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

[snowmman]

It would have been nice, when they interviewed Tina and she said "no jewelry" that they would have asked "yeah but did he check a wrist watch?"

he was making all these references to 5:00 (see stew notes, also written as 1700 in stew notes) and time delays. You would think he'd have a device to measure whether his request is being met (in terms of absolute or relative time).

I'd also like to hear about how they saw him smoking or not, and how he lit his cigarettes. No mention of matches found. Is the implication that he had a lighter? or ??? Remember how some guys used to light matches without tearing them from the pack, just bending them? Or if there was a matchbook what did it say? I guess no matchbook? (only 8 cigs?) How did Cooper light?

Did no one remember him buying cigarettes at the airport? All sorts of interesting questions.

I mean, if you saw him smoking, you should be able to say right or left handed?

We know they have butts. I don't know why we know they are butts from Cooper? I'm assuming they saw him smoke, not just "oh we found butts in his seat's ashtray".

Remember plane started at 8:30 AM in Washington DC, and had multiple stops before it picked Cooper up in Portland. Does that mean anything. Dunno.

 

[Sluggo]

a reference to "disconnect" the bomb is in the stew notes on page 6.
^
^
^
Searching for "no worry" thinking: when he showed the bomb, he supposedly talked about touching a wire to detonate it? So maybe they were hoping there was no timer. If there was no timer, then it's unlikely it would detonate after he exits, right?

snowmman,

There was another place in the comm. transcript where the term used was ‘ignite’ the bomb. Not detonate, set-off, explode, or activate. I just chalk it up to extreme stress and not being able to come up with the term.

I don’t care what the FBI says, Cooper knew aircraft procedures, he knew FBI responses, and he was prepared for both. He wasn’t in the lavatory, because he had to winky-tink. He was there so a sniper wouldn’t blow his head off while Tina was making four trips up and down the air-stairs.

Let me give you another interpretation about the error on the notes:

Insert “no” and it reads like this:

he will reassure not
trying anything - did
not want to scare her
if their was no attempt
he will disconnect the
bomb"

Light bulb thing is a myth as far as I'm concerned. Too many descriptions and none mention light bulb.

Sluggo

 

[snowmman]

Believeable interpretation Slug-go

"he will reassure not
trying anything - did
not want to scare her
if their was no attempt
he will disconnect the
bomb"

I was thinking about the prior sentence (separated by a line in the memo) where evidently the captain is on the PA telling the passengers about "fake" mechanical trouble. He's doing that to reassure the passengers right? So they want Cooper to know the pilot isn't "trying to pull something" when he's talking about mechanical trouble.


after the "-" maybe it's a totally different thought...
i.e. just as you say

"I don't want to scare you, so if [something] I'll disconnect it"


that interpretation matches the "literary license" quotes we've seen elsewhere, so maybe the source?

Edit: That sure gives us a good feeling about the description of Cooper as a "nice guy". I mean if he actually told Tina he didn't want to scare her. I mean he's threatening to blow her up, but at the same time says he didn't mean to scare her? And that it's evidently important to him that she understand that?
"I'm going to blow your f*ing head off, but in the nicest possible way"

 

[georger]

Jerry,

From Larry Carr:
"I have opened the case files to the public, no need for a FOIA, if I have it, it's yours. Simply ask."


Larry is still out-of-country right now. I don't think he realized the scope of this very broad statement. He may not be fully aware of the number of people who would like to have specific information, people who haven’t asked in the past because they were slowed down by the FOIA Request process.

I have offered to use my Web Site as a clearing house for information, so that he doesn’t get deluged by 1,000 requests for the same thing. I promised I would make all material immediately available. I don’t expect a response from him for at least two weeks.

Otherwise, I say: “Take him at his word. Ask, and ye shall be given."

Sluggo, here is my instant response. I understand others want info and
I will understand and accept whatever Agent Carr is able to do, or not do. That is 100% on my part. I will now make a few calls just in case dna
data might be forthcoming to us. I believe my people will do whatever they
can in this regard and honor all conditions Mr. Carr might need to set.
Very Sincerely: :blowkiss:
Jerry

 

[snowmman]

JWarner is making some good points about analysis.
I've been looking at pictures of the money and been astounded by how some have still pretty good whiteness (though edges ragged). And how some have apparent bug holes are in them.

I would think a specialist would be able to give an opinion on those holes being bugs, termites or mildew.

I was amazed while reading the analysis they did on the money found in the Brinks robbery back in the '50s. really GREAT read here:

http://www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/famcases/brinks/brinks.htm

When some of the Brinks loot was attempted to be passed 6? years later (a $10 bill) someone got suspicious because it was musty and thought it was counterfeit. FBI/police eventually tracked things back to a cooler in a wall, where money had been wrapped in plastic and newspapers while the money was damp. They worked out from analysis that the money had been buried in ashes and sand at some point and had insect droppings or something. That was in the '50s. In comparison, at least from what we know, it sounds like the Ingram money got NO analysis. (well Brinks was a lot more money to worry about!)

Interestingly the time from theft to find on that portion of the Brinks money was less than the Cooper to Ingram time period.

I remember reading some theory that they thought the edges of the Ingram money had been damaged by being pushed downstream. That's odd. I would think you could tell abrasion damage vs mold or insect damage. And the amount of discoloration (black/brown) on some of the bills, not all, should be analyzable.

Also, while not directly applicable, check out this table for decomposition at sea. It makes one scratch one's head about the 9 year period of the Cooper dollars before discovery at Tina's Bar. Protected by what? canvas? sand? something else? dry or wet or alternating?
And remember, the bills were "compressed" (not!) by rubber bands, not by the normal bank strapping!

from http://www.imo.org/environment/mainframe.asp?topic_id=297

*Time taken for objects to dissolve at sea*
Paper bus ticket 2-4 weeks
Cotton cloth *1-5 months*
Rope *3-14 months*
Woollen cloth *1 year*
Painted wood 13 years
Tin can 100 years
Aluminium can 200-500 years
Plastic bottle 450 years

/Source: Hellenic Marine Environment Protection Association (HELMEPA) /

 

[georger]

Actually what the psychiatrist thought might happen makes perfect sense, it is the behavior of the flight crew that I find unbelievable.

Cooper said he had a bomb so you have to error on the side of safety and assume the bomb is real.

So why would a guy jumping out of an airplane take the bomb with him?

Why would you not keep an eye on a guy who says he has a bomb and he is on your airplane?

Why did the young and inexperienced women have to take the brunt of this crime? Were the older and more experienced flight crew glued to their seats?

Every single thing you say is true, and more. We dont know that they didnt know more than the transcript reveals and if they did, would you
reveal it? I wouldnt! And if I had been the FBI or the Justice Dept I would not have allowed any further info to be released. Scott makes it very clear in the transcript that he is NOT going to bail (he and all the guys
in front are not going to bail) without Mucklow. But here is this madman in
the back with a bomb. What exactly are you supposed to do? Scott and the rest had lost control the minute this started. (Now do you see where's
Himmelsbach's attitude comes from?). I would be pissed too. Just my nature. I do not believe for a second they sat on the pane and did nothing. I think they made a million assessments on the premise the bomb
was real, and I believe they assessed and discussed 'is the bomb real'.
I think after 8:12 they did go back and looked and found no Cooper and
no bomb. I think they looked several times before Reno.

I dont think the psychiatrist said anything Scott and the others hadnt already processed in their own minds. Yes. It makes no sense whatever
that Coopoer would take the bomb along unless he was convinced it was
disarmed or was not real in the first place. Sluggo has just provided evidence Copper had long underwear on so he was prepared for a jump ..

Cooper did not take Mucklow along and he did not blow up 305, so
the psychiatrist's profile failed (thank God!). The point is, general profiles
don't work in specific situations but if people act on 'prophecy' it can
lead to a disaster. Scott and the crew had the good sense not to rush
Cooper based on the psychiatrist's prophecy, or they might all have been
dead. Or, did this psychiatrist have information that lead him to believe
Cooper was a foreign national and western (American) values did not apply .... and they had to take action?

Jerry

 

[snowmman]

Jerry:
You're aware of the Paul Cini Air Canada hijack that happened two weeks before Cooper, where Cini had real dynamite and a real shotgun? Paul Cini even declared himself to be IRA. The crew subdued him as he tried to put on the parachute.

Maybe Cooper learned that you can't let the crew get all around you, from that one.
Maybe he also learned that a gun doesn't help. That the important thing is to instill fear, and manage physical risks (overpowering).

Goes along with a lot of the criminology papers on hijacking, that people learn from and are motivated by the prior ones. And try to outdo the prior ones.

The McNally hijack is the amazing (in execution risk) 727 chute jump/extortion hijack in my mind. Better than McCoy. Both were in '72. McNally was a night jump at some amazing air speed.


The Cini 'hijack was resolved when, according to New York Times 4/13/72 (article on trial)
"after being paid $50,000 at Great Falls, the masked man put down his shotgun for a moment to open a package he said contained a parachute. The pilot grabbed him by the throat, and the steward hit him on the head with a fire ax."

I think Cooper might have learned what he need to learn from TV. The number of US and non-US hijackings was huge during that time. Remember the 3 planes hijacked to Jordanian desert AT THE SAME TIME! (that was 9/6/70...the PFLP ...300 hostages total..
the story is amazing (actually reminds me of today's times..sadly) see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawson's_Field
In all 5 planes were hijacked, one was foiled.

Read it and picture Cooper getting all that data and making his plan (plus info from other hijacks)

 

[georger]

Jwarner,

You have hit on an issue that has been bothering me for a long time. (I wonder if we sometimes communicate with the same third party).

The guy’s name is Dr. David Hubbard. I have no way on knowing what special skills this guy had or what information was given to him in DC, to allow him to come up with that statement back in 1971, but he parlayed it into a career as the recognized expert on the psychology of skyjacking.

See:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,910457,00.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/16/magazine/16HIJACKERS.html?pagewanted=print&position=

Note this:
Correction: May 8, 2005, Sunday: An article on Jan. 16, about aircraft hijackings in the 1970's, referred imprecisely to the role played by a psychiatrist, Dr. David Hubbard, in the creation of a psychological profile of potential hijackers for the F.A.A. Dr. Hubbard did develop such a profile, used by both the government and industry. But an F.A.A. task force in operation from 1969 to 1971 developed an earlier profile of potential hijackers, relying on the work of one of its members, John T. Dailey. This omission was brought to the attention of the editors shortly after the article appeared, and this correction was delayed for further research.


I imagine that there is a lot more to the story than you can glean from the Seattle PI transcripts (starting with the omitted 88 pages). For a long time now the popular press has produced story material that claims Tina Mucklow, told Cooper she was afraid that he intended to blow up the plane after he left. They always go on to say that Cooper promised her he would either disarm the bomb or take it with him when he jumped.

I have been (to this time) unsuccessful at finding any published testimony to indicate this is true. Maybe, with the FBI’s (Carr’s) willingness to release more material, the de-briefing transcripts from Reno and Seattle will give us insight into the actual interactions between Mucklow, Schaffner, and Cooper.

If you read the transcript carefully, you will notice that it was NWA’s intent to have the remaining crew “bail out” just before take-off and leave Cooper on board alone. They sent instructions from Boeing on ways to exit the aircraft (in the front) along with the charts. Cooper foiled the plan by keeping Mucklow with him. The remainder of the crew wouldn’t abandon her. [See pages 184 and 185 beginning with GC: Did you get that deal from Boeing… through … P: No we tried that.]

Sluggo

Yes, we do tend to think along the same lines. Yes I am fully aware of
the bailout discussions. Scott wasn't going to leave Mucklow. An honorable man and experienced.

Thanks for identifying Hubbard. Those were smart girls - they deserved medals.

Jerry

 

[georger]

I saw JWarner reference the "latin" description. (or I guess I thought of it when you mentioned foreign national in the psychiatrist post)

I was wondering: if you were latin, would you use an alias that sounded very "white" like Dan Cooper. Or is it my cultural goggles?

I was wondering if the "latin" description came about just because he was older with jet black hair, and there may have been a bias that jet black hair on older men (late 40's) may have suggested mexico or latin america ethnicity?

I'm throwing out all sorts of biases here I guess, based on no info. But It seems to me that "latin" doesn't add up. If you throw in the stews knowing he asking for "mexico" then I'm wondering if helps bias the description to "latin" when that's not really true?

It would have been better for them to say "what made you think latin? did his hips sway nicely or ???"

But if his hair was dyed and slicked down (with long underwear!) as Sluggo
says under New Evidence ... had he oiled or covered his skin with something to face the jump, thus olive skin? If you dismiss olive skin
ans swarthy look and are left only with 'Mexico City' and 'don't land in
the USA', what are you really left with? An Irishman with a hell of an
imagination?

Jerry

 

[georger]

I hadn't noticed that before.
So of course it made sense to keep Mucklow with him, so the crew wouldn't all run away!
He needed the chutes, the money, the fuel, the plane AND A CREW! But he didn't want the crew all around him, cause they might jump him.

And he didn't want to get hit by an FBI sniper.

So it all makes sense. No psych intrepretation needed. It was the most rational thing to do. There was no better rational plan, right?

Yes, FBI snipers were all around the plane. Cooper made Mucklow? lower
the blinds and the lights so he couldnt be seen and kept her close by to reduce the chance of the FBI doing anything. Agents Himmeslbach at Seattle and Harold Campbell at Reno talked about all of this in their interviews.

Jerry

 

[georger]

snowmman,

There was another place in the comm. transcript where the term used was ‘ignite’ the bomb. Not detonate, set-off, explode, or activate. I just chalk it up to extreme stress and not being able to come up with the term.

I don’t care what the FBI says, Cooper knew aircraft procedures, he knew FBI responses, and he was prepared for both. He wasn’t in the lavatory, because he had to winky-tink. He was there so a sniper wouldn’t blow his head off while Tina was making four trips up and down the air-stairs.

Let me give you another interpretation about the error on the notes:

Insert “no” and it reads like this:

he will reassure not
trying anything - did
not want to scare her
if their was no attempt
he will disconnect the
bomb"

Light bulb thing is a myth as far as I'm concerned. Too many descriptions and none mention light bulb.

Sluggo

There are three discussions about the bomb in the PiT. The first
occurs on the ground at SEA. Scott gives a brief general description based on the 'stews' discription (in Transcript 2). The second is at 7:57 in
Transcript 1, they are in the air at 10k feet, the rear door has been opened and Cooper has sent Mucklow to the front, and ground asks about the bomb again, and Scott puts Tina on the radio and she gives a detailed description, which includes: "............. then a battery lite, and a falshlite
battery .......". Tina is very specific. That is where "battery lite" comes from.

Consider the time: 7:57. The rear door has been opened earlier. They know Cooper is getting ready to do something. Concern for the bomb comes up. Scott gives a description then puts Tina on the radio who gives her fuller description. Scott then calls to the back and gets no answer until "All OK". Then at 8:10 - 8:13 and the Oscillations and no answer from Cooper.

The only question I have is what did she mean by "battery lite" vs light bulb, or flashlite litebulb, or bulb from a flashlite ???

jerry

 

[Sluggo]

Sluggo has just provided evidence Copper had long underwear on so he was prepared for a jump ..Jerry

Jerry,

Pardon me if I seem brash, but I am extremely sensitive to the “facts vs. myths” aspects of NORJAK. You just stated; “Sluggo has just provided evidence Copper had long underwear on so he was prepared for a jump ..” That is not a true statement.

If you are talking about the statement found on my web site, in the “Not Yet Classified” section that says; “There was a 20 year old student named Bill Mitchell, seated across from Cooper, but, he wasn't aware of the hijacking so paid little attention to Cooper. All he said was, “that Cooper hair was shiny, as if it were dyed, and that he was wearing long underwear," Then, you are misunderstanding the purpose of that section and possibly the entire purpose of my web site..

I am “all about” separating the facts from the myths. To do this, one has to discuss both. I have tried to make it clear, that (on my site) if it has been classified as “Fact,” I have researched (to my satisfaction) and believe it to be factual. If it is classified as “Myth,” I have researched it and find no support for it. But, if it is “Not Yet Classified,” then I am still trying to find records or testimony to support the statement.

I also have made it clear that I am not perfect, I welcome challenges from anyone and everyone. This policy helps me to maintain “intellectual honesty”. After all, I have “Culture Goggles” too.

So, in conclusion, if you choose to accept the word of a print media (so called) journalist, just because it appeared in an article, that is your choice. You have the right to set your facts vs. myths discriminator at any level you choose, but, do not, I repeat, do not, place my integrity in jeopardy, by taking a not-yet-proven statement and assigning it as presented as a fact by me.

As I said before, I don’t wish to seem brash, but this is an “emotional hot-button” for someone, like myself, who has been digging into the NORJAK case for almost 35 years, and has seen the mythology literally take on a life of its own.

Thanx,
Sluggo

 

[Sluggo]

The only question I have is what did she mean by "battery lite" vs light bulb, or flashlite litebulb, or bulb from a flashlite ???
>
>
>
That is where "battery lite" comes from. jerry

Jerry,


It says “lite” Granted. (Not light.) But in context, it is saying “A battery like a flashlight battery, only as thick as my arm and about eight inches long.”

Almost everywhere else in the TTY transcripts the word “light” has a G and an H in it.
Page 94 lighted
Page 94 lighted
Page 94 lites
Page 95 lighted
Page 98 Lithghts
Page 103 Lites

So if anyone wants to believe, the sense of the transcript description is: A battery lite a flashlight battery, only as thick as my arm,” then go for it. A light bulb “as thick as my arm,” powered by a flashlight battery makes absolutely no sense, but you can believe anything you want.

I believe she is describing a No. 6 Dry Cell battery. For you young whippersnappers (in my best Andy Devine voice) out there, these were some of the first radio batteries (sometimes called the “Columbia Battery”). They were very common for science experiments and hobby use in the 1970s. They were 6.0625 inches long and about 2.5 inches in diameter. [See Photo Here].

Well, once again, I have been “gifted” with a topic for this week’s Blog.

Thankx,

Sluggo

 

[snowmman]

Now as we all know, since we all played with those dry cells in the '70s ,
that they were just 1.5v, which is much lower than you would need for any detonator like a blasting cap.

Although they had nice current delivery. Which is why we loved them for electromagnets, right!

In today's world, you could imagine a simple circuit to create enough instantaneous voltage/current for a blasting cap, backed up by a 1.5v dry cell (I'm thinking the numbers would work out), but unlikely cooper had something like that.

We've been musing about fake vs real bomb, but you could say that if we believe he had a single 1.5v battery, it's unlikely it was real. A fused/ignited system might have been more reliable, but then there's the delay with lighting it..maybe doesn't seem as threatening.

One thing we can muse about: maybe he had a little electronic background, since he went with a battery/wire approach for the fake bomb.

I've shown sluggo the article about the 56 year old from Vancouver, WA who on 4/12?/72, tried a hijack in Portland with a bottle of what he said was nitroglycerin. Didn't work, they took it away from him. It wasn't nitro. (new york times 4/12/72)
(demanded $500k. flight 781 at 8 a.m. going to Seattle. flight crew persuaded him to release everyone)

So even though the bomb was probably fake, it might have clues to how Cooper thought when he was trying to solve a problem. Even so far as packaging it in a briefcase. Cooper may not have access to real dynamite. Maybe didn't have access to a gun also. Not that kind of lifestyle?

Cini approached the problem a different way. He brought real dynamite. (I've read 54, or 60, sticks but seems way too much, probably myth)

I figure if you have real dynamite, and it's obviously real, it doesn't matter if they can see a detonation mechanism. That's scary enough?

The battery/wires were probably to deflect attention from the probable flares.

I've noted before, based on looking at photos of inert dynamite, that it seems real dynamite packaging has warnings, or "dynamite" written on it a lot.

 

[georger]

Jerry,


It says “lite” Granted. (Not light.) But in context, it is saying “A battery like a flashlight battery, only as thick as my arm and about eight inches long.”

Almost everywhere else in the TTY transcripts the word “light” has a G and an H in it.
Page 94 lighted
Page 94 lighted
Page 94 lites
Page 95 lighted
Page 98 Lithghts
Page 103 Lites

So if anyone wants to believe, the sense of the transcript description is: A battery lite a flashlight battery, only as thick as my arm,” then go for it. A light bulb “as thick as my arm,” powered by a flashlight battery makes absolutely no sense, but you can believe anything you want.

I believe she is describing a No. 6 Dry Cell battery. For you young whippersnappers (in my best Andy Devine voice) out there, these were some of the first radio batteries (sometimes called the “Columbia Battery”). They were very common for science experiments and hobby use in the 1970s. They were 6.0625 inches long and about 2.5 inches in diameter. [See Photo Here].

Well, once again, I have been “gifted” with a topic for this week’s Blog.

Thankx,

Sluggo

I know exactly what you are saying. I looked for lite vs light myself, the
wording. But "lite" is easier to type out quickly. What got me was "thick as my arm"? How thick was Tina's arm, at the wrist? And I tried to put
that in the equation and it still didnt compute. I called a friend over - hey
honey how thick is your arm? Still no help! You go round and round and around trying to get things to fit, unless what he had (Snowmman's original idea) was nothing more than a brief case with flares and a
disassembled flashlite and some wires. So far as we know he did not show
Scott his bomb when he could have. He only showed the stews and cracked the briefcase just enough to get a look. How is a stewardess to
know if a bomb is real or not? And the funniest part is this bit about 'if I
touched these wires together it would go poof', said to Mucklow or Schaffner. Touch wires together? No switch? No outside switch? You have to open the briefcase and touch wires together to ignite the bomb? What
kind of bomb is that!? It's funny if not moronic.

I could be totally wet, but there is something about this guy (psychologically) I dont see carrying a bomb at all, for his own personal
protection. I see a guy like this performing magic and tricks and con jobs
and faking it 100% of the way, and relying on his audience to do all the
real lifting work, of their own imaginations, and then jumping ...

Jerry

 

[georger]

Jerry,

Pardon me if I seem brash, but I am extremely sensitive to the “facts vs. myths” aspects of NORJAK. You just stated; “Sluggo has just provided evidence Copper had long underwear on so he was prepared for a jump ..” That is not a true statement.

If you are talking about the statement found on my web site, in the “Not Yet Classified” section that says; “There was a 20 year old student named Bill Mitchell, seated across from Cooper, but, he wasn't aware of the hijacking so paid little attention to Cooper. All he said was, “that Cooper hair was shiny, as if it were dyed, and that he was wearing long underwear," Then, you are misunderstanding the purpose of that section and possibly the entire purpose of my web site..

I am “all about” separating the facts from the myths. To do this, one has to discuss both. I have tried to make it clear, that (on my site) if it has been classified as “Fact,” I have researched (to my satisfaction) and believe it to be factual. If it is classified as “Myth,” I have researched it and find no support for it. But, if it is “Not Yet Classified,” then I am still trying to find records or testimony to support the statement.

I also have made it clear that I am not perfect, I welcome challenges from anyone and everyone. This policy helps me to maintain “intellectual honesty”. After all, I have “Culture Goggles” too.

So, in conclusion, if you choose to accept the word of a print media (so called) journalist, just because it appeared in an article, that is your choice. You have the right to set your facts vs. myths discriminator at any level you choose, but, do not, I repeat, do not, place my integrity in jeopardy, by taking a not-yet-proven statement and assigning it as presented as a fact by me.

As I said before, I don’t wish to seem brash, but this is an “emotional hot-button” for someone, like myself, who has been digging into the NORJAK case for almost 35 years, and has seen the mythology literally take on a life of its own.

Thanx,
Sluggo

Well taken Sluggo, no problem whatever. I misspoke. I couldnt remember
the section where I had read this. You are entirely correct. Thanks for the
correction. It is distinctions like this that are very important.
Jerry

 

[Sluggo]

And the funniest part is this bit about 'if I touched these wires together it would go poof', said to Mucklow or Schaffner.

Jerry,

I respect your input, and I respect you. But, you and I are very different. Now, I know to some, it may seem like I have a “messiah complex,” but I have put a great deal of energy into trying to understand the “reality” of NORJAK and separate myself from the unfounded rumors and myths.

I do not, and never have expected a “scientific level of proof,” I tried that and it just didn’t work when applied to a case like this. I never could find documentation at that level in what had been released to the public. But, I do not accept something a “true” just because it has appeared in a dozen newspaper articles. After all, their business is to sell newspapers, not solve a crime.

I am referencing a statement you made; “And the funniest part is this bit about 'if I touched these wires together it would go poof', said to Mucklow or Schaffner”.

There is no evidence that this statement was ever made. Maybe it was made, maybe the FBI is holding that information back for some reason. But as of now, it’s just not there. Not in the comm. transcripts, not in the crew notes, not in any FBI interviews.

I think it may have come from Max Gunther’s book; “D.B. Cooper: What Really Happened,” which is classified as fiction. As I have said before, I have never read any books on NORJAK in order to keep my thinking independent. I am re-thinking that decision, because it might help me understand where some of this stuff is coming from.

You might say; ”Well, Sluggo, why do you care?” I’ll tell you. It causes people like you, someone who has the will, the drive, and the intelligence to contribute to solving this case, to go down the wrong path, and that’s a big loss to this community. I would like to see your energy going toward producing a solution, rather than chasing rabbits (created by the media) down rabbit holes.

That is the reason I constantly invite constructive critisism in my Web Site, Blog, and Forum. I want them to be the recognized as a place to get good, factual, data. If that makes me a man with a messiah complex, then so be it. Come and join me brother, salvation is on the way!

As Dennis miller would say; “That’s my opinion, your’s may be different.”

Sluggo

 

[Albert18]

I understand what you are trying to do Sluggo but here are my thoughts.

This crime apparently can't be solved with the information the FBI has obtained.

It isn't uncommon for journalists/investigative reporters/authors to do a better investigation than law enforcement.

There seems to be a lot of misinformation in this case. I put that blame squarely on the shoulders of the FBI. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the FBI has tried to skew this investigation because they couldn't get their hands on Cooper. On your website you talk about cultural goggles and how the head agent described Cooper differently than the stewardesses. You wondered if it wasn't a bias. No. It had to be deliberate and I assume the FBI was trying to keep Cooper from being looked on favorably. Hence, Cooper was a brute. That load of misinformation comes straight from the FBI.

 

[Sluggo]

There seems to be a lot of misinformation in this case. I put that blame squarely on the shoulders of the FBI. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the FBI has tried to skew this investigation because they couldn't get their hands on Cooper. On your website you talk about cultural goggles and how the head agent described Cooper differently than the stewardesses. You wondered if it wasn't a bias. No. It had to be deliberate and I assume the FBI was trying to keep Cooper from being looked on favorably. Hence, Cooper was a brute. That load of misinformation comes straight from the FBI.

Albert18,

I have had exactly those same thoughts.

I have no plausible explanation as to why it would be so, but one would be “intellectually dishonest” if they didn’t allow for that possibility.

At this time, however, I’m not willing to state that there was a conscious attempt by the FBI (in general) to (as you say) skew the investigation. Therefore, I’m going to continue with the concept of “bias among individuals” until such time as evidence is presented to indicate a “coordinated effort” by the bureau. (Notice how cleverly I avoided the term “conspiracy”?)

I will say one thing… The time lost in the dead end investigation will never be recovered, and to me, that’s as big a crime as NORJAK. Whoever is responsible should be held accountable.

I’m open minded, find some evidence of malicious intent on the part of any individual or agency and I’ll be on it like a duck on a June-bug! But hurry up, time is running out.

Thanks for the dialog,

Sluggo

 

[Sluggo]

I’m posting this on behalf of curious-one (who is waiting for forum approval):

Hi Sluggo!

I came across your DB Cooper site and thread in the websluths forum – both good reads. I wanted to give my interpretation of one of the notes. I tried registering with the forum, but it’s not letting me post right away.

he will reassure not
trying anything - did
not want to scare her
if their was attempt
he will disconnect the
bomb"

My interpretation…

he (not Cooper, but the pilot or another) will reassure [Cooper that they would] not [be]
trying anything (against Cooper) – [the pilot or another] did
not want to scare her (Tina or other stewardess)
if their was [an] attempt (against Cooper)
he (the pilot or another) will disconnect the
bomb

I think “disconnect” is correct, much different than “detonate”, so that it most likely wasn’t written in error. Feel free to post this as your own and change the wording.

Keep up the good work!

curious-one