WA WA - D.B. Cooper hijacking mystery, 24 Nov 1971 - #2

[leftcoast]

I agree. I was being purposefully flippant and terse in order to vent my continuing frustration with H-B. Flooding the FA's with photos right after the jacking is the wrong thing to do. Seems there was some confusion right after this heist as to who was in charge, or it hadn't been decided? T'wood have been interesting if Harold Campbell had been given this case. His office probably would have received several calls from Portland about a certain truck driver/sky diver. The question is what would HE have done?

I think Harold Campbell would have been all "over" a certain truck driver who lived on a houseboat across the street from PDX. Not to mention, this particular truck driver had just lost his job, was booted from an airport due to the FBI/FAA complaint, and was in the process of getting "booted" from his place in Donald.

Teddy boy knew this as well. That is why he "insisted" on talking to a certain agent. No one else would do. Just what was so important that Teddy boy had to talk to H-bach, at that particular minute, on that particular night, and never again. Hmm.?

That, and the fact that there is absolutely no fabric of methodology. Even Colombo( I know he's fictitious) uses methodology as his core and then because of the complexity of his cases has to take chances and use string theories to put it all together. The fact is that regardless of how smart someone is, we all use basic common sense in resolving everyday problems. If a noise in your transmission could either be from being a quart low or needing a full rebuild, what functional person would ever have the tranny rebuilt before adding a quart of fluid?

Agree. You start with the "most" likely, and the least expensive. Hence, you start with "local" suspects, and one's with the ability to pull off such a heist. Even today, very, very few people, would have the knowledge to "originate" such a plan. Many could copy, but, very few could come up with such an idea.

The idea of "not" investigating the most experienced skydiver living in Portland at the time is beyond comprehension. Like I said earlier, I don't care if Mayfield called in at 6pm, he still should have been investigated, and his alibi checked out. I just can't believe that H-bach never interviewed those FA's. Sounds a lot like Nifong.

Good example. Let's say your case isn't going well and like ours you have no real suspects. You've set your range to 33-47. So you get a call about a suspect that is a skydiver with a suspicious past but he's only 29 years old. Do you cross him off the list? After all he doesn't make the lower limit of your range.

OD

Absolutely not. The "range" is simply a "guide", not a method in which to eliminate suspects.


left

 

[leftcoast]

I guess I wasn't clear on that, I was kind of tired when I wrote it.

What I meant was if H-B could be hooked up to a Polygraph, and honestly still doesn't see it today, then the notion that this blew right over his head in '71 is a forgone conclusion.

OD

Agree. But, I think we both agree that H-bach "probably" gets it today. HOwever, I can't speak for him. Some people just don't get "it", and other's are simply unwilling to admit a mistake. I have an idea which category this falls into, but, I can't speak for someone else. Remember, the lobster face, and the "I guess I'll just have to live with the fact that I'm his alibi"?

left

 

[Old Dominion]

Absolutely not. The "range" is simply a "guide", not a method in which to eliminate suspects.

However, at the same time, we realize that Cooper's sunglasses were part of his disguise, while other's suggest Cooper was wearing sunglasses because he had "sensitive" eyes, and was worried about ruining his eyesight. True story. I could not make that up.

left

I think it was part of the disguise. I also believe that the dark glasses preserved his night vision for the eventual jump.

OD

 

[Old Dominion]

The idea of "not" investigating the most experienced skydiver living in Portland at the time is beyond comprehension. Like I said earlier, I don't care if Mayfield called in at 6pm, he still should have been investigated, and his alibi checked out. I just can't believe that H-bach never interviewed those FA's. Sounds a lot like Nifong.

Yes it does a little. I'm glad you brought that up because Nifong was not incompetent. He was politically motivated to do what he did. It got him over the election hump, but he just couldn't clean up the mess, or "bury" it.
Nifong is a classic example of take care of the present and worry about the consequences later.

I'll bet he'd have given anything for the public to have seen him as just incompetent. Stigma...yes, but no tirals, no prisons, and after winning the election and an apology, he'd have kept his job .

Absolutely not. The "range" is simply a "guide", not a method in which to eliminate suspects.
left

And I think that every reasonable human being works within ranges. We do this naturally. This is why (as you know) I've had a tough time with H-B's rigid suspect profile. I particularly enjoyed the KOIN series where he makes the case that Coop could have been as old as 55.

I think the consensus was that the IE piece was a better piece, but those three KOIN pieces sure contained a lot of interesting material. It's a shame they're no longer available.

OD

 

[Old Dominion]

Agree. But, I think we both agree that H-bach "probably" gets it today. HOwever, I can't speak for him. Some people just don't get "it", and other's are simply unwilling to admit a mistake. I have an idea which category this falls into, but, I can't speak for someone else. Remember, the lobster face, and the "I guess I'll just have to live with the fact that I'm his alibi"?

left

I don't doubt that H-B gets it today. We disagree on some 30 years starting in late '71.

What the KOIN series didn't delve into is just how easily H-B gave in to "lobster face" and the viability of Teddy-boy as a suspect or perhaps the perp. They also let him off the hook in that interview. I'm surprised he wasn't defiant that he'd "done his job" and that Ted was "eliminated", as bad as that sounds, he can't have much to say w/o lying. After all, he never lifted a finger on Ted. IIRC (and correct me if I'm wrong) he was somewhat defiant in your 2001 lunch that Ted was even involved. Didn't he stand by that "balsa wood" alibi like Stone Wall Jackson and finally cave to the possibility that Teddy could have planned it? You said that the first time you mentioned Teddy's name he looked like he'd seen a ghost. Seems he's softened in the last 6 years.



OD

 

[AlwaysShocked]

Do the revelations during the ethics hearing of the past few days about the actions taken - and not taken - by Durham NC D.A. Mike Niphong in the Duke LaCross players case make anyone here more willing to believe that sometimes experienced, well-respected people do things they shouldn't do?

How about the Phil Spetor murder trial. currently taking place in L.A., where it has become clear that respected criminologist Dr. Henry Lee either deliberately or inadvertently lost or misplaced evidence found at the crime scene? The judge in the case ruled in an evidentiary hearing that Dr. Lee's testimony regarding the matter was "not credible". The evidence is missing. Three people saw Dr. Lee with the evidence piece in his hands. But Dr. Lee refuses to admit he ever saw anything, let alone picked it up, etc.

To me, it is not too much of a stretch to think the FBI agent deliberately didn't want Teddy boy investigated as the possible culprit.

What I can't figure out is why.

 

[leftcoast]

Yes it does a little. I'm glad you brought that up because Nifong was not incompetent. He was politically motivated to do what he did. It got him over the election hump, but he just couldn't clean up the mess, or "bury" it.
Nifong is a classic example of take care of the present and worry about the consequences later.

I'll bet he'd have given anything for the public to have seen him as just incompetent. Stigma...yes, but no tirals, no prisons, and after winning the election and an apology, he'd have kept his job .

I think the Duke case case is a "perfect" case to compare with the Teddy. On one hand, one could argue that Nifong believed the accuser and purposely didn't look for any exculpatory evidence regarding the Duke lacrosse players. In the Cooper case, H-bach assumed Mayfield was innocent, and looked for any bit of evidence to confirm his suspicion. ie, calling in, age, eye color, height, etc

On the other hand, most people feel that Nifong wanted this indictment to win an election. I totally agree with this conclusion. I think Nifong, in order to clear his "conscience", convinced himself that the 3 Duke men were guilty, and that he was in the right. At some point, I believe H-bach has done the same thing. Whether it happened in 1971, 2001, or 2007, I just don't know.

One thing I do know, is in my opinion both Nifong and H-bach will "never" admit they made a mistake. Even Friday, after apologizing, Nifong said something "happened" in the bathroom. It is called stubborn, tunnel vision, or is it called a "criminal act". In Nifong's case, no doubt a criminal act. As for H-bach, I just don't know for certain.

However, I do feel the FBI investigation of this case should start with an interview with H-bach. I'm not saying he is in on it, but, I want him to explain how a "seasoned" FBI agent could get fooled by a convicted felon. I could see if Mayfield was a doctor, with no criminal record, then "maybe". But, even in that situation, one would wonder why a person called "after" the hijacker left the plane.

left


I think that every reasonable human being works within ranges. We do this naturally. This is why (as you know) I've had a tough time with H-B's rigid suspect profile. I particularly enjoyed the KOIN series where he makes the case that Coop could have been as old as 55.

Actually, H-bach was kind of fudging it during that interview. In h-bach's book on page 33, the range of age for Cooper was from 30-55. Cooper's height is estimated at 5"10 on this page. Not very far away from Teddy's height of 5"8. It is in black and white on one of the pages. I think H-bach was "saving face" on the KOIN show. Sometimes I even wonder if H-bach knows what the definition of the word "mean" is. H-bach says the "mean" age was 47. Well, "mean", as it is used here, is a term describing an "average". As an investigator, you dont' use an average, you use an "estimated range" as a guide. If one person says 30, and another 55, you don't round it and say the mean age is 42 1/2. Obviously, one of the witnesses is not very good at guessing age, or both. That is why it is important to "interview" each witness individually, and give the "good" witnesses more weight, and especially the witnesses who appear to have a better ability to "remember details", versus those who are just trying to save their own skin. For example, if you listent to FS, it is obvious that she was scared, but that she did an excellent job remembering details. Just look at her 1988 sketch, and her estimate of Cooper's age of 40. Sure, she was off on the height, but considering that Cooper was seated when she made her estimate, it really isn't that big of a deal to an "experienced" FBI agent.

So, when H-bach continue to "edge up" the estimate on Coopers' age, I tend to lose respect for him. H-bach is fully aware that skydiving is a "young" man's game, and to think a 50 year old man could plan, and execute such a crime is pretty unlikely. Possible, but unlikely. One does have to wonder why H-bach all of a sudden starting using this 45-55 age range? On the FBI website, Cooper is listed at between 40-50. Even Rataczak, the co-pilot, uses the 40-50 in his range during one of the shows (Rataczak never did see Cooper, but, did hear his voice on the interphone).

I think the consensus was that the IE piece was a better piece, but those three KOIN pieces sure contained a lot of interesting material. It's a shame they're no longer available.

OD

I'm trying to get them posted to You-tube. Hopefully, my friend will do it soon.

left

 

[leftcoast]

I don't doubt that H-B gets it today. We disagree on some 30 years starting in late '71.

What the KOIN series didn't delve into is just how easily H-B gave in to "lobster face" and the viability of Teddy-boy as a suspect or perhaps the perp. They also let him off the hook in that interview. I'm surprised he wasn't defiant that he'd "done his job" and that Ted was "eliminated", as bad as that sounds, he can't have much to say w/o lying. After all, he never lifted a finger on Ted. IIRC (and correct me if I'm wrong) he was somewhat defiant in your 2001 lunch that Ted was even involved. Didn't he stand by that "balsa wood" alibi like Stone Wall Jackson and finally cave to the possibility that Teddy could have planned it? You said that the first time you mentioned Teddy's name he looked like he'd seen a ghost. Seems he's softened in the last 6 years.



OD

Right. What I did is mention the background of our suspect, and then at the end of our 2 hour lunch, I mentioned his name. Yes, H-bach gave me a very stern look as if I was "out of my league" by questioning his judgement. I think H-bach thought I really had the guy, and that it would be someone he never heard of. Of course, the name Ted Mayfield was extremely familar to H-bach and he was stunned.

H-bach became upset, but quickly, was open to my questioning. I then asked if he knew where teddy boy was from 2 pm until the time of the phone call, and he shocked my world when he said "no". I am still shocked.

When the other retired FBI agent starting questioning H-bach, then H-bach began to get very defensive. The agent asked H-bach if he had ever shown Teddy's picture to the FA's, and H-bach paused, and said "we must have". At that point, I lost a lot of respect for H-bach. He didn't want to lie and say "yes", and he didn't want to look bad in front of his fellow agent and say "no". But, we all know that "only" suspects picture's are placed in front of witnesses. If H-bach had concluded that Ted was too young, too short , to this or that, or that he didn't have enough time, why in the heck would you show his picture to the FA's? It goes against everything that H-bach has said about Ted. It makes zero sense to show the FA's a picture of TEd when H-bach never considered him a suspect.

left

 

[leftcoast]

Do the revelations during the ethics hearing of the past few days about the actions taken - and not taken - by Durham NC D.A. Mike Niphong in the Duke LaCross players case make anyone here more willing to believe that sometimes experienced, well-respected people do things they shouldn't do?

How about the Phil Spetor murder trial. currently taking place in L.A., where it has become clear that respected criminologist Dr. Henry Lee either deliberately or inadvertently lost or misplaced evidence found at the crime scene? The judge in the case ruled in an evidentiary hearing that Dr. Lee's testimony regarding the matter was "not credible". The evidence is missing. Three people saw Dr. Lee with the evidence piece in his hands. But Dr. Lee refuses to admit he ever saw anything, let alone picked it up, etc.

To me, it is not too much of a stretch to think the FBI agent deliberately didn't want Teddy boy investigated as the possible culprit.

What I can't figure out is why.

Well, yes, Nifong is not the only one out there. Just think if one of those boys would have made a "deal" with the DA, in exchange for immunity, and testified against the others. It does happen.

As for Henry LEe, I lost respect for him 10 years ago in the OJ case. He is simply a "hired gun" who will testify whichever way he is being paid. I can't believe a guy who is a PHD, and has lived in the United States for over 30 years, can't distinguish between "singular" and "plural" words.. Every time he speaks, I wish they would put "closed captioning", since I can't understand a word he is saying.

Back to Cooper:

Like I mentioned earlier, I believe the investigation in this case, should start with a conversation with H-bach and current FBI agents. I think the current FBI needs to assure themselves, that everything is on the up and up. There are several reasons why an agent could steer an investigation away from a particular suspect. They include:

Money, part of the take.
Someone could have dirt on you.
Someone could have threatened you or your families life.

Or what I believe happened. H-bach simply dropped the ball. Once he realized his mistake, whether it was in 71, 2001, 2007, he wanted to save face, and simply steered the investigation away from Teddy, by suggesting Teddy was too young, too short, and not able to physically commit the crime in the allotted time.

Or one could argue that H-bach still doesn't get it. I find this very difficult to believe. H-bach has had 6 years to think about it, I'm sure he has had time to think about the case, and whether or not Teddy should have been "investigated". Some men, and women for that matter, are just too "proud" to admit they could have made a mistake. Is that what happened here? I don't know, but, I think it is a good possibility. Of course, we may never know. What a shame, two men profitted from this crime, and two women are still in hiding because of this heist. Just doesn't seem fair.

left

 

[Niner]

I agree. And where is it (was it) written in the FBI that when you take over a case you use all the old leads? This was a case with zero success. I don't think H-B even had a hot potato the entire 10 years he had the case. Zip. So WHY would any new investigator even speak to Ralph except to learn his failed methods and then start again from scratch?
OD

agree OD - wondering with leftcoast & rightcoast's exposure on TV and such has brought a 'new' investigation (on the sly of course...) Guess we'll never know until they arrest Ted...

 

[Niner]

So, what do you think about the case. Have any reservations? Are you convinced, as much as you can be?

I truly think you two have solved it!!

Of course, everyone deserves a day in court. But, I sure would like to see if any of those prints, hairs from the seat headrest, etc, match a certain individual. I sure would like a little physical evidence to tie the case together, or exonnerate him.

True - I wish FBI would get off their butts on this case... And YES!! Prints would do it!!

Why not just tell us the story about how he called H-bach at 10pm and told h-bach he didn't want the FBI to think he was the hijacker? Is it because the rest of us know a world champion skydiver could easily predetermine a dropzone in advance, land, and make it to any phone in the area in 2 hours without breaking a sweat? I say yes.

[font-century gothic]me too![/font]

Also, why lie to us, and tell us he has never heard of Ralph HImmelsbach. I asked him 4 times, do you know h-bach, and he flat out said "no". Never heard of him.

WO!! I didn't know this!! Yes - why lie if you're innocent...

So, take the two lies, with all the rest of the circumstantial case, the sketch done by FS on UM, and what do you have?

DB = Ted!!

I'm sure his story worked on everyone else, because, it is next to impossible to prove his story is fabricated. Unless, of course, you pick up the phone and ask H-bach to lunch. Who would think such a thing would happen 30 years later, I'm sure Teddy didn't.

LOL! No - I really don't think he saw this coming....

 

[Niner]

I'll again say - I think you have the RIGHT guy here leftcoast!!

 

[rightcoast]

on the "HB couldn't have missed this much by accident" idea: human beings have a huge capacity for self delusion. this capacity is called upon for many reasons - fear, embarassment, pride, greed, etc. or more often than not a combination of varying degrees of more than one. people ignore plain evidence all the time. i doubt there is a human being alive past the age of reason that does not do it to some extent.
to use the other side of the argument to help illustrate my point. criminals are in total necessity of this to stay sane enough to be operational in society to the point that they can be successful in continuing their endeavors. i would think that it is very rare an evil individual that says flat out to themselves, "this is wrong. i know it's wrong. i'm just going to do it because i want to." usually instead, 'someone has it coming,' or 'i can't help it,' or 'i deserve it,' or 'i was meant to do this.' all deny the plainest and most obvious evidence.
so, to the extent that we give in to our more base, more selfish and less true selves - to that extent usually is the accompanying and proportional self-delusion.

 

[leftcoast]

Okay, we have a split board. Half think H-bach is incompetent, and the other half thinks he looked the other way or worse.

What's odd, is that I thought more people would be arguing against teddy boy being Cooper. Kind of strange how that worked out.

I think the telephone call to the fBI was basically Teddy telling everyone, "hey, I made it, but, do you think I am responsible".

My question is simple. Why in the world would the FBI allow one man to determine who is investigated in a case? Don't investigators have to review their list of suspects with their boss, and explain why certain people are no longer considered suspects? Why did the FBI allow a retired agent to continue to "run" an investigation in which he failed to get results for 9 years?

Even if the FBI doesnt' prosecute in this case, I certainly hope that they learned from this case, and the Hansen case.

Another thing. H-bach, if you think he simply made a mistake, had no business advertising to a local that he was in charge of hijackings in the Portland office. Otherwise, how would TEddy have known that H-bach would be in charge of the investigation? H-bach must have told him, or Teddy figured it out. Either way, the first mistake in this case was made in 1969, when H-bach pulled his "badge" and got Teddy booted from Aurora. H-bach should have simply notified the FAA, and kept his position as a FBI agent to himself.

Anyway, regardless of the outcome, at least we know what happened to Cooper, and how he was able to pull it off, and escape one of the biggest manhunts in US history.

It also explains why the money was found on Tena's bar, why Cooper's body has never been found, why FS said that McCoy was not Cooper, why Cooper gave the note while on Portland soil, why Cooper jumped just north of Portland, and why Teddy never held a job after 1971.

Interesting, how a very complex puzzle, seems to fit together perfectly, when you line up the correct pieces.

left

 

[Old Dominion]

Right. What I did is mention the background of our suspect, and then at the end of our 2 hour lunch, I mentioned his name. Yes, H-bach gave me a very stern look as if I was "out of my league" by questioning his judgement. I think H-bach thought I really had the guy, and that it would be someone he never heard of. Of course, the name Ted Mayfield was extremely familar to H-bach and he was stunned.

H-bach became upset, but quickly, was open to my questioning. I then asked if he knew where teddy boy was from 2 pm until the time of the phone call, and he shocked my world when he said "no". I am still shocked.

I'm shocked too. Had he been investigated like the rest he would have had the ability to "eliminate" another pulse.

I still see this as the cat coming out of the bag.

When the other retired FBI agent starting questioning H-bach, then H-bach began to get very defensive. The agent asked H-bach if he had ever shown Teddy's picture to the FA's, and H-bach paused, and said "we must have". At that point, I lost a lot of respect for H-bach. He didn't want to lie and say "yes", and he didn't want to look bad in front of his fellow agent and say "no". But, we all know that "only" suspects picture's are placed in front of witnesses. If H-bach had concluded that Ted was too young, too short , to this or that, or that he didn't have enough time, why in the heck would you show his picture to the FA's? It goes against everything that H-bach has said about Ted. It makes zero sense to show the FA's a picture of TEd when H-bach never considered him a suspect.

left

Just who was this other agent? Was he a friend of H-B or did you invite him to lunch or ..??

How could he "must have" when he never even spoke to the FAs? "Must have" emailed them the pictures back in '71. :waitasec:

 

[rightcoast]

the other agent was an acquaintance of mine. he was the the one to invite HB on our behalf.

semi-interesting: C W Jenson was on the radio this morning and said that even as a homicide detective, none of his supervisors were much use for training, etc. as none of them had ever been investigators. they were management types.

 

[Old Dominion]

Like I mentioned earlier, I believe the investigation in this case, should start with a conversation with H-bach and current FBI agents.

Agree. But would a retired H-B?

There are several reasons why an agent could steer an investigation away from a particular suspect. They include:

Money, part of the take.
Someone could have dirt on you.
Someone could have threatened you or your families life.

Knowing someone for 10 years leaves a lot of latitude for reasons why they might bury the case. I'd sure like to know more about their real friendship.

Or what I believe happened. H-bach simply dropped the ball. Once he realized his mistake, whether it was in 71, 2001, 2007, he wanted to save face, and simply steered the investigation away from Teddy, by suggesting Teddy was too young, too short, and not able to physically commit the crime in the allotted time.

The only problem with this is that there could not have been a mistake in 71 or 72 that wasn't rectifiable once learned. So the case took 1 or 2 years but it would have been solved. I don't think there's any face lost if you come back on old leads and reconsider. It's done all the time. You have a point if he only realized this mistake in 2001. I think that 2001 was the year of the cat. The cat that came out of the bag.

Or one could argue that H-bach still doesn't get it. I find this very difficult to believe.

No he definitely gets it now. I just don't think he wants it any more than he did in 71.

The question is, if the FBI is aware of this what are they going to do? Are they going to drop the ball again for budget or lack of resources? The case is still open, and H-B said himself if he found Cooper he'd say "you're under arrest".

I'm pretty sure there are two individuals in their 70's who are hoping that this whole thing just blows away like a gentle breeze.

OD

 

[Old Dominion]

the other agent was an acquaintance of mine. he was the the one to invite HB on our behalf.

Gotcha. Now I see why H-B wasn't warm to his questioning. Did he know H-B before the lunch, or did he call him just as a fellow retired agent?


OD

 

[leftcoast]

Gotcha. Now I see why H-B wasn't warm to his questioning. Did he know H-B before the lunch, or did he call him just as a fellow retired agent?


OD

NO, H-bach and the other retired FBI agent were friends. Matt knew of the other agent through an acquaintance and that he was a retired FBI agent, and asked him if he knew H-bach. THe other agent said "yes", I am friends with Ralph. Hence, he set up the lunch with us in 2001.

So, you can see that the other agent wasn't going to embarass his buddy or go over his head.

left

 

[leftcoast]

I'm shocked too. Had he been investigated like the rest he would have had the ability to "eliminate" another pulse.

I still see this as the cat coming out of the bag



Just who was this other agent? Was he a friend of H-B or did you invite him to lunch or ..??

How could he "must have" when he never even spoke to the FAs? "Must have" emailed them the pictures back in '71. :waitasec:

I think H-bach was trying to avoid being "showed up" in front of his friend. I don't think H-bach ever showed "any" pictures to the FA's. Since H-bach admitted he never interviewed the FA's, I am assuming that the Minnesota office must have been in charge of showing the FA's pictures of potential suspects.

However, that is simply a guess on my part.



left