FLYJACK

No insults.. If your goal is to inform the public that is fine, it isn't my goal right now. My goal was to solve this case for myself.. not others. The public generally does not have a good understanding of this case.. it is a very complex case with a very steep learning curve. I have over 9000 pieces of info in my Cooper case folder.. But, I have contributed a lot, more than I can probably remember, some things you may not even realize, and I have been advised to not talk about Cooper at all anywhere... the research I have would blow this thing wide open and be stolen by others.. it has already happened. Further, sharing my research will 100% jeopardize my ability to move the case forward. So, when many people attack me for not sharing all my research they don't understand that I have very good reasons. And I am still working on some things with the hope at some point to be able to present it properly in another format, it is too complex to present on a forum.. Educating hostile people doesn't interest me.. I am seriously considering just leaving this forum completely, I get virtually nothing from it but insults, crazy accusations and stupid irrelevant arguments..

Thanks for posting that, I had a vague memory of it but couldn't find it.. So, Tina and Alyce didn't get a full-face view of Cooper.. Flo was in the cockpit for much of the time. How interesting..

I have a vague recollection something to the effect that she was looking forward and Cooper whispered comms in her ear, but I can't find confirmation.. the amount if info in this case is getting hard to track.. Does anybody have documentation on that.. This was Alice...

Well, those things are an achievement but in the context of this case, they are virtually irrelevant..

You were wrong, personally attacked me... Most people apologize or at least acknowledge their error(s), you just go passive aggressive.. I don't share 80% of my research publicly because of people like you..

Maybe you just aren't a good enough researcher...

I wrote something 100% accurate intentionally using the word "some". YOU accused me of saying something else even changing my words (multiple) then you reject the meaning of what I actually wrote to fit your own bias.. does that sound rational. Lawyers are trained to be good with words and should know the meaning of the word "some".. It is crazy, I wrote something 100% accurate and get accused of meaning something else,, something I never wrote.. Most people don't know the definition of the word "some" but I would expect a lawyer to,, and to claim I meant something other than what I wrote that is just another level of crazy.. No, I am not taking the Hahneman bait..

So, I had to go find the "302" to be 100% accurate, I thought it was Alice that didn't see Cooper full-face. and I was right. It was Alice that said she didn't see Cooper's full-face.. You got this wrong as well...

and a personal attack,, it was just a matter of time.. This pattern always repeats,, a newish poster makes an error, I point it out and eventually I get called names. Really getting tired of this ego driven juvenile crap..

Not a good lawyer, you don't even know what "some" means. I used that word intentionally.

I said some not multiple, that is one or more and is correct. I knew it was at least one (in the 302's) and didn't have time to look it up so I said "some".. Nice try though.. and don't change my words to cover for your own error..

So what.. Obviously, we don't have Cooper speaking. Witness accounts is all we have.. if you want to go there, you can claim nothing in the 302's is valid because it is somebody's perception or recall. why would Tina add "US"... and the pilot add "American".. Most likely,,,, because Cooper said it.

Well, you are just making that up.. there is no reason for the pilot to add "American" but even so the problem with your claim is.. He also later told Tina "US" currency. It would be very odd and extremely rare for you to go down to your bank in middle America and engage in a transaction qualifying the money as American or US without any foreign aspect to it. Then do it again soon after. It just doesn't make sense.

Robert Gregory's description... Since most of these were corroborated by other witnesses, what is there to dismiss? all of it, some of it, one item, it makes no sense. He is a bit low on the age, but that is subjective and can be tough. IMO, Cooper was 45-50.. He said the suit was russet/brown, others said dark.. there may be a bit of conflation between the suit jacket and overcoat.. I do wonder if Cooper ever removed the overcoat.. He used Mexican American, others used Latin American. He said Marceled/wavy hair,, others said wavy or curly. His height and weight estimate is close to Mitchell's. Cooper was seated.. He said Caucasian, others said white. Hair slightly parted on the left, matches other witnesses. Hair dark black and slicked, Flo said slicked.. Mitchell said dark black as if dyed.. Narrow lips,, others narrow lips.. but overall, very minor differences.. there is no rational reason to dismiss Gregory. Caucasian, Mexican American possibly American Indian blood about 35, (later said up to 40) Swarthy Jet Black hair, wavy, marceled, greasy sheen, combed slightly back to right, slightly parted on left close to head slightly receding in front eyes unknown, wore dark horn rimmed glasses remained seated, maybe 5' 9” estimate 165 lbs Reddish brown (russet) suit coat with wide lapel, neutral shirt contrasting tie, medium to dark color other comments re first sketch hair slicked down flatter nose rounded cheeks high cheekbones long nose wide forehead lips narrower

So, this is a big problem in this case,,, just making sh!t up.. to dismiss something you don't like. Here is the explanation.. doesn't sound like BS. After Mitchell went forward, Gregory was the closest passenger to Cooper, four seats away. He wasn't wrong.. Plane had landed and passenger's were instructed to remain seated. Stew was standing in the aisle blocking Gregory's seat. He asked what is the problem, she said don't look back.. Doesn't sound like BS.. Gregory got a (2nd) good look at Cooper as he left..

The problem people are having is that anything is possible,, we are trying to discern was is probable. We can't "prove" these things one way or another. You can always imagine the possible. Our goal is to separate the probable from the possible using the best evidence, logic and reason. First, we have the pilots say "American" currency.. that wasn't the FBI lingo. then Tina said Cooper later told her "US" currency.. that is two.. So, it is very likely Cooper used the descriptor "American/US" for the money.. Second, it would be very rare and odd in 1971 to use the descriptor "American/US" by somebody who has never left the US or planned to or was never exposed to another currency.. very rare. Those things indicate a foreign aspect to Cooper. The profile of Cooper also suggests a foreign aspect,, military experience, airplane experience and swarthy/olive Latin American... his Mexico demand. The American/US descriptor doesn't prove a foreign aspect but it does support it. In conclusion, based on all the evidence, Cooper very likely spent significant time outside the US.. probably recently (before NORJAK).

He wasn't incorrect,, at some point he was the closest to Cooper and that was when Tina delivered the money and the passengers got up and left the plane. His testimony varies only slightly from others. In fact, everyone's testimony varies slightly as you would expect. There is no reason to discount Gregory,, most of what he said was also said by others. So, what do people actually reject.. all witnesses have slight variations. IMO, the FBI description blending all witness is very accurate... This weird obsession with discounting Gregory does back a long way,, Maybe it was the "russet" suit vs "dark" suit,, russet can be virtually black as a paint guy he would have been able to tell. shades of russet

There was no reason to reject SF or LA if he was going to jump in the PNW.. he rejected them because they were too large and wanted a smaller airport because he was still going to be on the plane. If he was going to jump in the PNW, he wouldn't care.. When Reno was agreed to, he decided to jump ASAP. It is simple and very rational. It makes perfect sense, he has the money, he doesn't need to risk being on the plane when it lands it Reno.. that is why he changed his demand from airstairs lowered inflight to on takeoff when Reno was agreed to. He wanted out ASAP. Being on the plane when it landed in Reno was an unnecessary risk.. Everybody gets this wrong, Cooper changed his demand when Reno was in play. His first demand was airstairs lowered in flight. He changed his demand and his plan when Reno was in play.. If the plane could have reached Mexico, Cooper could have given further instructions.. the plan was to refuel in Mazatlan.. but wasn't needed obviously.

Mr House?

In the old west they commonly had gold, silver and many non Gov bank notes... as money.. Not the same as 1971.. That phrase would be extremely rare without a foreign context.. let alone two people on Norjak using it..

Sure, I get it you impose motive on Tina the way it suits you and inversely on Gregory when it suits you. That is not an actual argument. It is emotion. You have no real evidence to discredit Gregory but have anyway. No, it doesn't mean that at all. Frankly, I just don't see that argument. You have no idea what Tina said or why.. maybe Cooper told her to say it, who knows. Remember, they moved Mitchell, not Gregory,, Gregory said slicked hair as did Flo.. Mitchell said his hair was odd, all black as if dyed. Gregory said marceled, others wavy and curly.. Olive/Swarthy and Latin American was said by others. Gregory's description is not that different from the others collectively.. I don't see a big conflict in the descriptions, some minor differences but overall close and it is well summarized in the FBI description. So, again where is the argument to discredit.. I don't see one. I put all the witnesses together to create a profile..

Gregory has almost nothing to do with the Cooper going to Mexico argument.. but, I think Gregory is credible. Everybody dismisses him based on false info. Others corroborated Latin American/olive features. He was the closest after Mitchell moved forward.. Gregory stayed in his seat.. So, Gregory was the closet for much of the flight. He was correct. I know everybody gets this wrong at their own peril. He said in the rear, "believed" row 18, he was not claiming for certain. He said he had an aisle seat and that he looked back, so clearly he was a row or two ahead of Cooper and wasn't claiming the absolute rear seat. He just got the row number wrong, not his position. Stew said not to look at Cooper,,, what does that mean for credibility. Nothing. Since Gregory had the aisle seat and looked back at Cooper, he would have had a good view. He also got up to go to the rear restroom but was intercepted by the stew. He saw a blonde stew bring the money on the plane. The brown haired stew is incorrect but that is minor, he did say there were 3 stews a blonde and two brunettes. It could be he mixed up Flo and Tina or the FBI interviewer mixed them up in notes or when he looked at Cooper he saw Flo with him both times.. this is the only inconsistency. So, you want to dismiss his testimony on that. Gregory was a paint guy, he would have eye for colour and detail and he said the suit was russet which can be very dark almost black. Most would think it was black. I once bought a sport jacket I thought was black but only when I put it next to a real black I could tell it was actually a russet colour.. That is my view on Gregory, if people want to dismiss him they can go right ahead.. I think he is one of the best witnesses, he got a look at Cooper straight on, unlike Mitchell and some of the Stews.

He gets more time.. and the FBI was planning for him to be in Reno. Once Reno was in play he wanted to jump ASAP,, he was slightly delayed by the airstair issue..

No it isn't,, My conclusion based on all the evidence is that Cooper initially wanted to jump much further South probably outside the US.. when the range was a problem and the crew negotiated Reno Cooper changed his plan. He had the money and didn't want to be on the plane in Reno for the refuel.. 1. Cooper's initial demand was airstairs lowered in flight (changed demand during discussion with crew to open on takeoff) When Reno was in play he wanted to jump early. 2. Cooper demanded to go to Mexico, no stops in US for any reason.. this was impossible, Cooper would not make this demand unless he actually believed it was possible. 3. Cooper was described as swarthy. Latin American possibly Mexican. 4. [REDACTED] 5. Cooper rejected a refuel stop at LA and San Francisco, said too large wanted a small airport. At this point, he was still thinking he would be on the plane for the refuelling. Why would he care if he was jumping in the PNW. 6. Cooper never gave route instructions. He did not have a specific LZ, if they had flown to Mexico he could have later given specific instructions to an LZ. 7. Cooper was not dressed for a PNW jump. 8. There is no counterargument. People claim Mexico was just a ruse to get the plane heading South, there is no evidence for that and it doesn't make sense. There is no way Cooper would make a demand that he knew was impossible, would be rejected and need to be renegotiated.

"negotiable currency" is more common and "circulated" obviously means used.. I don't think they have any relevance.. anybody could use those terms,,