DB Cooper

[c99acer 8]

  On 5/9/2025 at 4:25 PM, FLYJACK said:

This is contradicted by the evidence..

The rubber bands crumbled when the packets were picked up and the money was tested for soil/sand.. It was only Columbia River sand. Shards were also present in the sand. Plus, the money was exposed to the River in spring/early summer.

So, the money was buried for maybe 2-9 years. Not a short time. Palmer concluded the money was buried within a few years of the find.. 

The recent burial plant find idea just doesn't work.

Are you sure the rubber band crumbles weren't laying amongst the shards of bills? I recall language of how they picked stuck parts of the rubber bands off the bills, not that it crumbled away (like it was holding the packet together). More importantly, why didn't Tina identify rubber bands as holding the original cash - I only recall her statement of 'Bank Type bands'. 

[FLYJACK 760]

  On 5/9/2025 at 6:01 PM, c99acer said:

Are you sure the rubber band crumbles weren't laying amongst the shards of bills? I recall language of how they picked stuck parts of the rubber bands off the bills, not that it crumbled away (like it was holding the packet together). More importantly, why didn't Tina identify rubber bands as holding the original cash - I only recall her statement of 'Bank Type bands'. 

Both, they later picked off stuck pieces of rubber band and they crumbled when picked up.

Per Tina, the packets had "bank type bands", but the packets were rubber banded into a bundle of several packets.

That convinced me it was not a recent plant long before the diatoms were analyzed.. The diatoms confirmed it.

Edited May 9 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 760]

Another point is that a local,, I think it was a Fazio said during the money find search that the money find spot was recently underwater..

[c99acer 8]

  On 5/10/2025 at 3:52 PM, FLYJACK said:

Another point is that a local,, I think it was a Fazio said during the money find search that the money find spot was recently underwater..

I seem to recall reading a few years back, that Georger spoke to the Fazio brothers and they had indicated the money had to be a plant based on their knowledge of the Columbia and its action in that area. Georger still have that info?

[FLYJACK 760]

  On 5/10/2025 at 5:12 PM, c99acer said:

I seem to recall reading a few years back, that Georger spoke to the Fazio brothers and they had indicated the money had to be a plant based on their knowledge of the Columbia and its action in that area. Georger still have that info?

No, the opposite.. Fazio's believed the money washed onto TBAR.. though that is an opinion.

 

Bruce Smith post..

Last Monday, Al Fazio walked me through the money find, or tried to. He had a lot of memory gaps about which day what happened, but here is what I walked away with: 

Ingrams found the money on a Sunday afternoon. Al says they tried to pass some of it a bank on Monday. Couldn't do it, apparantly, and got directed to the FBI who got out to the beach late Monday. 

Al and his family were in the dark on the find, and Al first learned about the money when he was driving a load of cattle back from a sale in Oregon and the Feds had his driveway blocked out and wouldn't let him in. 

Once he cleared that up, he headed to the beach and saw lots of shards scattered along the high-tide line. Al says the bundle of bills was found just below the high-tide line, and Al is passionate when he says, "They washed in. They were buried there by the tide." 

The next day Tuesday, the feds asked Al and Richard to get their backhoes out and start digging. Al is adamant that no pieces of Cooper money were found beneath the surface of Tina's Beach. 

Feds were out there for a few days, and then the media came in, and that lasted for a few days. 

The Fazios seem to have every book written on DB Cooper and access them freely and readily. 

I saw no evidence of stroke on the part of Richard, as Jerry alluded to a few days ago. He's smart and conversant.

[georger 258]

  On 5/10/2025 at 5:12 PM, c99acer said:

I seem to recall reading a few years back, that Georger spoke to the Fazio brothers and they had indicated the money had to be a plant based on their knowledge of the Columbia and its action in that area. Georger still have that info?

Not me!  The Fazios never said anything to me about the money being a plant. Just the opposite! The Fazios have always maintained the money arrived with the last high tide. They said they saw pieces of money spread out at the Ingram find area, just below the high tide line. They concluded the money had  washed in ...  no plant.

The Fazisos observations must be taken *very seriously. The Fazios link the appearance of the money on their beach with a high tide event. The Fazios know their land and the river and how things work on their beach after decades of observation etc! The Fazios did not say 'the money washed in from the river'. The Fazios merely linked the appearance of the money and its morphology in a small area at the find site, with a high tide event and the last 'high tide line'. Tides generally erode beach material and move material on beaches in the direction of river flow.    

Edited May 10 by georger

[georger 258]

  On 5/9/2025 at 6:01 PM, c99acer said:

Are you sure the rubber band crumbles weren't laying amongst the shards of bills? I recall language of how they picked stuck parts of the rubber bands off the bills, not that it crumbled away (like it was holding the packet together). More importantly, why didn't Tina identify rubber bands as holding the original cash - I only recall her statement of 'Bank Type bands'. 

The interviewer did not think to ask Tina what she meant by "bank type bands" or to explain how the money she saw was packaged. Major omission. This omission has been perpetuated by everyone,  and was never corrected by anyone in spite of countless opportunities to correct these omissions! People are idiots! Its as simple as that.  

Edited May 10 by georger

[georger 258]

  On 5/9/2025 at 12:50 PM, FLYJACK said:

Nope, the rubber bands crumbled when picked up. That proves the money was there for a long time and not recently placed there.. How do you get spring diatoms on the money. It doesn't fit the evidence.

And I have looked at many many ideas including Ingram placing it for Brian to find. The FP went almost right over Ingram's workplace.. Ultimately, no... the money was there for a few years to 9 years..  It would be helpful if somebody could figure out when the money landed there. 

The exact words describing the bands the Ingrams used published in the FBI document have been published countless times.  People would rather guess and make stuff up about this rather than simply citing what the document(s) say ....  

BTW: all of this speculation about Tina's thoughts and motives etc etc etc, especially in regard to her transaction with Cooper during the money conversation, is a total waste of time and  misleading. Agents opened the door to this nonsense when they failed to ask Tina to clarify and explain her statements. There is no evidence that Tina was playing games or working some kind of agenda of her own in any of these transactions with Cooper! Moreover, decades have passed with nobody thinking to ask Tina to clarify points in her interviews! People are self-serving morons!   

 

Edited May 10 by georger

[FLYJACK 760]

  On 5/10/2025 at 8:03 PM, georger said:

The exact words describing the bands the Ingrams used published in the FBI document have been published countless times.  People would rather guess and make stuff up about this rather than simply citing what the document(s) say ....  

BTW: all of this speculation about Tina's thoughts and motives etc etc etc, especially in regard to her transaction with Cooper during the money conversation, is a total waste of time and  misleading. Agents opened the door to this nonsense when they failed to ask Tina to clarify and explain her statements. There is no evidence that Tina was playing games or working some kind of agenda of her own in any of these transactions with Cooper! Moreover, decades have passed with nobody thinking to ask Tina to clarify points in her interviews! People are self-serving morons!   

 

Yup, it would have been nice if the agents back then followed up on some of these things.. but if they did a better job the case may have been solved.

There is corroboration from several sources that the money was in bank bands/straps and then rubber banded into bundles when given to Cooper. There is an agent statement that the bundles were made into a random size before going to Cooper... FWW.

Giving the stews money was not to be generous but to buy their confidence by implicating them and tainting them as witnesses...  they would not be completely cooperative or entirely accurate. They would not want Cooper to be caught.

As for Tina, she was the only one we know of that handled ransom money outside the bag other than Cooper. She had opportunity living next to the Columbia just upstream of TBAR in the late 70's. She had an piece in the newspaper right before the extensive ground search giving out case info claiming she refused the offer. The FBI was watching her when she lived in San Diego. She asked for the money claiming to be humorous, she was not humorous at any other time. Her behaviour was odd, around the time the money find she went into a nunnery, was she hiding, witness protection? During the first sketch she made comments on Cooper's face, during the second revised sketch B she claimed she never saw his face.. she is either lying to be evasive or was lying earlier.

To dismiss this theory based on an assumption that she wouldn't do this or lie is the same error everyone makes, using an assumption to reject a theory, rookie stuff. Nobody knows what really happened, only Tina and Cooper knows. She claimed she handed it back citing company policy on tips,, this was not a tip.

It is a solid theory based on the facts we have, it is not proven but is something that can't just be dismissed because people think it is out of character. Joking and asking for money was out of character.. If this happened and she did take the money or Cooper put it in her purse it wasn't something nefarious, she got scared and thought she would be in trouble, not true. Even if she admitted this today she wouldn't be in trouble.

This is a classic Bayesian analysis... it doesn't mean it is true but it is a valid theory based on probabilities.

But as I said this is a TBAR theory, there are others.

Did Cooper put the Tina money in his pocket and pay for a ride after he landed to not be turned in..  Then that money ended up at TBAR when it became a liability and was tossed into the River.

[georger 258]

  On 5/9/2025 at 6:01 PM, c99acer said:

Are you sure the rubber band crumbles weren't laying amongst the shards of bills? I recall language of how they picked stuck parts of the rubber bands off the bills, not that it crumbled away (like it was holding the packet together). More importantly, why didn't Tina identify rubber bands as holding the original cash - I only recall her statement of 'Bank Type bands'. 

Publish the quotation you think you have and your source ?  

Here is the FBI account from the files:

"…  The boy picked up the money and they looked at it and determined that it had once been $20 bills. The money was badly decomposed and was held together with rubber bands which were so old they crumbled away immediately upon handling. They took the money home where they showed it to INGRAMs brother-in-law, who took the rest of the rubber bands off and was going to dry out the money and try to reclaim it. They had no idea at this time where the money had come from. "

You might also read Tom Kaye's work on the money. Quite obviously badly decomposed rubber bands are not holding anything together. Rather, Tom describes the bills as being in a state of 'cemented adhesion', more or less,  except that the Ingrams later testified they pulled the money out in three or four pieces. When the Ingrams presented their find to Ralph Himmelsbach the bills were presented as twelve groups of mutually adhering bills, in a sandwich bag. These groups were placed on a table and photographed as received by the press. Here is that photo ...

You might want to compare those bills to a part of an old notebook found in the sand on some beach except that paper money is actually cloth and much more durable than pulp paper pages in a notebook.

Edited May 12 by georger

[georger 258]

  On 5/11/2025 at 2:58 PM, FLYJACK said:

Yup, it would have been nice if the agents back then followed up on some of these things.. but if they did a better job the case may have been solved.

There is corroboration from several sources that the money was in bank bands/straps and then rubber banded into bundles when given to Cooper. There is an agent statement that the bundles were made into a random size before going to Cooper... FWW.

Giving the stews money was not to be generous but to buy their confidence by implicating them and tainting them as witnesses...  they would not be completely cooperative or entirely accurate. They would not want Cooper to be caught.

As for Tina, she was the only one we know of that handled ransom money outside the bag other than Cooper. She had opportunity living next to the Columbia just upstream of TBAR in the late 70's. She had an piece in the newspaper right before the extensive ground search giving out case info claiming she refused the offer. The FBI was watching her when she lived in San Diego. She asked for the money claiming to be humorous, she was not humorous at any other time. Her behaviour was odd, around the time the money find she went into a nunnery, was she hiding, witness protection? During the first sketch she made comments on Cooper's face, during the second revised sketch B she claimed she never saw his face.. she is either lying to be evasive or was lying earlier.

To dismiss this theory based on an assumption that she wouldn't do this or lie is the same error everyone makes, using an assumption to reject a theory, rookie stuff. Nobody knows what really happened, only Tina and Cooper knows. She claimed she handed it back citing company policy on tips,, this was not a tip.

It is a solid theory based on the facts we have, it is not proven but is something that can't just be dismissed because people think it is out of character. Joking and asking for money was out of character.. If this happened and she did take the money or Cooper put it in her purse it wasn't something nefarious, she got scared and thought she would be in trouble, not true. Even if she admitted this today she wouldn't be in trouble.

This is a classic Bayesian analysis... it doesn't mean it is true but it is a valid theory based on probabilities.

But as I said this is a TBAR theory, there are others.

Did Cooper put the Tina money in his pocket and pay for a ride after he landed to not be turned in..  Then that money ended up at TBAR when it became a liability and was tossed into the River.

Or did Cooper put the 'package' he offered Tina in his coat pocket ... then it winds up on Tena Bar ?  Implies he wound up in the river ? I can tell you there were agents exploring Tena Bar who were expecting to find the coat, brief case, etc ? There was a strong sense of the money and Cooper being together ... 

I want to know what year Tom's diatoms date to.   

[FLYJACK 760]

  On 5/12/2025 at 8:10 AM, georger said:

Or did Cooper put the 'package' he offered Tina in his coat pocket ... then it winds up on Tena Bar ?  Implies he wound up in the river ? I can tell you there were agents exploring Tena Bar who were expecting to find the coat, brief case, etc ? There was a strong sense of the money and Cooper being together ... 

I want to know what year Tom's diatoms date to.   

I agree.. he could have put the money in his coat pocket...   the date the money arrived on TBAR is critical.. I have competing theories for close to the hijacking and closer to the find..

My latest idea that has not got any traction is that the dredge layer identified by Palmer as 1974 was actually the 1970 dredge layer,, if true that means the money was under the 1974 dredge layer which was eroded away by 1980... obviously in that scenario the money had to arrive before the 1974.. This idea fits the evidence..

One thing that always bothered me was that the TBAR banks were always being eroded while the river bottom was being filled. That is one reason the hydrologist dismissed natural means burial,, after the money arrived it would be taken back by the erosion. So, some mechanism must have kept it there. If the 1974 dredge layer was put on top that would explain it. Because Palmer identified it as the 1974 layer everyone assumes the money arrived after 1974. Then Tom questioned Palmer's identification of the layer as being from the dredge..  that is tricky after so many years of erosion.

 

[georger 258]

  On 5/12/2025 at 1:20 PM, FLYJACK said:

I agree.. he could have put the money in his coat pocket...   the date the money arrived on TBAR is critical.. I have competing theories for close to the hijacking and closer to the find..

My latest idea that has not got any traction is that the dredge layer identified by Palmer as 1974 was actually the 1970 dredge layer,, if true that means the money was under the 1974 dredge layer which was eroded away by 1980... obviously in that scenario the money had to arrive before the 1974.. This idea fits the evidence..

One thing that always bothered me was that the TBAR banks were always being eroded while the river bottom was being filled. That is one reason the hydrologist dismissed natural means burial,, after the money arrived it would be taken back by the erosion. So, some mechanism must have kept it there. If the 1974 dredge layer was put on top that would explain it. Because Palmer identified it as the 1974 layer everyone assumes the money arrived after 1974. Then Tom questioned Palmer's identification of the layer as being from the dredge..  that is tricky after so many years of erosion.

 

And the amazing thing to Tom and me, out of all of the work at TBar nobody bothered to save a box of the sands or take a core sample. WTF were these people thinking? !  That is the same as going to Court without any written documents and no tape recording! Its beyond belief! In other words, no record of anything... and nothing that anyone can test independently in a lab ...

Palmer literally told everyone  'I am a professional ... Ive been doing this so long ... nobody dares question my authority/expertise ...'   '''we dont need no stinken lab work or samples''' !  Himmelsbach bought right into it.

Tom's interpretation of the strata at TBar is probably the correct one. The 8-24" cross bedded layer Palmer documented with photos, directly below the Ingram find money site, probably establishes the date of the Cooper money appearance at Tena Bar. I think Palmer said one thing but meant another! The real issue is semantics. I think Palmer said one thing but meant another and Tom has got the beach/river strata correct. That secures the time frame for the Cooper money and Tom's diatoms ... 

Edited May 12 by georger

[FLYJACK 760]

 

[c99acer 8]

  On 5/12/2025 at 7:56 AM, georger said:

Publish the quotation you think you have and your source ?  

I misspoke about the rubber bands and the crumbles. I do not have a source - sorry to add any confusion on the money find. I did review the Citizen Sleuths website as you highlighted, and as FLYJACK had mentioned also, "the rubber bands were still intact and crumbled when touched". 

[FLYJACK 760]

  On 5/13/2025 at 5:16 PM, c99acer said:

I misspoke about the rubber bands and the crumbles. I do not have a source - sorry to add any confusion on the money find. I did review the Citizen Sleuths website as you highlighted, and as FLYJACK had mentioned also, "the rubber bands were still intact and crumbled when touched". 

To be fair..  the amount of case information and sources is overwhelming,,

I find myself having to go back and double check notes more and more.. 

I have almost 10,000 files in my Cooper folder... even that is getting hard to search.

[FunnyStuff 6]

  On 5/13/2025 at 5:28 PM, FLYJACK said:

To be fair..  the amount of case information and sources is overwhelming,,

I find myself having to go back and double check notes more and more.. 

I have almost 10,000 files in my Cooper folder... even that is getting hard to search.

I would love to get my hands on an OCR converted version of the FBI PDFs. Do you have them and/or are they readily available?

[FLYJACK 760]

  On 5/13/2025 at 10:44 PM, FunnyStuff said:

I would love to get my hands on an OCR converted version of the FBI PDFs. Do you have them and/or are they readily available?

I OCR convert them myself.. and they are big files..

Dr Edwards was converting them and posting them at one time,, I didn't use his files and don't know if he still posts them..

Here they are.. he seems to have stopped at file #80

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1O44iSvxmOgFrju0rLZu7oQu64Osf_aMe

Edited May 13 by FLYJACK

[georger 258]

  On 5/13/2025 at 5:16 PM, c99acer said:

I misspoke about the rubber bands and the crumbles. I do not have a source - sorry to add any confusion on the money find. I did review the Citizen Sleuths website as you highlighted, and as FLYJACK had mentioned also, "the rubber bands were still intact and crumbled when touched". 

According to Pat Ingram, Harold's brother spent considerable time picking off pieces of decomposed bands stuck to the fibers of the bills. Its too bad they didnt keep those specimens for lab analysis. This description suggests that at some time the money was in a warm-hot environment, causing the bands to enter a gooey melt phrase. When and where could that have been between the time Cooper was given the money and its discovery in 1980. ?

The chemistry of the bands is  very important.  The bands are a window into the money's history.

Edited May 14 by georger

[georger 258]

  On 5/14/2025 at 3:39 AM, georger said:

According to Pat Ingram, Harold's brother spent considerable time picking off pieces of decomposed bands stuck to the fibers of the bills. Its too bad they didnt keep those specimens for lab analysis. This description suggests that at some time the money was in a warm-hot environment, causing the bands to enter a gooey melt phrase. When and where could that have been between the time Cooper was given the money and its discovery in 1980. ?

The chemistry of the bands is  very important.  The bands are a window into the money's history.

…  The boy picked up the money and they looked at it and determined that it had once been $20 bills. The money was badly decomposed and was held together with rubber bands which were so old they crumbled away immediately upon handling. They took the money home where they showed it to INGRAMs brother-in-law, who took the rest of the rubber bands off and was going to dry out the money and try to reclaim it. They had no idea at this time where the money had come from.

We know that the FBI statement above is only partially true, it is contradictory, and not the whole story. If as Pat Ingram reported, the money came out of the ground in three (or more?) pieces, after which  the Ingrams separated their find into twelve groups turned into the  FBI, Harold Ingrams brother spent considerable time removing pieces of bands from the money back at the apartment. Miraculously, no pieces of the rubber band survived to be tested in a lab by the FBI to determine their status and exact condition/history. These rubber bands could have been considered the 'rosetta stone' of the money's history! The FBI was apparently clueless to this whole issue going on right under their noses. 

These Alliance@ rubber bands had a known history, chemistry, formulation, and predictable prognosis based on environmental factors. They were a window into the money's history after Cooper was given the money.    

 

[georger 258]

  On 5/14/2025 at 8:33 PM, georger said:

…  The boy picked up the money and they looked at it and determined that it had once been $20 bills. The money was badly decomposed and was held together with rubber bands which were so old they crumbled away immediately upon handling. They took the money home where they showed it to INGRAMs brother-in-law, who took the rest of the rubber bands off and was going to dry out the money and try to reclaim it. They had no idea at this time where the money had come from.

 

We know that the FBI statement above is only partially true, it is contradictory, and not the whole story. If as Pat Ingram reported, the money came out of the ground in three (or more?) pieces, after which  the Ingrams separated their find into twelve groups turned into the  FBI, Harold Ingrams brother spent considerable time removing pieces of bands from the money back at the apartment. Miraculously, no pieces of the rubber band survived to be tested in a lab by the FBI to determine their status and exact condition/history. These rubber bands could have been considered the 'rosetta stone' of the money's history! The FBI was apparently clueless to this whole issue going on right under their noses. 

These Alliance@ rubber bands had a known history, chemistry, formulation, and predictable prognosis based on environmental factors. They were a window into the money's history after Cooper was given the money.    

 

The FBI should have gone to the Ingram's apartment immediately once it learned of the money, and secured the Cooper money to prevent any further alteration of the EVIDENCE!.  Cases are solved on 'evidence' not on giddy press conferences with young lottery winners! The Portland press conference with the Ingrams turned out to be premature and ill advised. The Ingrams lawyered up to get their reward with Richard Tosaw of all people. And any advantage or opportunity to the evidence side of the Cooper case went right out the window ...   

Edited Thursday at 08:55 AM by georger

[FLYJACK 760]

  On 5/14/2025 at 8:33 PM, georger said:

…  The boy picked up the money and they looked at it and determined that it had once been $20 bills. The money was badly decomposed and was held together with rubber bands which were so old they crumbled away immediately upon handling. They took the money home where they showed it to INGRAMs brother-in-law, who took the rest of the rubber bands off and was going to dry out the money and try to reclaim it. They had no idea at this time where the money had come from.

 

We know that the FBI statement above is only partially true, it is contradictory, and not the whole story. If as Pat Ingram reported, the money came out of the ground in three (or more?) pieces, after which  the Ingrams separated their find into twelve groups turned into the  FBI, Harold Ingrams brother spent considerable time removing pieces of bands from the money back at the apartment. Miraculously, no pieces of the rubber band survived to be tested in a lab by the FBI to determine their status and exact condition/history. These rubber bands could have been considered the 'rosetta stone' of the money's history! The FBI was apparently clueless to this whole issue going on right under their noses. 

These Alliance@ rubber bands had a known history, chemistry, formulation, and predictable prognosis based on environmental factors. They were a window into the money's history after Cooper was given the money.    

 

The brittle vs stuck rubber bands may have been the difference between top and bottom..  those areas would have been subject to different environments.

Also the packets were about half the original size so the rubber bands were clearly not "intact" as reported.

Edited Thursday at 01:18 PM by FLYJACK

[georger 258]

  On 5/15/2025 at 12:49 PM, FLYJACK said:

The brittle vs stuck rubber bands may have been the difference between top and bottom..  those areas would have been subject to different environments.

Also the packets were about half the original size so the rubber bands were clearly not "intact" as reported.

I think the FBI guys were being loose with their language. I take by 'intact' that they meant something very likely band remnants were visible and still in place on the bills. You could tell it was or had been a rubber bands. Their goal was little more than a general description that would fill a news byte on radio and tv. The Lab went further and separated the bills, examined the sediment between the bills, but the bands never comes up in any lab report Ive heard of. I wish Tom had those bands to look at today! God only knows what he might find ...

The chemistry and response options of those bands under various conditions is so well known, they might tell a story nobody expects. Those bands might write a travelogue which only raises more questions than anyone can answer!

Edited Friday at 08:43 AM by georger

[73blazer 1]

  On 5/16/2025 at 3:07 AM, georger said:

 Those bands might write a travelogue which only raises more questions than anyone can answer!

I believe they've already raised more questions than answers.

[georger 258]

  On 5/16/2025 at 3:02 PM, 73blazer said:

I believe they've already raised more questions than answers.

Perhaps another conversation with Dorwin Schreuder is in order - searching for clues. I still think something crucial about this money is missing, and we dont have an accurate working model of the beach where this money was found. I think Palmer's '8-24" cross-bedded layer' found  just below the upper active money layer Palmer identified, is crucial to interpreting the money find... there were either shards of Cooper money found below the Ingram find layer, or there weren't. And of course those deeper specimens bagged and filmed by a tv crew at TBar as they were found, are now missing ... what else! If there is any lesson to be learned from the DB Cooper Case, it is that 'haste makes waste'.

Go BIG or go HOME!

Edited Friday at 07:15 PM by georger