DB Cooper

[FLYJACK 654]

35 minutes ago, ParrotheadVol said:

You are correct, it does not make sense, at least to me. But, I am not a hoaxer. 

We aren't hijacker's either.

[ParrotheadVol 70]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

We aren't hijacker's either.

No comment.

[FLYJACK 654]

9 hours ago, ParrotheadVol said:

No comment.

Even speculation is based on reasoned analysis of information..  but it can't be evaluated without the underlying argument.. Not all speculation is equal... You claimed things you read in the book caused you to believe Gunther wasn't contacted by the real Cooper. How can anybody evaluate that without knowing what information you used to reach that conclusion. I haven't seen anything in the book that indicates the "Cooper" contact was or wasn't the real Cooper.

This happens all the time in this case because we don't have a lot of hard facts. We have to use speculation or inference to try to understand things.

Most people conclude the Gunther book is a hoax but nobody can put together a good argument or they have misunderstood the book.. 

 

If it was a couple of hoaxers it tells us nothing about Cooper.

If it was the real Cooper that tells us he survived, he likely lost the money, he was on the East coast and suddenly dropped contact. He was probably alive in 1982 but wanted to be considered dead by using an associate to push that narrative. 

[JAGdb 71]

In the original letter to Gunther, wasn't there an acknowledgement that the writer wouldn't be able to collect any of the proceeds?  I thought he asked Gunther to donate a portion of the earnings to a NYT charity or something ? 

The hoax scenario doesn't make a lot of sense to me given the way it played out.  As you ask, why come back 10 years later ?  Was the hoaxer(s) in prison for 10 years, waiting to complete the hoax they started ?  I doubt it...it just doesn't add up.

But once you come to the conclusion that it was not a hoax, it then follows that it would have to have been the real cooper of someone related to the real cooper.  Then you run into some parts of the story that don't seem to sound realistic and that begins to cast doubts.

BTW, do we know how much money the book made and if Gunther kept all of the proceeds or donated a portion of it to the charity specified ?

[FLYJACK 654]

1 hour ago, JAGdb said:

In the original letter to Gunther, wasn't there an acknowledgement that the writer wouldn't be able to collect any of the proceeds?  I thought he asked Gunther to donate a portion of the earnings to a NYT charity or something ? 

The hoax scenario doesn't make a lot of sense to me given the way it played out.  As you ask, why come back 10 years later ?  Was the hoaxer(s) in prison for 10 years, waiting to complete the hoax they started ?  I doubt it...it just doesn't add up.

But once you come to the conclusion that it was not a hoax, it then follows that it would have to have been the real cooper of someone related to the real cooper.  Then you run into some parts of the story that don't seem to sound realistic and that begins to cast doubts.

BTW, do we know how much money the book made and if Gunther kept all of the proceeds or donated a portion of it to the charity specified ?

Gunther claimed that the "Cooper" initially wanted money to go to charity but that was a ruse to get a dialogue going,,, The "Cooper" just wanted money.

 

You are right though there are some logic steps here.. none can be proven.

First is.. was Gunther the hoaxer. Very unlikely for reasons previously laid out.

If we accept that Gunther wasn't the hoaxer,,

Then was the "Cooper" a hoaxer, if so then "Clara" was also a hoaxer.

If the "Cooper" was the real Cooper then Clara was an associate.

 

Those are the best two options.. and I can't figure out why if a hoaxer, "Cooper" would disappear then have a surrogate contact Gunther and Himmelsbach ten years later claiming he had died and was a good guy....  it makes more sense if he was the real Cooper.

[CooperNWO305 146]

1 hour ago, JAGdb said:

In the original letter to Gunther, wasn't there an acknowledgement that the writer wouldn't be able to collect any of the proceeds?  I thought he asked Gunther to donate a portion of the earnings to a NYT charity or something ? 

The hoax scenario doesn't make a lot of sense to me given the way it played out.  As you ask, why come back 10 years later ?  Was the hoaxer(s) in prison for 10 years, waiting to complete the hoax they started ?  I doubt it...it just doesn't add up.

But once you come to the conclusion that it was not a hoax, it then follows that it would have to have been the real cooper of someone related to the real cooper.  Then you run into some parts of the story that don't seem to sound realistic and that begins to cast doubts.

BTW, do we know how much money the book made and if Gunther kept all of the proceeds or donated a portion of it to the charity specified ?

The New York Times had a “neediest case” fund or something like that. I remember reading about it and how they would report out on it every year. I figured the caller decided that there would be no way to really get the money if it was a trap. To Fly’s point I think LeClair said that he just did it to get Gunther’s attention. 
 

You raise a good point about how much $ Gunther made on the book or sales. Gunther definitely came from money, and lived in a very well to do town. Generational wealth is a huge head start for many. I’m speculating, but I’m guessing he did not need the money. From all I’ve heard, he was disappointed at the feedback from the book and how Cooper was not a high time in his life. 
 

There are missing notes for sure. And we don’t know what he changed and kept to himself. He may not have wanted to send Himm’s everything until he got it in the book. 
 

In terms of parts that don’t seem realistic, I’ve heard the cabin and the disappearance. Are there others? When I read it I was all set to fly out to Washington and explore lakes. Luckily Martin and Google Maps set me straight. There are just not many lakes in that area. 

[ParrotheadVol 70]

8 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Even speculation is based on reasoned analysis of information..  but it can't be evaluated without the underlying argument.. Not all speculation is equal... You claimed things you read in the book caused you to believe Gunther wasn't contacted by the real Cooper. How can anybody evaluate that without knowing what information you used to reach that conclusion. I haven't seen anything in the book that indicates the "Cooper" contact was or wasn't the real Cooper.

This happens all the time in this case because we don't have a lot of hard facts. We have to use speculation or inference to try to understand things.

Most people conclude the Gunther book is a hoax but nobody can put together a good argument or they have misunderstood the book.. 

 

If it was a couple of hoaxers it tells us nothing about Cooper.

If it was the real Cooper that tells us he survived, he likely lost the money, he was on the East coast and suddenly dropped contact. He was probably alive in 1982 but wanted to be considered dead by using an associate to push that narrative. 

I read the book over a couple of weeks and I don't recall every little thing that made me think one way or the other. It's just more of a gut feeling that causes me to have my doubts. Not scientific at all and maybe I'm wrong. I thought the story of losing the money, then going and finding some of it, burying the chute and then laundering the money years later was a bit sketchy. I've always been of the opinion that the money wasn't spent or laundered, but maybe it was. On the other hand, I found it odd that Clara mentioned more than once that the description of Coopers shoes as loafers was wrong. Not sure why a hoaxer would even think to mention something like that. There were a few things that I questioned why a hoaxer would say, but I don't recall them. I should have made a list or took notes while reading the book. Perhaps I'll read it again and do that.

You mentioned earlier that you had evidence that pointed more toward it not being a hoax. Has this evidence been revealed before, or is it part of the evidence that you have not made public?

Edited December 30, 2023 by ParrotheadVol

[Cola 26]

8 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

This happens all the time in this case because we don't have a lot of hard facts. We have to use speculation or inference to try to understand things.

Most people conclude the Gunther book is a hoax but nobody can put together a good argument or they have misunderstood the book.. 

 

 

I've always dismissed the Gunter book as more of a fun side-adventure than something which may advance the case. It's hard to credit Cooper, Clara, and the story as being genuine or accurate.

For me Jude's (DanCooperHimself ) Youtube analysis on Gunther was insightful and worth my time. This video was the first time I'd encountered Gunther's literary synopsis/notes via -  https://dbcooperhijack.com/files/

Although, reading the literary synopsis/notes has not changed my thinking on the Gunther text. I'm a non-believer because... Is it relevant if Cooper and Clara were real or not?

If they were real, I still would question the authenticity of the text. If they were real then why would they not muddled their story with half-truths to avoid being identified. If they were hoaxers then there is no truth to the text. 

I believe Gunther's sources at-best could have provided half-truths. I think there is no validation of Gunther's work without identifying the real Cooper. If the real Cooper were identified, I think Gunther's text would then only ever rise to a level of "plausible half-truth". Ultimately, I do not think Gunther's story will prove detailed or accurate enough to "definitively align" with whomever the real Cooper was.

Believing the sources are half-truth's at best, I don't see how the book can be used as a lead to get within proximity of the real Cooper. 

Summation - The book will not take us to Cooper. The real Cooper may surprise us and validate aspects of the book as true. However, the sources, if real, likely muddled the truth and Gunther's accounting of "a story as heard" will likely not raise the work  above the level of a "plausible half-truth".

[FLYJACK 654]

2 hours ago, Cola said:

 

 

I've always dismissed the Gunter book as more of a fun side-adventure than something which may advance the case. It's hard to credit Cooper, Clara, and the story as being genuine or accurate.

For me Jude's (DanCooperHimself ) Youtube analysis on Gunther was insightful and worth my time. This video was the first time I'd encountered Gunther's literary synopsis/notes via -  https://dbcooperhijack.com/files/

Although, reading the literary synopsis/notes has not changed my thinking on the Gunther text. I'm a non-believer because... Is it relevant if Cooper and Clara were real or not?

If they were real, I still would question the authenticity of the text. If they were real then why would they not muddled their story with half-truths to avoid being identified. If they were hoaxers then there is no truth to the text. 

I believe Gunther's sources at-best could have provided half-truths. I think there is no validation of Gunther's work without identifying the real Cooper. If the real Cooper were identified, I think Gunther's text would then only ever rise to a level of "plausible half-truth". Ultimately, I do not think Gunther's story will prove detailed or accurate enough to "definitively align" with whomever the real Cooper was.

Believing the sources are half-truth's at best, I don't see how the book can be used as a lead to get within proximity of the real Cooper. 

Summation - The book will not take us to Cooper. The real Cooper may surprise us and validate aspects of the book as true. However, the sources, if real, likely muddled the truth and Gunther's accounting of "a story as heard" will likely not raise the work  above the level of a "plausible half-truth".

Are you saying that if it was the real Cooper it doesn't help.. because the Clara narrative is unverifiable.. 

 

 

[JAGdb 71]

8 hours ago, CooperNWO305 said:

 

In terms of parts that don’t seem realistic, I’ve heard the cabin and the disappearance. Are there others? When I read it I was all set to fly out to Washington and explore lakes. Luckily Martin and Google Maps set me straight. There are just not many lakes in that area. 

Yes, you pretty much hit the parts of the story I was thinking of being a little too hokey.  Being nursed back to health by Clara and then falling in love and getting married etc.  (pretty much the definition of the Florence Nightingale effect.)

Sometimes real life is hokey, so I suppose it's possible.  Or maybe some of that is what Gunther filled in.

But what brings me the most pause or doubt is that the letter writer never delivers on his promise to provide proof of authenticity.  Nor did Clara.  It wouldn't take that much, they didn't necessarily have to produce a $20 bill, they simply had to give a piece of information or detail that only the hijacker would know.  

[CooperNWO305 146]

20 minutes ago, JAGdb said:

Yes, you pretty much hit the parts of the story I was thinking of being a little too hokey.  Being nursed back to health by Clara and then falling in love and getting married etc.  (pretty much the definition of the Florence Nightingale effect.)

Sometimes real life is hokey, so I suppose it's possible.  Or maybe some of that is what Gunther filled in.

But what brings me the most pause or doubt is that the letter writer never delivers on his promise to provide proof of authenticity.  Nor did Clara.  It wouldn't take that much, they didn't necessarily have to produce a $20 bill, they simply had to give a piece of information or detail that only the hijacker would know.  

In 1972 he just stopped communicating. Ed Kuhn thought maybe he lost his nerve. Clara was telling Gunther in 1982 that Cooper died, she was not looking so much to prove it was him. At least that’s how I see it. For whatever reason it feels like she wanted people off his trail. I don’t know how hot the case was in April of 82, but the money find in 1980 definitely brought some interest back. Even SNL Weekend Update with Bill Murray covered it. You also had the movie and the million dollar reward (whether real or a gag). We also don’t know what was going on in their lives then. Maybe they didn’t need the $, maybe they got scared, maybe the FBI was close, maybe they did need the money and were now spending it and wanted to throw people off. Who knows. I see it as subterfuge. If you give a $20 or the plane ticket, then it is game on for the FBI. Say he died and maybe a few people who matter will believe it. 
 

[FLYJACK 654]

36 minutes ago, JAGdb said:

Yes, you pretty much hit the parts of the story I was thinking of being a little too hokey.  Being nursed back to health by Clara and then falling in love and getting married etc.  (pretty much the definition of the Florence Nightingale effect.)

Sometimes real life is hokey, so I suppose it's possible.  Or maybe some of that is what Gunther filled in.

But what brings me the most pause or doubt is that the letter writer never delivers on his promise to provide proof of authenticity.  Nor did Clara.  It wouldn't take that much, they didn't necessarily have to produce a $20 bill, they simply had to give a piece of information or detail that only the hijacker would know.  

The Clara narrative doesn't have to be all true, just enough for credibility with Gunther.. if Clara was a real associate of Cooper that doesn't mean her story has to true. 

In other words, Cooper being the real one doesn't require Clara's narrative to be accurate. People falsely believe that identifying the initial contact as the real Cooper depends on the legitimacy of Clara's narrative. It doesn't, I assume Clara's story is somewhat made up even if she was legit,, I just don't know which parts or how much.

 

 

[FLYJACK 654]

35 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

In 1972 he just stopped communicating. Ed Kuhn thought maybe he lost his nerve. Clara was telling Gunther in 1982 that Cooper died, she was not looking so much to prove it was him. At least that’s how I see it. For whatever reason it feels like she wanted people off his trail. I don’t know how hot the case was in April of 82, but the money find in 1980 definitely brought some interest back. Even SNL Weekend Update with Bill Murray covered it. You also had the movie and the million dollar reward (whether real or a gag). We also don’t know what was going on in their lives then. Maybe they didn’t need the $, maybe they got scared, maybe the FBI was close, maybe they did need the money and were now spending it and wanted to throw people off. Who knows. I see it as subterfuge. If you give a $20 or the plane ticket, then it is game on for the FBI. Say he died and maybe a few people who matter will believe it. 
 

 

That is my read,, Clara's role was to convince the public via Gunther and the FBI via Himmelsbach that Cooper had died and was a good person right when interest in the case had increased...  He hadn't died they wanted people to give up looking for him...

I wonder if Cooper might have written the letter to Himmelsbach as Clara. I don't get the impression this was written by a woman.

[CooperNWO305 146]

49 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

 

That is my read,, Clara's role was to convince the public via Gunther and the FBI via Himmelsbach that Cooper had died and was a good person right when interest in the case had increased...  He hadn't died they wanted people to give up looking for him...

I wonder if Cooper might have written the letter to Himmelsbach as Clara. I don't get the impression this was written by a woman.

From DNA testing on the stamp. 
 

“I’m pretty sure it’s male. Well the Amelogenin had 2 different amplicons so indicates male but the second band was pretty weak. So might have tiny bit of female contamination.”

[Cola 26]

4 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Are you saying that if it was the real Cooper it doesn't help.. because the Clara narrative is unverifiable.. 

Yes, I do not think it will help if Cooper or Clara were real or not.

I have to think that the narrative as told by Clara would never have been the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

She did not want to reveal her identity or his and face questioning by authorities, by her family or his.

I can only assume the narrative, if real, has been corrupted by intentional misstatements and fabrications to obscure his and her identity. I'm willing to accept that if Clara was real within her narrative there may be unique assertions that eventual overlay with whom the real Cooper is/was.

The 302's may yet reveal something that gives me/us greater confidence in Gunther's work. However, I think it would take identifying the real Cooper to verify any/some of Clara's assertions. Unfortunately as it is now, I do not have confidence in the narrative as truthful.  

Right now,  we are unable to separate what assertions of Clara's are truth or fabrication. Therefore, I don't see a way of anyone getting to within proximity of the real Cooper with Gunther's work.  In the end the best I see Gunther's work being accepted as is a work of "plausible half-truths".  

ref: https://dbcooperhijack.com/files/

[FLYJACK 654]

1 minute ago, Cola said:

Yes, I do not think it will help if Cooper or Clara were real or not.

I have to think that the narrative as told by Clara would never have been the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

She did not want to reveal her identity or his and face questioning by authorities, by her family or his.

I can only assume the narrative, if real, has been corrupted by intentional misstatements and fabrications to obscure his and her identity. I'm willing to accept that if Clara was real within her narrative there may be unique assertions that eventual overlay with whom the real Cooper is/was.

The 302's may yet reveal something that gives me/us greater confidence in Gunther's work. However, I think it would take identifying the real Cooper to verify any/some of Clara's assertions. Unfortunately as it is now, I do not have confidence in the narrative as truthful.  

Right now,  we are unable to separate what assertions of Clara's are truth or fabrication. Therefore, I don't see a way of anyone getting to within proximity of the real Cooper with Gunther's work.  In the end the best I see Gunther's work being accepted as is a work of "plausible half-truths".  

ref: https://dbcooperhijack.com/files/

If Clara was real then Cooper was real.

You are saying Cooper's identity can't be determined from Clara's story.. because it is unverifiable. Obviously his identity would have been obfuscated.

But, if we assume it was the real Cooper, we can draw conclusions from Gunther's experience even outside of Clara's narrative. Cooper's location/residence, he survived, likely lost the money, and timing etc.. 

For Clara's narrative we have less confidence but may find some things that correlate with a suspect.. 

To claim it would not help if it were the real Cooper just makes no sense.. 

 

[FLYJACK 654]

It is self evident,, if Gunther was contacted by a pair of hoaxers then the book tells us nothing about Cooper. But, if Gunther was contacted the real Cooper it gives us clues about his identity.

Jude's (DanCooperHimself) video gives us insight on the technical side of writing but it doesn't move the needle either way.. We already know Gunther was an accomplished writer...  but Jude seemed to miss the premise of Gunther's book,,

He was not claiming that Clara's story was factual.. or even that he was contacted by the real Cooper.. 

He gave his first hand experience with the Cooper contact. (His truth)

He also gave his first hand contact experience with Clara and Himmlesbach. (His truth)

And he gave Clara's narrative as told to him.. (Clara's truth)

IMO, Gunther went through this experience and could not determine if it was the real Cooper or not. He went to the FBI and they rejected it outright,, Cooper was a hoaxer.. Gunther was not convinced. So, Gunther decided to write a book to publish his experience and let the reader decide. Gunther was really expressing his own battle with trying to determine if it was the real Cooper..   and if it was then there are real consequences for the case.

Edited December 31, 2023 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 654]

I checked the reference to Miller Wohl stock and it checked out.. it was in the $40's in 1977...   could have been planted for credibility though...

Edited December 31, 2023 by FLYJACK

[CooperNWO305 146]

One thing I find interesting is that in 1982 and even today, Cooper was seen as maybe a James Bond by most. Or at least a cool dude. Sunglasses. Bomb. Daring. Master criminal. It is really not until recently and only in the Vortex that we’ve been hearing terms like homely. 
 

So, in Gunther’s book, he is self described as mousy. He just comes across as a real average guy. Seems odd to do a hoax and just claim he’s an ordinary guy. What was the motive? If you’re hoaxing and the press and public think you’re a hero, why risk Gunther turning you down for not being cool enough?

I’d love to see if we can find the ad placed by Mark Penzer. I have one I suspect, but it’s speculation. 

[Cola 26]

18 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

In other words, Cooper being the real one doesn't require Clara's narrative to be accurate. People falsely believe that identifying the initial contact as the real Cooper depends on the legitimacy of Clara's narrative. It doesn't, I assume Clara's story is somewhat made up even if she was legit,, I just don't know which parts or how much.

 

We are 100% in agreement on this.

 

On 12/30/2023 at 1:50 PM, FLYJACK said:

If it was the real Cooper that tells us he survived, he likely lost the money, he was on the East coast and suddenly dropped contact. He was probably alive in 1982 but wanted to be considered dead by using an associate to push that narrative. 

 

The above are plausible. However, we don't know what parts are true or fabricated and without proof we can only speculate.

For me...

I'm in the survived camp. Gunther's book has not influenced me on this thinking. I think the case knowns support survivability.

I'm also into the fairy tail ending. The version where Coops walks away unscathed, with the ransom, into the sunset of life. Maybe he lost a bit, but he kept to the outlaw code of silence.

East Coast -  I'd consider it standard MO for any criminal to lie about location.

I'd agree, if he did reach out to Gunther via Clara in 82 he was alive. If its real, I think his motive was to bring closure to the investigation or muddle things up.

[FLYJACK 654]

2 hours ago, Cola said:

 

We are 100% in agreement on this.

 

 

The above are plausible. However, we don't know what parts are true or fabricated and without proof we can only speculate.

For me...

I'm in the survived camp. Gunther's book has not influenced me on this thinking. I think the case knowns support survivability.

I'm also into the fairy tail ending. The version where Coops walks away unscathed, with the ransom, into the sunset of life. Maybe he lost a bit, but he kept to the outlaw code of silence.

East Coast -  I'd consider it standard MO for any criminal to lie about location.

I'd agree, if he did reach out to Gunther via Clara in 82 he was alive. If its real, I think his motive was to bring closure to the investigation or muddle things up.

If Gunther's encounter with the person claiming to be Cooper was real (hoaxer or the real Cooper) then he was in or close to NY.. from Feb - April 1972. 

He requested and responded to the ad in village voice.

He contacted others in NY..

He asked Mark Penzer to go to a public phone in NY and got the number correct.

[olemisscub 466]

Has anyone independently verified the Village Voice listing from 72? I've looked for a copy extensively in online archives and can't find it. 

The following is my not-so-well informed opinion about a topic of The Vortex that I've not spent much time investigating on my own. So no need for anyone to get rustled over it and I'm glad to be proven wrong about it since I admittedly haven't really researched it nearly as much as others have, specifically Dave, Marty, and Flyjack. 

1. Truth

If this book involved the real Cooper and his real girlfriend, then I think it's mostly useless in trying to determine the real Cooper. To protect his source, Gunther would have absolutely had to change certain biographical information. If she was real, Clara should have easily been identified by a number of Clark or Cowlitz County residents given the information that is in the book. Born in Longview. Had an older brother and sister. Father died in 1950. Round face and wore glasses. Attended college in her hometown. It's hard to fathom that being accurate biographical information. As for Cooper. A Canadian born American paratrooper who ran for Rutgers track after the war? That shouldn't be too hard to find. Yet none of these individuals have been found, so clearly those biographical details aren't authentic. 

This is all assuming that Clara gave Gunther accurate biographical information to begin with. If she was worried about criminal liability, then why would she give Gunther accurate biographical information about herself? So either way, be it Clara changing details to protect herself or Gunther changing details to protect his source, we have to assume that the biographical information contained in the book is a complete non-starter and mostly useless for identification purposes. 

And with complete respect to my friends who have spent years pursuing this as a lead, isn't the name Dan LeClair a total invention by Gunther? I don't proclaim to be an expert on the book, but Clara never gave Gunther Cooper's name, right? So chasing leads based on that name should also be a complete non-starter. 

So if we assume that Gunther was contacted by the real person, then the only informative aspects of the book for those of us in The Vortex are with the narrative of what occurred before and after the hijacking. 

2. Hoax

Don't have too much to say about this except that there is a well respected researcher in The Vortex who believes they may have identified the hoaxer and it's a fascinating theory. It's not my place to go into those details though. I'm sure they'll announce their findings if and when something comes of it. 

3. Fiction

I'm sure I'll catch heat for my opinion on this, but this is where I'm leaning lately. I believe it's very possible this is performance art. It's nothing new for an artist, be it an author or filmmaker, to portray something as truthful that is fictional. What immediately comes to mind is The Blair Witch Project claiming that it was "found footage". Or even the beginning of Fargo: "The following is based on true events." For those claiming Gunther was taking a professional risk, why would this be a risk if it was actually just made up? This was an individual

Additionally, I spent some time recently looking at reviews from 1986 (I found about 15) and despite what many people have claimed over the years on the forums, I found that most of the critics reviews were positive. It appeared to me that the majority of the reviews understood it to be fiction, wrapped in a rouse of truth for artistic effect. None of those who believed it was fiction attacked Gunther's reputation or anything like that, so I don't buy that narrative that he was taking a risk. The only person who claimed this was a risk was Gunther himself during the promotion of the book. To me that just seems like part of the whole "is it real or isn't it?" schtick. To use a wrestling term, Gunther was just engaging in Kayfabe. It's Gunther essentially saying "for real, this TOTALLY isn't made up by me...I mean I'm taking a risk here by believing it, so trust me."  In fact, many of the literary critics applauded Gunther for how cleverly he devised it and how expertly written it was. So I don't see any risk if it was just 100% fictional because it appears that most of his peers believe it to be fiction from the get-go. 

Concerning Gunther/Clara et al, contacting Himmelsbach...It's worth noting that we've so far not found anything in the Vault (unless Flyjack has) that indicates that the actual FBI was contacted by anyone about this. Contacting Himmelsbach, a retired FBI agent, with a falsity would not open anyone up to liability. However, contacting the FBI with a known falsehood could possibly have had criminal consequences.

I believe, if this was indeed a work of fiction, that contacting Himmelsbach was done to try and add credibility to the story by hopefully having him comment on it. There may even be evidence of this that we found in Himmy's papers that we went through last year. There was a letter from Gunther's publishing company to Himmy informing him that they were about to begin a publicity campaign for the book and that they were hoping that he would provide a comment to assist in their advertising efforts. I believe this may be the cause of Himmelsbach's particularly negative comments about Gunther and the book that he gave to reporters: I think he felt he was being used as a pawn or a tool by Gunther/the publishing company.  

Ultimately, I find the whole story to be too "cute" to be realistic. This criminal hijacker is found by a single lady and she nurses him back to health and they fall in love. Really? C'mon. That positively reeks of someone's fictional account: either Gunther's or a hoaxer's. 

I'm attaching an interesting Seattle Times review. This critic actually spent time looking for lakes and for the doctor and for anyone who might know Clara. 

SeattleTimes-Nov 21, 1985.pdf

[CooperNWO305 146]

7 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Has anyone independently verified the Village Voice listing from 72? I've looked for a copy extensively in online archives and can't find it. 

The following is my not-so-well informed opinion about a topic of The Vortex that I've not spent much time investigating on my own. So no need for anyone to get rustled over it and I'm glad to be proven wrong about it since I admittedly haven't really researched it nearly as much as others have, specifically Dave, Marty, and Flyjack. 

1. Truth

If this book involved the real Cooper and his real girlfriend, then I think it's mostly useless in trying to determine the real Cooper. To protect his source, Gunther would have absolutely had to change certain biographical information. If she was real, Clara should have easily been identified by a number of Clark or Cowlitz County residents given the information that is in the book. Born in Longview. Had an older brother and sister. Father died in 1950. Round face and wore glasses. Attended college in her hometown. It's hard to fathom that being accurate biographical information. As for Cooper. A Canadian born American paratrooper who ran for Rutgers track after the war? That shouldn't be too hard to find. Yet none of these individuals have been found, so clearly those biographical details aren't authentic. 

This is all assuming that Clara gave Gunther accurate biographical information to begin with. If she was worried about criminal liability, then why would she give Gunther accurate biographical information about herself? So either way, be it Clara changing details to protect herself or Gunther changing details to protect his source, we have to assume that the biographical information contained in the book is a complete non-starter and mostly useless for identification purposes. 

And with complete respect to my friends who have spent years pursuing this as a lead, isn't the name Dan LeClair a total invention by Gunther? I don't proclaim to be an expert on the book, but Clara never gave Gunther Cooper's name, right? So chasing leads based on that name should also be a complete non-starter. 

So if we assume that Gunther was contacted by the real person, then the only informative aspects of the book for those of us in The Vortex are with the narrative of what occurred before and after the hijacking. 

2. Hoax

Don't have too much to say about this except that there is a well respected researcher in The Vortex who believes they may have identified the hoaxer and it's a fascinating theory. It's not my place to go into those details though. I'm sure they'll announce their findings if and when something comes of it. 

3. Fiction

I'm sure I'll catch heat for my opinion on this, but this is where I'm leaning lately. I believe it's very possible this is performance art. It's nothing new for an artist, be it an author or filmmaker, to portray something as truthful that is fictional. What immediately comes to mind is The Blair Witch Project claiming that it was "found footage". Or even the beginning of Fargo: "The following is based on true events." For those claiming Gunther was taking a professional risk, why would this be a risk if it was actually just made up? This was an individual

Additionally, I spent some time recently looking at reviews from 1986 (I found about 15) and despite what many people have claimed over the years on the forums, I found that most of the critics reviews were positive. It appeared to me that the majority of the reviews understood it to be fiction, wrapped in a rouse of truth for artistic effect. None of those who believed it was fiction attacked Gunther's reputation or anything like that, so I don't buy that narrative that he was taking a risk. The only person who claimed this was a risk was Gunther himself during the promotion of the book. To me that just seems like part of the whole "is it real or isn't it?" schtick. To use a wrestling term, Gunther was just engaging in Kayfabe. It's Gunther essentially saying "for real, this TOTALLY isn't made up by me...I mean I'm taking a risk here by believing it, so trust me."  In fact, many of the literary critics applauded Gunther for how cleverly he devised it and how expertly written it was. So I don't see any risk if it was just 100% fictional because it appears that most of his peers believe it to be fiction from the get-go. 

Concerning Gunther/Clara et al, contacting Himmelsbach...It's worth noting that we've so far not found anything in the Vault (unless Flyjack has) that indicates that the actual FBI was contacted by anyone about this. Contacting Himmelsbach, a retired FBI agent, with a falsity would not open anyone up to liability. However, contacting the FBI with a known falsehood could possibly have had criminal consequences.

I believe, if this was indeed a work of fiction, that contacting Himmelsbach was done to try and add credibility to the story by hopefully having him comment on it. There may even be evidence of this that we found in Himmy's papers that we went through last year. There was a letter from Gunther's publishing company to Himmy informing him that they were about to begin a publicity campaign for the book and that they were hoping that he would provide a comment to assist in their advertising efforts. I believe this may be the cause of Himmelsbach's particularly negative comments about Gunther and the book that he gave to reporters: I think he felt he was being used as a pawn or a tool by Gunther/the publishing company.  

Ultimately, I find the whole story to be too "cute" to be realistic. This criminal hijacker is found by a single lady and she nurses him back to health and they fall in love. Really? C'mon. That positively reeks of someone's fictional account: either Gunther's or a hoaxer's. 

I'm attaching an interesting Seattle Times review. This critic actually spent time looking for lakes and for the doctor and for anyone who might know Clara. 

SeattleTimes-Nov 21, 1985.pdf 35.41 kB · 2 downloads

Valid opinions. A lot to comment on, but I’ll keep it to just a few. 
 

The Village Voice ad is in the book? Isn’t that enough? If we were able to independently verify the ad was in the VV, how would that impact your thoughts?

Book reviews. I have not collected all of the ones I’ve seen, but to me they seem generally negative, and the more positive ones say it’s good fiction or some sort of comment like that. Not great reviews if you’re a writer. Now I can’t verify for sure that Gunther was unhappy with this, but according to Dave Lipson, a former radio host who I have been chatting with for years, he thinks Gunther was unhappy. He spoke to him a number of times. Martin actually did a podcast with him. This is one comment Dave wrote me back in February of 2020. 
 

 

I had several subsequent conversations with Max; one was at a book seller convention in Los Angeles. He told me that he was convinced that his phone was being tapped and that even his personal mail was being read.

Dave was under the impression that the FBI wanted more info from Max and that Max did not want to give it. Read into it how you will. 
 

In terms of the FBI being contacted by Gunther. If we found info in the files or other places that he did contact the FBI, how would this affect your thinking?

The cabin is a fantastic story. Too fantastic. Hiding out somewhere maybe, but a single woman finds a guy right after the hijacking and takes him in and marries him? I think we have to look for more concrete clues in the book. 
 

As for a new theory on the hoaxer. I’m looking forward to it. More discussion on the book is fun. 
 

One more point. On the name  In the notes Gunther says Dan Collins. I need to check and see if Paul Cotton is in the notes. In the book it is Dan LeClair and Paul Cotton  My theory is that Gunther may have gotten a potentially real name and changed it some or was keeping  it from the FBI. My main theory is that Smith wanted to use Dan Clair and may have even given that name or said LeClair. I realize some people don’t like that approach. In 1982 it would have been very hard to match up anything like we can today. We also don’t have all the notes. We may never get those. 

 

Edited January 1 by CooperNWO305

[olemisscub 466]

8 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

 

The Village Voice ad is in the book? Isn’t that enough? If we were able to independently verify the ad was in the VV, how would that impact your thoughts?

In the book it's not the original ad. Look at it again. It has some sort of highlighted layer that is magnified. I'd just like to see it in its original format. I'm not quite sure how that would effect my thinking. I would still think it's possible that it's fiction and that perhaps he was planning on writing this way back then and planted that there himself and got sidetracked for several years. Perhaps he was planning on writing a different book back in 72 about something completely different and planted it there for that book and then years later repurposed it for his Cooper story to try and give it credibility. I'm just not sure. But it definitely wouldn't hurt to see the original. I might back off my fiction belief a smidge. 

In terms of the FBI being contacted by Gunther. If we found info in the files or other places that he did contact the FBI, how would this affect your thinking?

If we were to find that info, I'd completely back off the fiction train. At the pace they are going, it will be many years before they release that info. If Max had contacted his local FBI, we'd have already seen the paper trail, since all of the files that have been released are incoming and outgoing correspondence. So if the NY Office had contacted the Seattle Office about this, then we'd have seen it already. If Max contacted the Seattle Office directly AND the Seattle Office never sent out any leads on it (which would have been reflected in the incoming/outgoing correspondence so far), then it may be in a Subject File from the 80's or whenever. That would definitely sway me into believing that the contact was real. As I said, wasting Himmy's time with an untruth isn't a crime, but doing it to the big boys is no joke. Max would have known that. 

The cabin is a fantastic story. Too fantastic. Hiding out somewhere maybe, but a single woman finds a guy right after the hijacking and takes him in and marries him? I think we have to look for more concrete clues in the book. 

My concern is that if someone accepts that as false, then why accept anything in the book as true?
 

One more point. On the name  In the notes Gunther says Dan Collins. I need to check and see if Paul Cotton is in the notes. In the book it is Dan LeClair and Paul Cotton  My theory is that Gunther may have gotten a potentially real name and changed it some or was keeping  it from the FBI. My main theory is that Smith wanted to use Dan Clair and may have even given that name or said LeClair. I realize some people don’t like that approach. In 1982 it would have been very hard to match up anything like we can today. We also don’t have all the notes. We may never get those. 

Interesting thoughts for sure. I can buy that as a possibility.  

 

 

[FLYJACK 654]

7 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Has anyone independently verified the Village Voice listing from 72? I've looked for a copy extensively in online archives and can't find it. 

The following is my not-so-well informed opinion about a topic of The Vortex that I've not spent much time investigating on my own. So no need for anyone to get rustled over it and I'm glad to be proven wrong about it since I admittedly haven't really researched it nearly as much as others have, specifically Dave, Marty, and Flyjack. 

1. Truth

If this book involved the real Cooper and his real girlfriend, then I think it's mostly useless in trying to determine the real Cooper. To protect his source, Gunther would have absolutely had to change certain biographical information. If she was real, Clara should have easily been identified by a number of Clark or Cowlitz County residents given the information that is in the book. Born in Longview. Had an older brother and sister. Father died in 1950. Round face and wore glasses. Attended college in her hometown. It's hard to fathom that being accurate biographical information. As for Cooper. A Canadian born American paratrooper who ran for Rutgers track after the war? That shouldn't be too hard to find. Yet none of these individuals have been found, so clearly those biographical details aren't authentic. 

This is all assuming that Clara gave Gunther accurate biographical information to begin with. If she was worried about criminal liability, then why would she give Gunther accurate biographical information about herself? So either way, be it Clara changing details to protect herself or Gunther changing details to protect his source, we have to assume that the biographical information contained in the book is a complete non-starter and mostly useless for identification purposes. 

And with complete respect to my friends who have spent years pursuing this as a lead, isn't the name Dan LeClair a total invention by Gunther? I don't proclaim to be an expert on the book, but Clara never gave Gunther Cooper's name, right? So chasing leads based on that name should also be a complete non-starter. 

So if we assume that Gunther was contacted by the real person, then the only informative aspects of the book for those of us in The Vortex are with the narrative of what occurred before and after the hijacking. 

2. Hoax

Don't have too much to say about this except that there is a well respected researcher in The Vortex who believes they may have identified the hoaxer and it's a fascinating theory. It's not my place to go into those details though. I'm sure they'll announce their findings if and when something comes of it. 

3. Fiction

I'm sure I'll catch heat for my opinion on this, but this is where I'm leaning lately. I believe it's very possible this is performance art. It's nothing new for an artist, be it an author or filmmaker, to portray something as truthful that is fictional. What immediately comes to mind is The Blair Witch Project claiming that it was "found footage". Or even the beginning of Fargo: "The following is based on true events." For those claiming Gunther was taking a professional risk, why would this be a risk if it was actually just made up? This was an individual

Additionally, I spent some time recently looking at reviews from 1986 (I found about 15) and despite what many people have claimed over the years on the forums, I found that most of the critics reviews were positive. It appeared to me that the majority of the reviews understood it to be fiction, wrapped in a rouse of truth for artistic effect. None of those who believed it was fiction attacked Gunther's reputation or anything like that, so I don't buy that narrative that he was taking a risk. The only person who claimed this was a risk was Gunther himself during the promotion of the book. To me that just seems like part of the whole "is it real or isn't it?" schtick. To use a wrestling term, Gunther was just engaging in Kayfabe. It's Gunther essentially saying "for real, this TOTALLY isn't made up by me...I mean I'm taking a risk here by believing it, so trust me."  In fact, many of the literary critics applauded Gunther for how cleverly he devised it and how expertly written it was. So I don't see any risk if it was just 100% fictional because it appears that most of his peers believe it to be fiction from the get-go. 

Concerning Gunther/Clara et al, contacting Himmelsbach...It's worth noting that we've so far not found anything in the Vault (unless Flyjack has) that indicates that the actual FBI was contacted by anyone about this. Contacting Himmelsbach, a retired FBI agent, with a falsity would not open anyone up to liability. However, contacting the FBI with a known falsehood could possibly have had criminal consequences.

I believe, if this was indeed a work of fiction, that contacting Himmelsbach was done to try and add credibility to the story by hopefully having him comment on it. There may even be evidence of this that we found in Himmy's papers that we went through last year. There was a letter from Gunther's publishing company to Himmy informing him that they were about to begin a publicity campaign for the book and that they were hoping that he would provide a comment to assist in their advertising efforts. I believe this may be the cause of Himmelsbach's particularly negative comments about Gunther and the book that he gave to reporters: I think he felt he was being used as a pawn or a tool by Gunther/the publishing company.  

Ultimately, I find the whole story to be too "cute" to be realistic. This criminal hijacker is found by a single lady and she nurses him back to health and they fall in love. Really? C'mon. That positively reeks of someone's fictional account: either Gunther's or a hoaxer's. 

I'm attaching an interesting Seattle Times review. This critic actually spent time looking for lakes and for the doctor and for anyone who might know Clara. 

SeattleTimes-Nov 21, 1985.pdf 35.41 kB · 2 downloads

Sounds like you haven't read the book,, the VV listing is in the book and has been independently confirmed. Gunther claimed he contacted the FBI several times in 1972.

Gunther named others who were involved with the first "Cooper" contact,,, were they in on the hoax?

But you make a common error. Clara's story is at least partially or perhaps completely fabricated and the "Cooper" contact could still be legit.. Discrediting part or all of Clara's narrative doesn't affect the Cooper contact.

In the book, Gunther told parts that were his first hand experience, the contact with "Cooper" the contact with the FBI (first in 1972) and Himmelsbach and the contact with "Clara"...

Those things he is representing as true,, the Clara narrative is Clara's story.

Gunther claimed he called the FBI in 1972.. and wrote a letter to acting director L. Patrick Gray III Sept 20, 1972.. regarding that "Cooper" contact.

Gunther claimed Himmelsbach and the FBI have his transcripts.. and that they, both the FBI and Himmelsbach believe it was a hoax. It isn't clear when Gunther actually started communicating with Himmelsbach.

So, would Gunther lie about his early contact wth the FBI and Himmelsbach in the book. The FBI could out him instantly. That is a reputational risk beyond a potential obstruction of justice charge if he lied to the FBI. For a writer, reputation is currency.

No way he lies about the FBI in the book, that is too much of a risk.

 

My take is that Gunther was legitimately contacted by somebody claiming to be Cooper.. could have been a hoaxer just trying to get money. Gunther contacted the FBI and they thought it was a hoax because it was clearly unverifiable with nothing to go on. Clara's narrative is largely irrelevant in determining whether the "Cooper" was legit. If "Cooper" was a hoaxer then we gain nothing but if he was the real Cooper we gain some pieces to the puzzle.

IMO, the rational position is not to be a rejectionist but to be open to possibility that it may have been the real Cooper and what that would mean. To reject it as outright as a hoax based on opinion is not rational. If somebody makes a fact based case that proves it was a hoax then that needs to be evaluated.