22 22
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

Regarding the chutes...

 

On 9/3/2021 at 4:26 PM, FLYJACK said:

Putting all the info together, this may not be exact but close...

 

You study the evidence a lot closer than I do, so I have to follow you on this, but it begs a question...

 

On 9/3/2021 at 4:26 PM, FLYJACK said:

Cossey is contacted at home about getting 2 back and 2 front chutes.

He tells them to grab the two fronts and two of his backs from Issaquah.

Linn Emrich is contacted to obtain the chutes at Issaquah.

Hayden is contacted and sends his two back chutes in by cab. 

Linn Emrich grabs (the front reserves). Back chutes are no longer required from Issaquah.

 

On 9/3/2021 at 4:26 PM, FLYJACK said:

Cossey's back chutes were not sent from Issaquah. Cossey must have figured this out

 

Cossey would have to know that. Emrich would tell him and/or he would see it the next time he was at the dz.

 

On 9/3/2021 at 4:26 PM, FLYJACK said:

Cossey thought the two back chutes were his from Issaquah

 

???

He (and the FBI) would know that they weren't.

 

Now, Cossey seemed to like to bs reporters, so anything he told them can be discounted as unreliable.

But as for the communication between Cossey and the FBI...

 

On 9/3/2021 at 4:26 PM, FLYJACK said:

Cossey is contacted... and gave the FBI the description of the chute...

All the chutes found were rejected based on Cossey’s description.

 

Why would the FBI ask for and rely on Cossey's descriptions when they both knew that they were not Cossey's chutes?

If they were asking Cossey for descriptions of Hayden's chutes based on the fact that he packed them, that would have to have been clarified. But Cossey probably wouldn't have remembered, and any info he would have in his records would be the same info on the packing cards.

???

 

-----

 

Also, where would any of the info on the McChord chutes (and their rejection) have come from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am understanding Flyjack's theory correctly, there is a chance that Cooper intentionally swapped the packing cards to confuse the authorities, right? Or the cards somehow got mixed up before that in the scramble to get them to the airport. Either way it sounds like the FBI could have been looking for the wrong parachute all these years which would be huge. I wonder if any of the chutes found in the dropzone could fit this new description...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
13 hours ago, dudeman17 said:

Cossey would have to know that. Emrich would tell him and/or he would see it the next time he was at the dz.

 

 

???

He (and the FBI) would know that they weren't.

 

Now, Cossey seemed to like to bs reporters, so anything he told them can be discounted as unreliable.

But as for the communication between Cossey and the FBI...

 

 

Why would the FBI ask for and rely on Cossey's descriptions when they both knew that they were not Cossey's chutes?

If they were asking Cossey for descriptions of Hayden's chutes based on the fact that he packed them, that would have to have been clarified. But Cossey probably wouldn't have remembered, and any info he would have in his records would be the same info on the packing cards.

???

 

-----

 

Also, where would any of the info on the McChord chutes (and their rejection) have come from?

There are reports that they requested both front and back from Issaquah but the backs weren't needed as they secured them from Hayden.

We can only speculate here, but I think Cossey initially believed that his back chutes were taken from Issaquah, they weren't. He was told a Pioneer was left behind and he described his other chute as the custom NB6/8. Soon after he would have figured out that his back chutes were not used. IMO, he never supplied his records because it would show his description was wrong.

In the FBI files, it does claim that Cossey owned the back chutes, it also states elsewhere that the back chutes came from Hayden, it does not state that Cossey owned the chutes prior to Hayden purchasing them. Cossey claimed they were his back chutes and he had never heard of Hayden.

I believe the FBI got confused, they knew Cossey packed both of Hayden's back chutes May 21, 1971 and relied on him as that was all they had. However, Cossey was initially mistaken then lied to cover up his error. Adding to the confusion was the ownership of the the front chutes.

FBI agent Larry Carr interviewed Cossey around June of 2008 and he believed the back chutes came from Cossey's home.

 

I haven't been able to sort out the McChord chutes, I assume they asked McChord but they didn't have them, refused or made an excuse.

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
12 hours ago, Coopericane said:

If I am understanding Flyjack's theory correctly, there is a chance that Cooper intentionally swapped the packing cards to confuse the authorities, right? Or the cards somehow got mixed up before that in the scramble to get them to the airport. Either way it sounds like the FBI could have been looking for the wrong parachute all these years which would be huge. I wonder if any of the chutes found in the dropzone could fit this new description...

Close, I don't believe Cooper intentionally swapped the cards to confuse authorities..

Somehow the SN 60-9707 card ended up in the pocket of SN 226..

The dummy had no card, the opened front reserve had its card and there were two other packing cards noted in the FBI files, SN 226 and SN 60-9707.

I can't see Cooper jumping with the front dummy chute, if he used it to carry anything he would have left the contents on the plane,, IMO, he tossed it because it had no card or seal which indicated tampering.

Either somebody in Reno put the SN 60-9707 packing card in the remaining back chute as there as they were loose on the plane,, or Cooper did..

Tosaw claimed Cooper removed the packing cards and inspected the chutes. Tina also said Cooper inspected the chutes.. that would include checking the cards and seals to ensure the chutes weren't tampered with.

Perhaps Cooper pulled the card from SN 60-9707, checked it and checked the chute and the seal. With that card still in his hand he pulled the card from SN 226 and stuck the SN 60-9707 card in that pocket for convenience. He chose the SN 60-9707 chute and left the SN 226 card on the plane. The FBI files show that card SN 60-9707 was found in the pocket of the chute left on the plane but the chute returned to Hayden had the card for SN 226 in it.

There were many chutes rejected by Cossey or because they didn't match his description.

Two of interest are the chute found near Heisson in the South Fork Lewis River and another with no location. There may be others.

In 1975, SN 226 Manufactured date Sept 1957 returned to Hayden..  SN 60-9707 was July 1960..

parachutereturnedhayden.jpeg.5cd6b0df4ce12cbbd833fdb25b98a7c4.jpeg

haydenchutesent.jpeg.5b9b3008692b731a927b67c659775bb3.jpeg

 

Chute found and rejected because it was a 24 fT chute. SN 60-9707 was noted as a 24 FT. 

24ftchutefound.jpeg.4ec708084c99094afb8a82758d0bf19d.jpeg.ab77746d0b5fb070a914aca5c4a8960c.jpeg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A chute was found near Heisson in the South Fork Lewis River less than a mile form the Heisson store. The Rail tracks run right along the River and past the store all the way to Vancouver.

The chute was several miles E of the flight path right about the 8:12 time along the flightpath.. right in the zone.

The chute was rejected because it was orange and white.

chuteheissonbr1.jpeg.cfbe14f13562b2546a8ce7f9c71eef1a.jpeg

 

The chute was found in the River (blue line) and the rail tracks are the red line.

That area would be a good target to search..

There was an historic flood in Heisson in Spring 1972.

chutefound.jpeg.8a6835eecd61a0204c85dccae88eab62.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hicks placard did not come from inside the NORJAK plane..

The placard did come from 727's but not all.

The FBI stated after obtaining the blueprints for the placard that it was on the outside and could have fallen from any passing 727.

The placard is an for an.. emergency exit pull red handle..

The only interior pull red handle for the 727 is the optional emergency exit release. Not all 727's had that option.

The Cooper plane did not even have that option.

The normal emergency release is to push main lever.

The Hick's placard did not come from inside that plane.

norjakairstairintadj.jpg.94314e9590b5dc4246295703c3a08209.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 2008 Cossey claimed he still has the chute serial number in old log books..

https://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Unlikely-FBI-has-found-Cooper-s-chute-says-man-1268323.php

"I would recognize the stitching on the parachute," said Cossey, who believes he got the parachute in the 1960s and still has the serial number in old log books.

 

However,

The FBI never got the serial number for the chute Cooper used, Cossey was contacted several times and never provided his records claiming he gave the FBI all he had.

Cosseyrecords1.jpeg.4a679abde408b219aca9b285d667cde5.jpeg

Cosseychuterecords.jpeg.fc53b6539204b42a5fcd6d8289de247e.jpeg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2021 at 8:54 AM, FLYJACK said:

Thanks to people like Georger and Ulis I have publicly posted only about 20% of my research...

and I have so much stuff I forget what I have already done..

I went back in my files..

 

Palmer believed the fragments found at depth were deposited by digging actions..

I agree, that is most likely, the digging was sloppy and few frags were found.

 

I found a high resolution image of the fragment found by the FBI and with 5 digits from the serial number plus the letter G matched a Cooper bill.

G21056376B was the serial number for the larger bill fragment found by the FBI.

It is not in my TBAR bill number list but I have accumulated only 85 out of the roughly 285-300 bills in the three packets. If this bill number was not from the three packets the FBI would know as the FBI had the micro of bills in order.

This is not the hi res image.

tbarfragfound.jpeg.c5f8d4aaa06f85e52a719909c8623e39.jpeg

Snowmman,

I already found that bill and if you look one page back I have a list of about 80 TBAR bills already found..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

Snowmman,

I already found that bill and if you look one page back I have a list of about 80 TBAR bills already found..

Yes I just noticed that. For some reason Google doesn't hit the dropzone.com pages on a search as well as it hits the dbcooperforum.com pages (it does hit some dropzone.com pages)

I'll have to look at why G21056376B didn't hit on this forum with google.
I had only seen a fuzzy image of the fragment the FBI found before...so I was surprised that video had a serial that was in-focus enough to deduce.

If you have a list of 80 serials, where did they all come from? Have you been able to get PCGS to release a list of all serials they certified? I read a release which made it sound like they had access to a list the FBI maintained (of found serials).

Both of those lists would be interesting to have.
If I count the ha.com auction images, and the FBI file serials from Crystal Ingram, and the small number of serials visible in images I know of, I'm surprised you got up to 80 serial numbers? Did you maintain links to sources for each serial?

I guess this has been discussed before. But all the FBI statements about the "bundles" when they were found seem false/made up (bills in same sequence, 3 bundles, amount of money found)

I'm still not sure the physical sequence of bills given to Cooper, matches the recordak scan..there's no reason that's guaranteed. It might be true, but it might not.
But FBI said the order matched (the found order matched the delivery order)..in the info they were feeding the press.

 

I guess I'm wondering how the count of bills adds up to 3x100. Maybe there was just 2 bundles, with one split in half or so.


EDIT: I'm thinking the FBI had no paper printout of the recordak serial number order. If they wanted to verify the order delivered to Cooper, they would have had to get the recordak out and look (if the recordak had that order matching delivery to cooper). I suppose it makes sense that the top and bottom of the packets had serials in the recordak ordered correctly. But unclear if the 98 bills between, were strapped in the same order as the recordak scan. Maybe.

But note: when they used the 15 start/end pairs for deciding what bills weren't sent to cooper, they had difficulty, and (fbi lab) asked for the entire recordak of the 15 bundles for subtracting from the cooper $230k list. So something wasn't right in how they tracked bundles with start/end pairs. Cause they had "difficulty" and needed the full recordak of the $30k. Isn't that what the fbi files said?

EDIT: now when the FBI lab created the sorted list. I'm guessing they transcribed the recordak, into a computer and used a computer to sort and print it out in the tabulated list we have. So at some time, the recordak list was available to be printed. I just wonder if they ever printed it. If so, why not in the fbi files we have so far?

Edited by snowmman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, snowmman said:

If I count the ha.com auction images, and the FBI file serials from Crystal Ingram, and the small number of serials visible in images I know of, I'm surprised you got up to 80 serial numbers? Did you maintain links to sources for each serial?

I guess this has been discussed before. But all the FBI statements about the "bundles" when they were found seem false/made up (bills in same sequence, 3 bundles, amount of money found)

I'm still not sure the physical sequence of bills given to Cooper, matches the recordak scan..there's no reason that's guaranteed. It might be true, but it might not.
But FBI said the order matched (the found order matched the delivery order)..in the info they were feeding the press.

 

I guess I'm wondering how the count of bills adds up to 3x100. Maybe there was just 2 bundles, with one split in half or so.


EDIT: I'm thinking the FBI had no paper printout of the recordak serial number order. If they wanted to verify the order delivered to Cooper, they would have had to get the recordak out and look (if the recordak had that order matching delivery to cooper). I suppose it makes sense that the top and bottom of the packets had serials in the recordak ordered correctly. But unclear if the 98 bills between, were strapped in the same order as the recordak scan. Maybe.

But note: when they used the 15 start/end pairs for deciding what bills weren't sent to cooper, they had difficulty, and (fbi lab) asked for the entire recordak of the 15 bundles for subtracting from the cooper $230k list. So something wasn't right in how they tracked bundles with start/end pairs. Cause they had "difficulty" and needed the full recordak of the $30k. Isn't that what the fbi files said?

EDIT: now when the FBI lab created the sorted list. I'm guessing they transcribed the recordak, into a computer and used a computer to sort and print it out in the tabulated list we have. So at some time, the recordak list was available to be printed. I just wonder if they ever printed it. If so, why not in the fbi files we have so far?

Lots to unpack there...

The 80 or so came from HA auction images and brochure documentation as well as from images and video.. I did not document every source formally but do have the source images on my computer somewhere. I just added a note to the full bill list I created.

The money was in "packets" of 100 rubber banded into "bundles" when given to Cooper. So, I prefer to refer the the TBAR money as 3 packets to avoid the confusion Larry Carr created. The Recordak was claimed to be in order so the 15 start/stops for the remaining bundles could be deducted.

Since the money went to Cooper in packets of 100 then was rubber banded into bundles then it is more likely the money landed on TBAR in a single rubber banded bundle.. otherwise the packets had to be removed from the bundle by somebody.

My understanding is that the Recordak film needed to be processed into images. They would have  manually entered the SN and dates then sorted them alphanumerically. Since they had the original order it would have been easy to determine all 300 bill SN's of the 3 packets and they would have been able to claim the money was in the original order. So, I don't dispute the FBI claim that it was in the order as given to Cooper.

Without the original order, the TBAR bills and Cooper list is only good for searching for bills. I picked out unique numbers and star bills that a collector might keep and googled them, also check EBAY once in a while.

Yes, they claimed they were having trouble deducting the 15 packets x 100 from the original micro using the start/stop bills. The 15 packets were quickly incorporated into a second bank stash and that entire micro was given to the FBI. 

So, there are is lots of room for error in this process. It was not proactive but a deductive process. The final FBI bill list is not as certain as people think but we can't check it without the original order and documented chain of custody for the money vs micro before Norjak. It is one of the typical Cooper dead ends.

 

Also, the bills were circulated and "random",, but they wouldn't be completely random as packets start out new in order and get distributed. Collecting circulated currency would not be entirely random, new bills would not get completely randomized when circulated. Note, there are no 1969A bills, that can roughly date the assembly of the bank stash. 1969A bills came out new June 1971. No circulated 1969A bills given to Cooper.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

The card found in the pocket of the chute left in the plane is a Steithal SN 60-9707 July 1960..

The "60" in the SN is consistent with the year 1960 on a Steinthal..

Here a Steinthal SN 44-98914 is June 1944...  the "44" = 1944

That indicates the data on that card is legit and not some error.

ww2-navy-air-force-army-parachute_1_e3185022d62c391998a28db4c4a2140f.jpg.0463ca018b839a87cfd51ecf9fe442f3.jpg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

thanks for the response flyjack

I'm not questioning that 100 note packets were delivered to Cooper. I agree they were likely strapped (and maybe rubber banded also. I'll accept that based on the Ingram testimony)

I'm just wondering why we're confident the three stuck-together bundles on Tena Bar were remnants of three cooper 100-note packets.

It's not clear to me at all, how the total number of found notes was determined. It would have been nice if the bundles were weighed, for instance.

The bills were not separated into more than 12 bundles at the time of the press party...where they were already quoting number of bills, and "in same order as delivered to cooper"

It just seems to me, that in 1980, the number of bills found, was a made-up number.
If that's true, then I don't know for sure why anyone thinks the 3 bundles found represent three independent packets delivered to cooper.

I guess I need more info that says there were >200 bills probably found at Tena Bar.

For instance: why shouldn't I believe that <200 bills were found? Maybe there's info I'm not aware of. The three bundles found, could be two split-up bundles.

I don't believe what the FBI said the day of the Ingram turn-in. I can't believe they could have determined either # of bills, or the order of bills (found vs delivered to cooper) on that day, in such a short amount of time.

If they did, how did they do it?

Edited by snowmman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
14 minutes ago, snowmman said:

thanks for the response flyjack

I'm not questioning that 100 note packets were delivered to Cooper. I agree they were likely strapped (and maybe rubber banded also. I'll accept that based on the Ingram testimony)

I'm just wondering why we're confident the 3 stuck-together bundles on Tena Bar were remnants of three cooper 100-note packets.

It's not clear to me at all, how the total number of found notes was determined. It would have been nice if the bundles were weighed, for instance.

The bills were not separated into more than 12 bundles at the time of the press party...where they were already quoting number of bills, and "in same order as delivered to cooper"

It just seems to me, that in 1980, the number of bills found, was a made-up number.
If that's true, then I don't know for sure why anyone thinks the 3 bundles found represent three independent packets delivered to cooper.

I guess I need more info that says there were >200 bills probably found at Tena Bar.

For instance: why shouldn't I believe that <200 bills were found? Maybe there's info I'm not aware of. The three bundles found, could be two split-up bundles.

I don't believe what the FBI said the day of the Ingram turn-in. I can't believe they could have determined either # of bills, or the order of bills (found vs delivered to cooper) on that day, in such a short amount of time.

If they did, how did they do it?

They don't say how they did it but it was an estimate of 280, not a hard number.

I don't think it would be very hard at all. You can use bill SN's in the 12 piles to match the original micro sequence. With that original list if the bill SN's fall within a range of 100 (x3) that means three packets in the original order. Not hard to do but they never disclosed how they did it..

Also, look at the piles of 12.. if 300 bills that is 25 per pile average but some piles are larger than others,, it looks like about 300 bills.

 

I think you are right bill..

L58739558B 1963A is the correct SN.. it is a 7 not a 1.

https://www.apmex.com/product/235119/unknown-series-20-frn-pcgs-d-b-cooper-71-ransom-money

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

In terms of errors/typos in the FBI ransom list. Some are obvious, some are subtle.

L34 390 386A 63

seems innocuous.

But there are only a relatively small number of 1963 bills in the list.

All the others in the FBI list from 1963 L district have low serial numbers, with a leading 0.
examples:
L05662422A 1963 
L05794760A 1963 
L05805357A 1963 
L05883937A 1963 

According to a collector book, using BEP data (which is sometimes incorrect), the L district run for 1963 serials only had a A run, and the serials printed (non-star) were 00000001 thru 07040000

that would make L34 390 386A 63 incorrect (L3490386A 1963) because the number is too big.

It is more likely that the series year is 1963A for that number. Assuming series year errors were likely to be more common than errors in the serial.

That said: I think the FBI list has a very low error rate. The error rate in the list that the check six uses is higher.
However, it's possible there are  errors in the FBI list that are undetectable...i.e. they seem legal according to all known BEP data.

So far, there is no bill found on Tena Bar with a serial not on the FBI list. I sent a note to an ebay seller of a PCGS certified fragment, with a partial serial, but no full certified serial. From what I can tell, the partial that PCGS identified is incorrect. It's the first time I've seen incorrect identification from PCGS. (If PCGS was confident of the partial they provided, they would have been able to provide a full serial. If they are confident about that partial, it would have to mean that a bill was found that's not on the FBI list..My look at the bill says PCGS misidentified a 1 vs a 7.
 

should_be_63A.png

Edited by snowmman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
4 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

They don't say how they did it but it was an estimate of 280.

I don't think it would be very hard at all. You can use bill SN's in the 12 piles to match the original micro sequence. With that original list if the bill SN's fall within a range of 100 (x3) that means three packets in the original order. Not hard to do but they never disclosed how they did it..

Okay. So you think the process on the recordak was:

1) Unstrap the bills (assuming they were strapped before recording)

2) run each bill thru the recordak

3) stack the bills in the same order they went thru the recordak

4) re-strap the bills without shifting any

 

That makes sense. If so, then yes, the FBI should have the original ordered list on the recordak. 

But if they were able to determine "found in same order" on the day the Ingram reported (or within 48 hours or so)...how come a printed list isn't available of that order? Did they look at the recordak to verify? Unlikely?

Edited by snowmman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
14 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

They don't say how they did it but it was an estimate of 280.

I don't think it would be very hard at all. You can use bill SN's in the 12 piles to match the original micro sequence. With that original list if the bill SN's fall within a range of 100 (x3) that means three packets in the original order. Not hard to do but they never disclosed how they did it..

yes if they had the list of the original order, and they compared just the top and bottom serials that they had (they might have to look down or up in their individual packet list, if some "top"  or "bottom" bills had disappeared...

then they could be certain of the number of bills probably found.

But if they only had top bill serial numbers (visible from tena bar bundles) then they would only be able to determine number of unique packets. Not total number of bills found (since some bottom bills could have disappeared)

They would have to pry a bottom bill off each packet, to get the bottom bill serial, to make a determination as to # of bills in that clump (comparing to recordak)

Edited by snowmman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, snowmman said:

Okay. So you think the process on the recordak was:

1) Unstrap the bills (assuming they were strapped before recording)

2) run each bill thru the recordak

3) stack the bills in the same order they went thru the recordak

4) re-strap the bills without shifting any

 

That makes sense. If so, then yes, the FBI should have the original ordered list on the recordak. 

But if they were able to determine "found in same order" on the day the Ingram reported (or within 48 hours or so)...how come a printed list isn't available of that order? Did they look at the recordak to verify? Unlikely?

The Recordak has to be in the correct the order based on the bank instructions to deduct between the start/stop.. if it wasn't there would be no way to use the start/stop numbers.

The FBI must have the original bill order prior to sorting and to claim the bills were in the same order as given to Cooper.

We don't have direct evidence but it is implied.

 

In this case they only filmed the front half of bill.

recordakprocess.jpeg.2abe8c66d9be1b8cc8d680a283f46efa.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
57 minutes ago, snowmman said:

yes if they had the list of the original order, and they compared just the top and bottom serials that they had (they might have to look down or up in their individual packet list, if some "top"  or "bottom" bills had disappeared...

then they could be certain of the number of bills probably found.

But if they only had top bill serial numbers (visible from tena bar bundles) then they would only be able to determine number of unique packets. Not total number of bills found (since some bottom bills could have disappeared)

They would have to pry a bottom bill off each packet, to get the bottom bill serial, to make a determination as to # of bills in that clump (comparing to recordak)

They couldn't get the number exact,, the 280 bill count was an estimate.

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

They couldn't get the number exact,, the 280 bill count was an estimate.

Sure

But why say 280? Why not 210?

280 seems like a poor estimate (20 less than 300)

We both agree there's no record of why they said 280. I'm just saying the 280 could be way off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
3 minutes ago, snowmman said:

Sure

But why say 280? Why not 210?

280 seems like a poor estimate (20 less than 300)

We both agree there's no record of why they said 280. I'm just saying the 280 could be way off.

In fact if it was really 280, that's amazing.

only 20 bills lost from top and bottom of packets? were the lost 20 equally distributed among 3 packets..?

like was 7-10 bills lost per packet or ??

that is interesting if true. Why wouldn't more be lost? And depending on whether they were lost from top or bottom, might be interesting. I would think random processes might cause top and bottom to lose bills equally. But maybe not, if say just one side was more exposed to weathering.

Edited by snowmman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, snowmman said:

In fact if it was really 280, that's amazing.

only 20 bills lost from top and bottom of packets? were the lost 20 equally distributed among 3 packets..?

like was 7-10 bills lost per packet or ??

that is interesting if true. Why wouldn't more be lost? And depending on whether they were lost from top or bottom, might be interesting. I would think random processes might cause top and bottom to lose bills equally. But maybe not, if say just one side was more exposed to weathering.

Well, it was just an estimate, too many pieces and frags, look at the images of the 12 piles and make a guess, they aren't all the same size.

100 bills is just less than 0.5 inches thick..

They probably tried to separate them first and like many things in this case we are left with more questions..

But, if there were missing bills then there weren't rubber bands around all the packets..

I recall reading somewhere, Tosaw maybe? that 2 packets were complete and one was short.  Nothing official though..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snow,,

You are all over the place, I went over much of this stuff before..

I already passed on the potential for print and fluorescent powders on the tie to Tom Kaye..

Lycopodium Clavatum was used to lubricate latex gloves..

latextie.jpg.1498fa83e2d4fcd4f0140a558798bade.jpg

First, the Heisson store break in was never confirmed to be the Heisson store, it is about the right location and was the area store at the time.. so likely but not 100%.

Tina said Cooper's shoes were ankle high and laceless, not loafers, those french jump boots have laces..

There was a "commando sole" available on many boots at the time including laceless ones.

 

The store break in fits Cooper well, right area, right time, right stuff stolen... right along the rail tracks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

But, if there were missing bills then there weren't rubber bands around all the packets..

That's a good point.

How do the rubber band people resolve "rubber bands stuck to center of 2 packets" and 280 bills

Did 2 packets have 100 bills, and one had 80?

Edited by snowmman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

22 22