DB Cooper

[georger 228]

4 hours ago, Chaucer said:

The question really isn't "Is Barb Dayton DB Cooper?"  I think we can all agree that is very highly unlikely. Rather, the question at hand is "Did Barb Dayton write the Clara letters to Max Gunther?" 

That is a much more likely possibility based on Marty Andrade's analysis. However, that analysis - and even Marty would agree - should not be taken at face value. More investigation and analysis needs to be done to really put this to bed, but initially the results seem very encouraging. 

I disagree. On its face we have a person having an Identity crisis, which is real. People in that condition do a lot of testing out of different roles. She/he tells the Formans she is Cooper, whether or not she is. If the Formans are being truthful and complete in their statements, then Bob Dayton attached himself/herself to the Cooper hijacking for some reason. Its less likely Dayton will claim to have been Einstein or Moses or Eisenhower! Dayton picks an unprovable  by way of claiming personality traits-identity Dayton wants to have poeople think she is associated with. The Formans have no way of proving anything! Dayton might as well stand up in some church and claim she is Jesus. But Dayton will not do that - her confession is only private made in a safe environment where they cant be any consequences that matter. Dayton's identity formation is incomplete. But Dayton is also going some distance making extraordinary claims with her friends and supporters! There is no instance of Dayton going to the FBI and confessing she/he is Cooper! That would have consequences and leave a record. But, Dayton is making extraordinary claims ... probably to a variety of people ... for some reason related to an identity crisis. Did Dayton ever recant her claim to the Formans?   If so when? It would not be out of place for this person to contact some author who has no way of knowing who or where she is - then letting the whole matter go before any real consequences can materialise!  

Edited March 7 by georger

[CooperNWO305 147]

1 hour ago, georger said:

I disagree. On its face we have a person having an Identity crisis, which is real. People in that condition do a lot of testing out of different roles. She/he tells the Formans she is Cooper, whether or not she is. If the Formans are being truthful and complete in their statements, then Bob Dayton attached himself/herself to the Cooper hijacking for some reason. Its less likely Dayton will claim to have been Einstein or Moses or Eisenhower! Dayton picks an unprovable  by way of claiming personality traits-identity Dayton wants to have poeople think she is associated with. The Formans have no way of proving anything! Dayton might as well stand up in some church and claim she is Jesus. But Dayton will not do that - her confession is only private made in a safe environment where they cant be any consequences that matter. Dayton's identity formation is incomplete. But Dayton is also going some distance making extraordinary claims with her friends and supporters! There is no instance of Dayton going to the FBI and confessing she/he is Cooper! That would have consequences and leave a record. But, Dayton is making extraordinary claims ... probably to a variety of people ... for some reason related to an identity crisis. Did Dayton ever recant her claim to the Formans?   If so when? It would not be out of place for this person to contact some author who has no way of knowing who or where she is - then letting the whole matter go before any real consequences can materialise!  

It looks like it was Ron who came up with the idea that Barb was Cooper. 

[CooperNWO305 147]

Just now, CooperNWO305 said:

It looks like it was Ron who came up with the idea that Barb was Cooper. 

 

[CooperNWO305 147]

2 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Not me! I'm still leaning toward complete fiction. 

I do have a question though. This is what makes me scratch my head the hardest when it comes to Gunther researchers, with you and Marty being the top two. Gunther says Clara never gave him Cooper's real name. Gunther wrote that he just calls him "Dan LeClair" because he has French-Canadian background. So why did you guys seek out connections based on a name that the author admits is fictional? Even if Clara DID give Gunther the real name of Cooper, there's no way Gunther would have just thrown the real name out there nor does it seem like he'd supply a name that was close to Cooper's real name. So shouldn't Dan LeClair/Dan Clare, etc., be a complete non-starter. 

So to research anything concerning Dan LeClair must mean that you think two things: 1. Clara actually gave Gunther Cooper's real name (why in the hell would she do that?), and 2. Gunther decided to publish the real name or something extraordinarily similar to it (and why the hell would he do that?). 

Am I wrong? 

I can see the logic. Whether true or not, I suspected that the caller/writer wanted to tell someone of the crime. He could not do it in a public way and give all the true info. So he brags to Gunther. He gives a name that is close to someone he knows well and uses much of that guy’s life as his own. This is very common in novels. I just got done with a great John Grisham book and he writes how it was loosely based on a real story, at least parts. Lee Child does it. Michael Connelly. It happens. We write about what we know. Now maybe Gunther knew a LeClair. It just seemed odd that there was a Dan Clair in the military records who was born in Canada and moved to Newark and joined the Army. And that his wife shared the same birthday with Clara. And the guy was born like 60 miles from the real LeClair’s birthplace. Canada is a big country. 
 

That was my logic. Marty helped with the military records when I was still learning the Ancestry interface. 
 

His notes to Ralph could be edited. He may have more notes. In the Ralph notes the name is Collins. LeClair is not really that common of a name. The notes don’t match up exactly with the book. Someone could probably list those out. Like in the notes it’s Gettysburg college and in the book it’s Rutgers. 
 

Someone can say it’s not Dan Clair. Ok. I’ve made my points and it’s not worth debating anymore. But if someone says people don’t make up stories using people they know, I’ll call BS on them. 
 

I can see how there is debate. I’ve stated in the past that one scenario is that Gunther made it up, or at least parts. But I’m finding that harder and harder to believe. 
 

I still like the approach that some folks are taking to look at records and try to find out who these people were. In 1972 and 1982, no one dreamed that the internet would make all of this easy to find. Or sort of easy. 
 

Edit. Of note. All the info came from Clara for the most part. I don’t think if Cooper had jumped that Clara would have seen the chute. I can’t see him carrying it. It’s a simple mistake to think the captain came back to talk to Cooper. Cooper did talk to the cockpit. To me, those are weak ways to discount the whole book. 

Edited March 8 by CooperNWO305

[DanCooperHimself 12]

Thoughts on skepticism about the Stylometry analysis due to the sample size. 

It’s not a trial for penicillin that worked for one person and then a proclamation that it works without further randomised controlled or clinical trials.

Yes drugs and pharmaceuticals need large sample sizes. Same with molecular biology and stuff like that.

This is stylometry, a fingerprint. The tech is from 2003 because the detection software is as good as it can be. Human nature and the English language hasn’t evolved. It’s not IOS or Android that needs updated for security and data reasons. 

If the cops get one fingerprint, they don’t say “it’s only one print we need the whole hand to bust the criminal”.

These letters were written in the 1980s. Tested using workable 2003 software. GPS hasn’t really evolved much either because the Earth is the same. A 2003 GPS isn’t going to tell me I’m in New York when I’m really in Derry! 

New York is in the same location as it was 20 years ago and can be pinpointed with the same tech.

Here’s a good creative example. If I paint something and visually I use the same colours as Van Gogh, am I Van Gogh? NO! If Van Gogh painted two paintings and used vastly different colours in each painting is one of them a fake? NO.

How the paint is applied, pigments, composition structure are all detectable with visual and stylometric photography. The same methodology is applied to writing - like voice recognition for the written word.

Saying 200/300 words aloud is enough for voice recognition software to identify an individual, as is 200/300 written across two letters to pick up the idiosyncrasies, sentence length, SPG and other things that make a written finger print a written fingerprint.  

[Math of Insects 98]

2 hours ago, CooperNWO305 said:

I can see the logic. Whether true or not, I suspected that the caller/writer wanted to tell someone of the crime. He could not do it in a public way and give all the true info. So he brags to Gunther. He gives a name that is close to someone he knows well and uses much of that guy’s life as his own. This is very common in novels. I just got done with a great John Grisham book and he writes how it was loosely based on a real story, at least parts. Lee Child does it. Michael Connelly. It happens. We write about what we know. Now maybe Gunther knew a LeClair. It just seemed odd that there was a Dan Clair in the military records who was born in Canada and moved to Newark and joined the Army. And that his wife shared the same birthday with Clara. And the guy was born like 60 miles from the real LeClair’s birthplace. Canada is a big country. 
 

That was my logic. Marty helped with the military records when I was still learning the Ancestry interface. 
 

His notes to Ralph could be edited. He may have more notes. In the Ralph notes the name is Collins. LeClair is not really that common of a name. The notes don’t match up exactly with the book. Someone could probably list those out. Like in the notes it’s Gettysburg college and in the book it’s Rutgers. 
 

Someone can say it’s not Dan Clair. Ok. I’ve made my points and it’s not worth debating anymore. But if someone says people don’t make up stories using people they know, I’ll call BS on them.

"I can't reveal who Deep Throat is. Let's just say his name is Mark LeFelt."

--Bob Woodward

[georger 228]

Did Dayton/Forman claim to have landed at Woodburn OR ?

Edited March 8 by georger

[Chaucer 110]

4 hours ago, DanCooperHimself said:

Thoughts on skepticism about the Stylometry analysis due to the sample size. 

It’s not a trial for penicillin that worked for one person and then a proclamation that it works without further randomised controlled or clinical trials.

Yes drugs and pharmaceuticals need large sample sizes. Same with molecular biology and stuff like that.

This is stylometry, a fingerprint. The tech is from 2003 because the detection software is as good as it can be. Human nature and the English language hasn’t evolved. It’s not IOS or Android that needs updated for security and data reasons. 

If the cops get one fingerprint, they don’t say “it’s only one print we need the whole hand to bust the criminal”.

These letters were written in the 1980s. Tested using workable 2003 software. GPS hasn’t really evolved much either because the Earth is the same. A 2003 GPS isn’t going to tell me I’m in New York when I’m really in Derry! 

New York is in the same location as it was 20 years ago and can be pinpointed with the same tech.

Here’s a good creative example. If I paint something and visually I use the same colours as Van Gogh, am I Van Gogh? NO! If Van Gogh painted two paintings and used vastly different colours in each painting is one of them a fake? NO.

How the paint is applied, pigments, composition structure are all detectable with visual and stylometric photography. The same methodology is applied to writing - like voice recognition for the written word.

Saying 200/300 words aloud is enough for voice recognition software to identify an individual, as is 200/300 written across two letters to pick up the idiosyncrasies, sentence length, SPG and other things that make a written finger print a written fingerprint.  

It's important to point out that Barb was not pulled out of a hat. There was a suspicion that she was Clara. No one was claiming Sheridan Petersen was Clara or William Reca. 

I encourage more analysis into this, but I believe it will not yield a different result than the original. 

[olemisscub 487]

1 hour ago, georger said:

Did Dayton/Forman claim to have landed at Woodburn OR ?

The Forman’s wrote the book 20 years after discussing this with Barb. Maybe they are misremembering what Barb said. Perhaps she actually said that she jumped near Woodland and they misremembered it as Woodburn.

[olemisscub 487]

22 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

It's important to point out that Barb was not pulled out of a hat. There was a suspicion that she was Clara. No one was claiming Sheridan Petersen was Clara or William Reca. 

 

I guess that’s where I’m somewhat intrigued by it. It’s a 97% match to a person who is already a known DB Cooper bullshitter. 

[Chaucer 110]

Just now, olemisscub said:

I guess that’s where I’m somewhat intrigued by it. It’s a 97% match to a person who is already a known DB Cooper bullshitter. 

Right. And has been pointed out, the age of the program is essentially meaningless considering its necessity. Also, word use is meaningless in this regard as well. That's not how stylometry works. It's not just about WHAT words are used, but HOW. It's phrasing, construction, and convention. It's linguistic style. 

The more I look into this, the more I'm convinced the original conclusion was right. 

[CooperNWO305 147]

7 hours ago, olemisscub said:

The Forman’s wrote the book 20 years after discussing this with Barb. Maybe they are misremembering what Barb said. Perhaps she actually said that she jumped near Woodland and they misremembered it as Woodburn.

Check out page 53-54 in the book. It’s clear that it was Woodburn. They mention Aurora and there is a map. They also visit the spot later in the book. 
 

Edited March 8 by CooperNWO305

[CooperNWO305 147]

6 hours ago, olemisscub said:

I guess that’s where I’m somewhat intrigued by it. It’s a 97% match to a person who is already a known DB Cooper bullshitter. 

As someone who thinks Gunther probably made it up, do you really believe it is a 97% match? Programs are wrong. Data input can be wrong, mistakes are made. The program interprets input. I’ve already identified a major mistake in input, and I’ll get more into it when I reply to Chaucer. 
 

Eric was 98% sure that Sheridan is Cooper. Granted he did not use a program. 
 

The Signature program does not come out and say “these two letters are a 97% match”. Statistics are more than that. It takes interpretation. 
 

I’m good to see this simmer and see what ideas people come up with. 
 

This is a field that I work in, and I’ve seen so many incidents of people making mistakes and assumptions. Good, honest people. Myself included. It happens. 
 

When analyzing data it is vital to understand context and to still do a smell test. Looking at both letters will tell you they are different. 
 

[olemisscub 487]

1 hour ago, CooperNWO305 said:

Check out page 53-54 in the book. It’s clear that it was Woodburn. They mention Aurora and there is a map. They also visit the spot later in the book. 
 

Yeah, you're right. Just looked it up in the book. They are indeed quite specific about it. Yikes... How did Barb mess that up so badly?

[olemisscub 487]

1 hour ago, CooperNWO305 said:

As someone who thinks Gunther probably made it up, do you really believe it is a 97% match? Programs are wrong.
 

Fair point there. But I'm just saying that this apparent 97% match being tied to a known Cooper bullshitter from that era has me intrigued and questioning my own belief that it was complete fiction. 

[CooperNWO305 147]

8 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Fair point there. But I'm just saying that this apparent 97% match being tied to a known Cooper bullshitter from that era has me intrigued and questioning my own belief that it was complete fiction. 

Ok. Makes sense. I’m less impressed with the 97%, just given my experience. However, I am excited to interact with everything and see how people interact with things too. I was up late watching YouTube videos on coding and programming to help dust some cobwebs off before I fire up the more complex programs to look at these letters. I should have been at a bar. :). 
 

I’m trying to understand if the comments here are in reference to just the Signature program or Stylometry as a whole. As in, if Stylo works, does that mean Signature works? I’m sensing that the Signature results are being looked at as gospel. That seems unusual given the education and experience level of this group. 
 

I’ll put old differences aside and continue to see how this plays out. Jude and Chris both have unique backgrounds and experiences and I am interested to see what they learn. Jude has an app and Chris is a professor. Both will have access to people who can evaluate the letters. 
 

I definitely want to understand Marty’s steps. I have the program downloaded and running. It’s pretty quick and simple. I just want to duplicate what he did. 

[DanCooperHimself 12]

1 hour ago, CooperNWO305 said:

Ok. Makes sense. I’m less impressed with the 97%, just given my experience. However, I am excited to interact with everything and see how people interact with things too. I was up late watching YouTube videos on coding and programming to help dust some cobwebs off before I fire up the more complex programs to look at these letters. I should have been at a bar. :). 
 

I’m trying to understand if the comments here are in reference to just the Signature program or Stylometry as a whole. As in, if Stylo works, does that mean Signature works? I’m sensing that the Signature results are being looked at as gospel. That seems unusual given the education and experience level of this group. 
 

I’ll put old differences aside and continue to see how this plays out. Jude and Chris both have unique backgrounds and experiences and I am interested to see what they learn. Jude has an app and Chris is a professor. Both will have access to people who can evaluate the letters. 
 

I definitely want to understand Marty’s steps. I have the program downloaded and running. It’s pretty quick and simple. I just want to duplicate what he did. 

I appreciate this Dave. So I’m on a Vortex right of passage where I’ve ran my mouth excitedly and been brought back a peg or two today in terms of these letters. 
 

One of the coding people I use for app content checks (no real experience in forensic stylometry but handy with code) said that the match is enough to “prosecute but not convict”. What we use is R, because it can be adapted to suit our content, scheduler, plagiarism checks, embedding of videos/fillable activities and so on.
 

Needs further analysis perhaps from software not available to the gen pop to get a totally rock solid definitive answer. It gives a good indicator, it gives a strong direction, but not necessarily a 100% answer. 
 

It’s still a remarkable find that Barbs writing can be matched to the Clara letter, but even as a small chance - it could still technically be matched to someone else (remote possibility but not nil). 
 

Very encouraging, but not enough to say BEYOND all reasonable doubt that Barb authored the letters. Signature is a good software to give indication for sure, but not enough to state authorship as a resolute fact. 
 

What would be needed - at least 3/4 stylometric detection softwares (very expensive to buy, expensive to get a forensic coder to configure them as it’s very niche) at least 3 or 4 other samples of Barbs writings and then a compatible made against all the tests. 
 

So there we go. A step in a direction and a viable opening of a line of enquiry, but the end result after an extensive test can still rule Barb out, even at a small possibility. 

[CooperNWO305 147]

14 hours ago, Chaucer said:

Right. And has been pointed out, the age of the program is essentially meaningless considering its necessity. Also, word use is meaningless in this regard as well. That's not how stylometry works. It's not just about WHAT words are used, but HOW. It's phrasing, construction, and convention. It's linguistic style. 

The more I look into this, the more I'm convinced the original conclusion was right. 

Where did you come up with the belief that word use is not relevant in Stylometry, and that’s not how Stylometry works? Why is word use meaningless?  Also curious to hear more details about why a 20 year old program is as good as say one updated recently? 
 

Did I say somewhere that word count was the only part of stylometry?

[CooperNWO305 147]

6 hours ago, DanCooperHimself said:

I appreciate this Dave. So I’m on a Vortex right of passage where I’ve ran my mouth excitedly and been brought back a peg or two today in terms of these letters. 
 

One of the coding people I use for app content checks (no real experience in forensic stylometry but handy with code) said that the match is enough to “prosecute but not convict”. What we use is R, because it can be adapted to suit our content, scheduler, plagiarism checks, embedding of videos/fillable activities and so on.
 

Needs further analysis perhaps from software not available to the gen pop to get a totally rock solid definitive answer. It gives a good indicator, it gives a strong direction, but not necessarily a 100% answer. 
 

It’s still a remarkable find that Barbs writing can be matched to the Clara letter, but even as a small chance - it could still technically be matched to someone else (remote possibility but not nil). 
 

Very encouraging, but not enough to say BEYOND all reasonable doubt that Barb authored the letters. Signature is a good software to give indication for sure, but not enough to state authorship as a resolute fact. 
 

What would be needed - at least 3/4 stylometric detection softwares (very expensive to buy, expensive to get a forensic coder to configure them as it’s very niche) at least 3 or 4 other samples of Barbs writings and then a compatible made against all the tests. 
 

So there we go. A step in a direction and a viable opening of a line of enquiry, but the end result after an extensive test can still rule Barb out, even at a small possibility. 

R is what I work with. I’ve seen some amazing things done with it, and I can’t hold a candle to some of the people I work with. 

[Math of Insects 98]

I don't think the 20-year-old issue means anything in isolation, unless there have been significant changes in the science or knowledge-base in those years. Have there? I would expect newer programs to be more efficient in how they approach the data set, but I'm unclear how the underlying field has changed in that time. Does anyone know? 

[georger 228]

43 minutes ago, Math of Insects said:

I don't think the 20-year-old issue means anything in isolation, unless there have been significant changes in the science or knowledge-base in those years. Have there? I would expect newer programs to be more efficient in how they approach the data set, but I'm unclear how the underlying field has changed in that time. Does anyone know? 

Is stylometry admissible in Court? Is any Linguistic data or analytical process admissible in Court? Yes. Especially where it relates to some neurological condition or statement about background, identity, social class, intention, educational issues, etc.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stylometry   These modern assessment tools that people began developing in the 60's have become central in every sector of modern life across the globe. The roots of these assessment and measurement tools goes clear back into antiquity, eg. the Code of Hammurabi, etc.

Edited March 9 by georger

[olemisscub 487]

2 hours ago, georger said:

Is stylometry admissible in Court? 

Generally yes, as long as the person testifying about it is determined by the court to be an expert. 

[DanCooperHimself 12]

2 hours ago, georger said:

Is stylometry admissible in Court? Is any Linguistic data or analytical process admissible in Court? Yes. Especially where it relates to some neurological condition or statement about background, identity, social class, intention, educational issues, etc.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stylometry   These modern assessment tools that people began developing in the 60's have become central in every sector of modern life across the globe. The roots of these assessment and measurement tools goes clear back into antiquity, eg. the Code of Hammurabi, etc.

Yes! Someone became a covert member of my app community, then all of a sudden they created something remarkably similar using content and materials we published inside of it. Basically they took my/our writings and put their branding on them. Of course I hit the sue button and using a stylometric analyst our lawyer got (expensive), it was deemed authorship was ours, and their winning margin in front of a judge would be practically nil. It was settled. The other side knew it was admissible and black and white. 

[georger 228]

22 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Generally yes, as long as the person testifying about it is determined by the court to be an expert. 

I havent followed the evolution of linguistic computer programming but of course its been part of the whole computer revolution in data analysis since the 60s, in every area of science. My old colleague William P Gibson (a programmer) would be proud and very pleased. Bill was a mathematician by trade. One of Bill's concerns  was 'when computers begin talking to each other the dialogue will move beyond human comprehension quickly! Then where do we go from there?' I miss Bill every day. He would have loved the dialogue that is happening here lately - - -     

[CooperNWO305 147]

18 hours ago, georger said:

I havent followed the evolution of linguistic computer programming but of course its been part of the whole computer revolution in data analysis since the 60s, in every area of science. My old colleague William P Gibson (a programmer) would be proud and very pleased. Bill was a mathematician by trade. One of Bill's concerns  was 'when computers begin talking to each other the dialogue will move beyond human comprehension quickly! Then where do we go from there?' I miss Bill every day. He would have loved the dialogue that is happening here lately - - -     

Georger. I vaguely remember you had some connection to linguistics along with your math background. This stylometry is basically part of forensic linguistics. Your input would be interesting.