LeeW274

While I haven't gone back and checked every one of the over 20,000 posts (and I'll leave whether this is correct to ClassClown), but I believe I may have been the first to use "snarky" in this forum. Snarky isn't some new-fangled hip term. it's been part of the language for some time: snarky "irritable, short-tempered," 1906, from snark (v.) "to snort" (1866), from an imitative source akin to Low Ger. snarken, N.Fris. snarke, Swed. snarka. I'm 61 years old, by the way.

Robert, your use of the word "alias" implies dishonesty: a·li·as/ˈālēəs/ Adverb: Used to indicate that a named person is also known or more familiar under another specified name. Noun: A false or assumed identity. I have a friend whom I've known for a little over 2 years. She's been married 3 times. In the past 2 years I've known her by 3 different last names. None of those names was a "false or assumed identity". I don't really see anything false about Marla starting to use her maiden name - especially since she is planning on writing a book. It's not even a nom de plume since it's apparently the name she was born with. Personally, I'd call her use of "Cooper" to be good marketing.

Marla forwarded the following email communication to me and requested that I post it on Dropzone. The only changes I've made were to edit out the email addresses and to format Marla's answers in red as they were in the original email. Some other formatting was not possible, i.e.: Side-by-side comparison pictures of the composite sketch and Kenny Christiansen that were in the email could not be embedded. However, I've made every effort to duplicate the email forwarded to me as much as possible. One other note: Marla's answer to question #2 was not highlighted in red in the forwarded email I received. I have retained her error in this post and left the text its original color. Marla is planning on joining this convivial group in a couple of days. I think she's shopping for a stylish Kevlar vest first before subjecting herself to the direct potshots she's sure to get once she's in here.

Marla will be here soon. She should be showing up in a few days.

She did have some nice things to say about the cartoons. I think her exact words were "he gave me boobs!".

At the symposium, Marla mentioned that D.L. was a real Francophile - I believe she also said he spoke French.

I stand corrected. Never having had the opportunity, nor the desire to try to walk to the 'couve I've always taken a car. I live in Portland, born in Oregon City, and never noticed the pedestrian walk nor can I recall ever seeing anyone using it. I've been going over that bridge before it was two spans. About the "12 mile walk" though. Where did that figure come from?

He could have gotten to PDX the very same way I used to get to PDX back in the 1970's. In 1973 I was living in downtown Portland on the Park Blocks. My folks had moved to Alaska. Whenever I'd fly up to see them I'd walk over to the Hilton Hotel and wait in the lobby until the airport shuttle arrived. It was free and they didn't bother to check if you were a guest at the hotel. You just hopped on and got a free ride to the airport. How could he have gotten to the Hilton Hotel? The Greyhound bus station was close by.

There's one hell of a big, wide river between the suspected drop zone and PDX. Additionally, the Interstate bridge has no provision for pedestrian traffic. Anybody trying to walk over it would have stood out like a sore thumb and possibly gotten picked up by the cops for walking on an interstate highway. So if you're implying that he parked a car near the Portland Airport he wouldn't have had a way to walk back to it if he'd landed on the north side of the Columbia River. You make a couple of assertions: "DB was a loner" I'm not certain how that information has come to light. Sure, he jumped out of that plane by himself, but that doesn't give us any insight into his personality. For all we know he was a real cut-up at parties who continually fooled people with his "pull my finger" gag. "jumped within 12 miles of his car" - That's a pretty specific statement. While I'm pretty convinced an automobile probably did play some part in the getaway I think it's more probable that the car came to him rather than the other way around via an accomplice waiting by a phone. It's possible he didn't even use a car. He wouldn't have needed to use one to get to PDX. He could have just hopped on the Hilton airport shuttle no questions asked and gotten there for free. Although getting home after the jump would have been a lot more difficult if he had no transportation.

Classclown, Please forgive me for not going back through and reading every one of the over 29000 comments in this particular forum and making the mistake of asking perfectly valid question. There was a specific reason WHY I asked that question because I wanted to see if it agreed with some private communication I had received recently from a source that is independent of this forum.

I'll apply basic human nature and Occam. Keep in mind that Occam doesn't rule out complexity - just that in general the least complex of two competing theories generally tends to be the correct one. With respect to somebody committing a crime I'll go with the least complex explanation. Why? Because in crimes of theft the perpetrator has selected an easier path to getting what they want rather than working for it and getting it through legal means. Usually they'll choose the shortest path to the goal and not something convoluted and complex. So I'll ask the question, "What actions taking the least amount of effort will accomplish the goal?" Of course, it could also be argued that Cooper was a space alien who used the chutes as a ruse. He merely stepped off those back stairs into the waiting get away saucer, made the calculations for light speed, went back in time, and spent all that money sometime prior to November 24, 1971. If you like that one, I've also got a Kennedy suicide theory I'll sell ya.

There are definitely different kinds of dynamite. Most of the stuff I saw firsthand was stump powder. It wouldn't surprise me if it comes in different colors depending upon the type. If you use the wrong stuff you can have disastrous results.

Yep, you're right about the stairs being removed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrqdmXxBZjI

That's why I'm going with the hijacker getting to a pay phone. A not too far-fetched scenario: "Hi, I made it. The sign on the tavern says I'm in Ariel, WA. I gotta go, Get here as fast as you can, I'm &*%$# FREEZING! I'm pretty banged up. Will tell you all about it when you get here. Just pull up to the front of the tavern. I'll be hiding, but I'll see you." If he'd only had a cell phone with GPS

I'm reading a number of snarky comments about Marla. I'm inclined to go the Ronald Reagan "trust, but verify" route with her story. If there are gross inconsistencies or she changes her story over time then her claims would be suspect. As it stands right now, the only person who knows or knew the complete truth about what happened that night was the guy who jumped out of the plane. Everything else is theory or speculation apart from the concrete evidence left behind. I tend to go with what is plausible and also apply "Occam's Razor" to what people say. Maybe Marla's claims will get blown out of the water. When the prints from the guitar strap are compared with what the FBI has on file we'll know for certain it was D.L. Cooper if the prints match. However, if they don't match and it can't be conclusively proven that the prints the FBI has came from the hijacker then it only proves that the prints don't match and nothing more. It would make Marla's case weaker, but not rule D.L. out completely. That said, I'd like to know what Marla has said in the past regarding what happened to the $200k Has that story changed over time?