FLYJACK

7 minutes ago, Cola said:

 

This is worth getting right.....being exhaustive.

We don't even know the message of what is written on the magazine parts!! Was  this evidence destroyed for having no evidentiary value, was this magazine and parts retained in the evidence files for 50+ years? Looks like these prints were used to rule out Webber, possibly others.

I have to agree with the torn magazine angle. My thinking is that he tore this out, made notes stuffed the notes back in the magazine. When he was leaving for the jump he took the magazine because of prints with him, but  the notes fell out into the seat back. Somewhere there is a unicorn of an inflight magazine missing parts that match up with the evidence.

 We need to stay on this..

I believe it has nothing to do with with Cooper..  he didn't care about prints..

but if you can find something that links the magazine to Cooper go for it,, I tried years ago but couldn't...  I have a theory that includes a torn magazine..  but I rejected it.

23 minutes ago, Cola said:

 

Your potentially kicking out the most important evidence of the case... Coopers prints!!

You have to show me how they were eliminated.

 

I don't remember all the details but the magazine was not linked to Cooper..  An agent wrote NO in the margin on one file, Tina said in Tosaw's book he never had a magazine,, and in one file it says there was no connection to Cooper, it was from another seat area. There might be more in the files but I'd have to go looking but IMO it is a dead issue.. I looked at this a long time ago, I had a theory and was looking for a link to that torn magazine.. not there.

The palm print they used was from the seat arm..

There was never any magazine connection to Cooper established,, 

The prints are confusing. lots of conflicting numbers in the files.. having an FBI agent test the magazine prints to Duane in 1997 doesn't mean anything. Maybe he chose the wrong prints to compare..

4 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Could have just stopped there. 

I was referring to the quote posted... 

,,, you just can't stand being challenged.

Personal attack deleted

21 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

I don't need to take a breath. I'm calm as can be with you. 

How is Farrell's claim that Cooper was wearing his front chute any different than his claim that the matchbook was used to "convey notes."? Both are the ONLY times that such a claim is asserted in the entirety of the FBI Files. 

The difference is we have contradictory evidence..

Why is this so difficult for you.

I asked for contradictory evidence/argument for the matchbook and you failed several times..

Now, that doesn't mean it wasn't an error but you can't claim it was with no evidence or argument.

2 minutes ago, Cola said:

 

Show me it wasn't.. how, where, ref this Fly.

I have not sorted out the fingerprints, maybe this is the next project, maybe someone has worked these out and would be kind enough to share...

 

I think the writing and magazine parts were passed by witnesses and they affirmed it was likely Coopers.  I believe this because the prints and palm prints of the magazine parts were specifically used to eliminate Webber.

I need to sort this out, but the prints build,using loose numbers here. At one point the agency has 66 prints at another point a few years later they have like 77 prints. My guess is that the 24-5 prints from the magazine parts combined with the prints for the common areas settled at a final total of 77 prints.  Again, I need to sort this out.

Never the less, Cooper was seen writing by several witnesses and palm prints were from these magazine parts.

 

DB-32393

 

DB - 28129

 

DB-21286

 

 

Magazine not linked to Cooper, the palm print was from the seat arm..

Nobody claimed to see Cooper write with a felt pen, they saw the note that was already written with a felt pen.

15 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

That same report says Cooper was wearing the dummy chute. Fly, are you prepared to make this Cooper canon?

Olemiss, you fail to recognize the trap you have put yourself in.. now I can add another FAILed argument. You misrepresent my position and attack it.

You want to win an argument so badly that you have abandoned logic and reason.. take a deep breath.

I said it is possible it is an error but there is no evidence or argument to support that.

There are errors in the files and we know it because we have evidence and arguments to identify them..  that is not the case with the matchbook.

You want it accepted that it is an error with no evidence or argument... you tried many arguments and failed.

The pieces that need to be explained..

The FBI stated the matchbook had writing in it. 

Cooper took all evidence that had writing on it. His and dictated.

Cooper retrieved the empty matchbook,, why??

Cooper left many other things behind..

18 minutes ago, Cola said:

Agreed, Coops could written in the matchbook after retrieving, but it would be smarter at some point if Coops just wrote on an inflight magazine.

Please - Show me within the record how the parts of a magazine were a false lead...

As I  have an understanding of these prints here, it appears to me that the agency seemed to anchor on these palm prints over the next 40 years as a primary source of eliminating candidates. The prints from these materials were of value and may have been the primary elimination prints! Maybe someone has worked out the  full scope of print sources and is willing to share???   

Tina did relay  - but this does not mean he did not write instructions down or that she did not read off instructions form him to the the pilots.

 

The fact still remains that the agency is crediting in pg. DB-32393  that as many as 4+ witnesses saw him write.

 

Palm print was from the seating area.. they don't know if it was Cooper.

Cooper's note was written in felt pen they found a part of a magazine that had felt pen writing and wanted to ask witnesses about it. It wasn't.

Witnesses are not claiming to have seen him actively write, they are referring to the initial note.. pre-written by Cooper in felt pen.

Doesn't mean he didn't write.. that file just does not confirm it.

13 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

I didn't forget about the FBI document. I concluded that we had moved past discussing that because it insinuates that the matchbook was carried to the cockpit, unless you think "convey notes" is some cute way for saying that he wrote a note and handed it to Tina. So I'm not ignoring it, I just thought we had moved past it.

And my dude...this is silly. No evidence or reasonable argument to refute it? Aside from the fact that Tina herself never says ANYTHING at all about the matches being used to "convey notes". It's not mentioned in Tosaw either.

I don't think you can hang your hat on a single statement written years later in an FBI report, especially when it is contradicted by Tina's own statements from that very night. If he had pulled out a pen and wrote something down on a matchbook and passed it to Tina, don't you think she'd have mentioned that? Of course she would have. He had no need to write anything in a matchbook. He just whispered instructions to her. This is not even mentioning how awkward it is to write a note in a matchbook sitting in an airplane seat while you are maintaining a pretext that you're going to detonate a bomb at any moment. I can't see it. There was no reason for Cooper to have done such a thing nor is there any evidence that he did so. 

Cooper whipping out a pen and handwriting something on the matchbook would have come up at some point in the files apart from appearing one time in a review document written years later. 

And just look at the similarity in Rat's 302 and Farrell's paragraph. Do you think Farrell wrote that long report from memory? Of course not. He had the 302's in front of him when he was writing it. Quite easy to see how you could morph Rat's statement into what Farrell ended up writing. And I think perhaps the biggest tell that Farrell is relying on Rat's 302 is that phrase "match cover." As I said, the only two times that phrase is found in the 40,000 pages we have so far is Rat's 302 and Farrell's report. Given that we know Farrell was almost certainly relying on the 302's when constructing his report, the mistake seems obvious. 

 

 

This is false, it doesn't claim it went to the cockpit. "Insinuation" is your own bias.

And Tina doesn't refute it...

You have made this same argument before and it is bogus. You claim that if we don't have positive confirmation then it didn't happen,, logic 101.. absence of evidence isn't evidence.

You tried the cockpit argument.. FAIL

You tried the envelope argument.. FAIL

You tried the writing wasn't Cooper's argument.. FAIL

You tried the absence of evidence argument... FAIL

You tried misstating my position.. FAIL

All you have is an opinion that the FBI file is an error with NO reasonable argument to back it up...

I think you are just trying to justify your own belief without any rational argument.

As I said, it is possible it is an error but you have no argument to support it.

7 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

Yes,, 

Olemiss takes the position that it is an error..  that is possible but Olemiss doesn't have a legit argument for his assertion. 

So, without a reasonable argument or evidence to refute it we should accept it as likely true...  like most things in this case the caveat being it may be an error.

2 minutes ago, Cola said:

 

I take it that Tina struck the last match? If there were writing therein I think it would have registered with her looking at an empty cover.

If she saw the matches being used for notes then I'd have to believe she would have interpreted the action of taking the matches as understandable. The way I read her statement about Coops removing the matches form the trash is that it is a little bewildering to her.  

Rat was aware of the matches during the interview saying Coops was -especially careful to see that nothing was left behind taking the matchbook cover

 

Coops did write on the plane there is evidence of this..

pg. DB-32393

 

There could have been writing in the matchbook after Cooper had retrieved it..

The second image ended up being a false lead.. 

The last image refers to Tina dictating his demands..

6 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Flo's writing. So why would he care? 

He asked for all notes back with all writing..  that is clear in the files.

That included the demands he dictated to Tina..

5 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

A red herring? I'm going with the primary sources. Your entire belief that there was something written on the matchbook is based on an assumption that he must have had something written in it if he wanted it back. 

These aren't assumptions:

- Tina never indicates that the matches played any role except to light his cigarettes.

- Tina never indicates that Cooper wrote anything. If he had, I'm sure she'd have noted which hand he used, right? 

 

No, you are confused..

The FBI file states that he wanted the matchbook back that had writing in it.. you forgot that.

You, claim that is an error.. possible but your argument is bogus. So, I ask for a reasonable argument for why he took the matchbook back.. You claimed the envelope was taken back but it had writing on it. 

You claim it was an error because it wasn't sent to the cockpit.. it didn't have to be to have writing in it. Red herring.

Though it is always possible the FBI claim is an error there is no evidence or reasonable argument to refute it,, nothing.

2 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

And I again point out the envelope. Why would he have wanted an envelope back that didn't contain his writing?

The envelope did have writing on it.. 

20 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

I remember debating Shutter on this one. I would not have thought much of the notes in a matchbook until I saw it in North by Northwest. It would be interesting if he did write notes like in the movie. Some pics about 2/3 down in the post. 
 

https://dbcooperhijack.com/2019/01/04/d-b-cooper-cary-grant-and-the-1959-film-north-by-northwest/

Has anyone actually tried to put glue on their fingers? Airplane glue? And seen how it works? I have not tried it, although I do remember as a kid making models that the stuff was pretty hard to get off my fingers  

 

There are many ways to obfuscate fingerprints..

Super glue.. or coatings

chemicals.. burn..

abrasion.. sandpaper

14 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Yes, I'm going with Rat's statement as well. The more specific a statement is then the more reliable it is. Rat's statement is quite specific. Much like Tina's statement about putting the matchbook in the seat pocket (which she apparently reconfirmed in Tosaw...except she changed it to the ashtray and not seat pocket)

As for the matchbook, it may have had writing in it from an earlier time, but there is no evidence whatsoever that he wrote anything while on the plane nor any evidence that Tina ferried any notes to the cockpit, so I think it's safe to assume that Farrell was incorrectly interpreting Rat's statement by writing that the match was used to convey notes. Also recall Rat's speech. He never saw the matchbook. He said he learned about what was on it when Tina spoke at the debriefing. 

And I agree that Cooper didn't care about prints. Not even in the least. 

You have created a red herring,, 

A note or something written on the matchbook doesn't have to be sent to the cockpit to be true. It doesn't claim it was.. 

You have rejected writing on the matchbook based on a false assumption.

There was communications with the stews and to the cockpit mostly via interphone with Tina.

Again, if not for fingerprints why would Cooper take back an empty matchbook... I can't think of any reason... other than notes written in it as stated in the FBI file.

34 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

This is correct, according to Tina and Rat's 302's. Yet Flo says she wrote it on a note pad from her purse. 

Flo's note pad was used for the notes she made in the cockpit. Maybe somebody conflated them..

If Rat confirmed writing on the envelope that is solid.

Point is, Cooper wanted all communications back...  so, it makes sense if the matchbook had writing in it. Retaining the matchbook was not about fingerprints. 

AND that supports the contention that Cooper didn't care about prints.. because he had obfuscated them.

The long time dominant narrative was that he took the matchbook back because of prints. FALSE

19 minutes ago, Cola said:

I agree 100%, no one is going to tug at the matches and unravel anything. Never the less, the matches, if true, are part of the mosaic of who Cooper was. When Cooper is identified, I'd like to believe there was an explanation as to how they fit in.

I'm sure the Gunther folks would love it one day if a Cooper proxy is found and one of his two kids happens to be a high-school drop out...!

There is no connection to the subject matter advertised on the matchbook,, it is random.. many companies advertised that way.

47 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

But why did he want the envelope back? He didn't write on it. 

Flo wrote his demands on a plain envelope,, I assume it was his..  though they don't make that clear I can't imagine another plain envelope appearing then.

4 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

But we're talking about Farrell's statement specifically. He says it was used to convey notes. I believe that to me a mistake. 

Again, I think it possibly had something written on it from an earlier time. I think he just wanted everything he brought on board with him to leave with him out of an abundance of caution. I mean, there was nothing at all written on the envelope by Cooper, just by Flo, and yet he still wanted that envelope back. He must have been pretty pissed when he realized he left his tie. 

That doesn't make sense... he left the cig butts...  

and we don't know if he even cared about the tie or not. 

So, if it wasn't for the prints then why?? Writing is the only reason.

13 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

But Tina says it was recovered from where she had discarded it: in the seat pocket. That's pretty specific, so it was never in the cockpit. 

I see it as one of two things: He just wanted to leave literally no trace whatsoever of himself on the plane (nothing to do with fingerprints...as you say, he didn't seem to care about his prints) OR it did have something written on it, perhaps a phone number, etc. 

It didn't have to go to the cockpit to have something written on it..

Most Comms were via Tina and the interphone...  

If he didn't retrieve it for the prints then why? I can't think of any reason..

12 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Being that Tina has never made any comment ever about ferrying notes to the cockpit, I've been of the belief that this is Farrell brainfarting a bit and misinterpreting Rat's 302. If you'll look at Rat's 302, he has a paragraph where he talks about the notes being returned to Cooper and in the same paragraph comments on the match book. His 302 even uses this same phraseology, calling it a "match cover". Would be easy to see how that statement could be misinterpreted. In a search of the files, the only time "match cover" comes up is in Rat's 302 and Farrell's report. I don't think that's a coincidence. 

 

I lean toward it being legit...  why would Cooper take an empty matchbook?

The reason given by most was for the fingerprints.. but that makes no sense, he left other items that would have had prints, he offered money that would have prints, his ticket, the glass, the tie, the plane, the chute, the card..  it makes no sense for him to want the empty matchbook for the prints and not the other things. So, what other reason would there be,,,  Writing, he took back things with writing, notes.

2 minutes ago, Cola said:

I got ya, but I think your assigning way to much ubiquity to ICS matches.

ICS in no way could flood a market like AOL, a fortune 50 company. In 1971 its like saying Ford vs. ICS, those two advertising budgets do not comport.

I believe there are limits and conditions on where these ICS matchbooks can exist. I don't know what can we get from him having ICS matches but I'd like to think that there is a way these fit into the mosaic of who Cooper was...

The agency deduced Coops may have eaten at the airport because he possessed skychef matches.

My most optimistic fit on ICS, if true, is that Coops was within proximity of a dropout.

Or maybe this is just Rataczak taking a character jab at Coops....

 

 

 

The advertising subsidized the matches, so they were cheap/free where cigarettes were bought... stores or machines.. they were headquartered in PA but available everywhere. They were just cheap/free, ubiquitous and tell us nothing about Cooper. The advertising subject is irrelevant.

11 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

The ICS matches were used as advertisements, so they were just everywhere. Thrown in gas stations, laying on tables at airports, etc. I'm not sure how old you are and so maybe you don't remember this, but think of them as those AOL CD-ROM's. They were so common that there was no point in trying to trace them.

Exactly,,

another thing is the empty matchbook Cooper retrieved and taken had notes in it..

Cooper took it because it had writing like the notes not because of prints.

Cooper didn't care about prints. IMO, he had obfuscated his prints.

7 minutes ago, Cola said:

 

It's logical, but its hard for me to digest Tosaw's claim that Tina grabbed the skychef matches and this detail slipped past the agency, even the ICS matches got by them if true....

Do you think Tina affirmed her statements in the final interview memos? There must have been some point where an Agent sat down with her over the next few years while showing her photos and as a mater of procedure reviewed the November and December interviews with her for accuracy...!

Not seen this in the 302's, possibly one of the teletypes that were flying around is an affirmation of a review of the interviews by Tina.??? 

Maybe those details just weren't important enough.

 

 

Yeah,, it is what it is... The 302 may not be complete or accurate, she did say there was a second matchbook that fits but no description of the second cover.. Witness 302's are not facts, they have errors and omissions.

On the other side, Tosaw did interview Tina and Rataczak,, both kept in contact.

Nothing is certain..  but the ICS cover would have to have been completely fabricated and those aren't typically the type of errors in books...

13 minutes ago, Cola said:

I should look up the exact wording so forgive me but Tina attributes two matchbooks as coming from Coop. She only ever identifies skycheif.

Welcome to the Vortex, you can think but you can never believe..

Even the FBI files have errors...  they are not conclusions, they are investigative notes.

Interviews are not always accurate either... an agent takes notes then it gets typed up later... She confirms two matchbooks.. 

The Vortex is full of these things...