Recommended Posts
snowmman 3
(the dark sand, I'm thinking, is where the water level changes due to tide)
and the "dark sand" is?
Its been two years and you havent figured that
out yet? You must not want to know! Keeps your
act alive I guess... are you a drunk?
The dark sand is caused by ammonium nitrate, washed down from the Washougal. Traces of acetone and hydrogen peroxide were also found in it.
However, I don't want to know.
snowmman 3
I'm looking at that side to side photo composite, of the initial searching at Tena Bar, before the backhoes trenched.
The left photo is clearly the money find. But the right photo, that Georger supplied, doesn't seem to look the same.
It has certain characteristics of the money find location, that are recognizable from recent Google Earth photos. But the sand seems smoother, and the outline of the water vs the sand seems different.
I wonder if georger's photo is from some other time.
It just seems different to me. It's possible I have the photo oriented wrong. But even flipped or reversed, the differences are still there.
There is a strong curviness to the water/sand boundary in the known-good photo on the left.
(edit) I thought it couldn't be resolved with changes in water height. But then I realized, that assumes the water/sand boundary retains its shape as the water level rises. If the sand profile changes with height, the water/sand boundary will change shape with water height changes.
Maybe that's what's going on.
The "dark sand" on the left photo, seemed to track the lower water level..which made me think the same curviness would be there at higher water levels.
Unclear.
The left photo is clearly the money find. But the right photo, that Georger supplied, doesn't seem to look the same.
It has certain characteristics of the money find location, that are recognizable from recent Google Earth photos. But the sand seems smoother, and the outline of the water vs the sand seems different.
I wonder if georger's photo is from some other time.
It just seems different to me. It's possible I have the photo oriented wrong. But even flipped or reversed, the differences are still there.
There is a strong curviness to the water/sand boundary in the known-good photo on the left.
(edit) I thought it couldn't be resolved with changes in water height. But then I realized, that assumes the water/sand boundary retains its shape as the water level rises. If the sand profile changes with height, the water/sand boundary will change shape with water height changes.
Maybe that's what's going on.
The "dark sand" on the left photo, seemed to track the lower water level..which made me think the same curviness would be there at higher water levels.
Unclear.
snowmman 3
for Farflung:
I was just searching and noticed georger had posted a nice subset of various images from the thread of the money dig in 1980
here:
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3636302;search_string=excavation%20photos;#3636302
I was looking at the first image (it was from a news video)
Although there's some distortion, you can see the angle of Tena Bar beach in 1980. (attached)
Now we don't know how much the angle changed over the years. We know it's different now, from reporting by Bruce.
But you can guesstimate from this photo, a bit about how high the river would need to rise, to deposit the money "below the high tide mark"
We've played with this issue before. I think georger posted some info about the water level variation around interesting dates.
I guess, just seeing that brush only grows down so far, that the water, at some time, rises all the way up (and we know there's flooding that goes out to the road at some point in time).
So maybe, the actual "spot" the money was found doesn't tell us anything.
If so, then it shouldn't tell Fazio anything either.
Fazio seems adamant on saying the position of the money find means something.
I think the right answer is "There's nothing about the condition of the money found, that can be used to make some theory about the position of the money find, vs water levels"
Isn't that right?
There was some that was feared of Pew, and some that was feared of Flint; but Flint his own self was feared of me.
Feared he was, and proud. They was the roughest crew afloat, was Flint's; the devil himself would have been feared to go to sea with them.
Well, now, I tell you, I'm not a boasting man, and you seen yourself how easy I keep company; but when I was quartermaster, lambs wasn't the word for Flint's old buccaneers.
Ah, you may be sure of yourself in old John's ship.
I was just searching and noticed georger had posted a nice subset of various images from the thread of the money dig in 1980
here:
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3636302;search_string=excavation%20photos;#3636302
I was looking at the first image (it was from a news video)
Although there's some distortion, you can see the angle of Tena Bar beach in 1980. (attached)
Now we don't know how much the angle changed over the years. We know it's different now, from reporting by Bruce.
But you can guesstimate from this photo, a bit about how high the river would need to rise, to deposit the money "below the high tide mark"
We've played with this issue before. I think georger posted some info about the water level variation around interesting dates.
I guess, just seeing that brush only grows down so far, that the water, at some time, rises all the way up (and we know there's flooding that goes out to the road at some point in time).
So maybe, the actual "spot" the money was found doesn't tell us anything.
If so, then it shouldn't tell Fazio anything either.
Fazio seems adamant on saying the position of the money find means something.
I think the right answer is "There's nothing about the condition of the money found, that can be used to make some theory about the position of the money find, vs water levels"
Isn't that right?
There was some that was feared of Pew, and some that was feared of Flint; but Flint his own self was feared of me.
Feared he was, and proud. They was the roughest crew afloat, was Flint's; the devil himself would have been feared to go to sea with them.
Well, now, I tell you, I'm not a boasting man, and you seen yourself how easy I keep company; but when I was quartermaster, lambs wasn't the word for Flint's old buccaneers.
Ah, you may be sure of yourself in old John's ship.
snowmman 3
we're talking again, about the position of the money on the exposed sand, vs water levels in 1980.
I'm thinking there's just no way to connect the money position, to water levels, and have any meaning.
That's because the money condition tells us nothing about how long the money was there.
When Kennewick Man was discovered, the police that responded to the scene actually found some floating bones. How long was Kenniwick Man buried at his site? and where did he come from?
http://books.google.com/books?id=81_EUr-q_PkC&pg=PA27&dq=kennewick+man+floating+bones#v=onepage&q=kennewick%20man%20floating%20bones&f=false
Four bones had dark brown stains.
Very nice photos of the bones here
http://www.nps.gov/history/aad/kennewick/walker.HTM
The Kennewick remains were all recovered along the shore of the Columbia River at the base of the river's bank. Although none of them were recovered in situ, all of the larger fragments occurred within a 12m area (Chatters 2000). This suggests recent exposure. Bones rapidly become sorted through fluvial transport (Aslan and Behrensmeyer 1996) with lighter, more porous bones, (e.g., vertebrae, patellae, and phalanges) being transported farther than heavy bones (e.g., limb bones and mandibles).
..
Our observations confirm the conclusion of Powell and Rose (1999). The preponderance of the evidence indicates that these are the remains of a single individual who was interred at the site instead of being left to decompose on the surface of the ground, or incorporated into the deposit through some catastrophic hydrologic event. This conclusion is consistent with the completeness of the skeleton and the absence of any clear indications of carnivore activity. Our taphonomic analysis clearly shows that the skeleton had been exposed on the riverbank for a relatively short period of time prior to discovery.
We've gone over all the photos we have from various dates.
In reviewing them, the amount of exposed sand varies.
The 5/02 photo has the least sand showing and is interesting to look at.
I didn't create another montage but attached (these have been posted before)
are:
the montage of
8-9-70
9-6-74
9-49-79
Google earth:
7-15-90
7-24-00
5-02
7-05
(i had posted these when GE started including historical imagery capability)
(edit) Comparing georger's photo, to where I identified "money find from FBI aerials" ...I notice I'm a little off. It appears that the money find is a little bit S of where the dirt/gravel road curves closest to the columbia....so I should be a little more to the right, say, in the 2002 snap.
I suppose that little building on the right close to the beach, might be the building visible in georger's photo from 1980.
(edit) in looking at it again, the road has a double curve. so it's unclear. It's amazing how close it is to the 2nd dredge plume from '74 (see the montage photo).
I'm thinking there's just no way to connect the money position, to water levels, and have any meaning.
That's because the money condition tells us nothing about how long the money was there.
When Kennewick Man was discovered, the police that responded to the scene actually found some floating bones. How long was Kenniwick Man buried at his site? and where did he come from?
http://books.google.com/books?id=81_EUr-q_PkC&pg=PA27&dq=kennewick+man+floating+bones#v=onepage&q=kennewick%20man%20floating%20bones&f=false
Four bones had dark brown stains.
Very nice photos of the bones here
http://www.nps.gov/history/aad/kennewick/walker.HTM
The Kennewick remains were all recovered along the shore of the Columbia River at the base of the river's bank. Although none of them were recovered in situ, all of the larger fragments occurred within a 12m area (Chatters 2000). This suggests recent exposure. Bones rapidly become sorted through fluvial transport (Aslan and Behrensmeyer 1996) with lighter, more porous bones, (e.g., vertebrae, patellae, and phalanges) being transported farther than heavy bones (e.g., limb bones and mandibles).
..
Our observations confirm the conclusion of Powell and Rose (1999). The preponderance of the evidence indicates that these are the remains of a single individual who was interred at the site instead of being left to decompose on the surface of the ground, or incorporated into the deposit through some catastrophic hydrologic event. This conclusion is consistent with the completeness of the skeleton and the absence of any clear indications of carnivore activity. Our taphonomic analysis clearly shows that the skeleton had been exposed on the riverbank for a relatively short period of time prior to discovery.
We've gone over all the photos we have from various dates.
In reviewing them, the amount of exposed sand varies.
The 5/02 photo has the least sand showing and is interesting to look at.
I didn't create another montage but attached (these have been posted before)
are:
the montage of
8-9-70
9-6-74
9-49-79
Google earth:
7-15-90
7-24-00
5-02
7-05
(i had posted these when GE started including historical imagery capability)
(edit) Comparing georger's photo, to where I identified "money find from FBI aerials" ...I notice I'm a little off. It appears that the money find is a little bit S of where the dirt/gravel road curves closest to the columbia....so I should be a little more to the right, say, in the 2002 snap.
I suppose that little building on the right close to the beach, might be the building visible in georger's photo from 1980.
(edit) in looking at it again, the road has a double curve. so it's unclear. It's amazing how close it is to the 2nd dredge plume from '74 (see the montage photo).
snowmman 3
I've been interested in studies of trash and wood debris in rivers.
Here's one (4MB) that while not the Columbia, is Pacific Northwest, and talks about wood debris in rivers, flowing out to the ocean.
Some nice data in it.
also data on the type of organisms that start feeding on the wood.
they have some estimates of the total amount of wood that travels into the ocean per year. It's enormous. (billions of board-feet)
some nice historical photos (of wood)
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/229chpt4.pdf
Here's one (4MB) that while not the Columbia, is Pacific Northwest, and talks about wood debris in rivers, flowing out to the ocean.
Some nice data in it.
also data on the type of organisms that start feeding on the wood.
they have some estimates of the total amount of wood that travels into the ocean per year. It's enormous. (billions of board-feet)
some nice historical photos (of wood)
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/229chpt4.pdf
snowmman 3
are mentioned in this report, page 10 and on.
http://oregonmufon.com/PDFs/CattleMutilationsAndUFOs.pdf
This is a great background report for you Bruce. It has a lot of detail about the Fazio incident.
There were also other cow mutilations in OR
Spring and Summer 1989, near Bend, La Pine and Fort Rock, OR
35 carcasses.
page 11 has the picture and locations of the Fazio cow mutilations (attached, along with the lab report)
Interestingly, everyone will recognize the area from our study of Tena Bar.
Vancouver Cattle Mutilations
• When and where: June to October 1990, outside of
Vancouver, WA, along the Columbia River on New Columbia
Garden Farms, Inc., property.
• Evidence: Five carcasses of cattle, photos, veterinarian
examination, OSU Diagnostic Veterinary Lab report.
• Description: Owner Richard Fazio found eventually five
cattle mysteriously mutilated on his property. He called the
Clark County sheriff’s office. They investigated, but never
suspected or prosecuted anyone for killing the cattle by
cutting out hunks of them.
• Investigators Carlo Sposito and Keith Rowell in cooperation
with the Clark County sheriff’s department pursued the
investigation.
• Vancouver veterinarian Randy Lee oversaw the dissection of
the last mutilated cow (#4).
• Tissue samples were sent to the Oregon State University
Diagnostic Veterinary Laboratory.
• The mutilated cattle were clustered within a mile in three
different fenced pastures.
• Cow #1 was discovered by a field hand. Fazio called the
sheriff’s department. They took information and called
Randy Lee to examine it. He found no bullet holes.
• Fazio, Sposito, and Rowell discovered cow #3 in the same
field. Cursory examination was made and photos were
taken. Cow #3 was in rigor mortis (dead within 36 hours
earlier).
• Cow #4 (a steer) was discovered by Fazio north of #1, #2,
and #3. Sposito, Rowell, Fazio, and Lee participated in a
dissection. Blood samples and tissue samples were taken.
Video and photos were taken.
• All cattle showed at least some of the typical anomalous
cattle mutilation characteristics: removal of eye(s), ear(s),
tongue, hide around the mouth, rectum, udder, vagina, penis,
belly skin, sometimes inner organs, etc.
• Cow #2 was discovered by another field hand. Fazio called
in Sposito and Rowell since the sheriff’s department was not
interested any longer.
• In October, Sposito interviewed two women neighbors of
the New Columbia Garden Farms property.
• The neighbors were well acquainted with “normal” farm
machinery sounds during the day and night.
• However, during the general timeframe of the mutilations in
late summer, they heard strange sounds that they could not
reasonably attribute to “normal” farm machinery sounds.
• Sposito also located and interviewed a woman who worked
as a late night custodian at a local Vancouver business. One
evening driving home in the AM she was startled by a “little
man” apparently carrying a “flashlight” in the same pasture
as mutilations #1, #2, and #3.
Graphic photos are on page 16-18 of the pdf (not attached)
such as pics of Cow #4: Classic “cookie cutter” (serrated), non-scavenger caused excision, heat hardened. Pics of cows with missing eye, penis, rectum.
Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory Report, OSU
attached (from page 19)
Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory Report, OSU
Randy Lee sent a tissue specimen consisting of "fixed tissue" from a "hereford
cross steer" male, 2 years old, which was received by the lab on 12 February
1991. Madeline A Rae, DVM, signed the "Report of Laboratory Examinations".
The “Pathologist Report” states:
“HISTOPATHOLOGY: Sections of skin from a steer are examined. All sections
display moderately severe post-mortem autolysis. The notched edge does
exhibit a band of coagulation necrosis consistent with a heat induced incision,
such as with an electrosurgical unit. Numerous bacteria are present on the
skin, except in the area of coagulation necrosis. This is consistent with a
specimen collected via electrosurgical excision.
DIAGNOSIS: Coagulation necrosis of the skin.
COMMENT: It is not possible to tell whether this lesion was caused by a laser.
It does appear consistent with a heat-induced injury.”
starting on page 26, it goes thru a checklist of the possible causes:
• Basically, there are only five theories:
(1) Natural causes: predators, lightning, poison, sickness.
(2) “Crazy” guy with a knife.
(3) (Satanic) cult activity.
(4) Covert (U.S.) government activity.
(5) UFO-related activity.
• Which one fits the evidence the best?
The evidence seems to support UFOs best (page 35) more so than Covert activity (page 33)
Conclusion
• The theories in order of increasing plausibility when
all the evidence is considered are:
(1) Natural causes: predators, lightning, poison,
sickness.
(2) “Crazy” guy with a knife. [Ed. Cooper?]
(3) (Satanic) cult activity.
(4) Covert (U.S.) government activity.
(5) UFO-related activity.
•Only UFOs really fit all the facts and evidence. But
authorities can’t acknowledge this. Thus, animal
mutilations will remain officially a mystery.
http://oregonmufon.com/PDFs/CattleMutilationsAndUFOs.pdf
This is a great background report for you Bruce. It has a lot of detail about the Fazio incident.
There were also other cow mutilations in OR
Spring and Summer 1989, near Bend, La Pine and Fort Rock, OR
35 carcasses.
page 11 has the picture and locations of the Fazio cow mutilations (attached, along with the lab report)
Interestingly, everyone will recognize the area from our study of Tena Bar.
Vancouver Cattle Mutilations
• When and where: June to October 1990, outside of
Vancouver, WA, along the Columbia River on New Columbia
Garden Farms, Inc., property.
• Evidence: Five carcasses of cattle, photos, veterinarian
examination, OSU Diagnostic Veterinary Lab report.
• Description: Owner Richard Fazio found eventually five
cattle mysteriously mutilated on his property. He called the
Clark County sheriff’s office. They investigated, but never
suspected or prosecuted anyone for killing the cattle by
cutting out hunks of them.
• Investigators Carlo Sposito and Keith Rowell in cooperation
with the Clark County sheriff’s department pursued the
investigation.
• Vancouver veterinarian Randy Lee oversaw the dissection of
the last mutilated cow (#4).
• Tissue samples were sent to the Oregon State University
Diagnostic Veterinary Laboratory.
• The mutilated cattle were clustered within a mile in three
different fenced pastures.
• Cow #1 was discovered by a field hand. Fazio called the
sheriff’s department. They took information and called
Randy Lee to examine it. He found no bullet holes.
• Fazio, Sposito, and Rowell discovered cow #3 in the same
field. Cursory examination was made and photos were
taken. Cow #3 was in rigor mortis (dead within 36 hours
earlier).
• Cow #4 (a steer) was discovered by Fazio north of #1, #2,
and #3. Sposito, Rowell, Fazio, and Lee participated in a
dissection. Blood samples and tissue samples were taken.
Video and photos were taken.
• All cattle showed at least some of the typical anomalous
cattle mutilation characteristics: removal of eye(s), ear(s),
tongue, hide around the mouth, rectum, udder, vagina, penis,
belly skin, sometimes inner organs, etc.
• Cow #2 was discovered by another field hand. Fazio called
in Sposito and Rowell since the sheriff’s department was not
interested any longer.
• In October, Sposito interviewed two women neighbors of
the New Columbia Garden Farms property.
• The neighbors were well acquainted with “normal” farm
machinery sounds during the day and night.
• However, during the general timeframe of the mutilations in
late summer, they heard strange sounds that they could not
reasonably attribute to “normal” farm machinery sounds.
• Sposito also located and interviewed a woman who worked
as a late night custodian at a local Vancouver business. One
evening driving home in the AM she was startled by a “little
man” apparently carrying a “flashlight” in the same pasture
as mutilations #1, #2, and #3.
Graphic photos are on page 16-18 of the pdf (not attached)
such as pics of Cow #4: Classic “cookie cutter” (serrated), non-scavenger caused excision, heat hardened. Pics of cows with missing eye, penis, rectum.
Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory Report, OSU
attached (from page 19)
Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory Report, OSU
Randy Lee sent a tissue specimen consisting of "fixed tissue" from a "hereford
cross steer" male, 2 years old, which was received by the lab on 12 February
1991. Madeline A Rae, DVM, signed the "Report of Laboratory Examinations".
The “Pathologist Report” states:
“HISTOPATHOLOGY: Sections of skin from a steer are examined. All sections
display moderately severe post-mortem autolysis. The notched edge does
exhibit a band of coagulation necrosis consistent with a heat induced incision,
such as with an electrosurgical unit. Numerous bacteria are present on the
skin, except in the area of coagulation necrosis. This is consistent with a
specimen collected via electrosurgical excision.
DIAGNOSIS: Coagulation necrosis of the skin.
COMMENT: It is not possible to tell whether this lesion was caused by a laser.
It does appear consistent with a heat-induced injury.”
starting on page 26, it goes thru a checklist of the possible causes:
• Basically, there are only five theories:
(1) Natural causes: predators, lightning, poison, sickness.
(2) “Crazy” guy with a knife.
(3) (Satanic) cult activity.
(4) Covert (U.S.) government activity.
(5) UFO-related activity.
• Which one fits the evidence the best?
The evidence seems to support UFOs best (page 35) more so than Covert activity (page 33)
Conclusion
• The theories in order of increasing plausibility when
all the evidence is considered are:
(1) Natural causes: predators, lightning, poison,
sickness.
(2) “Crazy” guy with a knife. [Ed. Cooper?]
(3) (Satanic) cult activity.
(4) Covert (U.S.) government activity.
(5) UFO-related activity.
•Only UFOs really fit all the facts and evidence. But
authorities can’t acknowledge this. Thus, animal
mutilations will remain officially a mystery.
snowmman 3
this seems like a good find.
http://books.google.com/books?id=fF4urADqI48C&pg=PA138#v=onepage&q=&f=false
BRUCE: if you can find this guy and interview him, that would be cool.
His book was just published in 2009. memoirs.
Title Agent Bishop: True Stories from an FBI Agent Moonlighting As a Mormon Bishop
Author Mike McPheters
Publisher Cedar Fort, 2009
ISBN 1599553171, 9781599553177
Length 273 pages
Agent Mike McPheters worked hijackings out of Miami in 1971.
In 1980, he apparently was up in the Portland Division, FBI. In 1980 he became part of the Portland SWAT. Other interesting stories in the book.
He says he found some money while they were searching after the Ingram find
from the above link/page
"While sifting through a parcel of the beach assigned to me, I turned up portions of soil containing pieces of paper currency approximately two inches wide, but still containing serial numbers that matched Cooper's demand money.
I preserved each piece as evidence by storing them in plastic bags, tagging them with my initials and the date and case number. I kept digging. By late that night and with the help of a good rake, I had found numerous pieces of the money, all of which matched up. I documented my discovery as one of the most interesting reports I had ever written."
What's interesting to me, is how Ckret protested the dredge story. The pieces of bills found, seem to support the dredge story more.
If the story of McPheters money find is true, it's another example of where Ckret didn't know basic stuff, or withheld it from us.
(edit) I've since researched McPheters more. He's the real deal. Interesting full life.
http://books.google.com/books?id=fF4urADqI48C&pg=PA138#v=onepage&q=&f=false
BRUCE: if you can find this guy and interview him, that would be cool.
His book was just published in 2009. memoirs.
Title Agent Bishop: True Stories from an FBI Agent Moonlighting As a Mormon Bishop
Author Mike McPheters
Publisher Cedar Fort, 2009
ISBN 1599553171, 9781599553177
Length 273 pages
Agent Mike McPheters worked hijackings out of Miami in 1971.
In 1980, he apparently was up in the Portland Division, FBI. In 1980 he became part of the Portland SWAT. Other interesting stories in the book.
He says he found some money while they were searching after the Ingram find
from the above link/page
"While sifting through a parcel of the beach assigned to me, I turned up portions of soil containing pieces of paper currency approximately two inches wide, but still containing serial numbers that matched Cooper's demand money.
I preserved each piece as evidence by storing them in plastic bags, tagging them with my initials and the date and case number. I kept digging. By late that night and with the help of a good rake, I had found numerous pieces of the money, all of which matched up. I documented my discovery as one of the most interesting reports I had ever written."
What's interesting to me, is how Ckret protested the dredge story. The pieces of bills found, seem to support the dredge story more.
If the story of McPheters money find is true, it's another example of where Ckret didn't know basic stuff, or withheld it from us.
(edit) I've since researched McPheters more. He's the real deal. Interesting full life.
snowmman 3
was pretty easy to find.
I forwarded contact info to Bruce.
I think this might yield some really useful info.
McPheters is retired from FBI. runs a PI thing of his own.
(edit) Remember, CSG inc. requires all information to be withheld from Skip Porteus and Galen Cook. Okay to post here though.
(edit) McPheters was late 30s in 1980. Unclear if he would have been familiar with the geologist report. But, he was in the Portland office with Himmelsbach. He may be able to give us background on Himmelsbach or the clay layer report.
I forwarded contact info to Bruce.
I think this might yield some really useful info.
McPheters is retired from FBI. runs a PI thing of his own.
(edit) Remember, CSG inc. requires all information to be withheld from Skip Porteus and Galen Cook. Okay to post here though.
(edit) McPheters was late 30s in 1980. Unclear if he would have been familiar with the geologist report. But, he was in the Portland office with Himmelsbach. He may be able to give us background on Himmelsbach or the clay layer report.
If the Co-pilot had the controls that mean he was sitting on the right side of the plane. Correct or incorrect? The Pilot sits on the left and the co-pilot on the right.
I ASSUME the above with my little knowledge of airplanes. It was established Rat the co-pilot claimed to have seen the hazed suburbs of Portland which means Vancouver.
I have never really understood if the Cooper was sitting on the left or right of the plane, but it really makes no difference, because he asked Tina to turn the cabin lights off before she went forward.
When Duane took me on that trip in 1979 he pointed out the towers. I looked at some maps Sluggo brought to me after accidentally getting a view of my marked map upsided down.
Duane made this comment about one - one SE of Lake LaCames. "There used to be a tower over there".
With Sluggo's maps I saw something else I was unaware of - 3 airport towers in a row. This is what Cooper would have seen out of the left side of the plane at the same time Rat saw the haze over Vancouver. One of these towers I am not sure was there in 1971, but there were other types of towers. I presume from looking at OLD maps one tower in 1971 could have been Prune Hill or Crisman.
I do not know if the tower at the airstrip on 267th /SR-500 was there in 1971. It is now called Grove Field and may have been so in 1971.
Does anyone have any idea what happens when you follow these towers and the route you would take using the towers as your guides starting with the Orchards area ? Do you know WHERE it takes you?
IT takes you to the area he took me - Coopers route out of the area. All of these towers point right to the area where powerlines crisscross and the Pipeline crosses at that same intersection in 2 places. He could follow the pipelines or the powerlines to take him to the Marina. There was a beacon on Woodburn Hill in 1971 - just encase he over shot, but that wasn't his goal.
The next paragraph actually occurred, but at the time I had NO REASON to connect it to Cooper or Duane. An expression Duane stated "If you want to get away with a crime go right back at them". This is exactly what he did - when he took that boat from the Marina and let it loose near the PDX.
All of this because I happened by chance to be viewing a map up-sided down after marking the things he told me about and the area he took me to. Everyone has tried to make Cooper"s escape complicated. It was simple and didn't take a pilot or a lot of aeronautic knowledge. The flaps and speed could have been learned thru his brother's association with Boeing and conversations and maybe thru some type of employment or military association.
The chute part I don't have an opinion, because I have never seen one up-close nor have I ever touched one
I ASSUME the above with my little knowledge of airplanes. It was established Rat the co-pilot claimed to have seen the hazed suburbs of Portland which means Vancouver.
I have never really understood if the Cooper was sitting on the left or right of the plane, but it really makes no difference, because he asked Tina to turn the cabin lights off before she went forward.
When Duane took me on that trip in 1979 he pointed out the towers. I looked at some maps Sluggo brought to me after accidentally getting a view of my marked map upsided down.
Duane made this comment about one - one SE of Lake LaCames. "There used to be a tower over there".
With Sluggo's maps I saw something else I was unaware of - 3 airport towers in a row. This is what Cooper would have seen out of the left side of the plane at the same time Rat saw the haze over Vancouver. One of these towers I am not sure was there in 1971, but there were other types of towers. I presume from looking at OLD maps one tower in 1971 could have been Prune Hill or Crisman.
I do not know if the tower at the airstrip on 267th /SR-500 was there in 1971. It is now called Grove Field and may have been so in 1971.
Does anyone have any idea what happens when you follow these towers and the route you would take using the towers as your guides starting with the Orchards area ? Do you know WHERE it takes you?
IT takes you to the area he took me - Coopers route out of the area. All of these towers point right to the area where powerlines crisscross and the Pipeline crosses at that same intersection in 2 places. He could follow the pipelines or the powerlines to take him to the Marina. There was a beacon on Woodburn Hill in 1971 - just encase he over shot, but that wasn't his goal.
The next paragraph actually occurred, but at the time I had NO REASON to connect it to Cooper or Duane. An expression Duane stated "If you want to get away with a crime go right back at them". This is exactly what he did - when he took that boat from the Marina and let it loose near the PDX.
All of this because I happened by chance to be viewing a map up-sided down after marking the things he told me about and the area he took me to. Everyone has tried to make Cooper"s escape complicated. It was simple and didn't take a pilot or a lot of aeronautic knowledge. The flaps and speed could have been learned thru his brother's association with Boeing and conversations and maybe thru some type of employment or military association.
The chute part I don't have an opinion, because I have never seen one up-close nor have I ever touched one
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber
snowmman 3
More detail from 1992 on the mutilations here.
I highlight only the connected UFO events in the area.
Bruce appears to be correct.
http://www.anomalies.net/archive/paranet/newsletter/590
UFO events
But what about the UFO connection to these mutilations. It turns out there there are some, but they are not exceedingly strong, just suggestive. And they are there, although many mutilation cases have no associated UFO reports.
The Adams's
Toni and Helen Locklear of Vancouver, WA, were trying out their new video camera along Lower River Road in December of 1988. When they spotted a UFO. They then proceeded to video tape 10 minutes of the UFO.
I have seen this video and it shows very clearly two distinct, apparently high flying, extremely thick and robust 'condensation trails'. They look like no condensation trails I have ever seen, however.
Columbia River Orange Ball with Recorded Sound
In the fall of 1980, an orange, glowing UFO was observed to move at low altitude and slow speed along the Columbia River starting around the Sauvie Island area and proceeding up river to cross the I-5 bridge, which connects Portland and Vancouver. I-5 is the main Oregon/Washington artery. It disappeared somewhere around the Government Island area, which is near Portland International Airport.
The UFO was observed by a policeman who called a local radio station at the time of observation, and the radio station recorded a sound thought by the policeman and other witnesses to be emanating from the UFO.
The UFO sound recording was later sent on to the Center for UFO Studies, where it was eventually analyzed by a highly qualified acoustics expert. The expert concluded that the sound on the tape would have been almost impossible to duplicate in the open-air situation of its recording.
[Ed. I have more detail on this case if interested]
Lois and Joan
Lois and Joan live less than a mile from the Farms pasture where mutilations #1, #2, and #3 were found. Their rented house is right on Lower River Road back toward Vancouver from the pasture.
Late one night they both heard loud noises akin to farm machinery in the direction of the Farms pasture from their house. They thought this was odd since they had never heard 'farm machinery noise' so late at night in their more than two
years of living in this location.
About two years earlier, Marty and Shawn witnessed typical UFO activity Q anomalous lights and a UFO itself Q along Lower River Road and in the environs around their house.
Rachel
Rachel, a neighbor and friend of Richard Fazio, lives north of the Fazio property along Lower River Road in an old farm house. She goes past the Fazio property every workday at night since she worked in Vancouver cleaning offices at night during the period of the Fazio mutilations.
During one night around 3 AM when she was routinely driving north along Lower River Road back home after working at her night time office cleaning job, she noticed two lights in a field.
This was the same field that mutilations #1, #2, and #3 were found. The two lights were very near the location of mutilations #1 and #2. These two small, white/yellowish lights and their movement brought to mind the thought that two people must be looking for something in the field with flashlights.
However, she was spooked enough by the sight of lights 'that weren't supposed to be there at that time of night' that she thought better of her first impulse to stop and investigate.
She drove on to her house and didn't return.
After the October mutilation, the Fazio's have reported no new
mutilations.
I highlight only the connected UFO events in the area.
Bruce appears to be correct.
http://www.anomalies.net/archive/paranet/newsletter/590
UFO events
But what about the UFO connection to these mutilations. It turns out there there are some, but they are not exceedingly strong, just suggestive. And they are there, although many mutilation cases have no associated UFO reports.
The Adams's
Toni and Helen Locklear of Vancouver, WA, were trying out their new video camera along Lower River Road in December of 1988. When they spotted a UFO. They then proceeded to video tape 10 minutes of the UFO.
I have seen this video and it shows very clearly two distinct, apparently high flying, extremely thick and robust 'condensation trails'. They look like no condensation trails I have ever seen, however.
Columbia River Orange Ball with Recorded Sound
In the fall of 1980, an orange, glowing UFO was observed to move at low altitude and slow speed along the Columbia River starting around the Sauvie Island area and proceeding up river to cross the I-5 bridge, which connects Portland and Vancouver. I-5 is the main Oregon/Washington artery. It disappeared somewhere around the Government Island area, which is near Portland International Airport.
The UFO was observed by a policeman who called a local radio station at the time of observation, and the radio station recorded a sound thought by the policeman and other witnesses to be emanating from the UFO.
The UFO sound recording was later sent on to the Center for UFO Studies, where it was eventually analyzed by a highly qualified acoustics expert. The expert concluded that the sound on the tape would have been almost impossible to duplicate in the open-air situation of its recording.
[Ed. I have more detail on this case if interested]
Lois and Joan
Lois and Joan live less than a mile from the Farms pasture where mutilations #1, #2, and #3 were found. Their rented house is right on Lower River Road back toward Vancouver from the pasture.
Late one night they both heard loud noises akin to farm machinery in the direction of the Farms pasture from their house. They thought this was odd since they had never heard 'farm machinery noise' so late at night in their more than two
years of living in this location.
About two years earlier, Marty and Shawn witnessed typical UFO activity Q anomalous lights and a UFO itself Q along Lower River Road and in the environs around their house.
Rachel
Rachel, a neighbor and friend of Richard Fazio, lives north of the Fazio property along Lower River Road in an old farm house. She goes past the Fazio property every workday at night since she worked in Vancouver cleaning offices at night during the period of the Fazio mutilations.
During one night around 3 AM when she was routinely driving north along Lower River Road back home after working at her night time office cleaning job, she noticed two lights in a field.
This was the same field that mutilations #1, #2, and #3 were found. The two lights were very near the location of mutilations #1 and #2. These two small, white/yellowish lights and their movement brought to mind the thought that two people must be looking for something in the field with flashlights.
However, she was spooked enough by the sight of lights 'that weren't supposed to be there at that time of night' that she thought better of her first impulse to stop and investigate.
She drove on to her house and didn't return.
After the October mutilation, the Fazio's have reported no new
mutilations.
377 22
What's interesting to me, is how Ckret protested the dredge story. The pieces of bills found, seem to support the dredge story more.
Agree. From what you know of the dredge type, could the stacked bills have made it through intact?
That cow mutilation account is provocative. The Skeptical Inquirer or one of the skeptic rags did an article on cattle mutilations. They made a convincing case for normal scavenger activity combined with unscientific pathology. So called cautery evidence was normal tissue necrosis around wound peripheries accelerated by sun.
Cattle people like the Fazios have seen normal scavenger ravages. They have seen cows die unexpectedly. They don't go blaming UFOs or lunatics for normal cattle deaths. I am not sure we have the whole story about what really happened.
Penis and gall bladder harvesting from wild bears in the US turned out to be Asian poachers seeking prized aphrodesiacs.
377
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.
snowmman 3
377 said "Agree. From what you know of the dredge type, could the stacked bills have made it through intact?"
yes..we went over this a lot. 30" pipeline dredge. We talked about the ball size that could go thru a typical 30" pipeline dredge. If a rock of a size can go thru, then a less hard object can go thru..it's not like the rock moves blades out of the way..it's steel..fixed configuration.
yes there was probably a cutterhead. But stuff goes thru. I provided pictures of debris that went thru. That's why they get debris in the spoils sites. ...it's not like it's all finely chopped up.
I still can't understand it. Ckret doesn't see this report? and Tom Kaye doesn't see it. But then again, Himmelsbach apparently never saw the radar flight path??
We have the "shards" memory from Fazio. We have multiple reports of additional fragments found. And now we have an FBI agent confirming that. Hopefully Bruce can get more.
I think the new info is that the fragments were not found in the trench, from "falling down" like we theorized.
This agent says they were dispersed...not very deep in the sand.
(so he's not really confirming Fazio's "shards" being visible, story)
yes..we went over this a lot. 30" pipeline dredge. We talked about the ball size that could go thru a typical 30" pipeline dredge. If a rock of a size can go thru, then a less hard object can go thru..it's not like the rock moves blades out of the way..it's steel..fixed configuration.
yes there was probably a cutterhead. But stuff goes thru. I provided pictures of debris that went thru. That's why they get debris in the spoils sites. ...it's not like it's all finely chopped up.
I still can't understand it. Ckret doesn't see this report? and Tom Kaye doesn't see it. But then again, Himmelsbach apparently never saw the radar flight path??
We have the "shards" memory from Fazio. We have multiple reports of additional fragments found. And now we have an FBI agent confirming that. Hopefully Bruce can get more.
I think the new info is that the fragments were not found in the trench, from "falling down" like we theorized.
This agent says they were dispersed...not very deep in the sand.
(so he's not really confirming Fazio's "shards" being visible, story)
georger 247
The dark sand is caused by ammonium nitrate, washed down from the Washougal. Traces of acetone and hydrogen peroxide were also found in it.
However, I don't want to know.
Funny. Now that I can live with. Damned funny.
You did your homework and you do have memory.
Good show! Mooooo.
snowmman 3
I was intrigued by the Fazio's dredging operations.
I found they had hired an environmental consultant to get their dredging access permit renewed recently.
They claimed they had been doing it since 1995. I don't know for sure when the earliest was.
But I found their dredging permit from 2004. (It expires at the end of Oct. this year)
There are 3 pages.
The second page has a picture of the exact location the dredge goes to. It's at the plume area in '74, that seemed to have runoff. Georger talked about this a lot apparently from info from Tom Kaye and Fazio.
It's right at the big sand hills, which you would expect.
I was half wondering if the Fazios could have done any illegal dredging in the late '70s. They started up their sand operation in the '70s right? I think we know that from the pictures? I forget how we went thru this. While this may be the current dredging output site (and it seems to match one of the plumes in '74)...the '74 picture shows two plumes..the other closer to the money find.
from http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/aqr_roe-dredgematerialremovalandsales31-C50305.pdf
and attached.
BergerABAM was the firm they used to get their permit through:
http://www.abam.com/portfolio/environmental/esa/index.cfm?id=283
I found they had hired an environmental consultant to get their dredging access permit renewed recently.
They claimed they had been doing it since 1995. I don't know for sure when the earliest was.
But I found their dredging permit from 2004. (It expires at the end of Oct. this year)
There are 3 pages.
The second page has a picture of the exact location the dredge goes to. It's at the plume area in '74, that seemed to have runoff. Georger talked about this a lot apparently from info from Tom Kaye and Fazio.
It's right at the big sand hills, which you would expect.
I was half wondering if the Fazios could have done any illegal dredging in the late '70s. They started up their sand operation in the '70s right? I think we know that from the pictures? I forget how we went thru this. While this may be the current dredging output site (and it seems to match one of the plumes in '74)...the '74 picture shows two plumes..the other closer to the money find.
from http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/aqr_roe-dredgematerialremovalandsales31-C50305.pdf
and attached.
BergerABAM was the firm they used to get their permit through:
http://www.abam.com/portfolio/environmental/esa/index.cfm?id=283
georger 247
well, the righthand photo is aI'm looking at that side to side photo composite, of the initial searching at Tena Bar, before the backhoes trenched.
The left photo is clearly the money find. But the right photo, that Georger supplied, doesn't seem to look the same.
It has certain characteristics of the money find location, that are recognizable from recent Google Earth photos. But the sand seems smoother, and the outline of the water vs the sand seems different.
I wonder if georger's photo is from some other time.
It just seems different to me. It's possible I have the photo oriented wrong. But even flipped or reversed, the differences are still there.
There is a strong curviness to the water/sand boundary in the known-good photo on the left.
(edit) I thought it couldn't be resolved with changes in water height. But then I realized, that assumes the water/sand boundary retains its shape as the water level rises. If the sand profile changes with height, the water/sand boundary will change shape with water height changes.
Maybe that's what's going on.
The "dark sand" on the left photo, seemed to track the lower water level..which made me think the same curviness would be there at higher water levels.
Unclear.
piece of crap on any account. I guess its a photo?
It almost looks like drawing. Or a drawing over a
photo? Its blured. Maybe is fallen into water. I dont
recall its origin. The whole purpose of the photo
was supposedly to show the trenches that were
dug at T-Bar during the excavation, but I question that. There is something about this socalled photo that looks unreal - I almost didnt post it except that
it supposedly reflects all the trenches dug at Tina Bar.
georger 247
If so, then it shouldn't tell Fazio anything either.
Fazio seems adamant on saying the position of the money find means something.
I think the right answer is "There's nothing about the condition of the money found, that can be used to make some theory about the position of the money find, vs water levels"
Fazio seems adamant on saying the position of the money find means something.
I think the right answer is "There's nothing about the condition of the money found, that can be used to make some theory about the position of the money find, vs water levels"
The only thing Fazio is adamant about is that the
money arrived with a high tide. He seems to equate
noticed or found with some immediately prior high tide. He could be right but he could be wrong.
Noticing or the discovery of the money in no way
guarantees its date of deposition.
Fazio's logic stems from his claim everything
was on the surface (nothing deep), as if having
just been deposited by a high tide. That still does
not guarantee a dat of deposition, and factually
Fazio is wrong. Pieces of money were found "under
the surface" during the excavation, after the Ingram
find. That is just a fact witnessed by "many".
The brushy area behind the money find interests
me. Was a bag snagged there and decayed then
money worked its way down back toward the water and spread out over time to suddenly be discovered, with a fragment field then noticed by Fazio. But a
single high tide would not create the forensic field
found at Ingram's discovery or afterwards during the
excavation.
BTW: Tom says he measured the beach and the
money find location is in a location unaffected by
the dredging debris. He bases this on measurements
alone so far as I know -
snowmman 3
georger said "BTW: Tom says he measured the beach and the
money find location is in a location unaffected by
the dredging debris. He bases this on measurements
alone so far as I know -"
He doesn't know the width of the plume fields, except as estimated from the photos?
He doesn't know if the sand was moved after the plume fields.
I thought we have info that Fazio moved the sand along the beach...in fact I thought most of the complaints now are how they can't replenish beaches (like across the Columbia at the RV park)
Now that I think of it:
The geologist says there were clay layers from dredging at the money find site.
The plume is slightly south.
So the dredging spoils were likely moved there by dozer or tractor.
Right?
It doesn't matter what Tom measured...I think. (I can't understand what Tom is saying: that with a measurement he can discount the geologist's statement on the source of sand at the money find location???)
money find location is in a location unaffected by
the dredging debris. He bases this on measurements
alone so far as I know -"
He doesn't know the width of the plume fields, except as estimated from the photos?
He doesn't know if the sand was moved after the plume fields.
I thought we have info that Fazio moved the sand along the beach...in fact I thought most of the complaints now are how they can't replenish beaches (like across the Columbia at the RV park)
Now that I think of it:
The geologist says there were clay layers from dredging at the money find site.
The plume is slightly south.
So the dredging spoils were likely moved there by dozer or tractor.
Right?
It doesn't matter what Tom measured...I think. (I can't understand what Tom is saying: that with a measurement he can discount the geologist's statement on the source of sand at the money find location???)
georger 247
we're talking again, about the position of the money on the exposed sand, vs water levels in 1980.
I'm thinking there's just no way to connect the money position to water levels, and have any meaning.
b50
That's because the money condition tells us nothing about how long the money was there.
There would have to be a match between high tide mark(s) and money location if the two are connected.
(has nothing to do with money condition but keep
in mind bands were in tact on two bundle which is
no accident).
Photo attached show "black sand". Now we know
where and what black sand is -
I am also going to post one of yours you posted
some time ago -
georger 247
What's interesting to me, is how Ckret protested the dredge story. The pieces of bills found, seem to support the dredge story more.
Agree. From what you know of the dredge type, could the stacked bills have made it through intact?: sure if the money was in a container and the
container or some part of the container with bundles
made it through, however the total forces involved
in suction and pickup and travel forcing out the long tube to the shore are enormous - without even considering the cutter. Its difficult to even consider
an open bag which does not spills its contents under
these conditions, or a bag that makes it through
in one piece, money already soft and 3+ years old
in its bag on the bottom, .... that at the very end in
1980 ruber bands are still in tact around two bundles. The fact of the rubber bands suggests
minimal movement, minimal pressures delivered
to the bundles that survived, as if the money had
been sitting a long time, ... not suddenly delivered
on shore in 1980 by a high tide, but something
already in situ and slowly exposed over time ....
especially if Tom is correct and money find is completely away from where bredge debris was
placed???
That cow mutilation account is provocative. The Skeptical Inquirer or one of the skeptic rags did an article on cattle mutilations. They made a convincing case for normal scavenger activity combined with unscientific pathology. So called cautery evidence was normal tissue necrosis around wound peripheries accelerated by sun.
Cattle people like the Fazios have seen normal scavenger ravages. They have seen cows die unexpectedly. They don't go blaming UFOs or lunatics for normal cattle deaths. I am not sure we have the whole story about what really happened.
Penis and gall bladder harvesting from wild bears in the US turned out to be Asian poachers seeking prized aphrodesiacs.
377
georger 247
377 said "Agree. From what you know of the dredge type, could the stacked bills have made it through intact?"
yes..we went over this a lot. 30" pipeline dredge. We talked about the ball size that could go thru a typical 30" pipeline dredge. If a rock of a size can go thru,
yes exactly, rocks shot out of this thing like canon
balls, whole tv sets .......... gives you an idea of
the forces involved ........ forget the cutter heads
for amoment ........ could a wet rotted bag stay
in tact? Could unprotedted bundles of money
stay in tact!? With rubber bands still in place
at the end of the trip ........ friction alone in this
stream of sand etc under the pressures at hand
would have turned the wads of money into soup?
snowmman 3
377 said "Agree. From what you know of the dredge type, could the stacked bills have made it through intact?"
yes..we went over this a lot. 30" pipeline dredge. We talked about the ball size that could go thru a typical 30" pipeline dredge. If a rock of a size can go thru,
yes exactly, rocks shot out of this thing like canon
balls, whole tv sets .......... gives you an idea of
the forces involved ........ forget the cutter heads
for amoment ........ could a wet rotted bag stay
in tact? Could unprotedted bundles of money
stay in tact!? With rubber bands still in place
at the end of the trip ........ friction alone in this
stream of sand etc under the pressures at hand
would have turned the wads of money into soup?
I think the sand slurry would be a big protectant.
Also note, that only 3 bundles got thru. So yeah a bunch might have gotten destroyed.
Who knows if the bag helped save some?
Also: to get chopped up, you have to resist forces...a compliant object like a bundle of bills would flex and give.
Wood would be more likely to get chopped/damaged.
I have some articles that provide more detail on the stuff Payne (the guy Tosaw hired to rake the Columbia) raked up from the bottom of the Columbia.
It makes you ask the question "okay there is stuff on the bottom of the columbia...what happens when the dredges hit this stuff?..."
Saying the answer is "the dredges just chop it all up into fine pieces"..doesn't seem plausible. or "The dredges somehow avoid
georger 247
I think the sand slurry would be a big protectant.
Also note, that only 3 bundles got thru. So yeah a bunch might have gotten destroyed.
Who knows if the bag helped save some?
Also note, that only 3 bundles got thru. So yeah a bunch might have gotten destroyed.
Who knows if the bag helped save some?
maybe. Sand slurry is very corrosive under
pressure. You carve rock and hard materials with
sand slurry under pressure. It is possible the dredge destroyed the bag and 98% of the contents ...
but a lab examination of the sands would easily
show cotton fibres etc ... that analysis was never
done of course. They didnt even take soil samples and analyse them so far as I know.
Here's a thought: we have a large array of fragments types for sure. pieces in all kinds of
sizes including microscopic. then large in tact bills
in good condition except at the edges and a few
holes. Total volume is estimated at what? Well
over any $5800 but how much over? 100 debris
field. Fragments found at 6-8 inches. Ingram finds
his under 1/2-2 inches of sand maybe slightly deeper. He wiped sand away to reveal a clump
of something and he tried to dig the clump out...
how much digging?
If the dredging had not been done we would be
discussing washed-in VRS erosion exposed or
Fazio vrs. not-Fazio hi tide.
snowmman 3
georger said "You carve rock and hard materials with
sand slurry under pressure."
Yes, as long as the rock stays stationary.
If the bag is free to move with the sand slurry, then it's less prone to damage.
If you nailed the bag to the ground, and hit it with the sand slurry...sure...death to bag.
I think the key is that the bills don't resist..they go with the flow.
To get destroyed, the two materials (slurry and bills) have to move at differential speeds. They don't?
sand slurry under pressure."
Yes, as long as the rock stays stationary.
If the bag is free to move with the sand slurry, then it's less prone to damage.
If you nailed the bag to the ground, and hit it with the sand slurry...sure...death to bag.
I think the key is that the bills don't resist..they go with the flow.
To get destroyed, the two materials (slurry and bills) have to move at differential speeds. They don't?
Do you also have issues with all of the subjects and suspects presented in the last 37 yrs.
If you feel I am twisting facts to fit theory - I apologize. I have taken what I do know and tried to find an explanation for them. The only explanation anyone can come up with is that I am dislusional - that I didn't see what I saw or hear what I was told.
Recently I have had some help on verifying the things I have claimed. The FBI was of no help at all - they shared your opinion for whatever reason and have ignored me. Understand I am not someone in your age bracket or background and without the ability to lay everything out as you young people do. I change subjects in the middle of a sentence - which makes me very difficult to follow. My mind is going faster than I can talk...I think the person on the other end is aware of everything I am.
Even Sluggo mentioned that I did not present my case well. I never intended to have to present my case - I am not an attorney. What was expected was the FBI would take the information and work with it - but after the initial interview not one agent called with questions - about what the interviewing agent took from me . In a short period of time I am telling him about 17 yrs with this man - he was not recording this - just taking notes. Now how much of what I said do you think he wrote down?
The guy had a sketchy idea of who Cooper was, but knew little of the details (he was a local FBI agent). One agent told me a few days ago that the Cooper case was Closed...I think that is news to everyone on the forum. I informed this agent the CASE was NOT closed.
I am NOT analytical nor an investigator - that is not my job that is the FBI's job to take the information and apply it and test it. Like yourself they come from a completely different era - and I am unable to relay the information in the orderly manner they require.
This has been like a giant gigsaw puzzle - and at times I have been quilty of trying to make the pieces fit simply out of frustration. What I have done if you will notice is stay with what I do know - and pouring more of it out there hoping someone might find that needle I have been looking for.
Believe me it would have been healthier for me to have walked away from this yrs ago - but, I know what I saw and what I held in my hands and what he said to me. With all of the people besides this thread working on this hopefully someone will find some answers - I know 2 of the places the answers lie in and I have been denied access to both.
The FBI agent told me to give them the names and they would check them against the suspect files - it is NOT that simple. Duane Weber used many aliases and some of these were not even known to the FBI or to me. They should know what names he used in 1944- 1949 - if they do they aren't telling me. The FBI also knows the names presented in 1971 that came out of California, but won't provide them - if these guys checked out then they should not have a problem with that.
The other area of Duane's life is 1962 - 1966. The FBI will NOT talk about...but, I have filled most of this in with the exception of ONE thing - seems John C. Collins was not licensed to sell insurance in Mo or Ks. So this opens up another can of worms. Since his stepchildren verified his working with Pyramid Life in Ks - I believe this to be a simple error and the insurance company has purged its record.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites