MarkBennett

Robert, Nobody is questioning yours or anyone's right to challenge Marla's story. Marla thought she'd stumbled upon solving the crime of the century based on memories from her childhood and what her dad told her. She thought she might be able to write a book and make lots of money on it. How is she any different than anyone else on this forum who has a favored suspect? The FBI investigated her story for months and said they considered LD Cooper a suspect. Yet, you (and this can be verified by going back in this forum) on the very day her name became public and with only cursory information out, wrote ON THIS FORUM that her story had "more holes than swiss cheese." I guess you are just that much better of an investigator than the FBI. And, then you brand her a liar, based on some facebook posts saying she wants to make money on it, or her brother can't cooroborate it? You like to say nobody in her family would cooroborate it -- well, they didn't come out and deny it either! In your world, Marla made up and deliberately peddled a false story to the FBI - which is a crime -- assuming not only she would not be found out, but they would believe it -- and they would publicize it and she would write a book about it and get rich. Does that scenario make sense to anyone? No, you're free to challenge her story. It was just very petty on your part to attack her integrity -- especially when she did exactly the same thing you did -- thought she had solved the case and wanted to make money on it. And, don't make comments about how you wanted to help her when we can all go back in this forum and read how you attacked her almost immediately and wouldn't go to the 2011 symposium because she was going to be there. And, may I point out, Marla at that symposium was willing to answer any and all questions from anyone who asked. When anyone challenges your reporting of Kenny's transactions, you change the subject or try to refer them to Gray. Don't want to believe her? Fine. But don't go back and try to tell us it wasn't personal with you. And try not to hurt your arm patting yourself on the back. Well, first...since Gray was the first to even bring up Christiansen's name...and since at least a portion of the investigation later in KC was based on Gray's work...I sometimes direct questions to the source: Gray. But we're not here to discuss that. As far as KC I've been very open about that except for a couple of minor points that I won't discuss until this August. See anyone else lately make a 30-page document public about a suspect that includes names? I don't think so. Her story DID have more holes than a block of Swiss cheese, and right from the beginning, just as I said. She says he landed near Sisters, no...then it was Tena Bar. Her witness is conveniently (and yes, sadly) no longer living. No one else who was at the house will back up even a piece of her story. And for the life of me I can't explain how the FBI bought into that crap. Or why they didn't figure out what the heck was going on with her. "I'm not going near this one..." her brother tells her on Facebook when he hears what's going on with Marla and her 'media frenzy'. Consider for a moment the order on how things happened. She has a law enforcement presence convey her story to the FBI. They do some kind of an investigation, but the only thing they REALLY investigated was a DNA test. When if fails...they give her a polygraph. It's like that's the point they figured out (finally) they were being hoodwinked. Marla's appearance at the symposium in Portland was not an exercise in 'openess'. It was a pre-book book tour intended to draw media attention to swing a fat deal with a big publisher. It's not my fault that the FBI failed to see her Facebook posts, which by the way were done BEFORE the symposium... I don't have to defend myself against an investigation into her story. She made it easy to discover the truth. Only the FBI found it difficult somehow. And that, as The Who once said, I Can't Explain. I don't know why I bother. Sigh.

Robert, Nobody is questioning yours or anyone's right to challenge Marla's story. Marla thought she'd stumbled upon solving the crime of the century based on memories from her childhood and what her dad told her. She thought she might be able to write a book and make lots of money on it. How is she any different than anyone else on this forum who has a favored suspect? The FBI investigated her story for months and said they considered LD Cooper a suspect. Yet, you (and this can be verified by going back in this forum) on the very day her name became public and with only cursory information out, wrote ON THIS FORUM that her story had "more holes than swiss cheese." I guess you are just that much better of an investigator than the FBI. And, then you brand her a liar, based on some facebook posts saying she wants to make money on it, or her brother can't cooroborate it? You like to say nobody in her family would cooroborate it -- well, they didn't come out and deny it either! In your world, Marla made up and deliberately peddled a false story to the FBI - which is a crime -- assuming not only she would not be found out, but they would believe it -- and they would publicize it and she would write a book about it and get rich. Does that scenario make sense to anyone? No, you're free to challenge her story. It was just very petty on your part to attack her integrity -- especially when she did exactly the same thing you did -- thought she had solved the case and wanted to make money on it. And, don't make comments about how you wanted to help her when we can all go back in this forum and read how you attacked her almost immediately and wouldn't go to the 2011 symposium because she was going to be there. And, may I point out, Marla at that symposium was willing to answer any and all questions from anyone who asked. When anyone challenges your reporting of Kenny's transactions, you change the subject or try to refer them to Gray. Don't want to believe her? Fine. But don't go back and try to tell us it wasn't personal with you. And try not to hurt your arm patting yourself on the back.

How does it remind you of Fargo. Did someone end up in the wood chipper?

And, not a member of the crew of flight 305? I have no idea who you might be referring to.

Hmmmmm.....and this person is flying in from Minnesota? And, not on the 305 crew? The only Minnesota people I can think of are: 1) Lyle Christianson 2) Bob Knoss 3) Vicki Wilson Is it Vicki?

Why don't you publish those names? You paint all of us here with that same brush if you keep repeating it. You say you choose to put up rather than shut up. Now is your chance to put up.

Are you suggesting you have new information that will blow this case wide open?

Without more details, I'm not sure what this means. Does this person associated with NWA know anything more about the Cooper case than someone not associated with them? What is this person's background with the company? I'm an airline employee. I certainly would never claim that my opinion is the official position of that airline. Who is this person?

I absolutely agree with that! Everyone with a suspect -- Marla, Sailshaw, the Foremans, Jo, Blevins -- each sincerely believes theirs is the true DB Cooper. Maybe one of them is correct, maybe not. But, I believe they are sincere and I'm glad they all came forward.

Face it. Some of you are simply rabid dogs. It's as simple as that. Robert, If you wonder why people give you a hard time on this site and block you from participating on other sites, you nailed it right here. You are often in this third group as well. But, alas, I don't think you see it.

Robert, If you don't like comments about Auburn School District, Books for Kids, Gayla, your cat, your cleaning business and Auburn days, why do you post about them here? Nobody else posts details of their personal life here. If you stop talking about those subjects, maybe people will leave them alone.

Marla's appearance at the Portland Symposium and the big publicity surge that followed was bad news for Geoff's book and he knew it would be, yet he let Marla have center stage at an event he arranged and paid for. I took that as a benevolent/alruistic move by Geoff against his own self interest. The Symposium barely promoted his book and did not restrict participation by critics or opponents. How do you see it Bruce? I am still puzzled by the FBI spokeswoman's initial enthusiasm about Marla's story. Hard to explain that one. Maybe she had too much coffee before she spoke to the UK reporter. 377 This seems to be a common belief that Marla was bad for Geoff's book sales. Why would that be? Geoff wrote a book about a 40 year old case that over half the population didn't even remember. It would seem to me that any publicity about the case would have stirred up interest and helped the sales of Geoff's book.

It's easy to get into a game of semantics here. Technically, it would be a hypothesis and not a theory. Much of your case, though, could be used to link Kenny and Bernie to ANY unsolved crime from that weekend. However, you're still stuck with same problem. Kenny was too short, too bald and had the wrong color eyes. Also, based on what you've wrote, he seemed like a good guy who didn't have a criminal past -- not the profile of a man who would do this. After the hijacking he bought a house no larger than the size of trailer in a rural area. He financed half of it by assuming a loan and didn't pay that off for almost 20 years. There is no record of how he financed the rest of it. And, when he died, the size of his estate was largely consistent with the value of some wooded land he sold in the early 1990s. I'm not saying it's not possible, or you're not allowed to have your own hypothesis. You are. I just wish you were more tolerant of others' hypotheses.

Robert, I don't know how much clearer I can be. I believe that Marla believes her story, just as I believe the others are all sincere in their beliefs. I don't believe any of the currently named suspects are DB Cooper. I also don't see how you can take exception to my statement that you made up a story. I watched Decoded and read your book and nobody goes on the record saying "Kenny is the hijacker", much less how. As far as Geestman goes, it sounds like a lot of "he said, she said". The whole first part of your book is a scenario of how the DB Cooper jump went down. How is that not making up a story?

Robert, I don't support anyone's story. If you asked me to make an up or down declaration on each of the suspects, I'd say I doubt each and every one of them. All of them have too many holes. I'm not commenting on Marla to support her story. I usually comment on here when you're the pot calling the kettle black. You say Marla is making up a story so she can write a book. You did make up a story and did write a book. You claim Jo has no witness testimony. Jo says Duane told her he was DB Cooper. Whether you agree or not, that's someone telling her something about the hijacking. You can write very long posts, but none of your witnesses will say anything definitive about the hijacking. You accused Shutter of using a fake name on DropZone, even though it was not to pretend to be someone else. You've used a fake name in order to pretend to be someone else. The Jane Smith identity you created on Facebook (although, I do see why you felt the need to do that) was one example. You then did it again on Shutter's site. Your accounting of Decoded is also suspect. You say the cast only said Geestman wasn't involved to avoid being sued. When you watch the episode (and read the Decoded book), they don't just say Geestman likely wasn't involved, they are adamant that they believe him. One more thought on those with favorite suspects. There are those who stumble on some information and they sincerely believe they've discovered the identity of DB Cooper. As Smokin99 describes, these people then massage every piece of information to fit their suspect and downplay those that don't because, hey, the honestly believe they know who DB Cooper was. And, that includes Marla, Jo, the Foremans, Sailshaw, and yes, Robert, you! I know you don't think of yourself that way, but instead as someone just trying to find the truth. But, I ask you, when Shutter and Smokin99 both tried to help you find the truth (by researching property records), you did not want to hear that information and refused to release any new Kenny yourself until your Cooperland book came out -- even though that book is not about Kenny! You're entitled to your opinions. I just wish you'd look in the mirror when you question the motivations of others.

According to Marla, at the time the FBI said LD Cooper was the best suspect to come forward in 40 years, they already had completed the DNA tests (no match). The fingerprint testing wasn't completed until 18 months later. I don't know why I bother engaging Robert. He'll repeat his stories, even though the entire history of the forum showing otherwise is still right here for all to read.

I should probably not beat this dead horse again, but Robert everything you say applies to you also. None of your witnesses has ever claimed to have any direct knowledge of the hijacking. The Decoded episode (in the book as well as the episode itself) refer to Geestman as YOUR theory and both say they believe Geestman -- and say it definitively. Much of your claims of KC's financial riches have fallen apart or can not be documented. Believe Jo or not, but she does have a witness who claims to have knowledge of the hijacking (Duane himself). That's one more than you have.

And you know this how?

Some of the people investigating the case have been doing it for a lot longer than I have. Others are more well-known. And over the years, they have deluded themselves into the creation of a group I call Cooper Royalty. These are a core group of people, who although they might not share similar opinions on a given suspect, will circle the wagons and support attacks and lies on anyone who threatens the conversation that is not within their accepted circle. They FEAR newcomers. They fear that someone outside that circle of fantasy might be the Johnny-Come-Lately who puts the lie to all their years of work. But what this does is have the effect of squashing any new, real investigation into the case. Cooper Royalty has been spinning the same tired theories, the same attempts to shift reality for years. They are chained to the Cooper Royalty Ferris Wheel, where they claim to encourage new discussion and openess, but in reality are AFRAID of it. Problem is, you can't have it both ways. No one within that group will ever be ready to accept a truth unless that truth falls within the strict, narrow agenda set by Cooper Royalty. In reality, they plod through their 'investigations' as if they have a ball and chain attached to their leg. They are an oxymoron, an aberration within civilian investigation groups. And this hampers their efforts while discouraging the public from participating. This is what I have observed since I first ventured into Cooperland back in 2008.

It's not a story. It was just an auction sale. If the only thing you were concerned about regarding that post was the amount I said 377 paid for a Cooper bill...then you missed the point completely. However, I'm not going to address that post any further. I said what I had to say. I think I provided sufficient proof of my point and we can leave it at that. Cooper Stuff: Tina (co-writer) reports that she has many of the storyboards drawn up for the KC script. .................................................. This is no big deal. .............. No Jane, I think you missed the point. To me, it looks like Mark noticed the dollar amount for the Cooper bill and tried to correct your inaccurate statement by asking 377. This amount could have easily been researched (in your words) before you exaggerated the "facts" and put it in print. All this does is perpetuate another falsehood. Maybe it is time to change the signature on your posts. Here....I found a quote you can use! You also go on to say "Cooper Stuff", but it seems it is more of a advertisement for a screenplay about the life of KC. In post #52262, MarkBennett queries: Could you answer his question without all the added DRAMA? No! Without all the socalled DRAMA he's just another voice in the noise. He is also the master of REVERSAL. Anything you say he will turn around and say applies to YOU! He thinks it's SMART & DECEPTION! Its a tempest in a jug ... with no cork. Blah, blah, blah. 90% or better of your posts here are about ME, not the Cooper case. Move on please, Georger. Your opinion means exactly zip to me on pretty much anything. To answer someone who had an actual question, Bennett I think... Page 101 of Blast: Decoded didn't interview Margie Geestman. They did provide her with a free cell phone, which I delivered to her. She spoke with History Channel's Marisa Kagan a few times. You would have to ask Kagan about that. Was she ever recorded on video or sound by me accusing her ex and Kenny of being involved in the hijacking? Answer, yes. Two videos, one is in the hands of Go Go Luckey productions. One I have. One sound-only recording I have, from the final interview. I believe the total number of times I interviewed Margie Geestman was SEVEN times. And these interviews sometimes went on for two days apiece. If I put everything she said into the book, it would have gone on longer than War and Peace. Most of her testimony is in notebooks in my office. Am I going to release anything from those items at Dropzone? (videos, digital sound recordings, notes) Not a chance in frickin' hell. Those go out to legit media or law enforcement only, on request. Any trust I once had with Cooperland disappeared a long time ago. Not your fault, but that's the way it is. On certain items, I no longer CARE whether Cooperland believes this or that, but only whether the info can be verified by sources NOT related to the civilian-based investigation on Cooper. In other words, legit media and law enforcement. Even though I consider Galen Cook a liar of major proportions, I also took a lesson from him: Don't give up the goods except to people who matter. You know, I think everyone in Cooperland has pretty much written off Christiansen as a possible suspect. I've been trying not to discuss him, except for the announcement about the screenplay, but technically that's not really discussing the case on him. So...if you've decided that KC is a write-off (no problem) then maybe you should stop asking questions about him...

It's not a story. It was just an auction sale. If the only thing you were concerned about regarding that post was the amount I said 377 paid for a Cooper bill...then you missed the point completely. However, I'm not going to address that post any further. I said what I had to say. I think I provided sufficient proof of my point and we can leave it at that. Cooper Stuff: Tina (co-writer) reports that she has many of the storyboards drawn up for the KC script. I'm going to be examining them soon and then we can start typing up the script based on the boards. We have a pretty good idea on how we want to present Kenny's story up until 1994, when he dies of cancer, but we haven't decided yet whether to take it to the present day, via Lyle's contact, the initial Geoff Gray article, and everything that followed. Still deciding on that. Some of this decision will be based on whether we can present everything or not within the usual 90-120 page limit. I mean...if we reach 1994 and we're already up to near 90 pages, we may have to simplify it down to some text presented on-screen at the end instead. I will keep you updated. I think Tina is going to allow me to reveal her name soon. This is no big deal. I doubt any of you know her or anything. Robert, You always assume someone is yanking your chain. I have no reason to doubt your Skip story, so I had no questions. I did want to know were that $8000 figure came from, since I didn't recall it being anywhere near that high and I was hoping 377 would respond.

Another possibility is that Porteous deceived Galen and that both emails presented are real. In my one phone call with Mr. Porteous he was coy and deceitful about his relationship with Geoffrey Gray, claiming that he had not met with him after their initial contact over the Lyle letter to the film maker. I disputed that, and he eventually changed his story, sounding contrite. As for lies, the most problematic one for me is the title of Mrrs. Porteous' and Blevins book. Into the Blast is not the "True Story of DB Cooper." And yet, maybe it IS. I asked Porteous about that choice of title. He told me: 'Just in case we're right...' (about Kenny) That's your biggest complaint, the TITLE of the book? That's funny. Face it. Your buddy, the guy you've posted for at Dropzone multiple times after he was banned permanently, is a LIAR. Simple as that. If you think his phony email messages 'from Porteous,' the ones he quoted, are real, why don't you ask him to produce them, as I did? Otherwise, you should ally yourself with people who don't make a habit of lying and calling others 'con men' in a pathetic effort to discredit. I figured when I posted the screenshot of Porteous' email showing we get along just fine, you would get the hint. Obviously you didn't. You are no better than him, either. You called my office under the guise of doing an interview for a local NW paper and the only place that 'interview' ever appeared was at Dropzone. I've deleted my shortcut to The Dead Zone (the alternate site). I no longer want to see anything that goes on there, and neither does the public I would imagine. You guys can busy yourselves eating each other's young and supporting users' lies over there. I know that's harsh, but you definitely deserve it. You say you support only the truth on the Cooper case. But your actions say it's okay to support non-truth as long as you like the guy telling the lies. Which makes your whole investigation into the case completely without merit until you change that policy. It's a trust thing, Bruce. It's okay to be wrong. It ain't okay to lie, or to support same. I'll attach that email from Porteous again...just in case you missed it. Robert, Regarding your attachment, I thought 377 bought the Cooper bill for closer to $4500 -- not $8000. Is that right, 377? This is how incorrect dollar figures work their way into other stories.

I'm not the one with the problem. That stuff isn't on our website anymore, (because we now have NEW info on Kenny) and that's at least TWICE now you've allowed Mr Cook to use to the word 'con man' with my name attached to it. Get real. That isn't gossip, it's slander. So please don't speak to me of 'honesty' or 'credibility'. Now these things really have nothing to do with Dropzone. But then if you are going to allow this stuff, you shouldn't come here and advertise your new and improved product and tout it as fair and honest. Because it isn't. Robert, When you come back to DropZone to comment on what is going on the other site (I call it the academic site), do you realize that most of us read both sites. So, I'm not sure who you're reporting to. Second question (as long as I'm asking questions). You report that Marge Geestman accused her ex-husband of being involved in the hijacking. I reviewed your book, and watched Decoded and that isn't in either place. Are the circumstances of her comments recorded anywhere?

RobertMBlevins, I read your synopsis of the screenplay. Are you going to use Bernie's real name in the script? Seems like you could get sued if you come right out accuse a living person of masterminding the hijacking.

No worries. I never had any intention of mentioning my little joke on Facebook, etc. I just felt like a little punk'n was in order since you singled me out....and then a few of the people you DID allow have made a habit of lying about me, Porteous and a nice old man named Lyle Christiansen. You should ask yourself this: If they lied about me and these other people, who's next? Whomever pisses them off? Anyone they see as a threat to the discussion because they present a viable suspect and it doesn't happen to be Gossett? I may not believe Gossett's the guy, but I don't go around making shit up on him in a pathetic effort to discredit. That would be Galen Cook and anything regarding Christiansen that he can think of. Funny thing, though. You'd be surprised at how the general public often sees right through that kind of thing for what it is. Robert, I think the sad part is you don't seem to understand why you're not welcome on the other site. I guess if you did, you probably wouldn't be unwelcome.