Ckret

Here is my profile of Snowman, no job I think the list of clip on tie wearerers is complete, I can't imagine who else would stoop so low

n467us 1) There is nothing preventing their release and they have been released. Someone just needs to scan them. 2) I didn't understand the process either so I repeat what I am told by the lab, I leave the science to them, knuckle dragging to me. 3) The tie was not taken to the McCoy family 4) No hat 5) We used Cossey and two others for help, the chute was ruled out for a number of reason and no it is not being investigated by the FBI 6) There was never any realistic way to track the money.

Sluggo The crew had no idea if Cooper was on the plane or off. They were guessing the pressure bump was his exit but weren't sure and not willing to go check it out. When they got to Reno for the schedule re-fueling they called back several times for him to put the stairs up or they would not be able to take-off. The stairs were not locked in the down position, just flapping around, so I dont think there was much damage other than some dings on the paint.

I agree snowman post away, I also think formating as you did will help all who are not up on all of the facts to understand you are basing your theory on nothing more than speculation. It really will help to stop "myth makers."

you don't need a FOIA request, just ask me. As for publishing FBI work product, such as the actual interviews, i cannot imagine that would ever happen.

Cooper said to Schaffner, "Take this down." These are Cooper exact words as spoken to Schaffner: "I want $200,000 by 5:00 PM in cash. Put it in a knapsack. I want two back parachutes and two front parachutes. When we land, I want a fuel truck ready to refuel. No funny stuff, or I'll do the job."

Now thats a post!!!! great stuff but I answered all of that on another thread. I edited the post to put in one of those icons so you would realize i was joking around. "Co-winky-dink" you have one of those too, mine just turned 12

You have it some what right. I think it would be best to state the facts before you ever get started putting sentences together. Several police departments have gone to this type of report writing. - I responded to 123 1st St S - On arrival I saw two white males. - male 1 was holding a black handgun - I order male 1 to drop the handgun on the ground and so on. It seems as if some want to almost eliminate or disregard fact from the Cooper case. In this case there are two kinds of fact; reported fact and known fact which has been discussed on the old thread. I think it would add clarity to simply state in bullet form the facts used to support a theory. One that comes to mind that I drew a blank on (not surprising since it was not my theory) is that DB Cooper got his military training in Southeast Asia. There are no facts from the events of the highjacking to support this. So maybe the poster, having to state facts before the theory, would put more thought in before posting. And don't get me wrong, it is fun to explore out-of-the- box stuff, but it also clogs up the message and we need a way to separate the two.

I have not found any mention of it in any of the case files, but there hundreds of them.

I have two friends that are Captains with Alaska based out of SeaTac. I just left messages for them to get the exact details. Stand-by to be "double secret called out."

I hate to keep referring to the past but it will save me time to say, read the posts on the old thread these things about missing persons was discussed. It would be a huge help if people would state what facts they based their theory on. For example, "I don't think this was Coopers first jump." What facts from the event lead you to conclude this was not Coopers first jump? If the answer is, "I just believe thats what happened." Great, then everyone can read your post for what it is, an interesting thought that may spark something but it is based on nothing factual. I really do believe if we come up with a formula for posting theories: Theory - Cooper had little to no jump experience. Facts to support theory - Cooper jumped at night in sub standard conditions - Cooper did not ask for specific equipment for the jump. - Cooper used non jumper language two fronts and two backs - Cooper destroyed a working reserve over an obviously marked training reserve. - Cooper never specified a flight path when the crew could have taken four different ones given Coopers demands - Cooper never asked for updates from the crew for conditions, location, speed of the craft - Cooper chose an unpadded NB6 with no sleeve over and padded sport model with a sleeve. - Cooper tied a 20 pound bag to his waist, not secured to his body. From here I state my theory based on the above facts and what they mean to me. I thin if some of you do this you will discover your not basing much of your thoughts on facts

Jo, I don't know what to say, are you turning sweet on me after all we've been through. I am not going away, just don't have the energy to participate. Not only do I work bank robbery but I also work other criminal matters that are taking a huge chunck of my time. The events of the Cooper case in the last two weeks have really put me behind, thats all.

The indictment stays, I have no input on that. I guess if it were up to me I would quash it and somehow have an order in place that any money made from book and movie deals would have to first be paid with interest to the victims. I believe I have posted the witnesses descriptions (including Hancock) on the old thread. Snowman, you may have found an opening, no one was ever asked why they thought Cooper was 45 to 50 years old. They also weren't asked why they thought he was 180 or had brown hair or why they thought his suite was dark or why they thought he was 6' tall. Age is a descriptor just as height and weight, we approach our estimations of those attributes in the same manner. If you want to rule out the age because they did not state when asked, "how old do you think he was?" and the answer was, "I know that on an average 45 year old male, the mid face has descended 5 mm and the skin folds commonly called wrinkles deepen by 2mm and this subject exhibited those characteristic" knock yourself out, it does open the door to many more options with regard to suspects. I have no idea (Larry mumbling to himself) how I allowed myself to get sucked onto this but I am pulling myself out. If you have a question I will answer it the best I can. I will leave the rest to the genius of this forum, I am simply out of energy.

Ok one more try Snowman, I am concluding Coopers physicals based on the fact (it's not fuzzy, it's very clear) all four individuals described him basically the same. Whether we like it not that is a fact. The next step is to determine the validity of the fact that they all described him the same. For example, if someone stated Cooper was 20 years old, it is a fact that they described him as 20 years old, but then we find out this person never saw Cooper but someone else he thought was Cooper who was 20 years old. Its still a fact but not a valid fact. When we look at the validity of the four statements, the three stews and the ticket agent, all gave them independent of each other. Two of the stews were taken off the plane and interviewed in Seattle. They were separated and interviewed apart but gave similar descriptions. Muklow was interviewed in Reno apart from Schaffner and Hancock but gave a similar description. The ticket agent was interviewed in Portland but gave a similar description. This is a fact that is not fuzzy, it is very clear. Please help me understand by telling me what facts are you using to change Coopers age. I would be more than happy to explore possibilities but you have to provide me with facts. For example, the finding of the money in 1980 is a fact. It is a fact that the money could not have gotten there by natural means from the 1972 DZ. Therefore, based on these facts we must change our thinking on the DZ and explore other possibilities. Give me one fact that causes pause for consideration on his physical make-up, it is not a fact that 20 somethings are not good witnesses.

Again with the one liner, first it was "bunnies in the clouds" and now this. Good stuff. It does lead me to this, I, like many of you have my theory, don't let it influence yours if you don't think it fits. I believe it was snowman who wrote something to the effect of, you hang onto the description of Coopers age... alluding that perhaps I shouldn't. There is nothing in the investigation that points to dismissing the witnesses accounts from that evening. Their accounts have remained solid and mostly unchanged in their several interviews. Not only that but when the witnesses (the four who had direct interaction with Cooper) were questioned, they gave virtually the same accounts of his physical make-up. Based on this, I take it as fact Coopers physical stature and make-up. If you have reason to dismiss their statements and form your own description of Cooper, go forward. Hell, make him 5'9, blond hair, blue eyed and in his late 20's; we'll call him McCoy and go home. As Quade put it (I can't believe I am quoting Quade, no offense, but when I write the name i say it my mind like Seinfeld would greet Newman) it's not thinking outside of the box it's making shit up. This type thinking leads to, as we call it, "static" which clouds the intel. If you mix to much B.S. in with the real intel you will miss the threat. "Garbage in Garbage out." In other words the theories are great but there's way to much junk here to make this effort meaningful. It would really be helpful if your going to post a theory to post the fact, in bullet form, before stating theory. For example: Theory - Cooper was not 45 to 50 years old in 1971. Facts to support the theory: - - - Here is where you write your post based on the facts. I think this would really help to start moving this effort into a useful direction

watch this video, it will give you some insight into bank robbery and what it is I really do. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7910921090914131395&q=bank+robbery+investigation&total=99&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0 Sorry, don't know how to do the clicky

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003168951_nicknames02m.html

My wife would say: A - Type A personality S - Self-assured S - Sadly way too involved into far to many things.

Quade, I laughed out loud, I am now committed to use that line the next time I interview a bank robber, (says in a gruff steely FBI voice) "Son!!!! (with a southern drawl for accent) you're lookin at clouds and seein bunnies!!!!" "you and I both know you were in that bank today, now give it up, the truth will set you free."

Sluggo, you crack me up, your supposed to highlight your question not your post. In regard to your "question/post" you have to look at what is most probable given a set of facts. Whats the most logical outcome or series of events that took place. From that, where does the most logical progression lead you. Once you have a solid foundation to build from you can start pouring on possibilities. Without a solid foundation your investigation will collapse around you. For example, if you have to change the witness statements to fit your subject, your starting on a weak foundation. Doesn't mean something will come up that may alter things, but without a valid reason for dismissing your witnesses your investigation might quickly fall apart. You can't pick and choose, if you find reason to dismiss witness descriptions of a subject then their whole description of the events that night are suspect. If thats the case we might as well stop discussing this whole incident because their stories of the night are really all we have. By the way Sluggo, that stuff about bank robbery, it's no rumor.

In my attempts to be responsive to your questions could you highlight them so I don't miss it. I enjoy the debate and theory and try to read it all but sometimes my head starts spinning with some of it and I miss your question. I think some of you could save yourself a lot of time and space on the board if you ask the question before stating the theory. A few times i have read posts that go on for quite a bit based on false information.

It was a briefcase, no one that had direct contact with Cooper described anything other than a briefcase and small paper bag.

I agree with you about the center bills not being as decayed as the outer and that wet things stick together but the debate is academic because the rubber bands were found around the bundles.

No witness ever stated Coopers hair appeared to be dyed.

Cossey is a kick in the pants, that guy was one of the best interviews i have had in my near 20 years. And playing the April Fools joke on the media almost went donw in media history. The story was minutes away from hitting the wire, in fact it made Google news for about 5 minutes before they pulled it.