WA WA - D.B. Cooper hijacking mystery, 24 Nov 1971 - #1

[scandi]

Amazing, isn't it? Still as cocky as he was back then by implying how smart DB was. It reminds me of the link I found about when he was waiting in the wings to go before a judge, giving the other arrestee a few words of wisdom on what to do in court and how he would schmooze the judge. He did schmooze him as he was released right away, and it was on a bank robbery charge I believe.

I think one thing that made him successful at pulling off the hijacking was he was very calculating and kept it as simple as he could. It was beyond the odds but he had enough self confidence to know he would make it. I don't especially think he planned that phone call ahead of time though. He might have been on edge. He left a few things on the plane as I remember, and I often have wondered why he didn't take everything with him.


Face it, LE wasn't nearly as saavy back in those days like they are now. Plus I think there has been a history of the Seattle and Portland offices being competitive in a negative way over the years. Cases have been transferred back and forth which looks bad I think. If one division can't solve a crime a call comes down to transfer it to the other local office. Now I have read the Portland office is used to train. My nephew interviewed there last year and was totally impressed. They didn't hire him because he had no relative work experience, but he is happy now. He joined the Army and is in their Intelligence Division. Scandi

 

[leftcoast]

Hi Scandi

Congrats on your nephew getting in the Intelligence Division of the ARmy.

As far as Cooper leaving things on the plane.

I thought he only left behind his tie, the two unused chutes, cig. butts, and the glass he drank out of. Have you heard differently?

As far as the FBI and LE getting more sophisticated, I think that is true when it comes to science, ie DNA, hairs, fibers, etc.

However, there are always going to be cases that go cold. The 50's had the Brink's case, until one of the participants finally ratted out his partners six years later. That case was not solved by the FBI. Then, we had the unabomber, and that case was solved by the bomber's brother. Another case solved by the public.

In recent years, we have had the train derailment in western Arizona that was never solved, the anthrax case from 2001, Hansen spy case from the 90's that was a major embarassment (that case was broken via a former Russian KGB agent who tipped off the FBI for over a million dollars in reward money)

So, while I agree LE is probably more effective today, I believe there will always be unsolved priority cases. There is only so much manpower, and heck, these cases are worked by human beings, and human beings will make mistakes.

However, in the Cooper case, there is no excuse why this case wasn't solved back in 1971.

IMO, this case should have focused on skydivers, pilots, and locals first. Instead, it seems that agents were so overwhelmed with leads from the public, that they just wanted to eliminate as many people as possible early on. This was a CRITICAL mistake.

And to assume that Cooper didn't have an escape plan, meaning a particular area in which he planned on jumping, is just incompetent.

JMO

left

 

[Seeker]

Just rambling a bit here, but what does it matter now? I doubt that he has much if any of that money left after 36 years and I'm pretty sure the statute of limitations on his crime have run out, so what difference would it make now to positively ID him?

Just wondering why it's so important since he can't be charged with anything now. Or is it just to finally solve the mystery of what became of him and the money?

I hope you're right leftcoast and it's finally solved, you and your friend deserve accolades for delving so deeply into this case and getting all the info you did.
I think it would be wonderful to finally get it solved, so don't get me wrong. I just wish there were more people like you and your friend who were as tenacious and obsessed with getting all the info to solve cases like this. Maybe then there wouldn't be so many "cold" cases out there.

 

[leftcoast]

Just rambling a bit here, but what does it matter now? I doubt that he has much if any of that money left after 36 years and I'm pretty sure the statute of limitations on his crime have run out, so what difference would it make now to positively ID him?

Just wondering why it's so important since he can't be charged with anything now. Or is it just to finally solve the mystery of what became of him and the money?

first of all, to solve a mystery

second, get closure for the victims

third, yes, he can be charged. He was indicted in 1976 before the statute of limitations ran out.

fourth, to get a career criminal off the street. A person who not only most likely committed this crime, but, has been responsible for effecting the lives of other's in the ultimate of ways.

So, just because, it is an old case, then we should forgive criminals because they weren't brought to justice earlier.

Not to mention giving the pilot and flight attendants some peace knowing the dirtbag who committed this crime is behind bars (he scared the living crap out of those 22 year old young women)

Plus, what he is currently doing today has the potential to put more people at risk in the future.

Not to mention he has assets worth a few hundred thousand dollars, so why not let Northwest airlines and their insurance carrier get some of their money back. I'm sure if it was your 200,000 that Cooper stole, you may want to know who stole it, and have a chance to have him outed, and get some of your money back. I know I would.

left

PS I noted your addendum to your post. So, I understand that you are on side. Thanks for the final paragraph of your post.

When my buddy and I started this, we wondered if we found Cooper, and he was a hard working guy, who got into financial trouble, or got a horrendous illness, would we turn him in. We struggled with the answer. However, it was a moot point since he turned out to be a callous man, who is a career criminal, and his actions since 1971 have been dispictable.

 

[Seeker]

LOL! I must have been adding to my original post when you were hotly typing your reply.

third, yes, he can be charged. He was indicted in 1976 before the statute of limitations ran out.

How can they indict an unknown someone? Even though the mystery man may, or may not have been indicted wouldn't it have run out by now? 21 years later?
Indictments have to have the name of the person and each specific count he/she is being charged with.

fourth, to get a career criminal off the street.

If this guy is the guy you think he is and he is a "career criminal" why isn't he in jail now? Or again? Doesn't a career criminal mean they've been to jail repeatedly over a period of time for similar offenses?

So, just because, it is an old case, then we should forgive criminals because they weren't brought to justice earlier.

I never said that! I just wondered what the purpose would be to finally solve it other than to just solve a great mystery.

Not to mention giving the pilot and flight attendants some peace knowing the dirtbag who committed this crime is behind bars.

This person, whoever he is cannot be charged 36 years after the fact unless new evidence surfaces. Besides this would be a federal case, not a state or local one.

But all that aside, I really do applaud you and your friend for your excellent sleuthing! I hope you are right, even if nothing much can be done now.

 

[leftcoast]

thanks for applauding us for our work.

first, he is a career criminal. He committed crimes before the hijacking, and has been convicted of at least 5 crimes since. He has spent time in jail since 1971, on several short stints.

AS a matter of fact, he was on probation when he allegedly committed this crime.

As for the statute of limitations:

When we started this case, we spoke to an Assistant D.A. who told us that the "john Doe" indictments do stand up in court. When L.E. doesn't know the identity of a criminal, LE can indict him/her under a JOhn Doe indictment. Supposedly, our DA friend told us there would be no problem charging him in court. That indictment lasts until the identity of the criminal is learned.

However, proving the case may be difficult. However, both flight attendants are still alive, there is physical evidence, etc. so, I wouldn't rule out anything. BUt, I will admit a successful prosecution would be a long shot.

As for jurisdiction, yes, it would be a federal case. It was a federal prosecutor who indicted Cooper in absentia in 1976. Cooper could have been indicted in any of the four states in which the hijacked plane traveled. Oregon, California, Washington, and Nevada. However, he was indicted in Oregon, since Oregon had a grand jury sitting the day the DA decided to indict Cooper under abstentia.

Yes, you can indict someone without knowing their name. They are simply indicted under a "john Doe" indictment, which lists the charges, and tells the court that LE is not aware of the person's identity. Supposedly, this happens all the time on case in which the statute of limitations is nearing.

Regardless of whether he is tried for this crime, I think it would be a major accomplishment to solve this crime.

I agree there are more important cold cases to solve. However, this is the one that we simply "stumbled upon".

left

PS The new evidence that has surfaced to prosecute him is his identity. The feds had zero clue of Cooper's identity since day one. If they would have known his name and that he was responsible for this crime, then the statute of limitations would have run out in 1976.

 

[scandi]

As always, most interesting!

The immediate thought I had was if they do indight him, think of the famous and crackerjack attornies that will want to handle his case. I think success in proving him guilty in court will weigh heavily on any evidence they collected at the crime scene, the airplane. I'll as DAWGIE how long DNA evidence would be retained in a cigg butt. She knows a forensic tech.

I think one of the reasons you gave that is so important is peace of mind for the 2 stewardesses, especially the one that was so traumatized. It was not a victimless crime. Many might think it was NW Airlines that was the victim, but all they lost was money. Money can be replaced, and should as you say.
To not have to look over your shoulder again, knowing he saw you and if he gets scared and is unstable, could come and find you; well relieving that burden would be worth all the effort spent in finding him IMHO.

I am really excited now with what is going to happen once the broadcasts are being aired. Oh, that will be something to watch! Scandi

 

[scandi]

Left, you said: "PS The new evidence that has surfaced to prosecute him is his identity. The feds had zero clue of Cooper's identity since day one. If they would have known his name and that he was responsible for this crime, then the statute of limitations would have run out in 1976"

Do you think the fact he called the FBI that night, evidently giving them his name, could be a motion to the court to evict that standing John Doe warrant? It is true they had his name but did not consider him a suspect. Just wondering if that would matter.

 

[Seeker]

Left, check your PMs.

 

[leftcoast]

Scandi"

thanks to our number one supporter.

I do understand where Seeker is coming from, but, if you stumbled on this case, would you look the other way?

Part of me thinks the prosecution would be very difficult, and the other half thinks it would not. Why?

First, think of all the people who called in his name as a potential suspect. Maybe one of them has inside information, maybe he bragged, maybe his ex-wife has evidence.

Second: the witnesses remember this case as if it was yesterday.

third: Going over his IRS records, financials, etc. in court could be damaging to him.

fourth: who is to say he didn't have an accomplice, or someone helped laudner the money, etc.

fifth: some of the information he has given us was never released to the public. How did he come upon this information?

sixth: there is still evidence, such as cig. butts (unlikely), hairs, fibers, and the 66 latent prints.

seventh: Who is to say he didn't keep a twenty, the note, or some type of souvenoir which is at his house?

on and on.


As for the flight attendants: You know, I think they have been victimized twice. Once on the plane, and once when Cooper was not caught and given folk hero status by the 60's crowd.

Imagine not knowing if this clown would come after you, or if he was your neighbor, etc. it would make one very cautious of their surroundings, and trust me, it has.

left

 

[Nova]

Scandi"

thanks to our number one supporter.

I do understand where Seeker is coming from, but, if you stumbled on this case, would you look the other way?

Part of me thinks the prosecution would be very difficult, and the other half thinks it would not. Why?

First, think of all the people who called in his name as a potential suspect. Maybe one of them has inside information, maybe he bragged, maybe his ex-wife has evidence.

Second: the witnesses remember this case as if it was yesterday.

third: Going over his IRS records, financials, etc. in court could be damaging to him.

fourth: who is to say he didn't have an accomplice, or someone helped laudner the money, etc.

fifth: some of the information he has given us was never released to the public. How did he come upon this information?

sixth: there is still evidence, such as cig. butts (unlikely), hairs, fibers, and the 66 latent prints.

seventh: Who is to say he didn't keep a twenty, the note, or some type of souvenoir which is at his house?

on and on.


As for the flight attendants: You know, I think they have been victimized twice. Once on the plane, and once when Cooper was not caught and given folk hero status by the 60's crowd.

Imagine not knowing if this clown would come after you, or if he was your neighbor, etc. it would make one very cautious of their surroundings, and trust me, it has.

left

Aw, lefti, don't be too hard on those of us of the "60's crowd."

DB Cooper may have received the benefit of some "anti-establishment" feeling at the time, but glorifying criminals is a long-established American tradition.

See Jesse James, Belle Starr, Bonnie and Clyde and, more recently, alas, O.J. Simpson to millions.

(Fascinated by your work, BTW, and I was never a DB Cooper fan. Can't wait to see the rest.)

 

[leftcoast]

Left, you said: "PS The new evidence that has surfaced to prosecute him is his identity. The feds had zero clue of Cooper's identity since day one. If they would have known his name and that he was responsible for this crime, then the statute of limitations would have run out in 1976"

Do you think the fact he called the FBI that night, evidently giving them his name, could be a motion to the court to evict that standing John Doe warrant? It is true they had his name but did not consider him a suspect. Just wondering if that would matter.

That is a good point and something we have thought about.

One would think if it came down to it, that Cooper's attorney would make such an argument.

However, there is sufficient proof that the FBI never, ever, considered him as a suspect. They didn't even know where he lived, what he did for a living, etc. So, I"m sure the feds would argue he was never investigated, nor considered. Plus, Cooper was wearing a disguise, which included sunglasses, wig, etc.

I"m not a lawyer, but, I believe the SOL is so that LE doesn't continue to harass, investigate, etc. a person for a significant number of years and in essence make their life a living hell.

So, if one thinks about that, you would think since the feds never investigated him, the indictment would hold.

Very, very good point.

I do think if the feds investigated him, and couldn't make a case, then the sol's would have expired in 1976. But, my conclusion is since he was not identified as a suspect, that the sol's will hold. But, again, I'm not a lawyer, and I would think it would be up to a judge to decide.


left

 

[leftcoast]

Aw, lefti, don't be too hard on those of us of the "60's crowd."

DB Cooper may have received the benefit of some "anti-establishment" feeling at the time, but glorifying criminals is a long-established American tradition.

See Jesse James, Belle Starr, Bonnie and Clyde and, more recently, alas, O.J. Simpson to millions.

(Fascinated by your work, BTW, and I was never a DB Cooper fan. Can't wait to see the rest.)

thanks for the support

Didn't mean to pick on the 60's people. It is just that I can't imagine cheering on someone who robs a bank, via parachute.

Plus, Cooper cost us 2 million in the investigation, plus security changes at the airport, the cooper vane on 727's, McCoy's life from duplicating this crime, and the people whose lives he ruined after 1971 really irritates me.

When this comes public, you will understand.

You are right, the public cheered on Bonnie and Clyde, Jesse james, etc.

And don't get me started on OJ.

I think part of the public support for criminals is more against corporations, banks, etc, than it is they are fans of the criminals. Just my take.


left

 

[Nova]

thanks for the support

Didn't mean to pick on the 60's people. It is just that I can't imagine cheering on someone who robs a bank, via parachute.

Plus, Cooper cost us 2 million in the investigation, plus security changes at the airport, the cooper vane on 727's, McCoy's life from duplicating this crime, and the people whose lives he ruined after 1971 really irritates me.

When this comes public, you will understand.

You are right, the public cheered on Bonnie and Clyde, Jesse james, etc.

And don't get me started on OJ.

I think part of the public support for criminals is more against corporations, banks, etc, than it is they are fans of the criminals. Just my take.


left

I wasn't arguing at all that DB should be admired, just that doing so wasn't just a quirk of the 60s and 70s. And you're right, admiration for criminals comes out of a feeling that the "establishment" (to use the 60s phrase) is corrupt anyway and deserves to be looted.

But nobody (present company excepted) ever talks about the very human victims of the crime, just as nobody said much about the human beings that Jesse James and his gang traumatized and even killed.

 

[leftcoast]

Nova

I do agree with your statement

left

 

[Seeker]

leftcoast, I have a friend who works for the US Attorney's office here check for us and here is what she found. Yes one Dan Cooper/AKA John Doe (they had to use a real name and since that's what he gave the woman who sold him his ticket) was charged in 1976, and the charges STILL STAND! The case is technically STILL OPEN!! :dance:

The biggest problem would be to conclusively prove who he was. Unless he still had some of the money with him then they could not prove it was him. They don't even know if any of those prints they found belonged to the hijacker or not. They did keep some cigarette butts, but she didn't know if they were still in evidence lockup or not. She's not in Portland, so she couldn't find that out for us.

If you guys are right and this is the guy there is still reward money....you guys would be able to recoup some of the money I'm sure you spent researching this. I'm sure you guys will throw a party right?

 

[leftcoast]

leftcoast, I have a friend who works for the US Attorney's office here check for us and here is what she found. Yes one Dan Cooper/AKA John Doe (they had to use a real name and since that's what he gave the woman who sold him his ticket) was charged in 1976, and the charges STILL STAND! The case is technically STILL OPEN!! :dance:

The biggest problem would be to conclusively prove who he was. Unless he still had some of the money with him then they could not prove it was him. They don't even know if any of those prints they found belonged to the hijacker or not. They did keep some cigarette butts, but she didn't know if they were still in evidence lockup or not. She's not in Portland, so she couldn't find that out for us.

If you guys are right and this is the guy there is still reward money....you guys would be able to recoup some of the money I'm sure you spent researching this. I'm sure you guys will throw a party right?

Seeker:

Thanks for posting with all the information. That is good news to get confirmation that the case is still technically open, and that Cooper has been indicted.

We really do believe we have the right guy.

It would be nice to finally know who committed this crime, and I must say I wouldn't say "no" to the reward. Heck, the feds spent 2 million on this case, us getting to recoup our costs would be nice.

thanks for the information

I hope you can catch the story on television when it airs on May 15th, 16th, and 17th on KOIN (a CBS affiliate).

left

ps we will throw a party, and everyone from the board will be invited to a shindig in Portland.

 

[annemc2]

ps we will throw a party, and everyone from the board will be invited to a shindig in Portland.

Whoo hoo! I'm in! I've been watching this thread with great interest and am *so excited* to see the news in less than a month!

 

[leftcoast]

for all the doubters out there: (you know who you are)

What kind of odds will you give us that our suspect isn't Cooper?

I'll take a 100 dollar bet at 1,000 to one if anyone wants to take the other side. Actually, the odds are much slimmer, closer to 1,000,000 to one, but, I am feeling generous today.

Heck, wouldn't it be like stealing a 100 dollars from me?

Of course, if we are right, that would be a pay out of 100,000 grand. Any takers?

left

 

[JDB]

for all the doubters out there: (you know who you are)

What kind of odds will you give us that our suspect isn't Cooper?

I'll take a 100 dollar bet at 1,000 to one if anyone wants to take the other side. Actually, the odds are much slimmer, closer to 1,000,000 to one, but, I am feeling generous today.

Heck, wouldn't it be like stealing a 100 dollars from me?

Of course, if we are right, that would be a pay out of 100,000 grand. Any takers?

left

hey left I think you have that Bet backwards. You are so sure you should put up the $100,000 grand.