1 was used as the base for sketch B because they thought age was the primary difference from sketch A.

Edited December 7, 2023 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 463]

7 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

You are making assumptions with no evidence..

The FBI wanted to do AGE and COMPLEXION...

Flo's KK5-1 had nothing to do with complexion. CHECKMATE

Flo's KK5-1 was not the ONLY reason for the revised sketch.

Why is this so hard for you to grasp.

I NEVER SAID IT WAS THE ONLY REASON!!! Stop straw manning me.

They clearly wanted to do a sketch that showed Cooper being older. But they would NOT have created an entirely new likeness of Cooper except that they EXPLICITLY STATED that they believed there was a disagreement among the witnesses about the sketch. There wasn’t a disagreement. They misinterpreted Flo’s comments and thought she was talking about Bing, THUS they thought there was a disagreement. 

Without their mistake they’d have likely just aged Bing up and put color to him. 

Show me a criticism of Comp A that would make the FBI think they needed to trash the sketch and start from scratch. You think Gregory saying the guy needed Nixon hair and rounder cheeks would have been enough for them to disregard the stews all liking the sketch?? No way.

[FLYJACK 654]

46 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

I NEVER SAID IT WAS THE ONLY REASON!!! Stop straw manning me.

They clearly wanted to do a sketch that showed Cooper being older. But they would NOT have created an entirely new likeness of Cooper except that they EXPLICITLY STATED that they believed there was a disagreement among the witnesses about the sketch. There wasn’t a disagreement. They misinterpreted Flo’s comments and thought she was talking about Bing, THUS they thought there was a disagreement. 

Without their mistake they’d have likely just aged Bing up and put color to him. 

Show me a criticism of Comp A that would make the FBI think they needed to trash the sketch and start from scratch. You think Gregory saying the guy needed Nixon hair and rounder cheeks would have been enough for them to disregard the stews all liking the sketch?? No way.

You said we wouldn't have the "Cary" sketch...  yes we would.

 

It wasn't trashed,

an initial sketch B was created which was a blend of KK5-1 and A..

That was refined over months of input from witnesses... to the final sketch B in Jan 1973..

Remember, they said the primary difference between KK5-1 and sketch A was age, so KK5-1 is a reasonable starting point.. whether Farrell believed Flo was referring to Sketch A or not... KK5-1 would be a reasonable starting point BECAUSE they believed the primary difference was age. An attribution error by Farrell would be irrelevant.

The shape of the lower face is very close between Sketch A and the initial sketch B.

Edited December 8, 2023 by FLYJACK

[Chaucer 102]

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

First , why do you always have to slide in a personal dig.. is it hard wired into your personality.

 

but you are just wrong,,,

He posts them on forums, facebook I assume, youtube and his website... maybe his upcoming book? They will be forever on the internet.. 

It pollutes the perception and influences people... this is just a fact.

If he wants to be a credible researcher and author, he should be more careful with the evidence, perhaps a disclaimer on the image..

If he wants to influence people's perceptions then by all means post them everywhere.

I have done some photoshopped images for my own research,, if I posted them publicly I'd get trashed for it.

That's rich. You accusing me of "personal digs". lol

I could waste hours quoting the insults and ad hominem attacks you have repeatedly made against members of this forum for years and years. Here's a few from just from the last couple of hours:

"childish"

"unprofessional and juvenile"

Also, the suggestion that his sketches "pollutes the perception and influences people" is not a fact. It's an opinion. Someone of your intellectual stature should know the difference, no?

Lastly, the idea that Cub is not a credible researcher or author is utterly laughable. Do I detect some envy, Flyjack? If so, that's unbecoming.

Regardless, there are multiple examples, from the beginning of this forum, of people editing case evidence. From adding arrows and circles to photographs, to creating side by side sketch profiles, to adding text and visuals to the flight path map. I've never heard you breath a word of complaint about any of those things. What go after Cub about his sketches? 

But, whatever, this is a stupid and unproductive argument. I'm done with it.

Enjoy the last word.  

 

[FLYJACK 654]

19 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

That's rich. You accusing me of "personal digs". lol

I could waste hours quoting the insults and ad hominem attacks you have repeatedly made against members of this forum for years and years. Here's a few from just from the last couple of hours:

"childish"

"unprofessional and juvenile"

Also, the suggestion that his sketches "pollutes the perception and influences people" is not a fact. It's an opinion. Someone of your intellectual stature should know the difference, no?

Lastly, the idea that Cub is not a credible researcher or author is utterly laughable. Do I detect some envy, Flyjack? If so, that's unbecoming.

Regardless, there are multiple examples, from the beginning of this forum, of people editing case evidence. From adding arrows and circles to photographs, to creating side by side sketch profiles, to adding text and visuals to the flight path map. I've never heard you breath a word of complaint about any of those things. What go after Cub about his sketches? 

But, whatever, this is a stupid and unproductive argument. I'm done with it.

Enjoy the last word.  

 

I didn't just accuse you,, you did it..  every single time. Admit it instead of writing some floundering excuse.

You can't write a post without a personal attack...

 

[dudeman17 267]

1 hour ago, Chaucer said:

Here's a few from just from the last couple of hours:

"childish"

"unprofessional and juvenile"

Aww geez, c'mon man!!

Two would be 'a couple'.

'A few' would be three.

Four or more would be 'some'.

What are ya, a....       ah, never mind!

 

 

(I'm sorry, I'm sorry, hehehe)

[FLYJACK 654]

This is why you get Sketch B (Cary)... not from Flo...

They incorporated ADDITIONAL modifications witnesses suggested during the process of updating AGE and COMPLEXION.

The result.. sketch B was more accurate than A..

[olemisscub 463]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

This is why you get Sketch B (Cary)... not from Flo...

They incorporated ADDITIONAL modifications witnesses suggested during the process of updating AGE and COMPLEXION.

The result.. sketch B was more accurate than A..

That was AFTER the decision to overhaul it. What originally PROMPTED the decision to overhaul it is the question, not what they did to make the sketch good AFTER their decision was made.

Those additional modifications could have just been applied to the Bing sketch. But they lacked confidence in Bing due to their misunderstanding of which sketch Flo was criticizing, so they started over.

Bottom line is that if Flo wasn’t the prime mover in getting the new sketch made, then why would her testimony be the polestar feature of all 4 memos that discuss why they are changing it? 

[FLYJACK 654]

10 hours ago, olemisscub said:

That was AFTER the decision to overhaul it. What originally PROMPTED the decision to overhaul it is the question, not what they did to make the sketch good AFTER their decision was made.

Those additional modifications could have just been applied to the Bing sketch. But they lacked confidence in Bing due to their misunderstanding of which sketch Flo was criticizing, so they started over.

Bottom line is that if Flo wasn’t the prime mover in getting the new sketch made, then why would her testimony be the polestar feature of all 4 memos that discuss why they are changing it? 

Of course it was after the process started..  they initiated the process with the goal of updating AGE and COMPLEXION.. they also wanted to do a profile and standing image. Profile would have been nice.

Your argument was that the Cary sketch was based on an error by Farrell, that is false. It was based on input from most witnesses.

But we are making progress, you are walking it back from ONLY reason to PRIMARY reason...

There were many reasons to revise the sketch.. because Farrell applied Flo's KK5-1 comment to sketch A that doesn't necessarily mean he didn't know she was referring to the first sketch.

Flo had selected a facial ID image that she claimed better reflected AGE,, they believed it did vs sketch A and since it differed primarily in AGE, it was perfectly reasonable to use it.. 

If Flo had never made the initial KK5-1 comment they would have still revised the sketch and used input from witnesses... the sketch B would still exist.

 

BTW, there are few other important things we don't know about the sketch process,, did Rose know about Flo's KK5-1 in the production of sketch A. He must have if she picked it out from the facial catalog, was it used or altered by the stews input?? Did it play any part in the production of sketch A. 

If it did play a role but the final image came out too young then everything makes sense and your speculation is over.. 

IMO, Rose must have in some way incorporated it in the sketch A process..  but the final image came out too young..

Would Rose completely ignore Flo's KK5-1 comment?? The FBI did say the primary difference was age..

 

We don't have proof but this must have happened,, Rose must have had Flo's KK5-1 comment for the production of sketch A.. but the final came out too young..  that is why Farrell mentions it and they use it for sketch B. That is why they said KK5-1 differed from sketch A primarily in AGE.

Solved that, no wiggle room. I'll be here all week try the veal.

Boomski..  Flo's KK5-1 comment had to be known to Rose while doing sketch A.

 

Edited December 8, 2023 by FLYJACK

[CooperNWO305 146]

I’m guessing they never did a side view or standing? Or got comments on the top of his head? Only thing I heard was that recently Alice said he had good hair on top. 

[FLYJACK 654]

"The tie clip, though it has been pictured as being on both the left and right sides of the tie, is believed to have originally been inserted from the left side."

When will this nonsense die.. "believed" by who?

A photo had the clip on the left side of the tie,, that was somebody putting it back on the wrong side.

Men's shirts have buttons on the right, the clip only works from the right side.. It can't clip the shirt from the left side.. unless Cooper wears a woman's shirt.

Further, Tom's UV particle image indicates the clip location was on the right,,

 

 

[Robert99 37]

29 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

"The tie clip, though it has been pictured as being on both the left and right sides of the tie, is believed to have originally been inserted from the left side."

When will this nonsense die.. "believed" by who?

A photo had the clip on the left side of the tie,, that was somebody putting it back on the wrong side.

Men's shirts have buttons on the right, the clip only works from the right side.. It can't clip the shirt from the left side.. unless Cooper wears a woman's shirt.

Further, Tom's UV particle image indicates the clip location was on the right,,

 

 

FlyJack, can you give us some firsthand information on British/Canadian locations for buttons and zippers on men's clothes?

[FLYJACK 654]

On 12/8/2023 at 1:33 PM, CooperNWO305 said:

I’m guessing they never did a side view or standing? Or got comments on the top of his head? Only thing I heard was that recently Alice said he had good hair on top. 

A profile would have been helpful...  even 3/4 view.

Matches Cooper's lower lip profile.. none of the rest of the image.

 

 

[FLYJACK 654]

33 minutes ago, Robert99 said:

FlyJack, can you give us some firsthand information on British/Canadian locations for buttons and zippers on men's clothes?

Try Google before you embarrass yourself.

[Robert99 37]

38 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

Try Google before you embarrass yourself.

Full disclosure:  I already knew the answers to the questions.

[FLYJACK 654]

2 hours ago, Robert99 said:

Full disclosure:  I already knew the answers to the questions.

Why ask then?

Point is we have enough trouble sorting out evidence, some dummy sticks the clasp on the wrong side of the tie and so it gets used over and over as "false" evidence that Cooper was left handed..  

 

 

[FLYJACK 654]

So, the alligator clip can only grab a man's shirt from the right side.. 

Whether the wearer is right or left handed.

Further, there are two pin holes in the tie, one is very significant meaning that for the life of the tie pre-Norjak, it had a pin. Since you don't wear a pin and a clip that suggests the clip was put on for the hijacking and the pin was removed. Also, if you have a tie with an obvious pin hole you keep using the same hole to hide the damage to the tie, you don't switch to a clasp leaving the significant pin hole damage exposed.

Why remove the pin and use the clip for the hijacking.. if it was a company/agency pin you would remove it OR the tie was not worn by Cooper pre-Norjak and the tie was obtained for the hijacking with the pin removed.

So, Cooper's tie from about 1965-1971 had a pin, either a company/agency pin and was replaced with the MOP alligator clip for the hijacking.

If Cooper owned the tie he removed the pin OR Cooper obtained the tie for the hijacking and added the alligator clip.

Further, with an alligator clip it is easier to remove the tie and replace and more robust for a jump. An alligator clip is a better option for a hijacking. 

 

[FLYJACK 654]

Does anybody know about the use of ties in the military after about 1965...

Were they strictly regulated?  I have read that some used clipons and even bought their own,,, might depend on branch.. and rank..  job. (obviously not combat soldiers)

Could Cooper's Penny's Towncraft clipon have been used in a military environment??

https://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/83572-clip-on-tie/

Edited December 12, 2023 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 654]

A common question is why did Cooper choose 305 from Portland to Seattle..

I don't believe Cooper was local so there is that caveat.

IMO, flight 305 was a good choice for the following... 

a short flight.

a light passenger load. A full plane is harder to manage.

a location he was familiar with/had been there before.

a flight to a major city with easier access to ransom money.

a flight to a location within an hour of a major AFB to obtain parachutes. Front and back chutes is military speak..

 

Major US AFB bases..

 

 

[georger 194]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

A common question is why did Cooper choose 305 from Portland to Seattle..

I don't believe Cooper was local so there is that caveat.

IMO, flight 305 was a good choice for the following... 

a short flight.

a light passenger load. A full plane is harder to manage.

a location he was familiar with/had been there before.

a flight to a major city with easier access to ransom money.

a flight to a location within an hour of a major AFB to obtain parachutes. Front and back chutes is military speak..

 

Major US AFB bases..

 

 

and for the same reasons he planned to bail there which probably means he had an escape plan involving the same area ...