FLYJACK

The best I could find was a reference for the Paradise Point area, the Hatfield family home, I couldn't find an exact address.. it matched the 5 miles South of Woodland. Maybe, look up "Jess Hatfield" .. "Cooper" could have gone via Woodland. If he did catch a ride it would most likely be to the next town, Woodland. There are several smaller roads South and the I5 bridge crosses the River to Paradise Point. There is also a rail track that goes from Woodland South with a bridge, it is about 1.5 miles West. That rail track goes down past Vancouver Lake to Vancouver. The only issue I see is the man walking was spotted about 11:30 PM... Though time estimates can be imprecise.

Let's put the pieces together... into a timeline.. At 8:09 - 8:10,, little bob noted on 305's FDR (Cooper at bottom of stairs, possibly jumping) A man in a white shirt and dark suit is seen walking West on Lewis River Rd at Fredrickson Rd... virtually under the flightpath at about 8:10 mark on map. About 11:00 PM.. About 4 miles West.. Store robbery at 3100 Lewis River Rd.. About midnight, an attempted break in at a rural home several miles south of Woodland. The break in would be about 9 miles from the store robbery. It would take about 2 h 15 m to walk 9 milles,, though he may have got a ride to Woodland. It all fits. This is a very good scenario.. Did he have a Polaroid camera, at home??

This is the referenced man walking.. Might be the same incident,, if not it is interesting on its own,, Why take Polaroid film? Is there some alternate uses for Polaroid film,,,, it has silver???

There are infinite theories... and TBAR will never be solved. My top 3 theories all have the a single bundle of packets going into the River in Spring between 72-79, the money tumbles/rolls along the sandy bottom to its find spot which is underwater effectively being the bottom of the River at that time. The River recedes and money is buried in a debris layer...

The quotes for the rubber bands was that they were "intact"... that was an exaggeration and misleading. There were 3 separate packets of 100 bills each found close/touching (one packet a few short)... the dominant narrative in the Vortex was that the three packets arrived individually but were found together. That would mean they were placed there or arrived in a container. How could three separate packets arrive and be together? However, the evidence indicates the packets were rubber banded into a single bundle. As the rubber bands deteriorated the packets would fall slightly apart but still together and touching.. The FBI knows how the money was packaged,, they even stated in a news report that only them and the hijacker knows indicating it was info being held back.. there was no need to ask Tina. So, if the packets were given to Cooper in a single rubber banded bundle and they arrived as a single bundle then that changes the means by which they could have arrived. It could have been a single bundle that came from the river.. Like Chaucer said,, we just don't know how many packets were in the bundle... 3, 4 or 5? I lean toward 3 because only 3 were found, less than $6000 and two packets had rubber band frags.

Made random and to look hastily prepared came from agent Baker and later from Carr..

The term bundle is informal, packet, pack, flat or strap are banking terms for a grouping of 100 bills.. Bundle is a general term for a group,, packet means 100 bills. Brian has used the term packet before.. bundle isn't necessarily wrong, it is just less accurate and informal. It doesn't really matter if the packets were bound paper or rubber or both. I have told you this before. The point is the packets were rubber banded in bundles when given to Cooper.. Brian has never before specifically said all three individual packets had rubber bands each.. His statements were always vague... Brian's recall about the rubber bands is likely incorrect. Tosaw said one packet had no rubber bands. He was heavily involved with Brian and the money at the time. The evidence indicates paper straps. Himmelsbach said straps. The bank guy said straps.. Tina,, etc.. Could some packets have paper and rubber bands, maybe, but irrelevant. The rubber bands were not "intact" as described, that sounds like an exaggeration. The size of the bills was less than 50%, the rubber bands could not be attached to over 50% of the missing bill area.. Brian also said many times the rubber bands crumbled or turned to dust when touched/picked up. There is no way the rubber bands were fully intact around all three packets. The short bundle could not have had rubber bands on the top. Think this through... forget about paper vs rubber bands for now.. Money was given to Cooper in packets of 100 bills.. =$2000 per packet. "Bundles" were randomized in count and rubber banded. To look hastily prepared. 3 packets of $2000 were found on TBAR (one was a little short). The FBI stated the money was in the same order and packaging as given to Cooper. The FBI had the order of the bills from the micro. The FBI said the TBAR money was from one bundle. So, if the "bundles" were randomized in count, it wasn't the packets of 100 that were randomized and rubber banded, it had to be the bundles of packets that was randomized in count. Normally they are in 5 packets per bundle. This is what Carr got wrong before, he stated that each of the 3 "bundles" found on TBAR were randomized in count and therefor rubber banded. He conflated the terms bundles with packets. It could not have been the packets, it had to be the bundles of packets. The packets were 100 bills each in $2000, not randomized in count, and the bundles of packets were randomized and rubber banded, 3, 4 or 5 packets per bundle. That is the take away, paper vs rubber banded packets is largely irrelevant. The money arrived on TBAR as one rubber banded bundle of several packets.. likely 3 packets, but maybe more. How do you get "intact" rubber bands that turned to dust around all 3 heavily eroded packets including a short one. There is less than 50% of the surface area left, top and bottom. The conventional thinking was that the money arrived on TBAR as 3 separate packets... and the means by which it could arrive like that is very limited. This is very unlikely based on the evidence. It most likely arrived as one rubber banded bundle... that is what the evidence indicates regardless of Brian's memory.

That was my initial thought,,, was the SN sprayed on the bills before Cooper got them.. I looked into it. I found that bleach will remove a SN stain.. and SN has been sprayed on ransom money to mark it,,, it turns black due to light exposure.. and becomes useless. but I think that the SN was most likely from a fingerprint process.. Buried bills do turn black in damp conditions.. I do recall Brian previously mentioned that there were blackened bills.. if you look at images of the money it is clear the bills are blackened from silver nitrate. It has a bluish tint.. It was definitely sprayed with SN.. Tom proved that. “Ingram recalls how the bills were stuck together. Some pieces were larger than others. Others had darkened in color. “They still had rubber bands on them,” Ingram says. “I remember picking them up and the rubber band didn’t really break, but it kind of turned to powder. You could tell they hadn’t been touched.” Fazio.. “Prior, though, in his air-conditioned office Al told me he saw a lot of shards of Cooper twenties in all kinds of shapes and sizes, discolored and black, and in various states of decomposition.” https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/1986/06/20/fairy-tale-ends-semisweetly-for-finder-of-jet-hijackers-loot/62722983007/ "While smoothing the sand, Brian, then 8, found $6,000 in three crumbling, blackened packets."

Both,, two sources for the black bills. Buried bills can turn black in the right conditions due to damp and mold and Tom found silver nitrate which was used to test for prints.. Silver Nitrate was never mentioned in the files but was a common test method for prints.. So, SN got on the bills at some point... unless they sprayed the ransom with SN before they gave it to Cooper then it would be from the fingerprint testing. Four systems used to test the Cooper money for prints.. no prints found. Buried money. BEP.

Wrongo... This is same problem with Georger,, false claims that I have to waste my time correcting... Why do you people just make up stuff.. I was not banned from Shutter's site... he hit me with a temp ban over a very minor thing, he did that on the fly often back then.. I thought it was completely unwarranted and his misunderstanding,,, So, that was the last straw and I decided to leave permanently and asked for my account to be deleted. I left. Later, Shutter even asked me to return... I am not interested in anything Facebook. It has its place but not for me. There is very little new here... most of the stuff you guys are hitting I had already figured out and I won't be publicly sharing the new stuff I have... And Chaucer, I kept this place alive while you were trashing it.. This is like groundhog day,, I spent years arguing these things alone, even told to shut up about it,, now you guys figure it out like it is new. This was all covered 7 years ago... but the #1 VORTEX researcher still doesn't get it. I always thought there should be a private space for the higher level researchers to discuss things... not to be.. most meaningful contact is done privately. You'd be better off with the #1 VORTEX researcher anyways... just don't ask him about bank bands or packets of 100 bills. It's a trigger.

Only the #1 researcher in the VORTEX... Georger..

This is the real Georger, the one I have had to deal with for years... and I have considered leaving,, I get very little out of participating here.. Georger the #1 VORTEX researcher can advance the case.

Your histrionics are nonsense.. you make claims that aren't true. I never denied the money was hastily assembled and randomized.. Why do you always need to make up falsehoods. Amazing, you still don't understand the error Carr made.... I have explained this to you many times over the years.. it is astounding that you still don't get it. and you still think Tina meant rubber bands... good grief.. This is the the genesis of your problem, you have constructed a false reality based on your own misunderstanding,, and you blame me or others for it. I gave you all the facts, you can even find them on your own,, you ridiculed and rejected them to maintain your own narrative based on a misunderstanding... for YEARS.. You rejected everything.... except the error by Carr. Now, the rest of the VORTEX has caught up and the top researcher in the VORTEX has been left behind in 2011. That is fine, do what you want... I just caught you doing the same thing with an unfounded dismissal of Palmer's quote and wanted it made clear that you are unreliable based on your own history.. I am no longer interested in discussing anything with you,,, unlike most in the VORTEX you aren't actually interested in finding the truth.... There is nothing to be gained by explaining these things to you AGAIN.. I have already wasted too much time on it.

Now, Georger wants Tom or Larry to clarify... it is their responsibility to process the information.. not Georger's. It is somebody else's fault.. Georger is being dishonest.. They didn't have to ask Tina to describe the money because they already knew the packaging. There was more evidence than Tina's 302, For Tina's "bank-type bands" Georger claimed she really meant rubber bands not paper and that she was asked and confirmed rubber bands,, clearly a lie. Georger denied and ridiculed the existence of paper bands FOR YEARS. Same with the term packet. But I pointed out other evidence... Carr's false statement that the 3 TBAR "bundles" were each of a random count.. he conflated the term bundle and packet. The bundles of packets were randomized not the packets of 100 bills.. Georger could not grasp this error. Carr misunderstood. Then there was Himmelsbach, "There were ten thousand twenty dollar bills assembled in straps of a hundred bills to a strap and individual straps held together with rubber bands." There was also the 302 from the bank manager, paper bands and in $2000's... Jack Almstead also said the money in the bag looked like "Bricks" Tosaw…. Cooper money was in $2,000 packets of 100 bill each. individual packets were wrapped in paper bank bands, they also had a rubber band. Top Vortex researcher Georger still denied it... Why was this important.. The dominant narrative in the VORTEX was that each bundle was only rubber banded... there were rubber band frags but no clear indication where they were,, and for three packets to arrive on TBAR and stay together they must have been planted or arrived in a container. This heavily restricted the means by which the money could have arrived. But, if there were paper bands on the packets and rubber banded into a single bundle then the means by which the money could arrive is expanded. Claiming Georger is the most credible researcher for the TBAR money has to be a joke. Nobody has been so wrong for so long.. So, when Georger calls Palmer's statement BS with no evidence just to fit his narrative,, he is expressing his lack of credibility just as he did for years with the money... Now that the money packaging has reached critical mass amongst the Vortex members rather than just me,, Georger cracks... the evidence hasn't changed only peer pressure.

Palmer report Fragments and money in top six - eight inch layer... If Palmer believed fragments were legitimately found over 3 feet deep, he would have said so. Palmer believed the fragments found at 3 ft depth was caused by digging operations.

I'd suggest you haven't been paying attention. How can anyone have credibility when they get everything wrong over the years. He spent years denying the paper bands, even made up evidence claiming Tina was asked and meant rubber bands and he has spent years denying there was a difference between bundles and packets... He could never understand the difference... and what it meant to TBAR.. Credibility,,,,, the guy was lost. He probably still denies paper bands or packets. Georger couldn't grasp the diatom evidence.. He attacked Tom Kaye, he attacked me for helping Tom. Georger got very little right... he grabbed a narrative early and just denied and riduculed all evidence that contradicted it. That isn't a researcher. He claims the quote from Palmer is BS, but Georger has no evidence or authority to make that claim. He just doesn't like that it doesn't fit his theory. Georger makes up stuff, he is not reliable.. I was the one who got the money find right over the years, Georger and most everyone else had it wrong.. Georger and R99 complained back then to Shutter, who told me to shut up about the TBAR money even though I was correct... they were wrong and tried to get me kicked off the forum. Sure, that sounds like a credible researcher. Georger has no credibility. I don't of anyone else in the Vortex who has just made up evidence and been so wrong.. it is though he is stuck in 2011.

Right,, ever wonder why you have little credibility in this case.. you have earned it.

We have gone over this many times...

This is false.. the FBI never identified all the serial numbers initially, they only estimated the bill total. The new numbers identified from fragments were not new bills.. but just existing bills that were unidentified from partials. The FBI had a list of the serial numbers in order as given to Cooper. So, 3 packets of 100 bills.. If a single identified serial number or partial fell outside those parameters they would know. One bundle was missing about 10 bills,,, plus the deterioration of the found packets made up the fragments found... I remember one frag found by the FBI had a serial number.. Palmer said the frags found 3 ft deep were likely moved from the digging process.. If the bundle was 5 packets, how do you get rubber band frags attached to two bundles,, the packets in the middle would have to have deteriorated or washed away.. It was most likely 3 packets in one rubber banded bundle. The question is.. were there more bundles?

I have been saying this for years... only now is it reaching critical mass. The money arrived as it was given to Cooper in the same order in one single rubber banded bundle of several packets.. as the rubber bands deteriorated the packets separated slightly. There were no sides to the money, only the top and bottom of the bill packets. One packet was missing some bills.. Rubber bands could never have been "intact"... there were fragments stuck to the top or bottom bill. The reports were that the bundles were randomized,,, not in the FBI docs but if so then it may have been only three packets.. this is most likely for rubber bands to be on two of the three packets. If it were five packets then two of the middle packets would have to disappear. Conclusion, a rubber banded bundle of packets (likely 3) landed on TBAR in the order and packaging as it was given to Cooper.... it might have been in a container, might might have been with other bundles but it did not have to be placed or buried to have all three packets together. A bundle of ransom money got separated from Cooper at some point..

Since ARINC was a just a data protocol.. frequencies were assigned to different entities and clearly in December 1970 frequency 131.9 and 131.8 were ARINC assigned to "Air Carrier"... I don't see why NWA frequency 131.9 can't also use the ARINC protocol.

ARINC has many different assignments.. Circa December 1970.. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19710016444/downloads/19710016444.pdf 131.9 is an Air Carrier assignment... that would be NWA. 131.8 is also Air Carrier..

That is what the FBI concluded,

Another variable is the money Cooper offered the stews.. that may have altered a bundle size.

Packets were $2000 each x 5 - $10,000 per bundle. Grinnel made some errors, there were reports of randomized bundles,, if so there could have been 3 packet bundles. Rubber band frags were on two of the three packets, that indicates a top and bottom packet and only 3 in the bundle. If it was a 5 packet bundle then two of the middle packets would have to have washed away,, unlikely. Given all the evidence, it was most likely a 3 packet bundle.