FLYJACK

They were referring to burial in dirt elsewhere,, they found sand no clay.. silt only refers to the particle size.

No soil, no clay found,,, only sand In the FBI files, mineralogy was tested.. It is referred to in many places.. part 43 p 426/7 part 70 p174/5 part 70 p 193/4 In part 43

Lots of debris on the beach behind them... they removed the stuff on the top in the find area before excavating. tbarmoneytrim.mov A little further upstream,, lots of debris.. lower down and at the high water mark.

7:19 in video Himmelsbach.. Money was given to Cooper strapped in 100's and bundled with rubber bands.. A strap is bank lingo for 100 bills paper bank banded.. "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."

Something isn't right... Silt exists in River water,, though it may be little.. and higher during a flood.. generally, the Columbia has low silt levels.. silt is defined by particle size. It may be different material. You'd expect some silt on the money even if in sand. Silt exists in River sand. Brian said the money was blackened.. Testing showed that sediment on the money was consistent with the Columbia.. Ingrams washed bills, unlikely they washed the ones inside the 12 piles.. If they washed a bill and they removed winter diatoms wouldn't they also remove spring/summer ones.. I wouldn't think they would remove all or only winter. Did Tom say there was NO silt at all on the money or no silt consistent with a flood. There is a difference. Something that has always bugged me,, the money was eroded about 50% from the edges in.. not from the top or bottom.. What causes that,, did the money roll or sail sideways end over end along the bottom of the River or is there something about the structure of a bill that wet and dry cycles only affect the edges.. Also, what if the money was in a plastic bag when it went into the River, it would float.

I checked seasonal data and Spring for the Columbia tends to have a higher sediment load... Still how could a money bag let in diatoms but not silt... True, lots of assumptions here.. How could the money be exposed to the Columbia River and have no silt..

Maybe, but how does it get into a "fresh" layer" in 1980.. Another problem,, the money got the diatoms from being in the River in Spring say.. and not while buried in the sand but got no silt from being in the River. How can that be.. unless there is no silt in the River, maybe seasonal.

It was dumped slightly upstream... But you still have a problem. From 72-74 the money had to remain buried given the erosion and then from 74 to 80 it remained buried and ended up in a "fresh" debris layer.. Then there is the argument that the 74 dump is below the money layer... It doesn't add up.

Then why no silt if the money was wet near the surface and under water a week before the find. How silty is the Columbia with no flood..

Sure, there is erosion and deposits.. clearly over time more erosion.. but it isn't linear. The piles of sand deposited slightly upstream in 74 would get eroded and deposited downstream...

Dredge would cause silt. Suction and pipe dredge is dead.

There are so many variables that we don't know. The money was found at about the high water mark.. it was well below the flood stage. The money was found in a layer with "fresh" debris. Clearly, objects do sink in sand.. tidal action, ship wakes, nearby erosion,, how would that affect the money?? How can we determine that. Was there more debris dumped there beyond the 1974 dredge.. If we assume the money went into the River in a Spring when the River was above the find spot but below flood stage and it gets deposited on TBAR then burial may have been a natural process... One thing I'd like to know is what a bundle of money does in the River with 3 mph current does after it sinks.. does it remain suspended above the bottom and get pushed?? I found that a corpse gets moved on a sand/gravel bottom with 1.35 mph current. I am now leaning toward the money arriving within a year or so of the find... for it to have been there and buried since 71/72 with all the erosion and found in a "fresh" layer... is hard to makes sense of.

Yes,, cool pic but Mac was NOT a victim.. nobody made him do his hijacking and if not a hijacking he would have done something else like a bank robbery.

You created a false binary.. These are two independent things... the money entering the River and the money landing on TBAR. Tom's research suggests the money did not arrive during a flood or dredge.. lack of silt. Sounds reasonable. However, you don't need a flood for the money to go into the River and you don't need a flood for the money to reach the find spot due to water level. The money spot is well below flood stage. Flotsam OR Jetsam... Flotsam is debri unintentionally or accidentally introduced into the water... Jetsam is debri intentionally introduced into the water... I have a theory for each... neither requires a flood.

Nope. Water can be above the TBAR spot without a flood.

Flood stage is 16ft,, IMO the money was at about 6-7 ft... Tom thinks a couple feet higher but the money may have been deposited at a high water above the money but well below flood stage. The money was about the normal high water line.

and I bet the paper strap was slightly right of center.. where there are fewer diatoms.

Palmer's reasoning.. "not at the site for more than a year"

It was in a layer with "fresher" debris.... So, how does the money theoretically older debris, get into a layer of fresher debris? If the money was older debris, you'd expect to find other old debris in that layer as well.. Palmer also concluded that the money arrived by the River within the last 2-3 months... (diatoms suggest slightly longer) but recent, not 71-72.. If Palmer is correct and the diatoms are correct then the money went into the River in Spring 79 or maybe 78 and was deposited soon after. Therefore, somebody had that money stored for some time and Cooper's jump location is irrelevant to TBAR.

The fact that the money was found in the upper layer with "fresher" debris supports the money arriving within a year or so of the find. (8-20 months) You'd think we could determine if the money arrived in 71-72 or 78-79... The condition if money does not support the claim it was deposited right before the find..

Too young and blue eyes... no receding hairline. No marcelled/wavy/curly hair... No, he doesn't fit the description.

Those fishing maps are not zeroed out... This one is zeroed out.. but 2023. https://hydrosurvey.nwp.usace.army.mil/nav_data/CL_26_WLWX_20230302_CS.pdf I had the money spot at about 6.5 feet and 35 ft from the water... The water level mean is about 2.5 ft. With flood stage 16 ft.. the River is often above the money spot. The Fazio's said it was underwater the week before the money find.

Found this depth and bathymetry map for the Columbia.. Though current, the depth all the way across at TBAR is actually relatively consistent. High 40's. There is no depth channel.. no slope in the channel just on the banks. https://usa.fishermap.org/depth-map/columbia-river/#map

There is another variable that has been missed.... Kelly Point Park, a seedy place is at the confluence of the Columbia and Willamette... Wading and swimming has been banned due to drownings. The current is unpredictable and dangerous... If the "money" were in the River the inflow current from the Willamette could push objects toward the Washington side.

It is different, it is round with some open panels. Cossey in 1973