georger 247
georger***Did you also have trouble with the audio version of the Kaye interview?
QuoteI did. So just read the pdf.
I did. Once the audio quit, I was too interested in the interview and had to do it the old fashioned way. Geoff Gray interview played fine as did a couple others I listened to. Very good site, I spent a few hours on it.
Blevins, I must respectfully disagree with you on the tie. Cooper targeted an airline and left behind a tie with titanium in it. That is too strong of a link to be ignored. As Kaye points out, this titanium was very rare. The odds of someone picking up a tie at Goodwill with titanium particles in it, and then targeting an airline with a hijacking is, in my opinion, very very low. If he borrowed it, it's still a valid link to the case. Find where this titanium came from, and this case is infinitely closer to being solved."They were saying he was never gonna make it now, now that daylight had set in. But later that night, they were shining those lights back down on that mountain again." - Todd Snider
BobKnoss 0
Mr. Crew Spokesperson:
Robert99 may be wrong about a lot of things, but he is correct on this subject. I know where you get your marching orders, Jim explained the program. Dig up Janet and interview her. You want to find the truth but you never seem to uncover anything but phoney misdirection. On second thought, Robert99 should interview "Janet" so we get to hear the real facts. We could try to call Mac (the dead guy) and verify what she says. Gaien could give contact info to Bruce, and Bruce could do an interview, if he could stay on subject long enough to actually prove something. WHERE did this woman see the plane with the stairs deployed? Describe the FBI Agent (McCoy) that warned her to not speak. Discount the "man on the stairs" comment as inconsequential. That argument is immaterial.
All this hoop-la over a few miles to the west to distract the search zone and cover up a beautiful drop zone that should be more than obvious, given the Tina Bar money find, dairy farm, flood, milk can, drop zone, Janet, plain as the knose on Jimmy Durante's face. That's the real truth as told by Sgt. Richard Floyd McCoy, Jr. in his debriefing of the execution of Project Norjak.
And the tie thing... The tie clasp came from McCoy, so I'd wager the tie came with the costume. Look-alike for an FBI student from BYU on semester break. That was the scene. With the FBI involvement, it is even possible the corkscrew titanium was another planted misdirection. What a crooked bunch of warped priority type A pilot personalities! And we thought the Russians were underhanded. Dos 'Divonia America!
mrshutter45 21
RobertMBlevinsLOL you'll never solve the case by chasing ti on a tie? Why?
Because, Brain Boys...you can't prove the source of the tie. What if Cooper picked up the tie from a Goodwill, or borrowed it from a friend? Why was it the only personal piece of evidence he left behind on the plane?
I'll give you a hint: Maybe he knew it couldn't be traced back to him. So he takes it off and tosses it on a seat because he doesn't give a shit about it. He does get rid of everything else, however.
We're talking about a guy who was careful enough to retrieve his original hijack note, so he was obviously aware of leaving behind any possible evidence. And if Cooper is already dead in 2013, unless you can identify him first and obtain some of the clothes he owned (especially ties, I suppose) then there isn't a chance in hell that tie, ti or not, will ever be traced to anyone. If he had implanted the ti chips in the shape of his initials, then maybe you would have a chance. (*laughs*)
Even if you ID a suspect later who worked with titanium sponge, this doesn't mean that person is Cooper. You would have to produce all the other evidence to even present a case: Alibi, motive, witnesses, money evidence. Otherwise you still don't have shit. I get a laugh out of reading some of the posts here chasing dead ends.
And the evidence is possibly tainted anyway. How many Seattle (home of the SST) FBI agents handled that tie before it was given to Kaye and his team for examination? Did all of them wash their hands first? Did any of them shake hands with someone who worked at Boeing?
As I said, maybe Cooper picked up the tie from a friend, an accomplice, maybe the Goodwill. You have no chain of evidence with the tie, making it basically USELESS unless you can link a suspect to it and then find similar deposits on that suspect's clothing...and then you have to provide the other evidence linking them to the hijacking.
Do you see a pattern here? It's a vicious circle, going nowhere. Except for DNA, which the FBI seems fairly sure about, you haven't a chance on the tie. It cannot be trusted anymore. Forty-plus years post-hijacking, who knows how many hands have handled it, and you don't have a source for it.
As far as the DNA, this is the only thing the Seattle FBI has ever told me about it: It cannot confirm a suspect 100% as the hijacker, but it can eliminate them if they compare a DNA sample from a possible suspect to the sample they have. Seattle FBI agent Fred Gutt laid that one on me. Whatever it means...
Robert99: I'd appreciate it if you'd stop referring to me as 'Jo and Blevins'. She's not my sister, I've never spoken to her, and I've never tried to prove that Duane Weber was the hijacker. You, on the other hand, keep trying to move the flight path to the other side of the Interstate 5 freeway without proof. What makes you think you are smarter than Paul Soderlind and his NWA team, the Seattle and Portland FBI offices, and those ATC guys? All of whom had HOURS to prepare during 305's initial circling, landing, FBI stalling on the ground, and then (finally) a takeoff from SeaTac? This is laughable. You keep saying you have presented evidence here previously. Yeah? What evidence? A flight sim on a computer done by Shutter? The two of you will have to do better than that before you move the flight six miles to the west side of the freeway. Hey...I wonder why the Army and the FBI went looking up in Ariel, which by the way is some distance from Tina Bar? I appreciate your efforts, I really do...but without hard evidence that disproves the official results, I will wait and see.
Oh yeah. On another note we had a good turnout for the movies today. Back to bed. Another day down there tomorrow is coming fast.
I think your new name shall be "Thumb Bob"
so, tell me Thumb Bob. what exactly (5th time) is the reason for my simulation project? try to keep it in a short sentence.
do you think R99 is telling me where to fly the plane?
what position does R99 have with my project? pilot. co-pilot, navigator, mentor?
"Even if you ID a suspect later who worked with titanium sponge, this doesn't mean that person is Cooper. You would have to produce all the other evidence to even present a case: Alibi, motive, witnesses, money evidence. Otherwise you still don't have shit. I get a laugh out of reading some of the posts here chasing dead ends"
"chasing dead ends" not the same as chasing some short bald guy? (*eyes roll*)
how many airline employee's do you think you could match the Cooper case too? lots I bet if you looked hard enough.
basically you conclude that descriptions are way off the chart.
zero proof of where extra income came from as evidence. (KC)
didn't Cooper say this. "'I don't have a grudge against your airline" let me guess. he was lying when he said this right?
how many things are YOU twisting around to fit your suspect into being Cooper? then you turn around and insult people with there theories without looking into the possibilities? it seems that it's ok for you to go against actual quotes and descriptions and certain events, but the flight path is correct and can't be looked into???
a bunch of smart guys did the flight path.
a bunch of idiots gave wrong descriptions.
a bunch of fools decided the Amboy chute was not Cooper's.
I'll give you a little hint. the FBI has a map showing the route flight 305 took. sets of transcripts and radio conversations were taken. they give details of where the plane was by time, altitude and locations. this is what I am recreating. I'm not (6th time) trying to put the plane over Tina Bar.
I have had a lot of trial and error along this path. I decided the software I was using was not good enough for the testing. I have changed the software and now will be changing the computer once again because of the demand the software requires. it will be a couple months before the new system will be fully functional. these things take time in order for it to be the way I want it be. I want good usable data coming off this project.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1N17yc7pe0
Please, continue with your smart ass comments that always seem to put this thread in a stand still. I am trying to resolve some issues and not one up or try to act like a know it all....
I forgot this quote: "Hey...I wonder why the Army and the FBI went looking up in Ariel, which by the way is some distance from Tina Bar?"
Hey, I wonder why they now admit the search area is probably wrong? how could this be with a bunch of smart guys? (*Laughs*)
mrshutter45 21
"Maybe he knew it couldn't be traced back to him."
now a quote from your website:
"When this picture (without the caption on it) was shown to the sister of the alleged accomplice, she did NOT recognize the tie. However, she immediately identified the tie-tac on it as one she had seen Kenny Christiansen wear many times. In addition, 'Dawn J,' also said the same thing as Kenny's brother Lyle Christiansen had claimed previously: That Kenny owned a toupee, but that he only wore it socially, and not on the job. NOTE: The tie is from JC Penneys. The tie-tack is of unknown origin."
I thought it couldn't be traced back to him? but you seem to fit it right into your story? the briefcase had his prints all over it, naturally he would get rid of it. as for the the tie. back in that day he had zero clue of how DNA could be found on it. zero risk of leaving it. the tie would only get in his way jumping. a guess would say he took it off while putting the harness on.
do you have a picture of him wearing it "many times"? nope. do you have a picture of him wearing a toupee? nope. you got nothing but a bunch of words.
perhaps you should jump on the Geviett boat and claim KC was wearing spring loaded lift boots to gain the height required.
If the FBI questioned KC and his family in 1971, what do you think they would say? probably lie and say something different as to what they now tell you right? but, they are being honest now right?
TomKaye 1
I most certainly do not believe that the money was two miles from the dredge pile. Its more like a little over 100 yards or so. I have to think it was a typo in the transcript. I can't get the complete interview downloaded to verify.
Hope to see many of you at the museum.
Tom
Robert99 50
RobertMBlevins
Robert99: I'd appreciate it if you'd stop referring to me as 'Jo and Blevins'. She's not my sister, I've never spoken to her, and I've never tried to prove that Duane Weber was the hijacker. You, on the other hand, keep trying to move the flight path to the other side of the Interstate 5 freeway without proof. What makes you think you are smarter than Paul Soderlind and his NWA team, the Seattle and Portland FBI offices, and those ATC guys? All of whom had HOURS to prepare during 305's initial circling, landing, FBI stalling on the ground, and then (finally) a takeoff from SeaTac? This is laughable. You keep saying you have presented evidence here previously. Yeah? What evidence? A flight sim on a computer done by Shutter? The two of you will have to do better than that before you move the flight six miles to the west side of the freeway. Hey...I wonder why the Army and the FBI went looking up in Ariel, which by the way is some distance from Tina Bar? I appreciate your efforts, I really do...but without hard evidence that disproves the official results, I will wait and see.
Blevins, I do appreciate your efforts at humor as indicated above. Really, I do. Honestly.
While I have not quoted your "legal opinions" about the Cooper case, it seems that most of those that you presented could also be applied to undermine your KC book and its theories.
Alas, "legal opinions" and "scientific facts" are two different things. But now that you have (reportedly) lawyered up, I suspect that you are more interested in trying to milk more money out of your Cooper book than in determining the identity of Cooper.
In your forthcoming Cooper book, which you have mentioned in this thread before, are you just ripping off the posters here on DZ and trying to cash in on their research rather than actually doing some research yourself? You might want to talk to your lawyer about that.
You have already downloaded and "published" the entire closed Cooper thread. And I imagine that you are doing, or going to do, the same thing for this present Cooper thread. And you probably have other "modifications" in mind for this thread as well. Again, you might want to talk to your lawyer about that.
Robert99
mrshutter45 21
Robert99***
Robert99: I'd appreciate it if you'd stop referring to me as 'Jo and Blevins'. She's not my sister, I've never spoken to her, and I've never tried to prove that Duane Weber was the hijacker. You, on the other hand, keep trying to move the flight path to the other side of the Interstate 5 freeway without proof. What makes you think you are smarter than Paul Soderlind and his NWA team, the Seattle and Portland FBI offices, and those ATC guys? All of whom had HOURS to prepare during 305's initial circling, landing, FBI stalling on the ground, and then (finally) a takeoff from SeaTac? This is laughable. You keep saying you have presented evidence here previously. Yeah? What evidence? A flight sim on a computer done by Shutter? The two of you will have to do better than that before you move the flight six miles to the west side of the freeway. Hey...I wonder why the Army and the FBI went looking up in Ariel, which by the way is some distance from Tina Bar? I appreciate your efforts, I really do...but without hard evidence that disproves the official results, I will wait and see.
Blevins, I do appreciate your efforts at humor as indicated above. Really, I do. Honestly.
While I have not quoted your "legal opinions" about the Cooper case, it seems that most of those that you presented could also be applied to undermine your KC book and its theories.
Alas, "legal opinions" and "scientific facts" are two different things. But now that you have (reportedly) lawyered up, I suspect that you are more interested in trying to milk more money out of your Cooper book than in determining the identity of Cooper.
In your forthcoming Cooper book, which you have mentioned in this thread before, are you just ripping off the posters here on DZ and trying to cash in on their research rather than actually doing some research yourself? You might want to talk to your lawyer about that.
You have already downloaded and "published" the entire closed Cooper thread. And I imagine that you are doing, or going to do, the same thing for this present Cooper thread. And you probably have other "modifications" in mind for this thread as well. Again, you might want to talk to your lawyer about that.
Robert99
they guy is amazing to say the least. he concludes things he has no knowledge of. threatens people with legal action. I'd love to see his bill if he decides to TRY and do something (*laughs*)
Georger has him pegged. it's his way, or no way. period. his logic makes zero sense because he side steps most of the evidence and turns around and says the path is 100% correct (*giggles*) (*new one*)
I don't know enough about your conclusions of how the money got onto the river bank, but, I'm all ears and open to anything possible. I believe one of the first steps in understanding these things would be checking the flight path.
I believe it's possible something can be found. calculations are always subject to error. I understand radar was involved, but, mistakes happen.
let me ask this question. exactly how would they take the radar information and pin it to the location given on the map. today's tech can probably tell you where the plane was at 8:15:22 showing it flying over Joe's junkyard at that exact moment. 1971? not so sure. plus the fact of how wide a Vector really is. lots of variables here. again, I find it strange that these people can take everything evidence wise out of context, but.......not that damn flight path buddy!!! that sucker is perfect! everything else...change at your own discretion?
description....change it all ya want.
things documented Cooper said.....nope...change it.
things Tom Kaye said.....nope, change the direction.
The tie and clip.............Goodwill....KC had one? went to Goodwill for the tie only?
The Flight Path.....DANGER this map has been sealed and locked down with neoprene washers and a Chastity belt for added security insuring the map is 100% correct. zero probability of error. big letters on the outside "BACK OFF"
smokin99 0
mrshutter45"Because, Brain Boys...you can't prove the source of the tie. What if Cooper picked up the tie from a Goodwill, or borrowed it from a friend? Why was it the only personal piece of evidence he left behind on the plane?"
"Maybe he knew it couldn't be traced back to him."
now a quote from your website:
"When this picture (without the caption on it) was shown to the sister of the alleged accomplice, she did NOT recognize the tie. However, she immediately identified the tie-tac on it as one she had seen Kenny Christiansen wear many times. In addition, 'Dawn J,' also said the same thing as Kenny's brother Lyle Christiansen had claimed previously: That Kenny owned a toupee, but that he only wore it socially, and not on the job. NOTE: The tie is from JC Penneys. The tie-tack is of unknown origin."
I thought it couldn't be traced back to him? but you seem to fit it right into your story? the briefcase had his prints all over it, naturally he would get rid of it. as for the the tie. back in that day he had zero clue of how DNA could be found on it. zero risk of leaving it. the tie would only get in his way jumping. a guess would say he took it off while putting the harness on.
do you have a picture of him wearing it "many times"? nope. do you have a picture of him wearing a toupee? nope. you got nothing but a bunch of words.
perhaps you should jump on the Geviett boat and claim KC was wearing spring loaded lift boots to gain the height required.
If the FBI questioned KC and his family in 1971, what do you think they would say? probably lie and say something different as to what they now tell you right? but, they are being honest now right?
You beat me to it. You know I don't dislike Blevins, but here's the thing you have to understand about him. He likes to cherry pick the evidence and then he forgets what he was for before he was against it. In short - he hasn't a clue.
The real problem with his theory is not just on its face - it is that he continually obfuscates the issue while trying to validate it. But I would imagine that it gets awful tiring and confusing trying to defend what one says this week when it contradicts what you said a month ago.
Does it bother Blevins that his argument has so many illogical facets? I doubt it - not trying to draw any parallels here by any means
, but they say that people who have difficulty in recognizing their own incompetence also tend to have an inflated sense of self. Of course, someone who was a former mental health expert is probably aware of this - lol --unless it applies to him. 
According to Blevins, witness statements are highly subjective - to the point of being wrong - dare I say it - just a bunch of words when it comes to the immediate interview of the one witness that had an up close, personal, and extended period of time with the hijacker. On the other hand, 40 year old "he said, she said" by people that may or may not have an axe to grind, should be given the weight of gold. Go figure.
"Brain boys" Why in the hell did he leave us girls out? LOL.....Not saying that he is the only one to blame when this thread disintegrates, but overall the thread seems to proceed a lot better during Blevin's breaks. Does that tell you anything? I honestly think that he likes the drama and courts the animosity that he draws.
mrshutter45 21
agreed, I don't have anything against him either! I draw the line when one attacks for no reason. he constantly warns Georger of credibility, are you F'n kidding me here. how does he say it..."Hello, is anybody in there"
it seems the people who push suspects want to configure things they way they think it should be, fit to there suspect. I believe he also mentions family testimonies and validation. he brought this up a couple years back with Marla.
I believe he is right when you read some of these comments and find it hard not to (*laugh*)....(*smiles*)
yep, the thread was turning until he showed up with the smart ass remarks and assaults.
unfortunately it's sad because he does feel superior over everyone else.
Me? just an average guy looking for answers to a not so average case.....
smokin99 0
"What makes you think you are smarter than Paul Soderlind and his NWA team, the Seattle and Portland FBI offices, and those ATC guys? All of whom had HOURS to prepare during 305's initial circling, landing, FBI stalling on the ground, and then (finally) a takeoff from SeaTac? This is laughable. "...
and then proceeds to disagree with anything the FBI or NWA folks say if it doesn't fit in with Kenny Christiansen.
smokin99 0
More lawsuit talk??
Our resident attorney has given his opinion on lawsuits in the Cooper vortex many times......pretty much boils down to..(and I quote)...
"This DBC squabbling would get laughed out of most courtooms. The judge would hold an off the record conference in his chambers and counsel would be told to "get this POS case off my GD docket."
As the saying goes - I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on tv, but I would imagine the only Cooper-related thing that is protected is quoting from another manuscript without proper atrribution, or against the unauthorized printing of actual documents or photo IF they are used without one's permission. And, as much as those have been bandied about all over the web without previous lawsuits, I have my doubts about that.
Short of plagarism, the "story" of DB, along with any speculation about candidates is pretty much in the public domain and out there for anyone that wants to write about it, I would imagine.
As for Kenny, a lot of the facts about the case were obtained, discussed, and/or corrected here on a public forum before publication of a book so I would think it's petty late for anyone to go whining about someone else using it now. I agree with the other 99 - there should probably be a lot of shoring up of glass houses if one is about to throw stones.
LOL...come on now...surely no one is being threatened with a lawsuit for speculating that Kenny was gay? lol... I'm pretty sure you can sue for anything if you have the money to waste, but again, I would suspect that the odds of a successful suit for defamation of a dead person would be a long shot. Not to mention - how is questioning whether someone is gay or not defamation? Welcome to 2013.
Not to mention the irony of accusing someone of defaming a dead person who you've accused of being a criminal.
As Blevins once said when he was dispensing legal advice to Jo about lawsuits....."Be not afraid...Be very not afraid"
georger
Tom's citation of Palmer is wrong. Quote: "The other thing was that the claim by Doctor Palmer, when he excavated the site on Tena Bar, was that the dredge had pulled the bills up off the bottom of the river and deposited them on the shore, and that’s how they got buried." -
Palmer never made such a claim. He specifically did not think the money had come from the 1974 dredging. Palmer's two claims were (a) the money arrived at the earliest in 1979 or even 1980, but very recently, because the money was found in the "upper active layer" of sand at Tina Bar, and (b) that a possible
source was the Washougal, during the high water period of 1979.
Thank YOU, Georger! THANK you so much for NOT allowing a misnomer by your friend to be twisted around to suit his personal convictions or motives. YOU surprise me many times regarding things like that. On this one - I do say THANK YOU!
mrshutter45 21
smokin99I don't even mind his opinions, but it is ironic when one posts....
"What makes you think you are smarter than Paul Soderlind and his NWA team, the Seattle and Portland FBI offices, and those ATC guys? All of whom had HOURS to prepare during 305's initial circling, landing, FBI stalling on the ground, and then (finally) a takeoff from SeaTac? This is laughable. "...
and then proceeds to disagree with anything the FBI or NWA folks say if it doesn't fit in with Kenny Christiansen.
suspect 101
Blevins is obviously (in his mind) smarter than the FBI, NWO and anyone who disagree's with his logic. what exactly did the ATC guys prepare for? ok guys he will be taking off in a couple hours, where he is going has not been said. be prepared for anything on your screens 
did they tune the screens, change the color? what exactly did they prepare for? McChord AFB. "305 appears to be going in circles. what now?" how many hours did McChord have with incoming missiles? Hey, Russia, you didn't give us time to prepare. 
or possibly they had the path made before take off? oops, Cooper told them a flight plan can be made after take off. thank God they had time to prepare.
Charlie Sheen acts in this manor.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LtBSqGzi3o
after his "Winning" tour, he went on talk shows admitting that he was "losing"... a Superiority complex can be a dangerous thing. Charlie proved this very well.
Oh well......
georger 247
smokin99I don't even mind his opinions, but it is ironic when one posts....
"What makes you think you are smarter than Paul Soderlind and his NWA team, the Seattle and Portland FBI offices, and those ATC guys? All of whom had HOURS to prepare during 305's initial circling, landing, FBI stalling on the ground, and then (finally) a takeoff from SeaTac? This is laughable. "...
and then proceeds to disagree with anything the FBI or NWA folks say if it doesn't fit in with Kenny Christiansen.
Quote
Blevins appears to want to be: the Court Jester.
We already had one! That is why Blevins has failed.
Blevins should move on to find another orchard to pillage,
while the owner is away!
mrshutter45I'm glad to see the Washington State History Museum is not accepting anything from known suspects. that's the way it should be. some people are doing it for the advertising. the exhibit is about DB Cooper, not Cooper wannabee's or people trying to saturate the public with circumstantial evidence.
I was elated to learn of that. It irritated me that per Blevins and - per Marla - they were using items for their suspects. I thought that was absurd! A museum does NOT promote a suspect - they present artifacts. If they had a catologue of all the suspect stories or Cooper related new articles - that might be acceptable.
Such as the Palmer report versus Kaye - hopefully that will be presented in an investigative way and without bias. If they are presenting a verbal OF Kaye's claims with a misnomer, that needs to be addressed and cleaned up. I have had NOTHING to do with the museum other than an email informing them if they presented items regarding Blevins and Marla's suspect - they would have to present things and books & articles on every suspect known since 1971. Was this to be a Cooper exhibition or promotional exhibition? I didn't get a reply so did NOT know the results. I guess I know now!
Betcha Blevins & Marla hit the ceiling - both of them have been making posting and remarks about the museum as though they were part of it!
Pull up D.B. Cooper and see the sites that are popping up. There are several in which the head liners lead one to believe the exhibit will show items from survivors of these suspect or writers promoting their books.
Me - I say what I need to say in this thread....the thread is the only one with the complete story other than the things I am afraid to discuss in public. If I did not worry about the safety of my family and their financial positions - I would be blurting out every name from Duane's past I ever knew. Not everyone for his past is decease and they probably had no knowledge of this past...but, there are those who do and did! Those are the one I am afraid of. BRR!
smokin99 0
I've never changed my opinion on the citizen sleuth thing - While I greatly appreciate any work by anyone that advances the case from an evidentiary point of view, I still think that the "citizen sleuths" came to some arbitrary conclusions involving the evidence. It's almost like -- okay we're going to analyze all this stuff - but at the end of the day we're going to speculate on what it means.
Maybe that was the intent - I guess that's a little better than trying to prove pre-conceived notions, but I was still a little disappointed because their conclusions are being given so much weight by some. For example, the fact that all that was left from the money they threw in the river was the tag is proof of nothing in relation to the viability of the rubber bands - so to discuss it in that context seems to be a little misleading. I've also always felt that any conclusions on the tie should be prefaced with "IF" it was his tie. Tom Kaye talks as if it is a certainty. Is it?
And these are minor points - there were several others that we have discussed in the past.
Lest I get flamed - I'm not saying that the exercise didn't have value, but realistically, at the end of the day, I'm not sure that the citizen sleuth exercise got anyone any closer to finding out who DB Cooper was or what happened to him.
That said, I'm still glad they did it because, even if I'm not entirely sold on the speculative conclusions, the results themselves were interesting. So thanks to them for their hard work.
QuoteCooper targeted an airline and left behind a tie with titanium in it. That is too strong of a link to be ignored. As Kaye points out, this titanium was very rare. The odds of someone picking up a tie at Goodwill with titanium particles in it, and then targeting an airline with a hijacking is, in my opinion, very very low. If he borrowed it, it's still a valid link to the case. Find where this titanium came from, and this case is infinitely closer to being solved.
I AGREE with this to a degree.
The FBI had other sources of DNA they never used. It was not until today that I found Cooper supposedly cut ALL of the cord of one of the chutes - in order to access the container for his bounty. I have never read that anywhere before.
So unless Cooper was wearing gloves why the HELL didn't they check the cords for DNA! Even yrs later it would still have been viable evidence unless some one washed the damn chute and the remains.
Now we need to find out did Cooper cut ALL the cords to use the container or just a few for rope to secure the bag to himself. Which story is true?
georger 247
Robert99
Quote
Where has Blevins published the entire closed thread? I thought
he was forced to take that down? How did it become Blevins'
property to publish?
smokin99 0
smokin99I'm having a lot of trouble downloading stuff from the historical site. Maybe it's having a lot of traffic. '
I've never changed my opinion on the citizen sleuth thing - While I greatly appreciate any work by anyone that advances the case from an evidentiary point of view, I still think that the "citizen sleuths" came to some arbitrary conclusions involving the evidence. It's almost like -- okay we're going to analyze all this stuff - but at the end of the day we're going to speculate on what it means.
Maybe that was the intent - I guess that's a little better than trying to prove pre-conceived notions, but I was still a little disappointed because their conclusions are being given so much weight by some. For example, the fact that all that was left from the money they threw in the river was the tag is proof of nothing in relation to the viability of the rubber bands - so to discuss it in that context seems to be a little misleading. I've also always felt that any conclusions on the tie should be prefaced with "IF" it was his tie. Tom Kaye talks as if it is a certainty. Is it?
And these are minor points - there were several others that we have discussed in the past.
Lest I get flamed - I'm not saying that the exercise didn't have value, but realistically, at the end of the day, I'm not sure that the citizen sleuth exercise got anyone any closer to finding out who DB Cooper was or what happened to him.
That said, I'm still glad they did it because, even if I'm not entirely sold on the speculative conclusions, the results themselves were interesting. So thanks to them for their hard work.
Oops - left off my sources....
from: http://www.citizensleuths.com/washugal.html
One of the deployed bundles had it's note recovered by a member of the public eighteen months after release (Fig. 2). The rubber bands and money had become separated from the tag and were not recovered. The tag was recovered in a shallow water area close to the mouth of the Columbia after traveling 5.5 miles (Fig. 3). The bundle did not survive the trip intact, suggesting that the rubber bands degraded and came loose over this time period which is considerably less than the 3-4 years required for the Washdown Theory.
From http://collections.washingtonhistory.org/details.aspx?id=121233
And the most interesting thing to come out of that was D.B. Cooper’s tie. Now D.B. Cooper’s tie was left on the plane and the FBI never released that information. So until three, four years ago, this was completely unknown to the public.
This is inaccurate - the tie information has been public for a long time at least since the 90s and maybe before that. This just makes it seem that it is a certainty that the tie was his. Just asking - is it a certainty? Does anyone know?
georger 247
smokin99I'm having a lot of trouble downloading stuff from the historical site. Maybe it's having a lot of traffic. '
I've never changed my opinion on the citizen sleuth thing - While I greatly appreciate any work by anyone that advances the case from an evidentiary point of view, I still think that the "citizen sleuths" came to some arbitrary conclusions involving the evidence. It's almost like -- okay we're going to analyze all this stuff - but at the end of the day we're going to speculate on what it means.
Maybe that was the intent - I guess that's a little better than trying to prove pre-conceived notions, but I was still a little disappointed because their conclusions are being given so much weight by some. For example, the fact that all that was left from the money they threw in the river was the tag is proof of nothing in relation to the viability of the rubber bands - so to discuss it in that context seems to be a little misleading. I've also always felt that any conclusions on the tie should be prefaced with "IF" it was his tie. Tom Kaye talks as if it is a certainty. Is it?
And these are minor points - there were several others that we have discussed in the past.
Lest I get flamed - I'm not saying that the exercise didn't have value, but realistically, at the end of the day, I'm not sure that the citizen sleuth exercise got anyone any closer to finding out who DB Cooper was or what happened to him.
That said, I'm still glad they did it because, even if I'm not entirely sold on the speculative conclusions, the results themselves were interesting. So thanks to them for their hard work.
Quote
I basically agree with these remarks. Especially: "Tom Kaye talks
as if it is a certainty." That's just Tom's personality. I learned
that trying to work with him. On the other hand, the Carr-Kaye
team produced some worhthwhile results and set a baseline
which was lacking prior to the effort.
Who, for example, would have ever guessed that the tie would
produce the "strange cocktail" it produced !? That tie is almost a
lottery ticket in terms of the general population of people and
ties on the planet, in 1971! Without Tom's effort we wouldn't
know that. Then contrast that with a nearly mundane report
for the money. The contrast is striking.
So, my judgement call to get Tom or somebody like Tom involved
in a basic analysis, may not have been that far fetched to begin
with, visi-a-vis SA Carr. Especially if the FBI had not done any
prior analysis, or wasn't going to. I would rather have that
information than not, at this point.
As far as this misanthrope RobertMBlevins esq is
concerned! Petty critics and opinionists like him are a dime a
dozen. Blevins is no winning lottery ticket - that's for sure! His
daily pronouncements of what people should be thinking and
doing never tell us anything new, but are a rehash of what
people are already doing and thinking, or already have thought
or done, before Blevins arrived to 'take charge'!
Now for the good news: Tom and his team represent a level of
effort, a fairly common level of effort and expertise as these
things go. Can you imagine what a higher level of effort(s) could
achieve? This is what I mean by: "Tom etal have set a baseline"
that did not exist in the same tangible way, prior to their effort
in the public domain. They took on a lot of responsibility which
few others were willing to do, or could do.
That leaves a lot for the future to work with. Was it worth the
effort? Only history will judge.
Then when you add Tom's team's work to the work of others
(Robert99, Sluggo, Snowmman, 377, Ckret, Shutter, Hominid,
Gray etal), we may be living through a kind of golden era where
some progress was made in the Cooper case. The system that
replaces the system ?
mrshutter45
Even if you ID a suspect later who worked with titanium sponge, this doesn't mean that person is Cooper. You would have to produce all the other evidence to even present a case: Alibi, motive, witnesses, money evidence. Otherwise you still don't have shit. I get a laugh out of reading some of the posts here chasing dead ends.
As I said, maybe Cooper picked up the tie from a friend, an accomplice, maybe the Goodwill. You have no chain of evidence with the tie, making it basically USELESS unless you can link a suspect to it and then find similar deposits on that suspect's clothing...and then you have to provide the other evidence linking them to the hijacking.
I will interject one thing here about the tie - I do NOT know if anyone on the thread ever contacted the FBI about this specifically.
Denver was one of the locations for the ti and Duane mention he worked there (supposedly as John Collins in the 60's) and a friend had worked there. The conversation was while we lived in Denver and was nothing I ever felt I would need to remember. This was around 1978 as we lived in Littleton, Co at that time.
Then REMEMBER this Duane takes me with him from Ft. Collins in 1979 to the mountains to see a man - as I have said before I could not remember if it was Vail or Aspen. This is BEFORE we go to WA in Sept. There was a golf shop there and Duane sent me shopping. Whatever he needed to discuss with this man was private.
I got bored and walked over to the GOLF shop. Duane is headed toward the door and his friend is in the back, but hears me come in...and comes forward.
It was an awkward moment as Duane stumbled over the introduction. I cannot remember the man's name now and I have tried to find him by contacting the sports and golf shops in both places, but things have changed. The man MADE custom Golf Clubs and sent Duane home with a set of woods made from persimmon wood. I still have them and they are beautiful...all cut for Duane's height and swing.
Playing this back in my head - I remember something I didn't remember until just now. When I went to leave which was BEFORE Duane did (they still had some business to transact)....the name John was used. The man made a remark as I was going out the door "I am not going to keep John much longer". Over the yrs, I had kept trying to remember when the name "John" came up before as all I could remembered was the man I knew as Tommy in ALABAMA.
Duane had been explicit about my going shopping. It was off season most of the shops were closed. I shopped & waited in the car for a while & decided to go in the Golf shop. The man was in the back and came out...Duane introduced me as his wife. The man said when I left that he would not keep John much longer.
I do not remember if I addressed this later w/Duane (I am sure I did), but the explanation must have been a good one. Then 3 yrs later a man hollers at Duane from across the mall - JOHN! Well, we all know that story because I looked at Duane and said he said John - not Duane and they swept it under the rug by saying it was a nick-name used by Duane because of the peanut butter jar - the Johnnie jar!
The time in the mountains was so vague and actually so forgettable that I did NOT remember it until I played the incident back today. I believe I had forgotten that because the AL (Johnnie Jar) incident was all that had ever stood out beside the exwife calling him John and Johnnie. Yet the sports shop thing was the first and very sutle - NOT like someone shouting across a mall.
Damn * I didn't make it to the point I was trying to make regarding the ti/titanium. Bet those rods have titanium dust in them - and the striker plates are probably ti. This was an ODD trip to make in the summer and evidently just to see an old friend.
An old friend who knows Duane as John and who Duane did NOT want me to meet. This was BEFORE we went to WA by just a couple of months. DOESN"T this sound the least bit ODD to any of you. I can picture the shop, but found nothing on line that looked or sounded right. I can draw the front of the story, but can't remember the name of the shop. The shop name was on the window. It was RED. Damn DAMN damn - why can't I remember his name?
I have put it all out there for you guys - the FBI doesn't read this thread - and the FBI doesn't know all of this - but I gave up long ago trying to relate anything to them.
I have been called a liar and teller of fantasy until even I doubt my memories sometimes.
PLEASE someone HEAR ME! Please!
Robert99 50
georger
You have already downloaded and "published" the entire closed Cooper thread. And I imagine that you are doing, or going to do, the same thing for this present Cooper thread. And you probably have other "modifications" in mind for this thread as well. Again, you might want to talk to your lawyer about that.
Robert99
Quote
Where has Blevins published the entire closed thread? I thought
he was forced to take that down? How did it become Blevins'
property to publish?
This wasn't very long after Blevins joined this thread. He downloaded and massaged the closed thread and then had a link to where he had the massaged thread online.
My use of the word "publish" was intended to convey that he had, as I remember it, a public link that led to an entire DZ thread (even though it was closed on DZ) that he had removed from DZ and that he had posted at a non-DZ site. Perhaps he later removed it.
But my question to Blevins is the same as the one you ask above. How did it become Blevins "property" to do that to a DZ thread? And was he doing the same thing under the table with the present thread?
A few years ago, a legal dispute arose between the now late J. D. Salinger, of "Catcher in the Rye" fame, about the ownership of letters he had written to his former 18 year old mistress. His former girlfriend wanted to sell the letters to pay for her children's college education.
As I remember it, after quite a bit of litigation it was ruled that the former girlfriend owned the letters but Salinger owned the words. Also, if I remember correctly, a wealthy admirer of Salinger's bought the letters and returned them to him. Consequently, they were not publicly released and the former girlfriend got the money she needed for her children's education.
Robert99
georger 247
Robert99***
You have already downloaded and "published" the entire closed Cooper thread. And I imagine that you are doing, or going to do, the same thing for this present Cooper thread. And you probably have other "modifications" in mind for this thread as well. Again, you might want to talk to your lawyer about that.
Robert99
Quote
Where has Blevins published the entire closed thread? I thought
he was forced to take that down? How did it become Blevins'
property to publish?
This wasn't very long after Blevins joined this thread. He downloaded and massaged the closed thread and then had a link to where he had the massaged thread online.
My use of the word "publish" was intended to convey that he had, as I remember it, a public link that led to an entire DZ thread (even though it was closed on DZ) that he had removed from DZ and that he had posted at a non-DZ site. Perhaps he later removed it.
But my question to Blevins is the same as the one you ask above. How did it become Blevins "property" to do that to a DZ thread? And was he doing the same thing under the table with the present thread?
A few years ago, a legal dispute arose between the now late J. D. Salinger, of "Catcher in the Rye" fame, about the ownership of letters he had written to his former 18 year old mistress. His former girlfriend wanted to sell the letters to pay for her children's college education.
As I remember it, after quite a bit of litigation it was ruled that the former girlfriend owned the letters but Salinger owned the words. Also, if I remember correctly, a wealthy admirer of Salinger's bought the letters and returned them to him. Consequently, they were not publicly released and the former girlfriend got the money she needed for her children's education.
Robert99Quote
what goes around comes around -
funny.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites