DB Cooper

[georger 194]

1 hour ago, olemisscub said:

Sorry to besmirch a passenger on the Cooper flight, but this is an embellishment on his part. We have his 302.

There we go - which is correct and how can anyone ever know ? It never fails .....

[dudeman17 267]

I'm reminded of the old Charles Bronson movie 'From Noon Till Three'.

[JAGdb 69]

6 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Sorry to besmirch a passenger on the Cooper flight, but this is an embellishment on his part. We have his 302.

Thanks Ryan, I was curious what the 302s may have documented for Michael Cooper.  It's really crazy, what a sharp contrast.  We have his 84 year old self in this article making very strong statements, while the 302 is like a complete 180 nothing burger...

Heck, he even says that he could pick him out of a lineup today !  And that both of the sketches are good likenesses...

I would generally agree with the idea to go with the statements immediately after the events, that those would be more reliable.  But gee-whiz, what is going on here !

BTW, enjoyed your pod cast with Jude and Chris...Cola was actually drinking "Cola"...nice touch !

No Pull ?  I doubt it...

Landed in the drink ?  Most likely scenario if he died, but hard to put him in the Colombia based on the timeline and best estimates of where he jumped.  

To Cola or other jumpers i.e. Dudeman...was it really certain death that there would have been no way for him to disengage from the chute to survive a water landing ?

PS 

Maybe Michael Cooper would come on your next podcast to explain...

[JAGdb 69]

Also, on the topic of seeing Cooper as a "hero".   While I agree that he did a bad thing with the hijacking, this was a criminal act which makes him a criminal.  Does it mean we put him in the same category as John Dillinger or Clyde Barrow ?  There's a possibility for a nuanced position where he was more of a desperate man as opposed to a regular old SOB.  

Fun topics...

[olemisscub 463]

3 hours ago, JAGdb said:

 

I would generally agree with the idea to go with the statements immediately after the events, that those would be more reliable.  But gee-whiz, what is going on here !

 

Just an embellishment. Only six passengers told the FBI they saw the hijacker: Mitchell, Gregory, Labissoniere, House, Spreckel, and Richard Simmons. 

Passengers who later claimed to have seen Cooper yet apparently did not: Finegold, Mike Cooper, and Jack Almstad. 

[ParrotheadVol 70]

4 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Just an embellishment. Only six passengers told the FBI they saw the hijacker: Mitchell, Gregory, Labissoniere, House, Spreckel, and Richard Simmons. 

Passengers who later claimed to have seen Cooper yet apparently did not: Finegold, Mike Cooper, and Jack Almstad. 

Just another example of stories changing over the years and people remembering things differently than they happened. Nothing new to the Cooper case.

[georger 194]

6 minutes ago, ParrotheadVol said:

Just another example of stories changing over the years and people remembering things differently than they happened. Nothing new to the Cooper case.

and in spite of being dead Cooper managed to bury himself and all of his stuff, never to be found by thousands of people conducting life in the region where he fell to Earth ...  during a Naked and Afraid episode ! Someone could hire the producers of that program to look for Cooper or get their advice about where and how to look ?

Edited January 31 by georger

[georger 194]

I think it is legitimate to ask:  does Cooper fit the Carr 'bank robber' profile?  It's an important question.

[georger 194]

On 1/30/2024 at 11:04 PM, olemisscub said:

Sorry to besmirch a passenger on the Cooper flight, but this is an embellishment on his part. We have his 302.

People change their stories after a passage of time, because they didnt want to be involved (or get involved) at the time. It's a common syndrome. People generally avoid train wrecks or situations which could become overwhelming, and a tax on one's life. We have all  been in situations and not come forward to avoid involvement at the time. Later, when people have distance, the full story comes out. 

So, I wouldnt automatically dismiss what Cooper is saying today. It could be the truth.

In fact, I would bet others tried to avoid involvement for the same reason ... which alters the factual record. We have all been in situations like that...

He further advised that he did not observe the hijacker at any time, before, during, or after this flight ?

Edited February 1 by georger

[c99acer 6]

3 hours ago, georger said:

People change their stories after a passage of time, because they didnt want to be involved (or get involved) at the time. It's a common syndrome. People generally avoid train wrecks or situations which could become overwhelming, and a tax on one's life. We have all  been in situations and not come forward to avoid involvement at the time. Later, when people have distance, the full story comes out. 

So, I wouldnt automatically dismiss what Cooper is saying today. It could be the truth.

In fact, I would bet others tried to avoid involvement for the same reason ... which alters the factual record. We have all been in situations like that...

He further advised that he did not observe the hijacker at any time, before, during, or after this flight ?

That is a good point about avoiding involvement when you know something is going on at the time.

But in this case, they didn't know there was a "train wreck". Nobody, but a few new of a hijacker being on the plane, so why would any passengers pay attention to one particular person?

I give more weight to comments made by witnesses when they offer them up closer to the time of this hijack event.

[Math of Insects 95]

I think the most that can be said is that his story is different. I don't think we can say if his memory "changed" as time went on, or if had a family or a life and just didn't want to be an eyewitness to a federal crime. For all anyone knew at the time the guy lived and would be coming after anyone who ratted him out. It is sometimes just easier to say you didn't see anything and get on with your life. 

It could also have gone the other way, of course, where over time there grow to be 200 people on the plane, all of whom sat next to him. Who knows? Is he alive? Someone should ask.

[JAGdb 69]

6 hours ago, georger said:

People change their stories after a passage of time, because they didnt want to be involved (or get involved) at the time. It's a common syndrome. People generally avoid train wrecks or situations which could become overwhelming, and a tax on one's life. We have all  been in situations and not come forward to avoid involvement at the time. Later, when people have distance, the full story comes out. 

So, I wouldnt automatically dismiss what Cooper is saying today. It could be the truth.

In fact, I would bet others tried to avoid involvement for the same reason ... which alters the factual record. We have all been in situations like that...

He further advised that he did not observe the hijacker at any time, before, during, or after this flight ?

I think your explanation is just about the only one that can account for the total 180.  He went from "never observing him before, during or after" in the 302 to "I can pick him out of a lineup today" in that article--there's no wiggle room to that, except maybe a loss of his marbles.

He did have his life flipped upside down briefly when in the immediate aftermath, the FBI implicated him as being the hijacker.  Maybe that was enough to say he didn't see anything and get out of it as quickly as possible.

At the end of the day, if he is telling the truth now, it's an interesting data point about the hijacker in terms of his profile, sort of in line with another witness's statement that said he had an "executive" type feel to him.  But it doesn't move the needle too much.

As far as Carr's profile, that he knew just enough to get himself killed, I'm just not there yet.  I tend to think he knew what he was doing a little bit more than that. He carried himself quite well given the circumstances and gravity of what he was doing.  Not saying he was a Braden type, I think he had a strategic lapse on the tarmac at Seatac that I wouldn't expect from a guy like Braden.  But I admit, it's all guess work...

Do we think that Carr's profile is the same as Himmelsbach's ? or the FBI's in general ?

 

[olemisscub 463]

WOW! Uncle LD was investigated in 71. 

 

[ParrotheadVol 70]

43 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

WOW! Uncle LD was investigated in 71. 

 

That makes me wonder if that may have sparked the talk within their family that Uncle LD could be Uncle DB. 
 

I think that’s the first I’ve seen a reference to his eye color. 

[georger 194]

1 hour ago, JAGdb said:

I think your explanation is just about the only one that can account for the total 180.  He went from "never observing him before, during or after" in the 302 to "I can pick him out of a lineup today" in that article--there's no wiggle room to that, except maybe a loss of his marbles.

He did have his life flipped upside down briefly when in the immediate aftermath, the FBI implicated him as being the hijacker.  Maybe that was enough to say he didn't see anything and get out of it as quickly as possible.

At the end of the day, if he is telling the truth now, it's an interesting data point about the hijacker in terms of his profile, sort of in line with another witness's statement that said he had an "executive" type feel to him.  But it doesn't move the needle too much.

As far as Carr's profile, that he knew just enough to get himself killed, I'm just not there yet.  I tend to think he knew what he was doing a little bit more than that. He carried himself quite well given the circumstances and gravity of what he was doing.  Not saying he was a Braden type, I think he had a strategic lapse on the tarmac at Seatac that I wouldn't expect from a guy like Braden.  But I admit, it's all guess work...

Do we think that Carr's profile is the same as Himmelsbach's ? or the FBI's in general ?

 

My bias is the same as my cousins': the money find basically requires that he survived enough to walk the money south.  What happened from there is anyone's guess (no evidence). Except that money is found at Tena Bar in 1980,  next to a river. There is a significant disconnect between the area where he landed and Tena Bar on the Columbia River which almost requires special facts or events, to connect the two.

If the money wound up on Tena Bar with Cooper being dead further north, then something specific has to explain that. My cousin said in 1980: 'if the money is here, Cooper was here - or in the area !' 

Edited February 2 by georger

[olemisscub 463]

1 hour ago, ParrotheadVol said:

That makes me wonder if that may have sparked the talk within their family that Uncle LD could be Uncle DB. 
 

I think that’s the first I’ve seen a reference to his eye color. 

I sent that to Marla. She obviously wasn’t aware of it. She says that his eyes weren’t blue and thinks LD’s mom is covering for him. The mom also says she hasn’t seen LD since he absconded from the VA hospital in October but Marla says that LD was living with his mom at the time so that’s another thing that the mom is lying about. 

[Coopericane 44]

There are new pictures of Al Cooper in the latest Vault and he's a damn good match for both sketches. Easy to see what the stews saw in him.

Edited February 2 by Coopericane

[Coopericane 44]

I also noticed these two new (?) instances of witnesses (Lysne and Williams - Lysne's name is accidentally misspelled and unredacted in one spot, and the second witness presumably has to be Williams since their redacted name is longer?) picking out people they thought resembled Cooper, though the people's names are unfortunately redacted.

Edited February 2 by Coopericane

[Coopericane 44]

I wonder who this very redacted tip is about.

 

 

Edited February 2 by Coopericane

[dudeman17 267]

On 1/31/2024 at 3:33 AM, JAGdb said:

was it really certain death that there would have been no way for him to disengage from the chute to survive a water landing ?

It would certainly be problematic if he lands in the water. On those bailout rigs there are no capewells or any way to release the chute from the harness. There are a lot of variables. If the chute lands on top of him and he gets tangled in the canopy or the lines, that would suck. If it lands to the side of him... How strong is the current in the river, would he be getting pulled along? How cold is the water, would he be quickly succumbing to hypothermia? His best bet would be to get out of the harness if he could. If he's had jump training, he might know that if he's going to land in water he should undo the chest strap before he lands. Then he just has to get out of the leg straps. If the leg straps have clips on them, that would be easier. (I looked at the pictures of Hayden's other rig on Bruce's site and couldn't really see that part.) If there are no clips and he has to pull his legs out of them, that would be more difficult. But the money bag, how is that tied on, and is that going to impede his access to the harness. If luck is with him and he knows what he's doing, he could conceivably survive a water landing, but it would be difficult.

[dudeman17 267]

On 1/30/2024 at 10:43 PM, dudeman17 said:

I'm reminded of the old Charles Bronson movie 'From Noon Till Three'.

No one bit on this, but I'll flesh it out a bit since it's kind of a funny movie and sort of relevant to some of what has been discussed here lately. It's an old western and Bronson plays an outlaw bank robber and blah blah blah...  One day he comes to an outside-of-town manor occupied by a lone woman. He needs to hide out for a while, so at first he's holding her hostage, but she's hot so he seduces her. She, being a lonely widow, likes the attention and goes along with it, and they spend an idyllic afternoon. After he leaves, he is soon arrested, convicted, and sentenced to a couple years in jail for some other crime under a different, mistaken identity. On her part, the townsfolk know what she did and brand her a harlot. But she writes a novel about the affair, and portrays it as an epic, romantic love story. The book becomes a runaway best seller, and the tale and the 'outlaw' persona become famous and larger than life. In jail, Bronson is aware of this and reads the book. When he is finally released, he decides to go back and reunite with the woman. But by then, the story has become so overblown, even in her mind, that she does not recognize him. His efforts to convince her and anyone else that he actually is the guy are met with disbelief, scorn, and derision.

[JAGdb 69]

I guess this is what some of you were referencing a couple of days or so ago:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25565774/db-cooper-case-not-closed-fbi-testing-tie-evidence/

I missed this part in the context of it:

"Officially the FBI won't confirm anything, and Larry Carr isn't going to confirm anything [...] but based on conversations I've had with some people privately and based on what Larry has said publicly, I do believe they are re-testing the evidence."

[JAGdb 69]

4 hours ago, dudeman17 said:

It would certainly be problematic if he lands in the water. On those bailout rigs there are no capewells or any way to release the chute from the harness. There are a lot of variables. If the chute lands on top of him and he gets tangled in the canopy or the lines, that would suck. If it lands to the side of him... How strong is the current in the river, would he be getting pulled along? How cold is the water, would he be quickly succumbing to hypothermia? His best bet would be to get out of the harness if he could. If he's had jump training, he might know that if he's going to land in water he should undo the chest strap before he lands. Then he just has to get out of the leg straps. If the leg straps have clips on them, that would be easier. (I looked at the pictures of Hayden's other rig on Bruce's site and couldn't really see that part.) If there are no clips and he has to pull his legs out of them, that would be more difficult. But the money bag, how is that tied on, and is that going to impede his access to the harness. If luck is with him and he knows what he's doing, he could conceivably survive a water landing, but it would be difficult.

Thank you for the response Dudeman.

Marty, did your research about WW2 bail out survival rates include bailing out over bodies of water ?  Time for me to pick up your book !

 

Edited February 2 by JAGdb

[Andrade1812 51]

1 hour ago, JAGdb said:

Thank you for the response Dudeman.

Marty, did your research about WW2 bail out survival rates include bailing out over bodies of water ?  Time for me to pick up your book !

 

I have the data, but it's not in the book. The waters off Denmark were lethal. Unless a fishing boat spotted you or you were close to shore, that was it. Also, the RAF and USAAC had flotation devices that Cooper did not have. Guys who landed in deep enough water without a "Mae West" almost all drowned even when close to shore. 

The water that night was about 10C, so cold but not North Sea cold. I think Dave's analysis is right, Cooper had a chance at survival if he knew enough and had experience in skydiving or in the military. My father did training jumps into water around that time.

[olemisscub 463]

8 hours ago, Coopericane said:

There are new pictures of Al Cooper in the latest Vault and he's a damn good match for both sketches. Easy to see what the stews saw in him.

This is my doing. I really don't understand the FBI sometimes. I FOIA'd for those photos a few months ago, asking for high resolution scans of them. Now they show up totally out of place at the start of the Vault drop. So the FBI I guess thinks that putting those in there is going to placate me. No, this doesn't placate me, FBI. I asked for HIGH. RESOLUTION. SCANS. for a reason. 

And for what it's worth, Al Cooper was bald in those photos. That hair was lifted from the sketch and placed on his head. Also, he had a beard in the original mugshot too, which they removed in most of those. 

I currently have a FOIA going on with the Albuquerque PD for that photo. I figured I'd just go through them and it'd be faster. But that was a few months ago. Every few weeks they respond and say they'll be getting to me soon. So that's better than nothing I guess.